共查询到20条相似文献，搜索用时 46 毫秒
1.
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
2.
Rola Khishfe 《International Journal of Science Education》2013,35(10):1639-1667
Having the learning and retention of science content and skills as a goal of scientific literacy, it is significant to study the issue of retention as it relates to teaching and learning about nature of science (NOS). Then, the purpose of this study was to investigate the development of NOS understandings of students, and the retention of these understandings four months after being acquired through explicit reflective instruction in relation to two contexts. Participants were 24 tenth-grade students at a private high school in a city in the Middle East. Explicit NOS instruction was addressed within a six-week unit about genetic engineering. Three NOS aspects were integrated and dispersed across the unit. A questionnaire, together with semi-structured interviews, was administered as pre-, post-, and delayed post-test to assess the retention of participants’ NOS understandings. The questionnaire had two open-ended scenarios addressing controversial socioscientific issues about genetically modified food and water fluoridation. Results showed that most students improved their naïve understandings of NOS in relation to the two contexts following the six-week unit with the explicit NOS instruction. However, these newly acquired NOS understandings were not retained by all students four months after instruction. Many of the students reverted back to their earlier naïve understandings. Conclusions about the factors facilitating the process of retention as the orientation to meaningful learning and the prolonged exposure to the domain were discussed in relation to practical implications in the classroom. 相似文献
3.
Rola Khishfe 《International Journal of Science Education》2013,35(17):2928-2953
The purpose of this study was to (a) investigate the effectiveness of explicit nature of science (NOS) instruction in the context of controversial socioscientific issues and (b) explore whether the transfer of acquired NOS understandings, which were explicitly taught in the context of one socioscientific context, into other similar contexts (familiar and unfamiliar) was possible. Participants were 10th grade students in two intact sections at one high school. The treatment involved teaching a six-week unit about genetic engineering. For one group (non-NOS group), there was no explicit instruction about NOS. For the other group (NOS group), explicit instruction about three NOS aspects (subjective, empirical, and tentative) was dispersed across the genetic engineering unit. A questionnaire including two open-ended scenarios, in conjunction with semi-structured interviews, was used to assess the change in participants’ understandings of NOS and their ability to transfer their acquired understandings into similar contexts. The first scenario involved a familiar context about genetically modified food and the second one focused on an unfamiliar context about water fluoridation. Results showed no improvement in NOS understandings of participants in the non-NOS group in relation to the familiar and unfamiliar contexts. On the other hand, there was a general improvement in the NOS understandings of participants in the NOS group in relation to both the familiar and unfamiliar contexts. Implications about the transfer of participants’ acquired NOS understandings on the basis of the distance between the context of learning and that of application are highlighted and discussed in link with the classroom learning environment. 相似文献
4.
《Learning and Instruction》2006,16(5):492-509
This study focuses on the contribution of overall epistemological understanding to argumentation skills, after controlling for topic knowledge and interest, in eighth graders. Students were introduced to two controversial topics, global warming and genetically modified food, through the reading of a two-sided text on each topic. After reading, students were asked to generate an argument, a counterargument, and a rebuttal for each topic. Findings from hierarchical regression analyses show that epistemological understanding was a significant predictor of all three components of argumentation skills for both controversies. In addition, participants at the evaluativist level of overall epistemological understanding generated arguments, counterarguments, and rebuttals of a higher quality than participants at the multiplist level. Findings were substantially replicated by a domain-specific analysis of epistemological understanding. Topic knowledge moderately, but significantly, contributed to the production of rebuttals about transgenic food only, while topic interest did not play a significant role. 相似文献
5.
6.
The purpose of this paper is to compare and contrast between two theoretical frameworks for addressing nature of science (NOS) and socioscientific issues (SSI) in school science. These frameworks are critical thinking (CT) and argumentation (AR). For the past years, the first and second authors of this paper have pursued research in this area using CT and AR as theoretical frameworks, respectively. Yacoubian argues that future citizens need to develop a critical mindset as they are guided to (1) practice making judgments on what views of NOS to acquire and (2) practice making decisions on SSI through applying their NOS understandings. Khishfe asserts that AR is an important component of decision making when dealing with SSI and the practice in AR in relation to controversial issues is needed for informed decision making. She argues that AR as a framework may assist in the development of more informed understandings of NOS. In this paper, the authors delve into a dialogue for (1) elucidating strengths and potential of each framework, (2) highlighting challenges that they face in their research using the frameworks in question, (3) exploring the extent to which the frameworks can overlap, and (4) proposing directions for future research. 相似文献
7.
