共查询到20条相似文献，搜索用时 78 毫秒
1.
Katherine L. McNeill 《科学教学研究杂志》2011,48(7):793-823
Science includes more than just concepts and facts, but also encompasses scientific ways of thinking and reasoning. Students' cultural and linguistic backgrounds influence the knowledge they bring to the classroom, which impacts their degree of comfort with scientific practices. Consequently, the goal of this study was to investigate 5th grade students' views of explanation, argument, and evidence across three contexts—what scientists do, what happens in science classrooms, and what happens in everyday life. The study also focused on how students' abilities to engage in one practice, argumentation, changed over the school year. Multiple data sources were analyzed: pre‐ and post‐student interviews, videotapes of classroom instruction, and student writing. The results from the beginning of the school year suggest that students' views of explanation, argument, and evidence, varied across the three contexts with students most likely to respond “I don't know” when talking about their science classroom. Students had resources to draw from both in their everyday knowledge and knowledge of scientists, but were unclear how to use those resources in their science classroom. Students' understandings of explanation, argument, and evidence for scientists and for science class changed over the course of the school year, while their everyday meanings remained more constant. This suggests that instruction can support students in developing stronger understanding of these scientific practices, while still maintaining distinct understandings for their everyday lives. Finally, the students wrote stronger scientific arguments by the end of the school year in terms of the structure of an argument, though the accuracy, appropriateness, and sufficiency of the arguments varied depending on the specific learning or assessment task. This indicates that elementary students are able to write scientific arguments, yet they need support to apply this practice to new and more complex contexts and content areas. © 2011 Wiley Periodicals, Inc. J Res Sci Teach 48: 793–823, 2011 相似文献
2.
The literature provides confounding information with regard to questions about whether students in high school can engage in meaningful argumentation about socio‐scientific issues and whether this process improves their conceptual understanding of science. The purpose of this research was to explore the impact of classroom‐based argumentation on high school students' argumentation skills, informal reasoning, and conceptual understanding of genetics. The research was conducted as a case study in one school with an embedded quasi‐experimental design with two Grade 10 classes (n = 46) forming the argumentation group and two Grade 10 classes (n = 46) forming the comparison group. The teacher of the argumentation group participated in professional learning and explicitly taught argumentation skills to the students in his classes during one, 50‐minute lesson and involved them in whole‐class argumentation about socio‐scientific issues in a further two lessons. Data were generated through a detailed, written pre‐ and post‐instruction student survey. The findings showed that the argumentation group, but not the comparison group, improved significantly in the complexity and quality of their arguments and gave more explanations showing rational informal reasoning. Both groups improved significantly in their genetics understanding, but the improvement of the argumentation group was significantly better than the comparison group. The importance of the findings are that after only a short intervention of three lessons, improvements in the structure and complexity of students' arguments, the degree of rational informal reasoning, and students' conceptual understanding of science can occur. © 2010 Wiley Periodicals, Inc. J Res Sci Teach 47: 952–977, 2010 相似文献
3.
Patricia Heitmann Martin Hecht Julia Schwanewedel Stefan Schipolowski 《International Journal of Science Education》2013,35(18):3148-3170
The ability to build arguments is a crucial skill and a central educational goal in all school subjects including science as it enables students to formulate reasoned opinions and thus to cope with the increasing complexity of knowledge. In the present cross-sectional study, we examined the domain-specificity of argumentative writing in science by comparing it with a rather general type of argumentation as promoted in first-language education and with formal reasoning to gain insight into different forms of argumentation on theoretical and empirical levels. Using a paper-and-pencil test, we analyzed written argumentations and the reasoning abilities of 3,274 Grade-10 students in German secondary schools. Correlation and multiple regression analyses as well as a qualitative analysis of students' answers to a subset of tasks in the domains of science and first-language education were conducted. Results showed moderate relations between argumentation in science, argumentation in first-language education, and reasoning. Half of the variance in argumentation in science was explained by individual differences in argumentation in first-language education and reasoning. Furthermore, the examination of written arguments revealed differences, for example, in students' weighing of pros and cons. We assume that the familiarity of the underlying scientific information may play an essential role in the argumentation process and posit that it needs to be investigated in more detail. Overall, the study indicates that investigating the argumentational abilities of learners in first-language education and reasoning abilities can help to shed light on the domain-specificity of argumentation in science. 相似文献
4.
