Science Classroom Discussion as Scientific Argumentation: A Study of Conceptually Rich (and Poor) Student Talk

Shemwell, Jonathan T.; Furtak, Erin Marie

doi:10.1080/10627197.2010.530563

Cited by 34 publications

(30 citation statements)

References 31 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…It has been pointed out, however, that researchers often fail to define what exactly they mean by argumentation or argument (Ryu & Sandoval, 2012) and that no consistent usage of the term argumentation has been established -sometimes, it refers to any kind of discussion, sometimes to advancing and evaluating knowledge claims based on evidence (Shemwell & Furtak, 2010). This inconsistency can also be observed for the publications analysed in this review (for descriptive characteristics of the studies, see Table 1).…”

Section: Engaging In Argumentation and Reasoningmentioning

confidence: 71%

“…developed a framework where the quality of argumentation is assessed in terms of five levels which illustrate the quality of opposition or rebuttals in the student discussions . Despite the prevalent usage of Toulmin's model in the analysis of argumentation in science classrooms, however, problems can still be observed with respect to the clarification of what counts as claim, data, warrant and backings Shemwell & Furtak, 2010). Some authors thus collapse Toulmin's data, warrants and backings into a single code called grounds to address the practical difficulty to reliably differentiate among these components (e.g.…”

Section: Engaging In Argumentation and Reasoningmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…'Constructing an explanation does not necessitate using evidence to support a conclusion or trying to convince or persuade another individual that your explanation is correct, yet these are key aspects of scientific argumentation' (p. 235). The aspect of persuasion is also a key aspect in delimitating argumentation from discussion: 'The label and term argumentation rather than discussion was used to emphasise debate and negotiation using specific methods of persuasion' (Hickey, Taasoobshirazi, & Cross, 2012, p. 1255; see also Shemwell & Furtak, 2010). With respect to argumentation, two major operationalisations can be identified: argumentation as students' general use of evidence (data and scientific concepts) to construct arguments or explanations about the phenomenon under study (e.g.…”

Section: Engaging In Argumentation and Reasoningmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…This aspect reflects the above-mentioned question whether scientific argumentation ability includes a component of conceptual quality or not -or, as kelly et al (1998) put it, whether an argument is substantive or not: 'An argument is considered substantive when knowledge of the actual content is requisite for understanding' (p. 853; see also Clark & Sampson, 2007). Shemwell and Furtak (2010) explicitly refer to this question by differentiating argumentation and scientific argumentation based on the kinds or levels of support that can warrant knowledge claims. Among the publications in this review, both operationalisations of argumentation in science classrooms exist.…”

Section: Engaging In Argumentation and Reasoningmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Clark & Sampson, 2007;erduran et al, 2004). Shemwell and Furtak (2010) argue that in the field of scientific argumentation, numerous studies can be identified that do not use any normative criteria for what can count as support for arguments. As a consequence, little to no information is provided about the role of students' subject matter conceptions in their use of evidence or the degree to which students' arguments reflect scientific criteria for validity.…”

Section: Engaging In Argumentation and Reasoningmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 4 more Smart Citations

Searching for a common ground – A literature review of empirical research on scientific inquiry activities

Rönnebeck

Bernholt

Ropohl

2016

Studies in Science Education

175

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Despite the importance of scientific inquiry in science education, researchers and educators disagree considerably regarding what features define this instructional approach. While a large body of literature addresses theoretical considerations, numerous empirical studies investigate scientific inquiry on quite different levels of detail and also on different theoretical grounds. Here, only little systematic research has analysed the different conceptualisations and usages of the overarching construct of scientific inquiry in detail. To close this gap, a review of the research literature on scientific inquiry was conducted based on a widespread approach to defining scientific inquiry as activities that students engage in. The main goal is to provide a systematic overview about the range and spectrum of definitions and operationalisations used with regard to single activities of the inquiry process in empirical studies. The findings from the review first and foremost illustrate the variability in the ways these activities have been operationalised and implemented. For each activity, studies differ significantly not only with respect to the focus, explicitness and comprehensiveness of their operationalisations but also with regard to the consistency of their implementation in the form of instructional or interventional components in the study and/or in the focus of the assessment of student performance. This has significant implications regarding the validity and comparability of results obtained in different studies, e.g. in the context of discussions concerning the effectiveness of inquiry-based instruction. In addition, the interrelation between scientific inquiry, scientific knowledge and the nature of science seems to be underexplored. The conclusions make the case for further theoretical work as well as empirical research.

show abstract

Section: Engaging In Argumentation and Reasoningmentioning

confidence: 71%

Section: Engaging In Argumentation and Reasoningmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Engaging In Argumentation and Reasoningmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Engaging In Argumentation and Reasoningmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Engaging In Argumentation and Reasoningmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

Searching for a common ground – A literature review of empirical research on scientific inquiry activities

Rönnebeck

Bernholt

Ropohl

2016

Studies in Science Education

175

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Data‐based conjectures for supporting responsive teaching in engineering design with elementary teachers

et al. 2018

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The national efforts underway to include engineering in K–12 science education present a variety of new challenges, including how to prepare teachers to teach a new discipline. In this paper, we focus on elementary teachers and how they enter into responsive teaching, in which they closely attend and meaningfully respond to students’ thinking. This pedagogical approach is particularly critical for teaching engineering design in ways that support students in developing original solutions to complex, dynamic problems. Drawing on 3 years of professional development that helped teachers incorporate engineering in literacy contexts, we investigated the knowledge and abilities teachers displayed for responsive teaching and how features of instructional design and classroom dynamics impacted their teaching. Throughout the project, we observed and videotaped professional development workshops and teachers’ classrooms, and interviewed teachers about their classroom experiences. We then conducted a thematic analysis across these data sources, presenting common themes as conjectures for how teachers enter into responsive teaching in engineering. We discuss how these conjectures can inform teacher research and the design of teacher preparation programs in engineering.

show abstract

Targeting disciplinary practices in an online learning environment

et al. 2018

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The Framework for K-12 Science Education (National Research Council, 2012) outlines eight practices to represent the diverse ways scientists construct and evaluate knowledge. Engaging students in these practices is a key instructional target in the science classroom. This target, however, creates particular challenges for online instruction, which has predominantly focused on delivering content.This study shows the possibility of addressing disciplinary practices online, here in the context of a professional development course for in-service science teachers, which we designed based on previous work in responsive teaching. We examine an episode of the participants' engagement in an online text-based message board and identify evidence of disciplinary practices in their work. We discuss design elements and instructional choices that supported disciplinary engagement: building instruction around learners' ideas, developing online spaces in interaction with learners, and privileging learners' engagement in disciplinary practices as an objective.

show abstract

Science Classroom Discussion as Scientific Argumentation: A Study of Conceptually Rich (and Poor) Student Talk

Cited by 34 publications

References 31 publications

Searching for a common ground – A literature review of empirical research on scientific inquiry activities

Searching for a common ground – A literature review of empirical research on scientific inquiry activities

Data‐based conjectures for supporting responsive teaching in engineering design with elementary teachers

Targeting disciplinary practices in an online learning environment

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About