共查询到20条相似文献，搜索用时 31 毫秒
1.
Feral Ogan-Bekiroglu Handan Eskin 《International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education》2012,10(6):1415-1443
Whereas there are some studies presenting the effects of argumentation on science knowledge development, there is still a need for research discovering the interrelationship between knowledge and argumentation. The purpose of this research was to investigate a possible relationship between students?? engagement in argumentation and their conceptual knowledge. A case study design was carried out for this research. The participants of the study were tenth graders studying in an urban all-girls school. There were 5 argumentations promoted in different contexts which were embedded through the dynamics chapter, for a 10-week period. Some of the conclusions drawn from the study are as follows: First, students?? quantity and quality of arguments improve through time as they get more involved with argumentation. Second, students?? knowledge does not improve instantly when they are involved with argumentation activities, that is, knowledge development in an argumentation process takes time. Third, students?? prior knowledge affects their participation in argumentation. Last, there are some patterns that indicate the relationship between argumentation and knowledge. However, students?? arguments and their knowledge do not develop at the same time. 相似文献
2.
3.
George Santi 《Educational Studies in Mathematics》2011,77(2-3):285-311
The objective of this paper is to study students?? difficulties when they have to ascribe the same meaning to different representations of the same mathematical object. We address two theoretical tools that are at the core of Radford??s cultural semiotic and Godino??s onto-semiotic approaches: objectification and the semiotic function. The analysis of a teaching experiment involving high school students working on the tangent, shows how students?? difficulties in ascribing sense to different representations of a common mathematical object can be traced back to the kind of objectification processes and semiotic functions they are able to establish. 相似文献
4.
AnnaMarie Conner Laura M. Singletary Ryan C. Smith Patty Anne Wagner Richard T. Francisco 《Educational Studies in Mathematics》2014,86(3):401-429
We propose a framework for examining how teachers may support collective argumentation in secondary mathematics classrooms, including teachers’ direct contributions to arguments, the kinds of questions teachers ask, and teachers’ other supportive actions. We illustrate our framework with examples from episodes of collective argumentation occurring across 2 days in a teacher’s classroom. Following from these examples, we discuss how the framework can be used to examine mathematical aspects of conversations in mathematics classrooms. We propose that the framework is useful for investigating and possibly enhancing how teachers support students’ reasoning and argumentation as fundamentally mathematical activities. 相似文献
5.
Daniel Cebrián-Robles Antonio-Joaquín Franco-Mariscal Ángel Blanco-López 《Instructional Science》2018,46(5):789-817
The recent literature has shown the importance of preservice elementary science teachers (PESTs) having a deep understanding of argumentation, as this factor may affect the nature of the class activities that are taught and what students learn. A lack of understanding of this factor may represent an obstacle in the development of science education programmes in line with the development of scientific competences. This paper presents the results of the design and implementation of a training programme of 6 sessions (12 h of class participation plus 8 h of personal homework) on argumentation. The programme was carried out by 57 Spanish PESTs from Malaga, Spain. The training programme incorporates the innovative use of certain strategies to improve competence in argumentation, such as teaching PESTs to identify the elements of arguments in order to design assessment rubrics or by including peer assessment during evaluation with and without rubrics. The results obtained on implementing the training programme were evaluated based on the development of PESTs’ argumentation competence using Toulmin’s argumentative model. Data collection methods involved two tasks carried out at the beginning and the end of the programme, i.e., pre- and post-test, respectively. The conclusion of the study is that students made significant progress in their argumentation competence on completing the course. In addition, PESTs who followed the training programme achieved statistically better results at the end than those in the control group (n = 41), who followed a traditional teaching programme. A 6-month transfer task showed a slight improvement for the PESTs of the experimental group in relation to the control group in their ability to transfer argumentation to practice. 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.
In this paper, we present a cognitive analysis of the relationship between the argumentation process leading to the construction of a conjecture and its algebraic proof in solving Calendar Algebra problems. To solve this kind of problem, students encounter two sources of potential difficulties: the shift from using arithmetic in the argumentation to using algebra in the proof and the shift from an inductive argument towards a deductive proof. Thus, the aims of this article are to describe these cognitive difficulties and to show how students overcome them. Methodologically, we compare students’ problem solving process corresponding to three problems presented in the first four lessons of a teaching experiment. The analysis and comparison between these three resolution processes is performed using Toulmin’s model. 相似文献
8.
Sarah K. Bleiler Denisse R. Thompson Milé Krajčevski 《Journal of Mathematics Teacher Education》2014,17(2):105-127
Mathematics teachers play a unique role as experts who provide opportunities for students to engage in the practices of the mathematics community. Proof is a tool essential to the practice of mathematics, and therefore, if teachers are to provide adequate opportunities for students to engage with this tool, they must be able to validate student arguments and provide feedback to students based on those validations. Prior research has demonstrated several weaknesses teachers have with respect to proof validation, but little research has investigated instructional sequences aimed to improve this skill. In this article, we present the results from the implementation of such an instructional sequence. A sample of 34 prospective secondary mathematics teachers (PSMTs) validated twelve mathematical arguments written by high school students. They provided a numeric score as well as a short paragraph of written feedback, indicating the strengths and weaknesses of each argument. The results provide insight into the errors to which PSMTs attend when validating mathematical arguments. In particular, PSMTs’ written feedback indicated that they were aware of the limitations of inductive argumentation. However, PSMTs had a superficial understanding of the “proof by contradiction” mode of argumentation, and their attendance to particular errors seemed to be mediated by the mode of argument representation (e.g., symbolic, verbal). We discuss implications of these findings for mathematics teacher education. 相似文献
9.
