The Learning Benefits of Being Willing and Able to Engage in Scientific Argumentation

Bathgate, Meghan; Crowell, Amanda; Schunn, Christian D.; Cannady, Mac; Dorph, Rena

doi:10.1080/09500693.2015.1045958

Cited by 78 publications

(67 citation statements)

References 55 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…For example, one paper in the IJSE volume surveyed (Bathgate, Crowell, Schunn, Cannady, & Dorph, 2015) made two references to an unspecified alpha statistic. Bathgate and colleagues describe developing "a measure of students' ability to make effective arguments in science" (p.1596) for which "the overall instrument had acceptable reliability (alpha = .77)," and a "knowledge test administered before and after the 4-month classroom unit on weather and climate" which comprised "21 items, alpha = .78" (p.1600).…”

Section: The Frequency Of Use Of Cronbach's Alpha In Science Educationmentioning

confidence: 99%

The Use of Cronbach’s Alpha When Developing and Reporting Research Instruments in Science Education

2017

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Cronbach's alpha is a statistic commonly quoted by authors to demonstrate that tests and scales that have been constructed or adopted for research projects are fit for purpose. Cronbach's alpha is regularly adopted in studies in science education: it was referred to in 69 different papers published in 4 leading science education journals in a single year (2015)-usually as a measure of reliability. This article explores how this statistic is used in reporting science education research and what it represents. Authors often cite alpha values with little commentary to explain why they feel this statistic is relevant and seldom interpret the result for readers beyond citing an arbitrary threshold for an acceptable value. Those authors who do offer readers qualitative descriptors interpreting alpha values adopt a diverse and seemingly arbitrary terminology. More seriously, illustrative examples from the science education literature demonstrate that alpha may be acceptable even when there are recognised problems with the scales concerned. Alpha is also sometimes inappropriately used to claim an instrument is unidimensional. It is argued that a high value of alpha offers limited evidence of the reliability of a research instrument, and that indeed a very high value may actually be undesirable when developing a test of scientific knowledge or understanding. Guidance is offered to authors reporting, and readers evaluating, studies that present Cronbach's alpha statistic as evidence of instrument quality.

show abstract

Section: The Frequency Of Use Of Cronbach's Alpha In Science Educationmentioning

confidence: 99%

The Use of Cronbach’s Alpha When Developing and Reporting Research Instruments in Science Education

2017

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The Scientific Reasoning Inventory (SRI) measures components of scientific reasoning in a paper-and-pencil multiple choice task. The task was based on the Argumentative Sensemaking Measure developed for middle school (Bathgate, Crowell, Schunn, Cannady, & Dorph, 2015) and adapted to elementary school by Van de Sande, Verhoeven, Kleemans, and Segers (in press). The subtasks are based on validated scientific reasoning tasks from previous research (Chen & Klahr, 1999;Kuhn & Dean, 2005;Schröder, Bödeker, & Edelstein, 2000).…”

Section: 32mentioning

confidence: 99%

A combined approach to strengthen children’s scientific thinking: direct instruction on scientific reasoning and training of teacher’s verbal support

Graaf

Sande

Gijsel

et al. 2019

International Journal of Science Education

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Inquiry-based lessons have been demonstrated to improve children's scientific thinking (i.e. reasoning abilities and domainspecific knowledge). Although empirical evidence shows that inquiry-based learning requires instruction, research comes from two approaches that have not been bridged yet: direct instruction of scientific reasoning and teacher training of verbal support. We investigated how these two types of instruction separately or combined strengthened children's scientific thinking by comparing four conditions: baseline, direct instruction, verbal support, and a combined approach. Effectiveness of an inquirybased lesson series on scientific reasoning abilities, vocabulary, and domain-specific knowledge (near and far transfer) were studied among 301 fourth graders. Results showed that both approaches strengthened different components of scientific reasoning abilities, and that a combination of instructions was most effective for scientific reasoning abilities, vocabulary, and domain-specific knowledge. Domain-specific knowledge acquisition was strengthened only when both instructions were provided. It can thus be concluded that each type of instruction has unique contributions to children's science learning and that these instructions complement each other. Our study thus showed that inquiry-based lesson series when preceded by direct instruction of scientific reasoning and scaffolded with verbal support are most effective. ARTICLE HISTORY

show abstract

“…Students who engage in scientific argumentation and model-based reasoning are more likely to achieve deep conceptual understandings of STEM phenomena (Bathgate, Crowell, Schunn, Cannady, & Dorph, 2015;Chinn & Clark, 2013;Chinn, O'Donnell, & Jinks, 2000;Sampson & Clark, 2009;Zohar & Nemet, 2002). They are also more likely to develop a better sense of how science truly works (Kuhn et al, 2017;NRC, 2012), including that models of scientific phenomena can, should, and do improve with continued research and analysis (Schwarz et al, 2009).…”

Section: Scientific Argumentation Researchmentioning

confidence: 99%

Fostering high school students’ conceptual understanding and argumentation performance in science through Quality Talk discussions

et al. 2018

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Flourishing in today's global society requires citizens that are both intelligent consumers and producers of scientific understanding. Indeed, the modern world is facing ever‐more complex problems that require innovative ways of thinking about, around, and with science. As numerous educational stakeholders have suggested, such skills and abilities are not innate and must, therefore, be taught (e.g., McNeill & Krajcik, Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 45(1), 53–78. 2008). However, such instruction requires a fundamental shift in science pedagogy so as to foster knowledge and practices like deep, conceptual understanding, model‐based reasoning, and oral and written argumentation where scientific evidence is evaluated (National Research Council, Next Generation Science Standards: For States, by States, Washington, DC: The National Academies Press, 2013). The purpose of our quasi‐experimental study was to examine the effectiveness of Quality Talk Science, a professional development model and intervention, in fostering changes in teachers’ and students’ discourse practices as well as their conceptual understanding and scientific argumentation. Findings revealed treatment teachers’ and students’ discourse practices better reflected critical‐analytic thinking and argumentation at posttest relative to comparison classrooms. Similarly, at posttest treatment students produced stronger written scientific arguments than comparison students. Students’ growth in conceptual understanding was nonsignificant. These findings suggest discourse interventions such as Quality Talk Science can improve high‐school students’ ability to engage in scientific argumentation.

show abstract

The Learning Benefits of Being Willing and Able to Engage in Scientific Argumentation

Cited by 78 publications

References 55 publications

The Use of Cronbach’s Alpha When Developing and Reporting Research Instruments in Science Education

The Use of Cronbach’s Alpha When Developing and Reporting Research Instruments in Science Education

A combined approach to strengthen children’s scientific thinking: direct instruction on scientific reasoning and training of teacher’s verbal support

Fostering high school students’ conceptual understanding and argumentation performance in science through Quality Talk discussions

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About