Anton Lawson 《International Journal of Science Education》2013,35(11):1387-1408
This paper explicates a pattern of scientific argumentation in which scientists respond to causal questions with the generation and test of alternative hypotheses through cycles of hypothetico‐predictive argumentation. Hypothetico‐predictive arguments are employed to test causal claims that exist on at least two levels (designated stage 4 in which the causal claims are perceptible, and stage 5 in which the causal claims are imperceptible). Origins of the ability to construct and comprehend hypothetico‐predictive arguments at the highest level can be traced to pre‐verbal reasoning of the sensory‐motor child and the gradual internalization of verbally mediated arguments involving nominal, categorical, causal and, finally, theoretical propositions. Presumably, the ability to construct and comprehend hypothetico‐predictive arguments (an aspect of procedural knowledge) is necessary for the construction of conceptual knowledge (an aspect of declarative knowledge) because such arguments are used during concept construction and conceptual change. Science instruction that focuses on the generation and debate of hypothetico‐predictive arguments should improve students' conceptual understanding and their argumentative/reasoning skills. 相似文献
5.
Current research indicates that student engagement in scientific argumentation can foster a better understanding of the concepts and the processes of science. Yet opportunities for students to participate in authentic argumentation inside the science classroom are rare. There also is little known about science teachers' understandings of argumentation, their ability to participate in this complex practice, or their views about using argumentation as part of the teaching and learning of science. In this study, the researchers used a cognitive appraisal interview to examine how 30 secondary science teachers evaluate alternative explanations, generate an argument to support a specific explanation, and investigate their views about engaging students in argumentation. The analysis of the teachers' comments and actions during the interview indicates that these teachers relied primarily on their prior content knowledge to evaluate the validity of an explanation rather than using available data. Although some of the teachers included data and reasoning in their arguments, most of the teachers crafted an argument that simply expanded on a chosen explanation but provided no real support for it. The teachers also mentioned multiple barriers to the integration of argumentation into the teaching and learning of science, primarily related to their perceptions of students' ability levels, even though all of these teachers viewed argumentation as a way to help students understand science. © 2012 Wiley Periodicals, Inc. J Res Sci Teach 49: 1122–1148, 2012 相似文献
6.
Dvora Katchevich Avi Hofstein Rachel Mamlok-Naaman 《Research in Science Education》2013,43(1):317-345
One of the goals of science education is to provide students with the ability to construct arguments—reasoning and thinking critically in a scientific context. Over the years, many studies have been conducted on constructing arguments in science teaching, but only few of them have dealt with studying argumentation in the laboratory. Our research focuses on the process in which students construct arguments in the chemistry laboratory while conducting various types of experiments. It was found that inquiry experiments have the potential to serve as an effective platform for formulating arguments, owing to the features of this learning environment. The discourse during inquiry-type experiments was found to be rich in arguments, whereas that during confirmatory-type experiments was found to be sparse in arguments. The arguments, which were developed during the discourse of an open inquiry experiment, focus on the hypothesis-building stage, analysis of the results, and drawing appropriate conclusions. 相似文献
7.
Brian L. Gerber Anne M.L. Cavallo Edmund A. Marek 《International Journal of Science Education》2013,35(5):535-549
Informal learning experiences have risen to the forefront of science education as being beneficial to students' learning. However, it is not clear in what ways such experiences may be beneficial to students; nor how informal learning experiences may interface with classroom science instruction. This study aims to acquire a better understanding of these issues by investigating one aspect of science learning, scientific reasoning ability, with respect to the students' informal learning experiences and classroom science instruction. Specifically, the purpose of this study was to investigate possible differences in students' scientific reasoning abilities relative to their informal learning environments (impoverished, enriched), classroom teaching experiences (non-inquiry, inquiry) and the interaction of these variables. The results of two-way ANOVAs indicated that informal learning environments and classroom science teaching procedures showed significant main effects on students' scientific reasoning abilities. Students with enriched informal learning environments had significantly higher scientific reasoning abilities compared to those with impoverished informal learning environments. Likewise, students in inquirybased science classrooms showed higher scientific reasoning abilities compared to those in non-inquiry science classrooms. There were no significant interaction effects. These results indicate the need for increased emphases on both informal learning opportunities and inquiry-based instruction in science. 相似文献
8.
