首页 | 本学科首页   官方微博 | 高级检索  
相似文献
 共查询到20条相似文献，搜索用时 46 毫秒
1.
An empirical study on 12th-grade students?? engagement on a global warming debate as a citizens?? conference is reported. Within the design-based research methodology, an interdisciplinary teaching sequence integrating an initiation to non-violent communication was developed. Students?? debates were analyzed according to three dimensions: communication, argumentation, and knowledge. Students regulated their oral contributions to the debate by identifying judgments in their discussions. Rhetorical processes developed by students were mainly related to the identity of debate protagonists with interest attributions, authority, and positions. Students?? arguments also relied on empirical data. The students?? knowledge focused on energy choices, economic, political, and science development issues. Implications for socioscientific issues integration in class are discussed.  相似文献   

2.
This study investigated the effects of students’ prior science knowledge and online learning approaches (social and individual) on their learning with regard to three topics: science concepts, inquiry, and argumentation. Two science teachers and 118 students from 4 eighth-grade science classes were invited to participate in this research. Students in each class were divided into three groups according to their level of prior science knowledge; they then took either our social- or individual-based online science learning program. The results show that students in the social online argumentation group performed better in argumentation and online argumentation learning. Qualitative analysis indicated that the students’ social interactions benefited the co-construction of sound arguments and the accurate understanding of science concepts. In constructing arguments, students in the individual online argumentation group were limited to knowledge recall and self-reflection. High prior-knowledge students significantly outperformed low prior-knowledge students in all three aspects of science learning. However, the difference in inquiry and argumentation performance between low and high prior-knowledge students decreased with the progression of online learning topics.  相似文献   

3.
To achieve the goal of scientific literacy, the skills of argumentation have been emphasized in science education during the past decades. But the extent to which students can apply scientific knowledge to their argumentation is still unclear. The purpose of this study was to analyse 80 Swedish upper secondary students’ informal argumentation on four socioscientific issues (SSIs) to explore students’ use of supporting reasons and to what extent students used scientific knowledge in their arguments. Eighty upper secondary students were asked to express their opinions on one SSI topic they chose through written reports. The four SSIs in this study include global warming, genetically modified organisms (GMO), nuclear power, and consumption. To analyse students’ supporting reasons from a holistic view, we used the SEE-SEP model, which links the six subject areas of sociology/culture (So), environment (En), economy (Ec), science (Sc), ethics/morality (Et) and policy (Po) connecting with three aspects, knowledge, value and personal experience (KVP). The results showed that students used value to a greater extent (67%) than they did scientific knowledge (27%) for all four SSI topics. According to the SEE-SEP model, the distribution of supporting reasons generated by students differed among the SSI topics. Also, some alternative concepts were disclosed in students’ arguments. The implications for research and education are discussed.  相似文献   

4.
  相似文献   

5.
ABSTRACT

This study investigated two science teachers’ meta-strategic knowledge (MSK) of argumentation teaching by applying the repertory grid technique (RGT). One teacher was a novice, while the other was experienced in teaching argumentation. Using the RGT, we elicited the objectives and strategies of the two teachers regarding their argumentation teaching involving two social scientific issue (SSI) scenarios. The results showed that the experienced teacher had more varied and organised MSK for teaching argumentation than the novice teacher. Meanwhile, the novice teacher indicated a belief that the learning of argumentation should occur in a more student-centred manner, rather than relying on a traditional lecture-based environment. Consequently, she spent a considerable amount of time engaging students with their peers’ ideas through discussion and collaboration. On the other hand, the experienced teacher noticed that most of students had the ability to generate arguments, but that few knew how to argue based on evidence. Therefore, she helped students to collect data from various resources and suggested that they construct their own knowledge framework in order to improve students’ ability to incorporate their understanding of scientific knowledge into scientific argumentation.  相似文献   

