Scientific argument and explanation: A necessary distinction?

Osborne, Jonathan; Patterson, Alexis

doi:10.1002/sce.20438

Cited by 254 publications

(189 citation statements)

References 42 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

171

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Estudos e pesquisas sobre argumentação no ensino de ciências vêm crescendo expressivamente e essa preocupação premente ocasionou importantes contribuições para a área de pesquisa e atualmente é possível encontrar trabalhos que ajudam a entender aspectos essenciais relacionados ao tema, como, por exemplo, formas de instaurar situações argumentativas em sala de aula (Leitão, 2011), como mediar a construção de argumentos pelos alunos (Simon et al, 2006) e, até mesmo, o que vem a ser a argumentação e quais são os produtos gerados em aulas que favorecem o seu surgimento (Berland & Reiser, 2009;Osborne& Patterson, 2011).…”

Section: Introductionunclassified

Propósitos Epistêmicos Para a Promoção Da Argumentação Em Aulas Investigativas

Ferraz

Sasseron

2017

IENCI

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

ResumoTendo em vista o interesse crescente de pesquisas sobre argumentação, buscamos com esse trabalho traçar um panorama das ações tomadas por um professor que possibilitaram instaurar e mediar a produção de argumentos pelos estudantes em sala de aula. Para isso, utilizamos como corpus de pesquisa uma aula de Física que discutia o tema dualidade onda-partícula da luz, por meio de uma sequência de ensino planejada considerando as diretrizes do Ensino por Investigação. Elaboramos um conjunto de categorias denominadas Propósitos Epistêmicos para a Promoção da Argumentação que, como o próprio nome sugere, explicitam os propósitos do professor bem como algumas de suas respectivas ações para a promoção da argumentação dos estudantes durante atividades investigativas desempenhadas em sala de aula. Como resultado da proposição teórica e análise empírica de nossos dados, foi revelado que a produção de argumentos pelos estudantes tem uma grande dependência da forma como a problematização de um objeto a ser compreendido é feita pelo professor. A construção de entendimentos pelos alunos requer que o professor desempenhe ações que resultem em contribuições de diferentes naturezas para construção e ampliação de argumentos pelos estudantes. Palavras-Chave:Argumentação; Ensino por Investigação; Práticas Epistêmicas. AbstractConsidering the growth in interest on argumentation in research on science education, in this paper our goal is to propose an overview of actions taken by a teacher that made possible to establish and mediate production of arguments by the students in classroom. For this purpose, we analyze a physics lesson where discussions were about light duality, through a planned inquiry-based sequence teaching. We developed a set of codes called Epistemic Purposes for Promotion of Argumentation that allow understanding teacher's purposes as well his actions to promote argumentation among students during inquiry-based lessons. According to theoretical proposition and empirical analysis, it was revealed that the construction of arguments by students has a high dependence on how ideas are problematized by teacher. The construction of understanding by students requires teacher actions that result in contributions of different kinds.

show abstract

Section: Introductionunclassified

Propósitos Epistêmicos Para a Promoção Da Argumentação Em Aulas Investigativas

Ferraz

Sasseron

2017

IENCI

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Inkuiri-based learning, students demanding to find the solution of the problem or phenomenon through inquiry and the giving of reasons which are scientific [13,14]. Learning inquiry have several stages, formulate the problem, observing or doing obervation, analyzing and presenting the results, as well as communicate [15]. On inquiry based-lab, students are given the opportunity to do the investigation directly using their hands or doing experiments [10,14,16].…”

Section: Inquiry Based-laboratorymentioning

confidence: 99%

Improving Students’ Argumentation by Providing Analogical Mapping-Based Through Lab Inquiry for Science Class

Diniya

Rusdiana

2018

IOP Conf. Ser.: Mater. Sci. Eng.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract. Science education researchers will never stop looking for the best way in learning. This is based on the fact that research on this issue has been mostly conducted in 21 century, the present science subject is not only about transferring knowledge but also how the students obtain a knowledge directly. This paper is concerned with one kind of the learnings that can support the students to get a knowledge called as a learning-based on lab inquiry. In Lab Inquiry learning, the students directly experience and look for the solution from a phenomenon through particular ways thus the learning will be more meaningful. Those steps are as follows; observation, asking, conducting an experiment, concluding and communicating. All of them are mainly important includes the communicating step. Communication ability can be viewed from how a student can provide an argument. Argumentation ability of a student will be crucially better if there is a use of analogical mapping-based. In this literature study, it is therefore argued that the students' argumentation ability by that analogical mapping-based can be improved through Lab Inquiry.

show abstract

“…This makes argumentation distinctive from explanation that focuses on causal description of an event involving certainty while, argumentation invites diverse opinions with both parties giving justifications for their claims (Ohlsson, 2002). The conclusion in argumentation unlike explanation is less certain (Osborne et al, 2011), tentative and is subject to criticism and refutation (Nussbaum, 2011). Students' involvement in argumentation require an explanation or decision to a research question which shall be supported by some evidences based on empirical data and include the use of scientific principles, theories, models etc.…”

Section: Understanding Argumentationmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Argumentation is a social and dynamic process, involving individuals engaged in thinking, constructing and critiquing knowledge (Wegerif, 2007;Golanics & Nussbaum, 2008;Ford, 2008;Berland & Reiser, 2009;Osborne & Patterson, 2011). It encompasses a statement or a claim that is backed by at least one reason (Angell, 1964) and involves at least two individuals or more (Iordanou, 2013).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

A Critical Review of Scientific Argumentation in Science Education

Faize

Husain

Nisar

2017

EURASIA J MATH SCI T

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The use of argumentation in science education is associated with many benefits. Some of these include developing critical skills, promoting spirit of enquiry, enhancing conceptual understanding and improving academic performance of students. However, there are also some issues and challenges while using argumentation in science classrooms. This research will discuss the strength of using scientific argumentation in science education. The findings from other such studies will also be critically reviewed to seek an in-depth understanding of the use of argumentation in teaching and associated challenges. The research would help in improving the use of argumentation in teaching and exploring solution to problems and challenges associated with this method.

show abstract

Scientific argument and explanation: A necessary distinction?

Cited by 254 publications

References 42 publications

Propósitos Epistêmicos Para a Promoção Da Argumentação Em Aulas Investigativas

Propósitos Epistêmicos Para a Promoção Da Argumentação Em Aulas Investigativas

Improving Students’ Argumentation by Providing Analogical Mapping-Based Through Lab Inquiry for Science Class

A Critical Review of Scientific Argumentation in Science Education

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About