The study explored the changes in pre-service science teachers’ understanding of the nature of science and their opinions about the nature of science, science teaching and argumentation after their participation in explicit nature of science (NOS) and socioscientific argumentation processes. The participants were 56 third-grade pre-service science teachers studying in a state university in Turkey. The treatment group comprised 27 participants, and there were 29 participants in the comparison group. The comparison group participants were involved in a student-centred science-teaching process, and the participants of the treatment group were involved in explicit NOS and socioscientific argumentation processes. In the study, which lasted a total of 11 weeks, a NOS-as-argumentation questionnaire was administered to all the participants to determine their understanding of NOS at the beginning and end of the data collection process, and six random participants of the treatment group participated in semi-structured interview questions in order to further understand their views regarding NOS, science teaching and argumentation. Qualitative and quantitative data analysis revealed that the explicit NOS and socioscientific argumentation processes had a significant effect on pre-service science teachers’ NOS understandings. Furthermore, NOS, argumentation and science teaching views of the participants in the treatment group showed a positive change. The results of this study are discussed in light of the related literature, and suggestions are made within the context of contribution to science-teaching literature, improvement of education quality and education of pre-service teachers. 相似文献
8.
Background: Many international science curriculum documents mandate that students should be able to participate in argument, debate and decision-making about contemporary science issues affecting society. Termed socioscientific issues, these topics provide students with opportunities to use their scientific knowledge to discuss, debate and defend their decisions and to evaluate the arguments of their peers.
Purpose: This study describes the development and trialling of scenarios based on the socioscientific issue of climate change. The scenarios required students to make and justify a decision and were designed to assess students’ argumentation skills.
Sample: A sample of 162 Year 10 students from five schools in Perth, Western Australia participated in this study.
Design and methods: Recent media articles were reviewed to identify relevant contexts for scenarios related to climate change that could be used to develop and assess students’ argumentation skills. In the first phase, students trialled scenarios about wind farms and hydrogen fuel buses using writing frames with scaffolding questions to generate as many reasons as possible to justify their decision. The responses were categorised into themes which were used to prepare a scoring rubric. In the second phase, students generated written arguments about the scenarios to support their decision. The arguments were analysed using both the scoring rubric developed from the first phase and Toulmin’s argumentation pattern of claim, data, backing, qualifier and rebuttal.
Results: Students’ responses to the scaffolded questions were categorised into themes of agriculture, economy, energy, environment, human impact and ethical factors. The themes of economy and the environment predominated with ethical justifications cited infrequently. An analysis of the arguments generated revealed a majority of students’ responses consisted of a claim and data with backings, qualifiers and rebuttals rarely provided.
Conclusions: Scenarios about climate change socioscientific issues can be used by teachers to both develop and assess students’ argumentation skills in classroom settings. 相似文献
9.
This article describes an effort to explore and enhance argumentation skills of Taiwanese grade 6 students through instruction
in socioscientific issues. An experienced elementary school teacher was given 8 months of personalized instruction on argumentation
skills and socioscientific issues, then subsequently implemented a 17-h classroom unit on the establishment of Ma-Guo National
Park. His students learned to establish claims and warrants, construct counterarguments, offer supportive arguments, and provide
evidence for each one. Data consisted of student responses to questionnaires and individual follow-up interviews. A multiple
regression analysis revealed that success in learning argumentation skills was not substantially related to pre-instruction
argumentation skills, but significantly related to the student ability levels. High-ability students were significantly better
than low-ability students at generating complete arguments. Most students elaborated their arguments, and more high-ability
students offered rebuttals after instruction. However, even these high achievers did not completely understand the meaning
of evidence and often misused supplementary warrants as evidence. 相似文献
10.
This study investigated the influence of an explicit and reflective inquiry‐oriented compared with an implicit inquiry‐oriented instructional approach on sixth graders' understandings of nature of science (NOS). The study emphasized the tentative, empirical, inferential, and imaginative and creative NOS. Participants were 62 sixth‐grade students in two intact groups. The intervention or explicit group was engaged in inquiry activities followed by reflective discussions of the target NOS aspects. The comparison or implicit group was engaged in the same inquiry activities. However, these latter activities included no explicit references to or discussion of any NOS aspects. Engagement time was balanced for both groups. An open‐ended questionnaire in conjunction with semistructured interviews was used to assess participants' NOS views before and at the conclusion of the intervention, which spanned 2.5 months. Before the intervention, the majority of participants in both groups held naive views of the target NOS aspects. The views of the implicit group participants were not different at the conclusion of the study. By comparison, substantially more participants in the explicit group articulated more informed views of one or more of the target NOS aspects. Thus, an explicit and reflective inquiry‐oriented approach was more effective than an implicit inquiry‐oriented approach in promoting participants' NOS conceptions. These results do not support the intuitively appealing assumption that students would automatically learn about NOS through engagement in science‐based inquiry activities. Developing informed conceptions of NOS is a cognitive instructional outcome that requires an explicit and reflective instructional approach. © 2002 Wiley Periodicals, Inc. J Res Sci Teach 39: 551–578, 2002 相似文献
11.
