Argumentation and Modeling: Integrating the Products and Practices of Science to Improve Science Education

There is now growing consensus that K12 science education needs to focus on core epistemic and representational practices of scientific inquiry (Duschl, Schweingruber, & Shouse, 2007; Lehrer & Schauble, 2006). In this chapter, we focus on two such practices: argumentation and computational modeling. Novice science learners engaging in these activities often struggle without appropriate and extensive scaffolding (e.g., Klahr, Dunbar, & Fay, 1990; Schauble, Klopfer, & Raghavan, 1991; Sandoval & Millwood, 2005; Lizotte, Harris, McNeill, Marx, & Krajcik, 2003). This chapter proposes that (a) integrating argumentation and modeling can productively engage students in inquiry-based activities that support learning of complex scientific concepts as well as the core argumentation and modeling practices at the heart of scientific inquiry, and (b) each of these activities can productively scaffold the other. This in turn can lead to higher academic achievement in schools, increased self-efficacy in science, and an overall increased interest in science that is absent in most traditional classrooms. This chapter provides a theoretical framework for engaging students in argumentation and a particular genre of computer modeling (i.e., agent-based modeling), illustrates the framework with examples of the authors’ own research and development, and introduces readers to freely available technologies and resources to adopt in classrooms to engage students in the practices discussed in the chapter. Audience. Science Teachers as primary audience with Policy Makers and Researchers as secondary audiences.

[1]  Patrick Felicia,et al.  Acceptance and Use of Game-Based Learning in Vocational Education and Training: An International Survey , 2015, Int. J. Game Based Learn..

[2]  Marcia C. Linn,et al.  The Knowledge Integration Perspective , 2013 .

[3]  Pratim Sengupta,et al.  Learning Natural Selection in 4th Grade with Multi-Agent-Based Computational Models , 2012, Research in Science Education.

[4]  Victor Sampson,et al.  Argument‐Driven Inquiry as a way to help students learn how to participate in scientific argumentation and craft written arguments: An exploratory study , 2011 .

[5]  V. Sampson,et al.  Two Instructional Models That Teachers Can use to Promote & Support Scientific Argumentation in the Biology Classroom , 2010 .

[6]  Victor Sampson,et al.  Generate an Argument: An Instructional Model. , 2010 .

[7]  Victor Sampson,et al.  Argument-Driven Inquiry: A Way to Promote Learning during Laboratory Activities , 2009 .

[8]  Paulo Blikstein,et al.  An Atom is Known by the Company it Keeps: A Constructionist Learning Environment for Materials Science Using Agent-Based Modeling , 2009, Int. J. Comput. Math. Learn..

[9]  Victor Sampson,et al.  Argument-Driven Inquiry To Promote the Understanding of Important Concepts & Practices in Biology , 2009 .

[10]  V. Sampson,et al.  Promoting and Supporting Scientific Argumentation in the Classroom: The Evaluate-Alternatives Instructional Model. , 2009 .

[11]  Richard Lehrer,et al.  Supporting development of the epistemology of inquiry , 2008 .

[12]  Jessica Thompson,et al.  Beyond the scientific method: Model‐based inquiry as a new paradigm of preference for school science investigations , 2008 .

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

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

[15]  R. Duschl Science Education in Three-Part Harmony: Balancing Conceptual, Epistemic, and Social Learning Goals , 2008 .

[16]  Uri Wilensky,et al.  Inventing a “Mid Level” to Make Ends Meet: Reasoning between the Levels of Complexity , 2008 .

[17]  Marsha C. Lovett,et al.  Middle school students’ use of appropriate and inappropriate evidence in writing scientific explanations , 2007 .

[18]  Jerry Wellington,et al.  America's lab report: Investigations in high school science , 2007 .

[19]  U. Wilensky,et al.  Thinking Like a Wolf, a Sheep, or a Firefly: Learning Biology Through Constructing and Testing Computational Theories—An Embodied Modeling Approach , 2006 .

[20]  Marcia C. Linn,et al.  Science Education: Integrating Views of Learning and Instruction , 2006 .

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

[22]  Michael J. Ford,et al.  Chapter 1: Redefining Disciplinary Learning in Classroom Contexts , 2006 .

[23]  Chris Beaumont,et al.  Technology and problem-based learning , 2005 .

[24]  Susan A. Yoon,et al.  Teaching Complex Dynamic Systems to Young Students with StarLogo , 2005 .

[25]  L. Schauble,et al.  Cultivating Model-Based Reasoning in Science Education , 2005 .

[26]  Marcia C. Linn,et al.  The Knowledge Integration Perspective on Learning and Instruction , 2005 .

[27]  G. Aikenhead,et al.  Science-Based Occupations and the Science Curriculum: Concepts of Evidence , 2005 .

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

[29]  Joseph Krajcik,et al.  Teacher Practices that Support Students' Construction of Scientific Explanations in Middle School Classrooms , 2004, ICLS.

[30]  W. Sandoval,et al.  Explanation-Driven Inquiry: Integrating Conceptual and Epistemic Scaffolds for Scientific Inquiry , 2004 .

[31]  Troy D. Sadler,et al.  Informal reasoning regarding socioscientific issues: A critical review of research , 2004 .

[32]  R. Fraser The structure of deoxyribose nucleic acid. , 2004, Journal of structural biology.

[33]  A. Lawson,et al.  The nature and development of hypothetico‐predictive argumentation with implications for science teaching , 2003 .

[34]  M. Baker,et al.  Arguing to Learn: Confronting Cognitions in Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning Environments , 2003 .