6.
《学习科学杂志》2013,22(2):219-256
In this article, we elaborate methodologies to study construction of knowledge in argumentative activities. For this purpose, we report on a quasi-empirical study on construction of knowledge through successive argumentative activities on a controversial issue. A group of 120 fifth grade students participated in successive argumentative activities; some activities involved individuals and some involved collectives. According to a first methodology, construction of knowledge was measured through arguments/outcomes produced. We developed tools for evaluating changes in individual and collective arguments. In the study, we showed the generally beneficial effect of argumentative activities on collective and individual arguments/outcomes. The significant discrepancies between collective and individual arguments suggested that individual students only partly internalized the collectively constructed arguments. We developed a qualitative methodology to refine this hypothesis as well as other hypotheses concerning the interpretation of the quantitative study. The integration of the quantitative and qualitative methodologies for studying argumentation helped identify several mechanisms of construction of knowledge in argumentative activities. In particular, it brought new light on the mediating role of representational tools such as Argumentative Maps or Pro-Con tables.  相似文献   

7.
This study explores the arguments used by 14-year-old students in making decisions about the design of a road in their area. The whole activity was based on an actual problem at the time the research took place. The procedure was a sequence, where students worked first individually, then in groups and finally they had to take a class decision. Then they had to realize one of the final proposals and design the construction of a bridge that their planning had involved. This paper first elaborates the general perspective of such an approach; it then describes the process of argumentation and analyses the nature of the students' arguments, which are discussed on the basis of a specifically constructed network.  相似文献   

8.
Argumentation, and the production of scientific arguments are critical elements of inquiry that are necessary for helping students become scientifically literate through engaging them in constructing and critiquing ideas. This case study employed a mixed methods research design to examine the development in 5th grade students’ practices of oral and written argumentation from one unit to another over 16 weeks utilizing the science writing heuristic approach. Data sources included five rounds of whole-class discussion focused on group presentations of arguments that occurred over eleven class periods; students’ group writings; interviews with six target students and the teacher; and the researcher’s field notes. The results revealed five salient trends in students’ development of oral and written argumentative practices over time: (1) Students came to use more critique components as they participated in more rounds of whole-class discussion focused on group presentations of arguments; (2) by challenging each other’s arguments, students came to focus on the coherence of the argument and the quality of evidence; (3) students came to use evidence to defend, support, and reject arguments; (4) the quality of students’ writing continuously improved over time; and (5) students connected oral argument skills to written argument skills as they had opportunities to revise their writing after debating and developed awareness of the usefulness of critique from peers. Given the development in oral argumentative practices and the quality of written arguments over time, this study indicates that students’ development of oral and written argumentative practices is positively related to each other. This study suggests that argumentative practices should be framed through both a social and epistemic understanding of argument-utilizing talk and writing as vehicles to create norms of these complex practices.  相似文献   

9.
The purpose of this study was to explore the impact of an intervention on pre-service science teachers’ self-efficacy to teach science through argumentation and explore the challenges they experienced while implementing argumentation. Forty pre-service science teachers in their final semester of schooling participated in an intervention that lasted for 11 weeks. Intervention focused on participants’ understanding of argumentation as a scientific practice and as a pedagogical tool. The participants engaged in argument construction, evaluation, and critique, taught three argumentation lessons, engaged in peer observation of teaching, and reflection on their teaching skills. Data were collected through Argumentation Self-Efficacy Scale and an open-ended questionnaire. The results show that the intervention had a significantly positive effect on pre-service teachers’ self-efficacy. Despite this reported self-efficacy, participants experienced significant challenges in guiding their students to construct scientific arguments and assessing the arguments developed by their students. Discussion focuses on implications for professional development of pre-service and in-service science teachers.  相似文献   

10.
We investigated how students articulate uncertainty when they are engaged in structured scientific argumentation tasks where they generate, examine, and interpret data to determine the existence of exoplanets. In this study, 302 high school students completed 4 structured scientific arguments that followed a series of computer-model-based curriculum module activities simulating the radial velocity and/or the transit method. Structured scientific argumentation tasks involved claim, explanation, uncertainty rating, and uncertainty rationale. We explored (1) how students are articulating uncertainty within the various elements of the task and (2) the relationship between the way the task is presented and the way students are articulating uncertainty. We found that (1) while the majority of students did not express uncertainty in either explanation or uncertainty rationale, students who did express uncertainty in their explanations did so scientifically without being prompted explicitly, (2) students’ uncertainty ratings and rationales revealed a mix of their personal confidence and uncertainty related to science, and (3) if a task presented noisy data, students were less likely to express uncertainty in their explanations.  相似文献   

