Identifying patterns in students’ scientific argumentation: content analysis through text mining using Latent Dirichlet Allocation

Constructing scientific arguments is an important practice for students because it helps them to make sense of data using scientific knowledge and within the conceptual and experimental boundaries of an investigation. In this study, we used a text mining method called Latent Dirichlet Allocation (LDA) to identify underlying patterns in students written scientific arguments about a complex scientific phenomenon called Albedo Effect. We further examined how identified patterns compare to existing frameworks related to explaining evidence to support claims and attributing sources of uncertainty. LDA was applied to electronically stored arguments written by 2472 students and concerning how decreases in sea ice affect global temperatures. The results indicated that each content topic identified in the explanations by the LDA— “data only,” “reasoning only,” “data and reasoning combined,” “wrong reasoning types,” and “restatement of the claim”—could be interpreted using the claim–evidence–reasoning framework. Similarly, each topic identified in the students’ uncertainty attributions— “self-evaluations,” “personal sources related to knowledge and experience,” and “scientific sources related to reasoning and data”—could be interpreted using the taxonomy of uncertainty attribution. These results indicate that LDA can serve as a tool for content analysis that can discover semantic patterns in students’ scientific argumentation in particular science domains and facilitate teachers’ providing help to students.

[1]  A. Tversky,et al.  Judgment under Uncertainty: Heuristics and Biases , 1974, Science.

[2]  Kalina Yacef,et al.  Analysis of collaborative writing processes using revision maps and probabilistic topic models , 2013, LAK '13.

[3]  Minsu Ha,et al.  Assessing Scientific Practices Using Machine-Learning Methods: How Closely Do They Match Clinical Interview Performance? , 2013, Journal of Science Education and Technology.

[4]  Kristy Elizabeth Boyer,et al.  Unsupervised modeling for understanding MOOC discussion forums: a learning analytics approach , 2015, LAK.

[5]  John L. Nietfeld,et al.  Using strategy instruction and confidence judgments to improve metacognitive monitoring , 2009 .

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

[7]  Gerd Stumme,et al.  Semantic resource management for the web: an e-learning application , 2004, WWW Alt. '04.

[8]  D. Kuhn Science as argument : Implications for teaching and learning scientific thinking , 1993 .

[9]  Amy Pallant,et al.  Articulating Uncertainty Attribution as Part of Critical Epistemic Practice of Scientific Argumentation , 2017, CSCL.

[10]  Nancy J. Stone,et al.  Exploring the Relationship between Calibration and Self-Regulated Learning , 2000 .

[11]  Xin Chen,et al.  "Twitter Archeology" of learning analytics and knowledge conferences , 2015, LAK.

[12]  Wu He,et al.  Using Data Mining for Predicting Relationships between Online Question Theme and Final Grade , 2012, J. Educ. Technol. Soc..

[13]  Libby Gerard,et al.  Validation of Automated Scoring of Science Assessments. , 2016 .

[14]  Chong Ho Yu,et al.  Compatibility between Text Mining and Qualitative Research in the Perspectives of Grounded Theory, Content Analysis, and Reliability , 2011 .

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

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

[17]  Semire Dikli,et al.  An Overview of Automated Scoring of Essays. , 2006 .

[18]  Chong Wang,et al.  Reading Tea Leaves: How Humans Interpret Topic Models , 2009, NIPS.

[19]  Wanli Xing,et al.  Beyond positive and negative emotions: Looking into the role of achievement emotions in discussion forums of MOOCs , 2019, Internet High. Educ..

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

[21]  Maria Simosi Using Toulmin's Framework for the Analysis of Everyday Argumentation: Some Methodological Considerations , 2003 .

[22]  Marlene Scardamalia,et al.  Exploring emotional and cognitive dynamics of Knowledge Building in grades 1 and 2 , 2019, User Modeling and User-Adapted Interaction.

[23]  Douglas B. Clark,et al.  Assessing Dialogic Argumentation in Online Environments to Relate Structure, Grounds, and Conceptual Quality , 2008 .

[24]  D. Allchin Teaching the nature of science through scientific errors , 2012 .

[25]  Yuen-Hsien Tseng,et al.  Mining concept maps from news stories for measuring civic scientific literacy in media , 2010, Comput. Educ..

[26]  Kinshuk,et al.  Mining e-Learning domain concept map from academic articles , 2008, Comput. Educ..

[27]  Wu He,et al.  Using text mining to uncover students' technology-related problems in live video streaming , 2011, Br. J. Educ. Technol..

[28]  Jill Burstein,et al.  Automated Essay Scoring : A Cross-disciplinary Perspective , 2003 .

[29]  Troy D. Sadler,et al.  A threshold model of content knowledge transfer for socioscientific argumentation , 2006 .

[30]  Wanli Xing,et al.  The effect of sustained vs. faded scaffolding on students' argumentation in ill-structured problem solving , 2018, Comput. Hum. Behav..

[31]  Philip Bell,et al.  Conceptualizations of argumentation from science studies and the learning sciences and their implications for the practices of science education , 2008 .

[32]  D. S. Guru,et al.  Representation and Classification of Text Documents: A Brief Review , 2010 .

[33]  Timo Honkela,et al.  Text Mining in Qualitative Research , 2009 .

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

[35]  Bodong Chen Visualizing semantic space of online discourse: the knowledge forum case , 2014, LAK '14.

[36]  Paul Horwitz,et al.  The effects of transformative and non-transformative discourse on individual performance in collaborative-inquiry learning , 2019, Comput. Hum. Behav..

[37]  Carolyn Penstein Rosé,et al.  Analyzing collaborative learning processes automatically: Exploiting the advances of computational linguistics in computer-supported collaborative learning , 2008, Int. J. Comput. Support. Collab. Learn..

[38]  S. Pryputniewicz,et al.  Assessment of uncertainty-infused scientific argumentation , 2014 .

[39]  Fu-Ren Lin,et al.  Discovering genres of online discussion threads via text mining , 2009, Comput. Educ..

[40]  Douglas B. Clark,et al.  Assessment of the ways students generate arguments in science education: Current perspectives and recommendations for future directions , 2008 .

[41]  Gökhan Akçapinar,et al.  How automated feedback through text mining changes plagiaristic behavior in online assignments , 2015, Comput. Educ..

[42]  Fei Gao,et al.  Exploring the relationship between online discourse and commitment in Twitter professional learning communities , 2018, Comput. Educ..

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

[44]  Leema K. Berland,et al.  Making sense of argumentation and explanation , 2009 .

[45]  S. Erduran,et al.  Arguing to learn and learning to argue: Case studies of how students' argumentation relates to their scientific knowledge , 2008 .

[46]  Andreas Hotho,et al.  A Brief Survey of Text Mining , 2005, LDV Forum.

[47]  Ngss Lead States Next generation science standards : for states, by states , 2013 .

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

[49]  Fan Zhang,et al.  Annotation and Classification of Argumentative Writing Revisions , 2015, BEA@NAACL-HLT.

[50]  John Dunlosky,et al.  Overconfidence produces underachievement: Inaccurate self evaluations undermine students’ learning and retention , 2012 .

[51]  Helen R. Quinn,et al.  A Framework for K-12 Science Education: Practices, Crosscutting Concepts, and Core Ideas , 2013 .

[52]  Jui-long Hung,et al.  Trends of e-learning research from 2000 to 2008: Use of text mining and bibliometrics , 2012, Br. J. Educ. Technol..

[53]  M. Baker,et al.  Computer-Mediated Epistemic Dialogue: Explanation and Argumentation as Vehicles for Understanding Scientific Notions , 2002 .