Teachers' use of curriculum to support students in writing scientific arguments to explain phenomena

The role of the teacher is essential for students' successful engagement in scientific inquiry practices. This study focuses on teachers' use of an 8-week chemistry curriculum that explicitly supports students in one particular inquiry practice, the construction of scientific arguments to explain phenomena in which students justify their claims using evidence and reasoning. Participants included 6 teachers and 568 students. Videotapes, teacher questionnaires, and student pre- and posttests were analyzed to develop case studies that characterized the support the teachers provided their students for scientific argumentation and subsequent student learning. Patterns from the case studies suggest that one particular instructional practice, the way teachers defined scientific argumentation, characterized teachers' support and influenced the other practices they used in their classrooms. In some cases, the teachers' definitions of scientific argumentation did not align with the intended learning goal in the curriculum materials. These teachers' greater simplification of this complex inquiry practice resulted in decreased learning gains in terms of students' ability to write scientific arguments to explain phenomena using appropriate evidence and reasoning. Educative curriculum materials can have a positive impact on teachers' classroom support for scientific argumentation, but how the teachers use these materials influences student learning. © 2008 Wiley Periodicals, Inc. Sci Ed93: 233–268, 2009

[1]  J. Remillard Examining Key Concepts in Research on Teachers’ Use of Mathematics Curricula , 2005 .

[2]  William A. Sandoval,et al.  Conceptual and Epistemic Aspects of Students' Scientific Explanations , 2003 .

[3]  Matthew B. Miles,et al.  Qualitative Data Analysis: An Expanded Sourcebook , 1994 .

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

[5]  Vaughan Prain,et al.  Using the science writing heuristic as a tool for learning from laboratory investigations in secondary science , 1999 .

[6]  Ronald W. Marx,et al.  “Maestro, what is ‘quality’?”: Language, literacy, and discourse in project-based science , 2001 .

[7]  Brian J. Reiser,et al.  Complementary roles of software-based scaffolding and teacher-student interactions in inquiry learning , 1997, CSCL.

[8]  Sandra H. Fradd,et al.  Teachers' Roles in Promoting Science Inquiry with Students from Diverse Language Backgrounds. , 1999 .

[9]  Katherine Lynch McNeill Supporting students' construction of scientific explanation through curricular scaffolds and teacher instructional practices. , 2006 .

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

[11]  Roy D. Pea,et al.  The Social and Technological Dimensions of Scaffolding and Related Theoretical Concepts for Learning, Education, and Human Activity , 2004, The Journal of the Learning Sciences.

[12]  W. Shadish,et al.  Experimental and Quasi-Experimental Designs for Generalized Causal Inference , 2001 .

[13]  H. Schweingruber,et al.  TAKING SCIENCE TO SCHOOL: LEARNING AND TEACHING SCIENCE IN GRADES K-8 , 2007 .

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

[15]  Ann L. Brown,et al.  How people learn: Brain, mind, experience, and school. , 1999 .

[16]  Katherine L. McNeill,et al.  Learning‐goals‐driven design model: Developing curriculum materials that align with national standards and incorporate project‐based pedagogy , 2008 .

[17]  Christopher Andersen,et al.  Cognitive Foundations of Learning Argumentation , 2007 .

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

[19]  Sibel Erduran,et al.  Argumentation in Science Education: Perspectives from Classroom-Based Research , 2007 .

[20]  Joseph Krajcik,et al.  Scientific Explanations: Characterizing and Evaluating the Effects of Teachers' Instructional Practices on Student Learning. , 2008 .

[21]  Shirley Simon,et al.  Learning to Teach Argumentation: Research and development in the science classroom , 2006 .

[22]  R. Driver,et al.  Children's Ideas in Science , 1985 .

[23]  Joseph Krajcik,et al.  Enacting Reform-Based Science Materials: The Range of Teacher Enactments in Reform Classrooms , 2005 .

[24]  William A. Prothero,et al.  Analysis of Lines of Reasoning in Written Argumentation , 2007 .

[25]  Joseph Krajcik,et al.  Supporting Students' Construction of Scientific Explanations by Fading Scaffolds in Instructional Materials , 2006 .

[26]  Greg Myers,et al.  Writing biology : texts in the social construction of scientific knowledge , 1990 .

[27]  J. Shea National Science Education Standards , 1995 .

[28]  J. Krajcik,et al.  Designing Educative Curriculum Materials to Promote Teacher Learning , 2005 .

[29]  Amelia Wenk Gotwals,et al.  Measuring Students' Scientific Content and Inquiry Reasoning , 2006, ICLS.

[30]  Gregory J. Kelly,et al.  The sound of music: Constructing science as sociocultural practices through oral and written discourse , 1999 .

[31]  Larry D. Yore,et al.  Scientists as Writers , 2002 .

[32]  Brian Hand,et al.  Factors Affecting the Implementation of Argument in the Elementary Science Classroom. A Longitudinal Case Study , 2009 .

[33]  D. Ball,et al.  Reform by the Book: What Is—or Might Be—the Role of Curriculum Materials in Teacher Learning and Instructional Reform? , 1996 .

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

[35]  J. A. Blair,et al.  Fundamentals of Argumentation Theory : A Handbook of Historical Backgrounds and Contemporary Developments , 1997 .

[36]  Christine Chin,et al.  Learning in Science: A Comparison of Deep and Surface Approaches. , 2000 .

[37]  J. Meece,et al.  Task Factors, Teacher Behavior, and Students' Involvement and Use of Learning Strategies in Science , 1988, The Elementary School Journal.

[38]  Carolyn W. Keys,et al.  Co-Constructing Inquiry-based Science with Teachers: Essential Research for Lasting Reform. , 2001 .

[39]  John B. Black,et al.  The Development of Cognitive Skills To Support Inquiry Learning , 2000 .

[40]  Joseph Krajcik,et al.  Sustaining Innovations Through Lead Teacher Learning: A learning sciences perspective on supporting professional development , 2006 .

[41]  W. Sandoval Understanding Students' Practical Epistemologies and Their Influence on Learning Through Inquiry , 2005 .

[42]  William A. Sandoval,et al.  The Quality of Students' Use of Evidence in Written Scientific Explanations , 2005 .

[43]  Lawrence B. Flick,et al.  Cognitive Scaffolding that Fosters Scientific Inquiry in Middle Level Science , 2000 .

[44]  M. Haberman,et al.  The Pedagogy of Poverty versus Good Teaching , 2010 .

[45]  Alan G. Gross,et al.  The rhetoric of science , 1990 .

[46]  B. Crawford Embracing the essence of inquiry: New roles for science teachers , 2000 .

[47]  Shirley Simon,et al.  Enhancing the quality of argumentation in school science , 2004 .

[48]  S. Erduran,et al.  Argumentation in Science Education: An Overview , 2007 .

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

[50]  S. Puntambekar,et al.  Comparing Classroom Enactments of an Inquiry Curriculum: Lessons Learned From Two Teachers , 2007 .

[51]  Iris Tabak,et al.  Synergy: A Complement to Emerging Patterns of Distributed Scaffolding , 2004, The Journal of the Learning Sciences.

[52]  Joseph Krajcik,et al.  A Scaffolding Design Framework for Software to Support Science Inquiry , 2004, The Journal of the Learning Sciences.