Helena Črne-Hladnik Aleš Hladnik Branka Javornik Katarina Košmelj Cirila Peklaj 《International Journal of Science Education》2013,35(8):1277-1296
Quantitative and qualitative studies of various aspects of the perception of biotechnology were conducted among 469 Slovenian high school students of average age 17 years. Our research aimed to explore relationships among students' pre-knowledge of molecular and human genetics, and their attitudes to four specific biotechnological applications. These applications—Bt corn, genetically modified (GM) salmon, somatic and germ line gene therapy (GT)—were investigated from the viewpoints of usefulness, moral acceptance and risk perception. In addition, patterns and quality of moral reasoning related to the biotechnological applications from the aspect of moral acceptability were examined. Clear gender differences were found regarding the relationship between our students' pre-knowledge of genetics and their attitudes to biotechnological applications. While females with a better genetics background expressed a higher risk perception in the case of GM salmon, their similarly well-educated male colleagues emphasized the risk associated with the use of germ line GT. With all four biotechnological applications, patterns of both rationalistic—deontological and teleological—and intuitive moral reasoning were identified. Students with poorer genetics pre-knowledge applied an intuitive pattern of moral reasoning more frequently than their peers with better pre-knowledge. A pattern of emotive reasoning was detected only in the case of GM salmon. A relatively low quality of students' moral reasoning, as demonstrated by their brief and small number of supporting justifications (explanations), show that there is a strong need for practising skills of argumentation about socio-scientific issues in Slovenian high schools on a much larger scale. The implications for future research and classroom applications are discussed. 相似文献
9.
《The Journal of educational research》2012,105(2):102-108
Abstract The effects of students' conceptual levels and teachers' instruction patterns on students' motivation to learn academic course content were investigated. An examination of 63 students enrolled in a course entitled “Motivation and Performance in Organizations” at West Point yielded statistically significant interactions: For low-conceptual-level students, direct teaching methods maximize motivation to learn course content; for high-conceptual-level students, nondirect instruction significantly enhances motivation. These results expand existing educational literature that suggests that proper conceptual level/instruction pattern matches enhance students' motivation in the classroom. Educators may use this knowledge to develop teaching environments that support the specific learning needs of individual students. 相似文献
10.
Ann M.L. Cavallo 《科学教学研究杂志》1996,33(6):625-656
The purpose of this study was to explore relationships among school students' (N = 189) meaningful learning orientation, reasoning ability and acquisition of meaningful understandings of genetics topics, and ability to solve genetics problems. This research first obtained measures of students' meaningful learning orientation (meaningful and rote) and reasoning ability (preformal and formal). Students were tested before and after laboratory-based learning cycle genetics instruction using a multiple choice assessment format and an open-ended assessment format (mental model). The assessment instruments were designed to measure students' interrelated understandings of genetics and their ability to solve and interpret problems using Punnett square diagrams. Regression analyses were conducted to examine the predictive influence of meaningful learning orientation, reasoning ability, and the interaction of these variables on students' performance on the different tests. Meaningful learning orientation best predicted students' understanding of genetics interrelationships, whereas reasoning ability best predicted their achievement in solving genetics problems. The interaction of meaningful learning orientation and reasoning ability did not significantly predict students' genetics understanding or problem solving. Meaningful learning orientation best predicted students' performance on all except one of the open-ended test questions. Examination of students' mental model explanations of meiosis, Punnett square diagrams, and relationships between meiosis and the use of Punnett square diagrams revealed unique patterns in students' understandings of these topics. This research provides information for educators on students' acquisition of meaningful understandings of genetics. © 1996 John Wiley & Sons, Inc. 相似文献
11.
This study explores how student-generated questions can support argumentation in science. Students were asked to discuss which of two graphs showing the change in temperature with time when ice is heated to steam was correct. Four classes of students, aged 12–14 years, from two countries, first wrote questions about the phenomenon. Then, working in groups with members who differed in their views, they discussed possible answers. To help them structure their arguments, students were given a sheet with prompts to guide their thinking and another sheet on which to represent their argument diagrammatically. One group of students from each class was audiotaped. Data from both students' written work and the taped oral discourse were then analyzed for types of questions asked, the content and function of their talk, and the quality of arguments elicited. To illustrate the dynamic interaction between students' questions and the evolution of their arguments, the discourse of one group is presented as a case study and comparative analyses made with the discourse from the other three groups. Emerging from our analysis is a tentative explanatory model of how different forms of interaction and, in particular, questioning are needed for productive argumentation to occur. 相似文献
12.
13.
Rola Khishfe 《International Journal of Science Education》2013,35(6):974-1016
The purpose of the study was two-fold: to (a) investigate the influence of explicit nature of science (NOS) and explicit argumentation instruction in the context of a socioscientific issue on the argumentation skills and NOS understandings of students, and (b) explore the transfer of students' NOS understandings and argumentation skills learned in one socioscientific context into other similar contexts (familiar and unfamiliar). Participants were a total of 121 seventh grade students from two schools. The treatment involved an eight-week unit about the water usage and safety, which was taught by two teachers for two intact groups (Treatments I and II). Explicit NOS instruction was integrated for all groups. However, only the Treatment I groups had the additional explicit argumentation instruction. Participants were pre- and post-tested using an open-ended questionnaire and interviews about two socioscientific issues to assess their learning and transfer of argumentation skills and NOS understandings. Results showed improvements in the learning of argumentation practice and NOS understandings for Treatment I group participants. Similarly, there were improvements in the learning and transfer of NOS understandings for Treatment II group participants with only some improvements for the argumentation practice. Further, some of the Treatment I group participants made connections to argumentation when explicating their NOS understandings by the end of the study. Findings were discussed in light of classroom practice that utilizes an explicit approach, contextual approach, as well as an approach that integrates NOS and argumentation simultaneously. 相似文献
14.
