Assessment of argument in science education: A critical review of the literature

ICLS 2006 - International Conference of the Learning Sciences, Proceedings

Volumn 2, Issue , 2006, Pages 655-661

  Sampson, Victor D ^a   Clark, Douglas B ^a  

^a Division of Curriculum and Instruction   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ANALYTICAL METHOD; CRITICAL REVIEW; EMPIRICAL RESEARCH; SCIENCE EDUCATION;

RESEARCH;

EDUCATION;

EID: 38949197644     PISSN: None     EISSN: None     Source Type: Conference Proceeding    
DOI: None     Document Type: Conference Paper

References (26)

1. Bazerman, C. (1988). Shaping written knowledge: The genre and activity of the experimental article in science. Madison, WI: University of Wisconsin Press.
2. Brem, S. K., & Rips, L. J. (2000). Explanation and evidence in informal argument. Cognitive Science, 24(4), 573-604.
3. Carey, S., Evans, R., Honda, M, Jay, E., & Unger, C. (1989). 'An experiment is when you try it and see if it works': A study of grade 7 students' understanding of the construction of scientific knowledge. International Journal of Science Education, 11(Special Issue), 514-529.
4. Clark, D. B., & Sampson, V. (2005). Analyzing the quality of argumentation supported by personally-seeded discussions. Paper presented at the Computer Supported Collaborative Learning Conference, Taipei, Taiwan.
5. Driver, R., Asoko, H., Leach, J., Mortimer, E., & Scott, P. (1994). Constructing scientific knowledge in the classroom. Educational Researcher, 23, 5-12.
6. Driver, R., Leach, J., Millar, R., & Scott, P. (1996). Young people's images of science. Philadelphia: Open University Press.
7. Driver, R., Newton, P., & Osborne, J. (2000). Establishing the norms of scientific argumentation in classrooms. Science Education, 84(3), 287-313.
8. Hogan, K., & Maglienti, M. (2001). Comparing the epistemological underpinnings of students' and scientists' reasoning about conclusions. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 38(6), 663-687.
9. Jimenez-Aleixandre, M., Rodrigues, M., & Duschl, R. A. (2000). 'Doing the lesson' or 'doing science': Argument in high school genetics. Science Education, 84(6), 757-792.
10. Kelly, G. J., Druker, S., & Chen, C. (1998). Students' reasoning about electricity: combining performance assessments with argumentation analysis. International Journal of Science Education, 20(7), 849-871.
11. 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.
12. Kitchener, K. S. (1983). Cognition, metacognition, and epistemic cognition: A three-level model of cognitive processing. Human Development, 26, 222-232.
13. Kuhn, D. (1993). Science as argument: Implications for teaching and learning scientific thinking. Science Education, 77(3), 319-337.
14. Kuhn, T., S. (1970). The structure of scientific revolutions (2nd ed.). Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
15. Latour, B. (1987). Science in action: How to follow scientists and engineers through society. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.
16. Lawson, A. (2003). The nature and development of hypothetico-predictive argumentation with implications for science teaching. International Journal of Science Education, 25(11), 1387-1408.
17. Means, L. M., & Voss, J. F. (1996). Who reasons well? Two studies of informal reasoning among children of different grade, ability, and knowledge levels. Cognition and Instruction, 14(2), 139-178.
18. Osborne, J., Erduran, S., & Simon, S. (2004). Enhancing the quality of argumentation in science classrooms. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 41(10), 994-1020.
19. Passmore, C, & Stewart, J. (2002). A modeling approach to teaching evolutionary biology in high schools. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 39(3), 185-204.
20. Sandoval, W. A. (2003). Conceptual and epistemic aspects of students' scientific explanations. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 12(1), 5-51.
21. Sandoval, W. A., & Millwood, K. (2005). The quality of students' use of evidence in written scientific explanations. Cognition and Instruction.
22. Sandoval, W. A., & Reiser, B. J. (2004). Explanation driven inquiry: Integrating conceptual and epistemic scaffolds for scientific inquiry. Science Education, 88(3), 345-372.
23. Takao, A. Y., & Kelly, G J. (2003). Assessment of evidence in university students' scientific writing. Science & Education, 12(4), 341-363.
24. Toulmin, S. (1958). The uses of argument. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
25. Zeidler, D., L. (1997). The central role of fallacious thinking in science education. Science Education, 81, 483-496.
26. Zohar, A., & Nemet, F. (2002). Fostering students' knowledge and argumentation skills through dilemmas in human genetics. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 39(1), 35-62.