Enhancing the quality of argumentation in school science

The research reported in this paper focussed on the design of learning environments that support the teaching and learning of argumentation in a scientific context. The research took place over two years between 1999 and 2001 in junior high schools in the greater London area. The research was conducted in two phases. In the first developmental phase, working with a group of 12 science teachers, the main emphasis was to develop sets of materials and strategies to support argumentation in the classroom and to assess teachers‘ development with teaching argumentation. Data were collected by videoing and audio recording the teachers attempts to implement these lessons at the beginning and end of the year. During this phase, analytical tools for evaluating the quality of argumentation were developed based on Toulmin‘s argument pattern. Analysis of the data shows that there was significant development in the majority of teachers use of argumentation across the year. Results indicate that the pattern of use of argumentation is teacher specific, as is the nature of the change. In the second phase of the project, teachers taught the experimental groups a minimum of nine lessons which involved socioscientific or scientific argumentation. In addition, these teachers taught similar lessons to a control group at the beginning and end of the year. Here the emphasis lay on assessing the progression in student capabilities with argumentation. Hence data were collected from several lessons of two groups of students engaging in argumentation. Using a framework for evaluating the nature of the discourse and its quality, the findings show that there was an improvement in the quality of students‘ argumentation. In addition, the research offers methodological developments for work in this field.

[1]  David Wray,et al.  Extending Literacy: Children Reading and Writing Non-Fiction , 1997 .

[2]  Jonathan Osborne,et al.  Science Education for the Future. , 1998 .

[3]  J. Rudduck,et al.  Co-operative learning traditions and transitions , 1990 .

[4]  M. Linn,et al.  Scientific arguments as learning artifacts: designing for learning from the web with KIE , 2000 .

[5]  Mike Watts,et al.  Science in the national curriculum , 1991 .

[6]  Barbara J. Guzzetti,et al.  Promoting conceptual change in science: A comparative meta-analysis of instructional interventions from reading education and science education , 1993 .

[7]  Cynthia R. Hynd,et al.  The Role of Refutation Text in Overcoming Difficulty with Science Concepts. College Reading and Learning Assistance Technical Report 85-08. , 1985 .

[8]  Sharon Price Bonham,et al.  Education and Employment , 1971 .

[9]  Thomas W. Shiland Probing for Understanding. , 2002 .

[10]  J. Lemke Talking Science: Language, Learning, and Values , 1990 .

[11]  Lucia Mason,et al.  An analysis of children's construction of new knowledge through their use of reasoning and arguing in classroom discussions , 1996 .

[12]  Leslie R. Herrenkohl,et al.  Participant Structures, Scientific Discourse, and Student Engagement in Fourth Grade , 1998 .

[13]  S. Erduran,et al.  TAPping into argumentation: Developments in the application of Toulmin's Argument Pattern for studying science discourse , 2004 .

[14]  B. Koslowski Theory and Evidence: The Development of Scientific Reasoning , 1996 .

[15]  R. Duschl,et al.  "Doing the Lesson" or "Doing Science": Argument in High School Genetics , 2000 .

[16]  J. F. Voss,et al.  Who Reasons Well? Two Studies of Informal Reasoning Among Children of Different Grade, Ability, and Knowledge Levels , 1996 .

[17]  Erik De Corte,et al.  Learning and Instruction: European Research in an International Context: Volume 1 , 1987 .

[18]  P. Scott Teacher Talk and Meaning Making in Science Classrooms: a Vygotskian Analysis and Review , 1998 .

[19]  Stephen P. Norris,et al.  How literacy in its fundamental sense is central to scientific literacy , 2003 .

[20]  A. Giddens The consequences of modernity , 1990 .

[21]  M. Jiménez-Aleixandre,et al.  Argument in High School Genetics. , 1997 .

[22]  Susan Bobbitt Nolen,et al.  Learning environment, motivation, and achievement in high school science , 2003 .

[23]  Joan Solomon Exploring the Nature of Science: Key Stage 3 , 1991 .

[24]  C. Sutton,et al.  Words, Science and Learning , 1992 .

[25]  R. Hackett Young People's Images of Science , 1996 .

[26]  Cynthia R. Hynd,et al.  The role of instructional variables in conceptual change in high school physics topics , 1994 .

[27]  Daniel H. Cohen TArgument is War...and War is Hell: Philosophy, Education, and Metaphors for Argumentation , 1995 .

[28]  Jonathan Osborne,et al.  Science Without Literacy: A ship without a sail? , 2002 .

[29]  Uri Zoller,et al.  Algorithmic, LOCS and HOCS (chemistry) exam questions: Performance and attitudes of college students , 2002 .

[30]  A. Douglas,et al.  Valuable Lessons: Engaging with the Social Context of Science in schools , 2001 .

[31]  B. Joyce Changing School Culture through Staff Development: 1990 Yearbook of the Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development. , 1990 .

[32]  David Hammer,et al.  Student Inquiry in a Physics Class Discussion , 1995 .

[33]  Peter Blatchford,et al.  Pupil Groupings in Primary School Classrooms: Sites for learning and social pedagogy? , 2002 .

[34]  Douglas R. Barnes From communication to curriculum , 1976 .

[35]  D. Kuhn THE SKILLS OF ARGUMENT , 2008, Education for Thinking.

[36]  R. Driver,et al.  Small-Group Discussion in Physics: Peer Interaction Modes in Pairs and Fours. , 1996 .

[37]  David F. Treagust,et al.  Conflict within dyadic interactions as a stimulant for conceptual change in physics , 1987 .

[38]  Jon Ogborn Ownership and transformation: teachers using curriculum innovations , 2002 .

[39]  J. Solomon The Discussion of Social Issues in the Science Classroom , 1990 .

