ERG SES G 03, Science Education
Argumentation is a crucial tool in the growth of scientific knowledge as a form of scientific discourse (Duschl & Osborne, 2002; Jiménez-Aleixandre, Rodríguez, & Duschl, 2000; Kelly, Druker & Chen, 1998). Over the last decade researchers have gave importance to promote argumentation in science classrooms and support students to evaluate and critique the process, and products of inquiry (Dushcl & Osborne, 2002). Many studies (Driver, Asoko, Leach, Mortimer & Scott, 1994; Dushcl & Osborne, 2002; Mason, 1998) highlighted the importance of discourse in the acquisition of scientific knowledge in science education. With the growing interest on argumentation, these studies emphasize that argumentation is a crucial tool for science learning and it should be supported and promoted in science classrooms (Duschl & Osborne, 2002; Jiménez-Aleixandre, Rodríguez, & Duschl, 2000; Kelly, Druker & Chen, 1998). Students in an argumentation process support each other for high quality arguments and show improvement in their interpretation and conceptual understanding of science (Erduran, Simon, & Osborne, 2004). Although supporting argumentation and encourage students to discourse in classroom environment is important, assessing structure of argument and evaluate their correctness have also importance. Yet, opportunities for pre-service teachers to learn how to assess an argumentation in the context of science are rare (Newton, Driver, &Osborne, 1999; Simon, Erduran, &Osborne, 2006). Therefore, in science teaching, pre-service teachers should not be only supported teaching and learning of scientific argumentation in science classrooms, but also should be taught to design and evaluate effective learning environments. This study was based on Toulmin’s Argumentation Pattern(TAP) that involves the components of an argumentation and the relationships between them that help to analyze an argument(Toulmin,1958). In Toulmin’s argumentation model, claim is the essential component for all arguments. For a good argument, the claim must be justified by providing a warrant and a backing. TAP is a five level scale used for evaluating qualitative and quantitative analyses of argumentation modified by Erduran, Simon and Osborne (2004). According to the modified model, levels of argumentation are determined in terms of components of TAP. So, TAP is a very useful model for analyzing the structure of an argument. In light of the literature indicating the gap, this study examined how pre-service chemistry teachers’ qualitative and quantitative contributions to scientific argumentation and assessment of structure of argument with respect to six science topics (i.e. atomic structure) developed within the context of argumentation based science course. The first contribution of this study to the literature is deeply focusing argumentation process during 12-week period in argumentation based science course and the second is evaluating quality of argumentation in the teaching of science effectively. The focus of this research is to investigate pre-service chemistry teachers’ qualitative and quantitative contributions to scientific argumentation and their conceptual understanding. Data were collected by written argumentation activities designed to investigate pre-service chemistry teachers’ conceptual understanding of a range of aspects of chemistry and audio recording during argumentation. This study was carried out by 27, 4th pre-service chemistry education students for 12 weeks period. Argumentation analyses as qualitative and quantitative were done by using Toulmin’s Argumentation Pattern. The results of study showed that pre-service chemistry teachers’ conceptual understanding and scientific argumentation quality can improve by promoting argumentation in learning environment.
Driver, R., Asoko, H., Leach, J., Mortimer, E., & Scott, P. (1994). Constructing scientific knowledge in the classroom. Educational Researcher, 23(7), 5-12. Dushl, R. A., & Ellenbogen, K. (1999, September). Middle school science students’ dialogic argumentation. Paper presented at the meeting of Second International Conference of the European Science Education Research Association, Kiel, Germany. Duschl, R., & Osborne, J. (2002). Supporting and promoting argumentation discourse in science education. Studies in Science Education, 38, 39-72. Erduran, S., Simon, S., & Osborne, J. (2004). TAPping into argumentation: Developments in the application of Toulmin’s argument pattern for studying science discourse. Science Education, 88, 915-933 Jiménez-Aleixandre, M. P., Rodrìguez, A., & Duschl, R. (2000). “Doing the lesson” or “doing science”: Argument in high school genetics. Science Education, 84(6), 757–792. Kelly, G., Druker, S., & Chen, C. (1998). Students' reasoning about electricity: Combining performance assessments with argumentation analysis. International Journal of Science Education, 20(7), 849-871. Kuhn, L., & Reiser, B. J. (2006, April). Structuring activities to foster argumentative discourse. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, San Francisco, CA. Osborne, J., Erduran, S., & Simon, S. (2004). Enhancing the quality of argumentation in school science. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 41(10), 994-1020. Osborne, J. (2005). The role of argument in science education. In K. Boersma, M. Goedhart, O. De Jong, & H. Eijkelhof (Eds.), Research and the quality of science education (pp. 367-380). Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Springer. Simon, S., Erduran, S., & Osborne, J. (2006). Learning to teach argumentation: Research and development in the science classroom. International Journal of Science Education, 28(2-3), 235-260. Toulmin, S. (1958). The uses of argument. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
- Search for keywords and phrases in "Text Search"
- Restrict in which part of the abstracts to search in "Where to search"
- Search for authors and in the respective field.
- For planning your conference attendance you may want to use the conference app, which will be issued some weeks before the conference
- If you are a session chair, best look up your chairing duties in the conference system (Conftool) or the app.