Rola Khishfe 《International Journal of Science Education》2019,41(9):1159-1180
It is important to question the generalizability of the knowledge about the nature of science (NOS), and thus know whether the knowledge about NOS can be transferred to various contexts. As such, the purpose of this study was to investigate whether students were able to transfer their acquired NOS understandings into contexts that vary in their similarity to the context of learning. Thirty-eight 7th grade students in two intact sections participated in the study. The treatment extended over seven weeks and involved teaching a unit about plate tectonics, earthquakes, and volcanoes. Only one of the two groups was explicitly taught about NOS in relation to the topics under study. To assess the change in students’ understandings of NOS and their ability to transfer these acquired understandings, a five-topic open-ended questionnaire and individual semi-structured interviews were used. Some of the questionnaire topics focused on scientific issues and were considered similar to the context of learning, while other topics were socioscientific and were considered less similar. Results showed that the transfer of participants’ acquired NOS understandings occurred when the context was similar to the context of learning and when the context was more familiar based on prior knowledge. Interpretations related to knowledge base schema, the distance between contexts, as well as the explicit teaching about transfer were discussed. 相似文献
12.
Enhancing the quality of argumentation in school science 总被引：1，自引：0，他引：1
The research reported in this study focuses on the design and evaluation of learning environments that support the teaching and learning of argumentation in a scientific context. The research took place over 2 years, between 1999 and 2001, in junior high schools in the greater London area. The research was conducted in two phases. In phase 1, working with a group of 12 science teachers, the main emphasis was to develop sets of materials and strategies to support argumentation in the classroom, and to support and assess teachers' development with teaching argumentation. Data were collected by video‐ and audio‐recording the teachers' attempts to implement these lessons at the beginning and end of the year. During this phase, analytical tools for evaluating the quality of argumentation were developed based on Toulmin's argument pattern. Analysis of the data shows that there was significant development in the majority of teachers use of argumentation across the year. Results indicate that the pattern of use of argumentation is teacher‐specific, as is the nature of the change. In phase 2 of the project, the focus of this paper, teachers taught the experimental groups a minimum of nine lessons which involved socioscientific or scientific argumentation. In addition, these teachers taught similar lessons to a comparison group at the beginning and end of the year. The purpose of this research was to assess the progression in student capabilities with argumentation. For this purpose, data were collected from 33 lessons by video‐taping two groups of four students in each class engaging in argumentation. Using a framework for evaluating the nature of the discourse and its quality developed from Toulmin's argument pattern, the findings show that there was improvement in the quality of students' argumentation. This research presents new methodological developments for work in this field. © 2004 Wiley Periodicals, Inc. J Res Sci Teach 41: 994–1020, 2004 相似文献
13.
Christine V. McDonald 《科学教学研究杂志》2010,47(9):1137-1164
There exists a general consensus in the science education literature around the goal of enhancing learners' views of nature of science (NOS). An extensive body of research in the field has highlighted the effectiveness of explicit NOS instructional approaches in improving learners' NOS views. Emerging research has suggested that engaging learners in argumentation may aid in the development of their NOS views, although this claim lacks empirical support. This study assessed the influence of a science content course incorporating explicit NOS and argumentation instruction on five preservice primary teachers' views of NOS using multiple sources of data including questionnaires and surveys, interviews, audio‐ and video‐taped class sessions, and written artifacts. Results indicated that the science content course was effective in enabling four of the five participants' views of NOS to be improved. A critical analysis of the effectiveness of the various course components led to the identification of three factors that mediated the development of participants' NOS views during the intervention: (a) contextual factors (context of argumentation, mode of argumentation), (b) task‐specific factors (argumentation scaffolds, epistemological probes, consideration of alternative data and explanations), and (c) personal factors (perceived previous knowledge about NOS, appreciation of the importance and utility value of NOS, durability and persistence of pre‐existing beliefs). The results of this study provide evidence to support the inclusion of explicit NOS and argumentation instruction as a context for learning about NOS, and promote consideration of this instructional approach in future studies which aim to enhance learners' views of NOS. © 2010 Wiley Periodicals, Inc. J Res Sci Teach 47: 1137–1164, 2010 相似文献
14.
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
15.