[35]  J. Osborne,et al.  Supporting and Promoting Argumentation Discourse in Science Education , 2002 .

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

[37]  Lance J. Rips,et al.  Explanation and evidence in informal argument , 2000, Cogn. Sci..

[38]  Selma Leitão,et al.  The Potential of Argument in Knowledge Building , 2000, Human Development.

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

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

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

[42]  M. Pressley,et al.  Discourse Patterns and Collaborative Scientific Reasoning in Peer and Teacher-Guided Discussions , 1999 .

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

[44]  Charles W. Anderson,et al.  Reasoning about data in middle school science , 1999 .

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

[46]  D. Zeidler The central role of fallacious thinking in science education , 1997 .

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

[48]  Leona Schauble,et al.  Students' Understanding of the Objectives and Procedures of Experimentation in the Science Classroom , 1995 .

[49]  P. Scott,et al.  Constructing Scientific Knowledge in the Classroom , 1994 .

[50]  J. Roschelle,et al.  Misconceptions Reconceived: A Constructivist Analysis of Knowledge in Transition , 1994 .

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

[52]  William F. Brewer,et al.  The Role of Anomalous Data in Knowledge Acquisition: A Theoretical Framework and Implications for Science Instruction , 1993 .

[53]  D. Hestenes Modeling games in the Newtonian World , 1992 .

[54]  L. Schauble,et al.  Students' transition from an engineering model to a science model of experimentation , 1991 .

[55]  C. Bazerman,et al.  Complex Dynamics: Literature, Science, and Postdisciplinarity@@@Reconnection: Dualism to Holism in Literary Study@@@Shaping Written Knowledge: The Genre and Activity of the Experimental Article in Science , 1991 .

[56]  S. Woolgar,et al.  Representation in Scientific Practice , 1990 .

[57]  Seymour Papert,et al.  Software Design as a Learning Environment , 1990, Interact. Learn. Environ..

[58]  Susan Carey,et al.  `An experiment is when you try it and see if it works': a study of grade 7 students' understanding of the construction of scientific knowledge , 1989 .

[59]  D. Kuhn Children and adults as intuitive scientists. , 1989, Psychological review.

[60]  David Klahr,et al.  Designing Good Experiments to Test Bad Hypotheses , 1989 .

[61]  Harvey Siegel,et al.  The rationality of science, critical thinking, and science education , 1989, Synthese.

[62]  Harold Abelson,et al.  Boxer: a reconstructible computational medium , 1986, CACM.

[63]  F. Crick,et al.  Molecular Structure of Nucleic Acids: A Structure for Deoxyribose Nucleic Acid , 1953, Nature.

[64]  G. Christou,et al.  Teaching Mathematics with Tablet PCs: A Professional Development Program Targeting Primary School Teachers , 2015 .

[65]  Nathalie Sinclair,et al.  Whatever Be Their Number: Counting on the Visible, the Audible, and the Tangible , 2015 .

[66]  Chen Yulai,et al.  Constructing the Knowledge Society: China's Experience , 2014 .

[67]  Charles B. Hodges,et al.  The Port Lesson: Grade 5 Mathematics Modeling for a Local Context , 2014 .

[68]  Judi Simmons Estes,et al.  Mathematics Acquisition and Immigrant Children , 2014 .

[69]  Giuseppe Del Re,et al.  Models and analogies in science , 2013 .

[70]  R. Blake,et al.  Enhancing Diversity in STEM Interdisciplinary Learning , 2013 .

[71]  Trina Halfhide,et al.  The Role of Authentic Science Research and Education Outreach in Increasing Community Resilience: Case Studies Using Informal Education to Address Ocean Acidification and Healthy Soils , 2013 .

[72]  C. Bardelle Improving Learning Strategies for Mathematics through E-Learning , 2013 .

[73]  Susan E. Searing Shaping the Librarian's Library: Collecting to Support LIS Education and Practice , 2013 .

[74]  David N. Rapp,et al.  Models and modeling in science learning , 2011 .

[75]  Elaine M. Raybourn,et al.  Honing Emotional Intelligence with Game-Based Crucible Experiences , 2011, Int. J. Game Based Learn..

[76]  Richard Lehrer,et al.  What Kind of Explanation is a Model , 2010 .

[77]  Nancy J. Nersessian,et al.  Model-Based Reasoning in Interdisciplinary Engineering , 2009 .

[78]  Gregory J. Kelly,et al.  Inquiry, Activity and Epistemic Practice , 2008 .

[79]  B. Reiser,et al.  DEFENDING EVIDENCE-BASED SCIENTIFIC EXPLANATIONS , 2005 .

[80]  Joseph Krajcik,et al.  Usable Assessments Aligned with Curriculum Materials: Measuring Explanation as a Scientific Way of Knowing , 2003 .

[81]  Ronald N. Giere,et al.  Using Models to Represent Reality , 1999 .

[82]  M. Resnick,et al.  Thinking in Levels: A Dynamic Systems Approach to Making Sense of the World , 1999 .

[83]  B. Zimmerman,et al.  Self-regulated learning : from teaching to self-reflective practice , 1998 .

[84]  Mitchel Resnick,et al.  Turtles, termites, and traffic jams - explorations in massively parallel microworlds , 1994 .

[85]  David Hammer,et al.  Dynaturtle Revisited: Learning Physics Through Collaborative Design of a Computer Model , 1993, Interact. Learn. Environ..

[86]  D. Kuhn Reasoning: The Skills of Argument , 2008 .

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

[88]  David Hestenes,et al.  MODELING is the name of the game , 2022 .