It takes two to tango: How scientific reasoning and self-regulation processes impact argumentation quality

Abstract

Background: Improving scientific reasoning and argumentation are central aims of science education. Because of their complex nature, self-regulation is important for successful scientific reasoning. This study provides a first attempt to investigate how scientific reasoning and self-regulation processes conjointly impact argumentation quality. Methods: In a study with university students (N = 30), we used fine-grained process data of scientific reasoning and self-regulation during inquiry learning to investigate how the co-occurrences between scientific reasoning and self-regulation processes are associated with argumentation quality. Findings: When modeling the co-occurrence of scientific reasoning and self-regulation processes using epistemic network analysis, differences between students showing either high or low argumentation quality become apparent. Students who showed high argumentation quality engaged in different scientific reasoning processes together more often than students with low argumentation quality, and they made more connections between self-regulation and scientific reasoning processes. Contribution: These findings offer educational implications for teaching scientific reasoning. Integrating self-regulation and scientific reasoning during instruction could be beneficial for improving scientific reasoning and argumentation.

Do Video Modeling and Metacognitive Prompts Improve Self-Regulated Scientific Inquiry?

“…The advantage of ENA is that the temporal patterns of individual connections can be easily captured and compared between individuals. In an exploratory think aloud study (Omarchevska et al, 2021), we found that students who were monitoring during scientific reasoning activities achieved higher argumentation quality than their peers who did not monitor using ENA. These findings demonstrated the added value of studying the temporal interaction between scientific reasoning and self-regulation processes and its effects on argumentation quality.…”

“…For instance, students need to monitor whether they are manipulating the correct variables or how much data they need before drawing a conclusion. According to a fine-grained analysis of students' self-regulation and scientific reasoning processes monitoring during scientific reasoning activities was associated with higher argumentation quality (Omarchevska et al, 2021).…”

“…It provides the basis for regulation, that is, students' selection and application of learning strategies. Selfregulation is particularly important for successful inquiry learning (Chin & Brown, 2000;Kuhn et al, 2000;Omarchevska et al, 2021;Reid et al, 2003;White et al, 2009). For instance, students need to monitor whether they are manipulating the correct variables or how much data they need before drawing a conclusion.…”

“…Guidance can be provided using process constraints, performance dashboards, prompts, heuristics, scaffolds, or direct presentation of information . Furthermore, guidance should aim to also support self-regulated learning (Zacharia et al, 2015), as self-regulation has been shown to be important to successful inquiry learning (Omarchevska et al, 2021). Therefore, combining scientific reasoning and self-regulation instruction might be beneficial for teaching scientific reasoning.…”

“…The raters used the coding scheme in Table 4, which was previously used by Omarchevska et al (2021) to code scientific reasoning, self-regulation, and the use of cognitive strategies. Scientific reasoning processes were coded from both data sources, whereas self-regulation processes and use of cognitive strategies were coded from the think aloud protocols only.…”