The features of peer argumentation in middle school students' scientific inquiry

Research in Science Education

Volumn 36, Issue 3, 2006, Pages 211-233

  Kim, Heekyong ^a,b   Song, Jinwoong ^a  

^a Seoul National University   (South Korea)

^b KING'S COLLEGE LONDON   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

Argumentative scientific inquiry; Critical discussion; Peer argumentation

Indexed keywords

EID: 33745089953     PISSN: 0157244X     EISSN: 15731898     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1007/s11165-005-9005-2     Document Type: Review

References (45)

1. Association for Science Education (1981). Education through science: An ASF policy statement. Hatfield, England: Author.
2. Bell, P., & Linn, M. C. (2000). Scientific arguments as learning artifacts: Designing for learning from the web with KIE. International Journal of Science Education, 22(8), 797-817.
3. Berry, A., Mulhall, P., Loughran, J. J., & Gunstone, R. F. (1999). Helping students learn from laboratory work. Australian Science Teachers Journal, 45(1), 27-31.
4. Chinn, C. A., & Anderson, R. C. (1998). The structure of discussions that promote reasoning. Teachers College Record, 100, 315-368.
5. Cunningham, C. M., & Helms, J. V. (1998). Sociology of science as a means to a more authentic inclusive science education. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 35(5), 483-499.
6. Driver, R., Leach, J., Millar, R., & Scott, P. (1996). Young people's images of science. Buckingham, UK: Open University Press.
7. Driver, R., Newton, P., & Osborne, J. (2000). Establishing the norms of scientific in argumentation in classrooms. Science Education, 84(3), 287-312.
8. Duschl, R. A., Ellenbogen, K., & Erduran, S. (1999, March). Promoting argumentation in middle school science students. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the National Association for Research in Science Teaching, Boston, MA.
9. Edmondson, K. M., & Novak, J. D. (1993). The interplay of scientific epistemological views, learning strategies, and attitudes of college students. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 30(6), 547-559.
10. Erduran, S., Simon, S., & Osborne, J. (2004). TAPing into argumentation: Developments in the application of Toulmin's argument pattern for studying science discourse. Science Educatoin, 88(6), 915-933.
11. Franklin, A. (1986). The neglect of experiment. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
12. Fuller, S. (1997). Science. Buckingham, UK: Open University Press.
13. Hodson, D. (1998). Is this really what scientists do? Seeking a more authentic science in and beyond the school laboratory. In J. J. Wellington (Ed.), Practical work in school science (pp. 93-108). New York: Routledge.
14. Hodson, D., & Bencze, L. (1998). Becoming critical about practical work: Changing views and changing practice through action research. International Journal of Science Education, 20(6), 683-694.
15. Hogan, K., Nastasi, B. K., & Pressley, M. (2000). Discourse patterns and collaborative scientific reasoning in peer and teacher-guided discussions. Cognition and Instruction, 17(4), 379-432.
16. Jimenez-Aleixandre, M. P., Rodriguez, A. B., & Duschl, R. (2000). 'Doing the lesson' or 'doing science' Argument in high school genetics. Science Education, 84(6), 757-792.
17. Johnson, B., & Christensen, L. B. (2003). Educational research: Quantitative, qualitative, and mixed approaches. Boston: Allyn & Bacon.
18. Jones, A., Simon, S., Black, P. J., Fairbrother, R. W., & Watson, J. R. (1992). Open work in science: Development of investigations in schools. Hatfield, England: Association for Science Education.
19. Kelly, G. J., & Takao, A. (2002). Epistemic levels in argument: An analysis of university oceanography students' use of evidence in writing. Science Education, 86(3), 314-342.
20. Kelly, G. J., Drucker, S., & Chen, K. (1998). Students' reasoning about electricity: Combining performance assessment with argumentation analysis. International Journal of Science Education, 20(7), 849-871.
21. Kim, H. & Song, J. (2003). Middle school students' ideas about the purposes of laboratory work. Journal of the Korean Association for Research in Science Education, 23(3), 254-264.
22. Kim, H., & Song, J. (2004). The exploration of open scientific inquiry model emphasizing students' argumentation. Journal of the Korean Association for Research in Science Education, 24(6), 1216-1234.
23. Kim, H., Kang, T., & Song, J. (2003). The features of practical work for physics in middle school science textbooks based on the 7th national curriculum in Korea. Sae Mulli, 47(6), 387-394.
24. Kuhn, D. (1992). Thinking as argument. Harvard Educational Review, 62(2), 155-178.
25. Kuhn, D. (1993). Science as argument: Implications for teaching and learning scientific thinking. Science Education, 77(3), 319-337.
26. Kuhn, D., Shaw, V., & Felton, M. (1997). Effects of dyadic interaction on argumentative reasoning. Cognition and Instruction, 15(3), 287-315.
27. Latour, B., & Woolgar, S. (1986). Laboratory life: The construction of scientific facts. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
28. Lemke, J. L. (1990). Talking science: Language, learning, and values. Norwood, NJ: Ablex.
29. Merriam, S. B. (1998). Qualitative research and case study applications in education. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass Publishers.
30. National Research Council (1996). National science education standards. Washington, DC: National Academy.
31. National Science Teachers Association (1995). A high school framework for national science education standards. Arlington, VA: Authors.
32. Newton, P., Driver, R., & Osborne, J. (1999). The place of argumentation in the pedagogy of school science. International Journal of Science Education, 21(5), 553-576.
33. Osborne, J., Erduran, S., & Simon, S. (2004). Enhancing the quality of argumentation in science. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 41(10), 994-1020.
34. Pera, M. (1994). The discourses of science (C. Botsford, Trans.). Chicago: The University of Chicago.
35. Russell, T. L. (1983). Analyzing arguments in science classroom discourse: Can teachers' questions distort scientific authority? Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 20(1), 27-45.
36. Strauss, A., & Corbin, J. (1990). Basics of qualitative research: Grounded theory procedures and techniques. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
37. Sunal, C. S., Sunal, D. W., & Tirri, K. (2001, April). Using evidence in scientific reasoning: Exploring characteristics of middle school students' argumentation. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, Seattle, WA.
38. Sutton, C. R. (1992). Words, science and learning. Buckingham, UK: Open University Press.
39. Taylor, C. (1996). Defining science. Madison, WI: University of Wisconsin.
40. van Eemeren, F. H., Grootendorst, R., & Henkemans, F. S. (2002). Argumentation; Analysis, evaluation, presentation. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
41. Vygotsky, L. (1986). Thought and language. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
42. Watson, J. R., Swain, J. R. L., & McRobbie C. (2004). Students' discussions in practical scientific inquiries. International Journal of Science Education, 26(1), 25-45.
43. Wellington, J. J. (1998). Practical work in science: Time for a reappraisal. In J. J. Wellington (Ed.), Practical work in school science (pp. 3-15). New York: Routledge.
44. Woolnough, B. E. (1998). Authentic science in schools, to develop personal knowledge. In J. J. Wellington (Ed.), Practical work in school science (pp. 109-125). New York: Routledge.
45. Zembal-Saul, C., Munford, D., Crawford, B., Friedrichsen, P., & Land, S. (2002). Scaffolding preservice science teachers' evidence-based arguments during an investigation of natural selection. Research in Science Education, 32(4), 437-463.