11.
  相似文献   

12.
We explored the scientific argumentation that occurs among university biology students during an argumentation task implemented in two environments: face-to-face in a classroom and online in an asynchronous discussion. We observed 10 student groups, each composed of three students. Our analysis focused on how students respond to their peers’ unscientific arguments, which we define as assertions, hypotheses, propositions, or explanations that are inaccurate or incomplete from a scientific perspective. Unscientific arguments provide opportunities for productive dissent, scientific argumentation, and conceptual development of scientifically desirable conceptions. We found that students did not respond to the majority of unscientific arguments in both environments. Challenges to unscientific arguments were expressed as a question or through explanation, although the latter was more common online than face-to-face. Students demonstrated significantly more epistemic distancing in the face-to-face environment than the online environment. We discuss the differences in discourse observed in both environments and teaching implications. We also provide direction for future research seeking to address the challenges of engaging students in productive scientific argumentation in both face-to-face and online environments.  相似文献   

13.
As China and the United States become the top two carbon emitters in the world, it is crucial for citizens in both countries to construct a sophisticated understanding of energy consumption issues. This interview study examines how U.S. and Chinese students compare in explaining and arguing about two critical energy consumption issues: burning fossil fuels and using electricity. In particular, we focused on using scientific knowledge to explain and argue about these issues. Based on relevant literature and our previous research, we developed a model to guide separate assessment and evaluation of students’ argumentation and explanation. We conducted clinical interviews with 40 biology majors, including 20 U.S. students and 20 Chinese students. This study generated several important findings. First, Chinese students tended to be less consistent across explanations and argumentation, and their levels of argumentation were lower than their levels of explanation. Second, in comparison to their Chinese counterparts, U.S. students provided more scientific arguments but many fewer scientific explanations. Finally, although all participants were college students and had completed at least one introductory level science course before the interviews, some of their explanations and arguments were based on informal ideas rather than matter and energy. We discuss the possible interpretations of these findings and their implications for teaching and learning of scientific explanation and argumentation in both countries.  相似文献   

14.
To make meaning of scientific knowledge in such a way that concepts and values of the life-world are not threatened is difficult for students and laymen. Ethics and morals pertaining to the use of genetic tests for hereditary diseases have been investigated and discussed by educators, anthropologists, medical doctors and philosophers giving, at least in part, diverging results. This study investigates how students explain and understand their argumentation about dilemmas concerning gene testing for the purpose to reduce hereditary diseases. Thirteen students were interviewed about their views on this issue. Qualitative analysis was done primarily by relating students’ argumentation to their movements between ethics and morals as opposing poles. Students used either objective or subjective knowledge but had difficulties to integrate them. They tried to negotiate ethic arguments using utilitarian motives and medical knowledge with sympathy or irrational and personal arguments. They discussed the embryo’s moral status to decide if it was replaceable in a social group or not. The educational implications of the students’ use of knowledge in personal arguments are discussed.  相似文献   

15.
In this review essay I respond to issues raised in Mijung Kim and Wolff-Michael Roth’s paper titled “Dialogical argumentation in elementary science classrooms”, which presents a study dealing with dialogical argumentation in early elementary school classrooms. Since there is very limited research on lower primary school students’ argumentation in school science, their paper makes a contribution to research on children’s argumentation skills. In this response, I focus on two main issues to extend the discussion in Kim and Roth’s paper: (a) methodological issues including conducting a quantitative study on children’s argumentation levels and focusing on children’s written argumentation in addition to their dialogical argumentation, and (b) investigating children’s conceptual understanding along with their argumentation levels. Kim and Roth emphasize the difficulty in determining the level of children’s argumentation through the Toulmin’s Argument Pattern and lack of high level arguments by children due to their difficulties in writing texts. Regarding these methodological issues, I suggest designing quantitative research on coding children’s argument levels because such research could potentially provide important findings on children’s argumentation. Furthermore, I discuss alternative written products including posters, figures, or pictures generated by children in order to trace children’s arguments, and finally articulating argumentation and conceptual understanding of children.  相似文献   