Randy K. Yerrick 《科学教学研究杂志》2000,37(8):807-838
The purpose of this study was to examine the effects of open inquiry instruction with low achieving, marginalized high school students. Students with long histories of scholastic failure were asked to participate in question generation, experimental design, and argument construction as a part of their General Science course instruction. Videotapes were collected from daily science instruction, and entrance and exit instruction interviews were conducted using identical open‐ended problems. From this dataset, comparisons were made between students' entrance and exit interview responses representing change over time. Shifts in student responses coincided with renegotiated classroom norms for scientific discourse. Results are reported for five students in the form of assertions. Students' arguments were observed to shift toward those more consistent with the nature of the scientific arguments including: (1) students' tentativeness of knowledge claims, (2) students' use of evidence, and (3) students' views regarding the source of scientific authority. Implications are discussed for research and practice in light of the national standards' call for universal scientific literacy. © 2000 John Wiley & Sons, Inc. J Res Sci Teach 37: 807–838, 2000 相似文献
15.
16.
Laurence Simonneaux 《International Journal of Science Education》2013,35(9):903-927
This paper compares the impact of a role-play and a conventional discussion on students' argumentation on an issue involving animal transgenesis. Students were confronted with an imaginable but fictional situation. They had to decide whether or not to approve a giant transgenic salmon farm being set up in a seaside village. Students received the same teaching and information, the only differences being in the debate situation. Students were asked to reach a decision on well-argued grounds, to identify areas of uncertainty and to define the condition or conditions under which a change of view might be considered. They had to write them down. Pre-post-tests were used to assess the students' opinions. The role-play and discussion were all video- and audio-taped and transcribed in full. The analysis focuses on the argumentative structure of the students' discourse and identifies the reference areas that students draw on to deliver their arguments. The theory of economics of 'greatness' or 'importance', which has recently emerged as a framework for the sociology of justification, has also been used in analysing students' discourse. 相似文献
17.
18.
19.
Students' Understanding of the Objectives and Procedures of Experimentation in the Science Classroom
《学习科学杂志》2013,22(2):131-166
As part of a project to identify opportunities for reasoning that occur in good but typical science classrooms, this study focuses on how sixth graders reason about the goals and strategies of experimentation and laboratory activities in school. Collaborating with teachers, we explore whether reasoning can be deepened by developing instruction that capitalizes more effectively on the classroom opportunities that arise for fostering complex thinking and understanding. The design of the study includes (a) a baseline interview probing students' understanding of experimentation in the context of a standard, 40-min "hands-on" activity that is part of the standard sixth-grade curriculum; (b) a 3-week teaching study, in which five teachers, informed by the cognitive science research concerning the development of scientific reasoning, designed and taught a special experimentation unit in their classrooms; and (c) a series of follow-up interviews, in which students' understanding of experimentation was reexamined. The findings from the two learning contexts-one more supportive of student reasoning than the other-inform us about the kinds of reasoning that are developing in middle-school students and the forms of instruction best suited to exercising those developing skills. 相似文献
20.
Chan-Choong Foong Esther G.S. Daniel 《International Journal of Science Education》2013,35(14):2331-2355
This paper argues the possible simultaneous development and transfer of students' argumentation skills from one socio-scientific issue to another in a Confucian classroom. In Malaysia, the Chinese vernacular schools follow a strict Confucian philosophy in the teaching and learning process. The teacher talks and the students listen. This case study explored the transfer of argumentation skills across two socio-scientific issues in such a Form 2 (8th grade) classroom. An instructional support to complement the syllabus was utilised. The teaching approach in the instructional support was more constructivist in nature and designed to introduce argumentation skills which is uncommon in a Confucian classroom. The two socio-scientific issues were genetically modified foods and deforestation. This paper presents a part of the bigger case study that was conducted. Data collected from written arguments were analysed using an analytical framework built upon Toulmin's ideas. The whole class analysis indicated progression in students' argumentation skills in their ability to give more valid grounds and rebuttals during the transfer. The individual analysis suggests progression in the majority of students' performance, while several students demonstrated non-progression when they faced a different socio-scientific issue. 相似文献