Quality of preservice teachers argumentation in socioscientific issues context

Abstract

This study aimed to explore preservice teachers' (PTs) argumentation quality during socioscientific issues (SSI) based classroom discussions. The participants of the study were 20 PTs from the Department of Elementary Education at a large, research oriented public university in Turkey. Qualitative case study method was used in this study. The study covered four socioscientific issues (food additives, alternative energy sources, climate change, and the industrial revolution). Each issue was discussed in the classroom and each discussion was video recorded. Video recordings were transcribed verbatim and used as data source. Classroom discussions verbatim transcribes were analyzed by using a modified version of Toulmin's argumentation pattern (TAP) model. The modified approach was found to be more conducive to informal argumentation patterns, in order to analyze preservice teachers' use of claims, grounds, warrants, backings, and rebuttals that support their debate positions, as well as their ability to use evidence-based reasoning, form coherent lines of reasoning, and use of correct (appropriate) evidence. Results of the study revealed that preservice teachers' use of evidence to support conflicting ideas tended to increase as their use of incorrect or insufficient use of evidence decreased through the present study.

A Systematic Review of the Research Papers on Chemistry-Focused Socio-Scientific Issues

“…As seen from Table S2 (see Supplementary Material), the aims of the research papers consisted of five different codes, whose percentages ranged from 4.6 to 38.5. A high frequency for the first code (see Table S2) may result from common features of SSI that directly trigger or influence such competencies as argumentation, reflective judgment, decision making, and informal reasoning (e.g., Bayram-Jacobs et al, 2019;Karışan et al, 2017;Wiyarsi & Çalik, 2019). The second code may come from mostly preferred common variables, i.e., conceptual understanding, attitude, critical thinking (e.g., Çalık et al, 2015).…”

Prospective Teachers' Written Argumentation Levels about Socio-Scientific Topics

“…The argumentation skills of students can be measured by examining the development and quality of their claims, counterarguments, data, backing, and rebuttals (Mason & Scirica, 2006;Sandoval & Millwood, 2005). As the argumentation process requires complex mental configurations, different perspectives on the analysis of arguments have emerged (Demir, 2017;Karışan, 2011;Yalçın, 2018).…”

Argumentation Skill Profile of Students Using Android-Based E-Module on Chemical Equilibrium Topic

“…Argumentation is an action taken by every individual in using logic and facts and making claims, evidence and evidence of a reasonable conclusion [14]. Argumentation was the process of getting arguments in a classroom learning that cannot be separated by carrying out a group discussion process between students where students will share ideas and exchange information so that the information obtained is durable [15]. In the process of arguing, students are allowed to build on the understanding they have and continuously develop their skills in argumentation [16].…”