[40]  Abbie Brown,et al.  Design experiments: Theoretical and methodological challenges in creating complex interventions in c , 1992 .

[41]  Norman G. Lederman,et al.  It's the nature of the beast: The influence of knowledge and intentions on learning and teaching nature of science , 2002 .

[42]  Anat Zohar,et al.  Fostering students' knowledge and argumentation skills through dilemmas in human genetics , 2002 .

[43]  H Roberts,et al.  Risk Society: Towards a New Modernity , 1994 .

[44]  Paul F. Brandwein,et al.  Teaching elementary science through investigation and colloquium , 1971 .

[45]  M. Ratcliffe,et al.  Science Education for Citizenship , 2003 .

[46]  L. Brain Structure of the scientific paper. , 1965, British medical journal.

[47]  Gregory J. Kelly,et al.  Students’ reasoning about electricity: combining performance assessments with argumentation analysis , 1998 .

[48]  S. Loucks-Horsley Designing Professional Development for Teachers of Science and Mathematics , 1997 .

[49]  Uri Zoller,et al.  The disposition toward critical thinking of high school and university science students: an interintra Israeli-Italian Study , 2000 .

[50]  G. Wells,et al.  "Dialogic Inquiry. Towards a Sociocultural Practice and Theory of Education", Gordon Wells, Cambridge 1999 : [recenzja] / Marta Marchow. , 2001 .

[51]  John A. Pare Staff Development/Organization Development. The Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development 1981 Yearbook. Edited by Betty Dillon-Peterson. Alexandria, Va.: ASCD, 1981 , 1981 .

[52]  Florence Davies,et al.  Reading for learning in the sciences , 1984 .

[53]  D. Kuhn,et al.  Effects of Dyadic Interaction on Argumentive Reasoning , 1997 .

[54]  Stuart Naylor,et al.  Concept cartoons, teaching and learning in science : an evaluation , 1999 .

[55]  Jonathan Osborne,et al.  The biological effects of ultraviolet radiation: a model for contemporary science education? , 1998 .

[56]  Jon Turney,et al.  Explaining Science in the Classroom , 1997 .

[57]  J. T. Dillon Using discussion in classrooms , 1994 .

[58]  D. Walton Argumentation Schemes for Presumptive Reasoning , 1995 .

[59]  J. Osborne Promoting Argument in the Science Classroom: A Rhetorical Perspective , 2001 .

[60]  Kathleen Hogan,et al.  Comparing the Epistemological Underpinnings of Students' and Scientists' Reasoning about Conclusions. , 2001 .

[61]  J. Osborne,et al.  Establishing the norms of scientific argumentation in classrooms , 2000 .

[62]  G. J. Kelly,et al.  An ethnographic investigation of the discourse processes of school science , 1997 .

[63]  A. Lockey,et al.  Teaching and learning , 2001, Emergency medicine journal : EMJ.

[64]  Shirley Simon,et al.  Enhancing the quality of argument in school science , 2001 .

[65]  Cynthia R. Hynd,et al.  Preservice elementary school teachers' conceptual change about projectile motion: Refutation text, demonstration, affective factors, and relevance , 1997 .

[66]  Mary Ratcliffe,et al.  Pupil decision‐making about socio‐scientific issues within the science curriculum , 1997 .

[67]  J. Bruner The act of discovery. , 1961 .

[68]  G. Aikenhead Logical Reasoning in Science and Technology: , 1992 .

[69]  J. Kovac A Question of Chemistry: Creative Problems for Critical Thinkers (Garratt, John; Overton, Tina; Threlfall, Terry) , 2000 .

[70]  Sara Delamont,et al.  Qualitative studies in education , 1995 .

[71]  Tom Russell Analyzing arguments in science classroom discourse: Can teachers' questions distort scientific authority? , 1983 .

[72]  J. Osborne,et al.  The place of argumentation in the pedagogy of school science , 1999 .

[73]  I. Scheffler Conditions of Knowledge: An Introduction to Epistemology and Education , 1983 .

[74]  Richard Andrews,et al.  Teaching and Learning Argument , 1995 .

[75]  Annemarie Sullivan Palincsar,et al.  Developing Scientific Communities in Classrooms: A Sociocognitive Approach , 1999 .

[76]  Jonathan Osborne,et al.  PLACING THE HISTORY AND PHILOSOPHY OF SCIENCE ON THE CURRICULUM : A MODEL FOR THE DEVELOPMENT OF PEDAGOGY , 1997 .

[77]  Cynthia R. Hynd,et al.  Effects of Prior Knowledge Activation Modes and Text Structure on Nonscience Majors’ Comprehension of Physics , 1989 .

[78]  Arthur N. Geddis Improving the quality of science classroom discourse on controversial issues , 1991 .

[79]  C. Gill,et al.  Beyond 19992000 2001 science education for the future a report with ten recommendations , 1998 .

[80]  G. Wells Dialogic Inquiry: Towards a Socio-cultural Practice and Theory of Education , 1999 .

[81]  Soran Reader,et al.  The philosophy of need , 2006 .

[82]  M. Scardamalia,et al.  The psychology of written composition , 1987 .

[83]  Ej Wood European journal of science education , 1979 .

[84]  F. Suppe The Structure of a Scientific Paper , 1998, Philosophy of Science.

[85]  Donna E. Alvermann,et al.  Effects of interactive discussion and text type on learning counterintuitive science concepts , 1995 .

[86]  L. Yore,et al.  Examining the literacy component of science literacy: 25 years of language arts and science research , 2003 .

[87]  S. Toulmin The uses of argument , 1960 .

[88]  John K. Gilbert,et al.  Concepts, Misconceptions and Alternative Conceptions: Changing Perspectives in Science Education , 1983 .