Chun-Yen Tsai Brady Michael Jack Tai-Chu Huang Jin-Tan Yang 《Journal of Science Education and Technology》2012,21(4):476-486
This study investigated how the instruction of argumentation skills could be promoted by using an online argumentation system. This system entitled ??Cognitive Apprenticeship Web-based Argumentation?? (CAWA) system was based on cognitive apprenticeship model. One hundred eighty-nine fifth grade students took part in this study. A quasi-experimental design was adopted and qualitative and quantitative analyses were used to evaluate the effectiveness of this online system in measuring students?? progress in learning argumentation. The results of this study showed that different teaching strategies had effects on students?? use of argumentation in the topics of daily life and the concept of ??vision.?? When the CAWA system was employed during the instruction and practice of argumentation on these two topics, the students?? argumentation performance improved. Suggestions on how the CAWA system could be used to enhance the instruction of argumentation skills in science education were also discussed. 相似文献
10.
Tami S. Martin Sharon M. Soucy McCrone Michelle L. Wallace Bower Jaguthsing Dindyal 《Educational Studies in Mathematics》2005,60(1):95-124
Proof and reasoning are fundamental aspects of mathematics. Yet, how to help students develop the skills they need to engage
in this type of higher-order thinking remains elusive. In order to contribute to the dialogue on this subject, we share results
from a classroom-based interpretive study of teaching and learning proof in geometry. The goal of this research was to identify
factors that may be related to the development of proof understanding. In this paper, we identify and interpret students'
actions, teacher's actions, and social aspects that are evident in a classroom in which students discuss mathematical conjectures,
justification processes and student-generated proofs. We conclude that pedagogical choices made by the teacher, as manifested
in the teacher's actions, are key to the type of classroom environment that is established and, hence, to students' opportunities
to hone their proof and reasoning skills. More specifically, the teacher's choice to pose open-ended tasks (tasks which are
not limited to one specific solution or solution strategy), engage in dialogue that places responsibility for reasoning on
the students, analyze student arguments, and coach students as they reason, creates an environment in which participating
students make conjectures, provide justifications, and build chains of reasoning. In this environment, students who actively
participate in the classroom discourse are supported as they engage in proof development activities. By examining connections
between teacher and student actions within a social context, we offer a first step in linking teachers' practice to students'
understanding of proof. 相似文献
11.
12.
Kristine Callis-Duehl Robert Idsardi Eve A. Humphrey Rebekka Darner Gougis 《Journal of Science Education and Technology》2018,27(1):86-98
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.
Bettina Pedemonte 《Educational Studies in Mathematics》2007,66(1):23-41
The paper presents a characterisation about argumentation and proof in mathematics. On the basis of contemporary linguistic
theories, the hypothesis that proof is a special case of argumentation is put forward and Toulmin’s model is proposed as a
methodological tool to compare them. This model can be used to detect and analyse the structure of an argumentation supporting
a conjecture (abduction, induction, etc.) and the structure of its proof. The aim of the paper is to highlight the importance
of structural analysis between argumentation and proof. This analysis shows that although there are clear cases of continuity
between argumentation supporting a conjecture and its proof, there is often a structural distance between the two (from an
abductive argumentation to a deductive proof, from an inductive argumentation to a mathematical inductive proof). 相似文献
14.
Many countries are revising their mathematics curriculum in order to elevate the role of proof and argumentation at all school levels and for all student groups. Yet, we have very little research on how proof-related competences are aimed to be developed in the mathematics curricula of different countries in Grades 1 to 12. This article contributes to filling this gap by analysing and comparing three countries’ curricula from the perspective of developmental proof. For this purpose, we created an analytical frame of proof-related competences that could be connected to the development of students’ understanding and skills concerning argumentation and mathematical proof. The analysis reveals three quite different trajectories with specific characteristics, shortcomings and strengths. 相似文献
15.
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
16.
Mats Gunnar Lindahl 《Science & Education》2009,18(10):1285-1311
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
17.
Magda Osman 《Learning and individual differences》2012,22(5):575-584
Monitoring refers to online awareness and self-evaluation of one's goal-directed actions, while Control refers to the generation and selection of goal-directed actions (Osman, 2010a). The present study examines the extent to which external estimations of performance influence monitoring and control behaviors. To achieve this, a complex dynamic decision making task was used in which three different cues were manipulated in order to control three outcomes. The experiment was divided into two conditions. The Externally guided-condition received information designed to influence people's evaluation of control performance, whereas the Self-guided-condition was not provided this information. The findings revealed that control performance differed according to whether the success of one's actions was evaluated against external or self-guided estimations of performance. This article proposes that Monitoring behaviors can strongly influence control behaviors and this is achieved according to the way in which outcomes of decisions are evaluated. Finally, with respect to adult learning, the findings from this study suggest that setting one's own goals do not lead to improvements in learning when the task is a complex one. 相似文献
18.
Hui Jin Hayat Hokayem Sasha Wang Xin Wei 《International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education》2016,14(6):1037-1057
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
19.
Ebru Kaya 《Cultural Studies of Science Education》2018,13(4):1087-1090
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
20.
Jonathan T. Shemwell Kalee R. Gwarjanski Daniel K. Capps Shirly Avargil Joanna L. Meyer 《International Journal of Science Education》2013,35(4):599-628
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