Andrew Tawfik David Jonassen 《Educational technology research and development : ETR & D》2013,61(3):385-406
Solving complex, ill-structured problems may be effectively supported by case-based reasoning through case libraries that provide just-in-time domain-specific principles in the form of stories. The cases not only articulate previous experiences of practitioners, but also serve as problem-solving narratives from which learners can acquire meaning. The current study investigated the effects of different case-types (success, failures) on analogical transfer to similar problems. In the first week, undergraduate sales management students (N = 36) were assigned to different case library treatments (success, failure) and asked to construct a multifaceted argument (initial argument, counterargument, rebuttal) to resolve an ill-structured, decision-making hiring problem. In the following week, students constructed an argument to solve a novel case without the support of the case library. Data analysis revealed the failure-based case library condition produced significantly higher scores on measurements of counterarguments and holistic argumentation scores on both tasks. A discussion of the implications for pedagogy and instructional design are also presented. 相似文献
16.
17.
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
18.
Ruey-Yun Horng Po-Hui Lu Pei-Hua Chen Shih-Huan Hou 《International Journal of Science Education》2013,35(16):2784-2800
This study investigates the effects of argument stance on knowledge inquiry skills. Sixty-two participants were assigned to three argument stance conditions (proponent, opponent, or control) to receive scaffolded argumentation practice on two science issues in random order. After the argumentation treatment, participants were asked to write down their own opinions regarding the claim. Their responses were analysed according to argument structure, argument content, methods of refutation, and number of new propositions. Results revealed that taking a proponent's stance increased the use of evidence in argumentation, while taking an opponent's stance enhanced both the use of evidence and alternative-based refutations to the claim, number of falsifications, and number of new propositions. This implies that arguing from an opponent's stance may increase the search for multiple causes behind observed phenomena and the need for evidence, thereby alleviating the confirmation bias in thinking. 相似文献
19.
This study (a) assessed the influence of three history of science (HOS) courses on college students' and preservice science teachers' conceptions of nature of science (NOS), (b) examined whether participants who entered the investigated courses with a conceptual framework consistent with contemporary NOS views achieved more elaborate NOS understandings, and (c) explored the aspects of the participant HOS courses that rendered them more “effective” in influencing students' views. Participants were 166 undergraduate and graduate students and 15 preservice secondary science teachers. An open‐ended questionnaire in conjunction with individual interviews, was used to assess participants' pre‐ and postinstruction NOS views. Almost all participants held inadequate views of several NOS aspects at the outset of the study. Very few and limited changes in participants' views were evident at the conclusion of the courses. Change was evident in the views of relatively more participants, especially preservice science teachers, who entered the HOS courses with frameworks that were somewhat consistent with current NOS views. Moreover, explicitly addressing certain NOS aspects rendered the HOS courses relatively more effective in enhancing participants' NOS views. The results of this study do not lend empirical support to the intuitively appealing assumption held by many science educators that coursework in HOS will necessarily enhance students' and preservice science teachers' NOS views. However, explicitly addressing specific NOS aspects might enhance the effectiveness of HOS courses in this regard. Moreover, the study suggests that exposing preservice science teachers to explicit NOS instruction in science methods courses prior to their enrollment in HOS courses might increase the likelihood that their NOS views will be changed or enriched as a result of their experiences with HOS. © 2000 John Wiley & Sons, Inc. J Res Sci Teach 37: 1057–1095, 2000 相似文献
20.
Science and Language Teachers’ Assessment of Upper Secondary Students’ Socioscientific Argumentation
Nina Christenson Niklas Gericke Shu-Nu Chang Rundgren 《International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education》2017,15(8):1403-1422
Researchers and policy-makers have recognized the importance of including and promoting socioscientific argumentation in science education worldwide. The Swedish curriculum focuses more than ever on socioscientific issues (SSI) as well. However, teaching socioscientific argumentation is not an easy task for science teachers and one of the more distinguished difficulties is the assessment of students’ performance. In this study, we investigate and compare how science and Swedish language teachers, participating in an SSI-driven project, assessed students’ written argumentation about global warming. Swedish language teachers have a long history of teaching and assessing argumentation and therefore it was of interest to identify possible gaps between the two groups of teachers’ assessment practices. The results showed that the science teachers focused on students’ content knowledge within their subjects, whereas the Swedish language teachers included students’ abilities to select and use content knowledge from reliable reference resources, the structure of the argumentation and the form of language used. Since the Swedish language teachers’ assessment correlated more with previous research about quality in socioscientific argumentation, we suggest that a closer co-operation between the two groups could be beneficial in terms of enhancing the quality of assessment. Moreover, SSI teaching and learning as well as assessment of socioscientific argumentation ought to be included in teacher training programs for both pre- and in-service science teachers. 相似文献