16.
  相似文献   

17.
What university teachers teach and how they teach it   总被引：2，自引：1，他引：1  
In this article we make three related arguments. The first isthat different teachers have different intentions concerning whatstudents will learn and consequently in their teaching they constitutethe topic or subject to be taught quite differently. The second is thata teacher's intentions concerning what it is that students should learnis closely aligned with a teacher's expectation of how students learnand how they can be helped to learn through teaching. The third is thatwhen teachers focus specifically on the teaching of a particular topic,within a specific context, there is a close relationship between theirintentions and their teaching practice. In this article we explore thesearguments through an empirical study which considers the different waysin which 26 university teachers intended to constitute a subject ortopic for their students to study, how they then taught the subject andsubsequently how consistent were their intentions and their practice.The analysis shows that when the context of teaching and learning istightly defined there is a clear relationship between a teacher'sintention and their practice. In particular, university teachers whoadopt more conceptual change and student-focussed approaches to teachingconstitute objects of study which are more relational and focus on thestudent's knowledge. Approaches which are more information transmissionand teacher-focussed constitute objects of study which are moremulti-structural and have a focus on knowledge which is as constitutedas being external to the student.  相似文献   

18.

We designed an educational activity for undergraduate students and assessed how this newly-constructed activity promoted students’ argumentation skills, thereby fostering their epistemic beliefs. This argumentation-based learning activity involved digital concept mapping. A quasi-experimental design involved pretests and posttests that were administered to 52 research participants in a group and 61 participants in a control group. Students’ argumentation skills were qualitatively examined by analyzing the structure of their arguments before and after the activity. Their perceptions of the activity and epistemic belief types (from absolutism to evaluativism) were measured with the Epistemic Beliefs Scale and the Concept Mapping for Problem-Based Learning Scale. The designed activity evoked epistemic change toward evaluativism among the students who were enrolled in the activity, whereas nonsignificant results emerged for the control group. However, for both pretest and posttest, the highest score was for Absolutist, followed by Multiplist, and Evaluativist had the lowest mean. The technology-enabled concept-mapping tool supported the research group’s online argumentation design. This tool helped students mainly at the cognitive level to discern between the arguments and better learn the topic. These findings are interpreted in relation to student characteristics.

  相似文献   

19.
The aim of this study is to investigate the influence of content knowledge on students’ socio-scientific argumentation in the Swedish National Assessment in biology, chemistry and physics for 12-year-olds. In Sweden, the assessment of socio-scientific argumentation has been a major part of the National Assessment during three consecutive years and this study utilizes data on student performance to investigate (a) the relationship between tasks primarily addressing argumentation and tasks addressing primarily content knowledge as well as (b) students’ performance on argumentation tasks, which differ in relation to content, subject, aspect of argumentation and assessment criteria. Findings suggest a strong and positive relationship between content knowledge and students’ performance on argumentation tasks. The analysis also provides some hypotheses about the task difficulty of argumentation tasks that may be pursued in future investigations.  相似文献   

20.
In scientific arguments, claims must have meaning that extends beyond the immediate circumstances of an investigation. That is, claims must be generalised in some way. Therefore, teachers facilitating classroom argumentation must be prepared to support students’ efforts to construct or criticise generalised claims. However, widely used argumentation support tools, for instance, the claim-evidence-reasoning (CER) framework, tend not to address generalisation. Accordingly, teachers using these kinds of tools may not be prepared to help their students negotiate issues of generalisation in arguments. We investigated this possibility in a study of professional development activities of 18 middle school teachers using CER. We compared the teachers’ approach to generalisation when using a published version of CER to their approach when using an alternate form of CER that increased support for generalisation. In several different sessions, the teachers: (1) responded to survey questions when using CER, (2) critiqued student arguments, (3) used both CER and alternate CER to construct arguments, and (4) discussed the experience of using CER and alternate CER. When using the standard CER, the teachers did not explicitly attend to generalisation in student arguments or in their own arguments. With alternate CER, the teachers generalised their own arguments, and they acknowledged the need for generalisation in student arguments. We concluded that teachers using frameworks for supporting scientific argumentation could benefit from more explicit support for generalisation than CER provides. More broadly, we concluded that generalisation deserves increased attention as a pedagogical challenge within classroom scientific argumentation.  相似文献   

设为首页 | 免责声明 | 关于勤云 | 加入收藏

Copyright©北京勤云科技发展有限公司  京ICP备09084417号