Examining arguments generated by year 5, 7, and 10 students in science classrooms

Research in Science Education

Volumn 40, Issue 2, 2010, Pages 149-169

  Choi, Aeran ^a   Notebaert, Andrew ^b   Diaz, Juan ^b   Hand, Brian ^b  

^a KENT STATE UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^b UNIVERSITY OF IOWA   (United States)

Author keywords

Arguments; Writing to learn

Indexed keywords

EID: 77955095127     PISSN: 0157244X     EISSN: 15731898     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1007/s11165-008-9105-x     Document Type: Article

References (47)

1. American Association for the Advancement of Science (AAAS) (1993). Benchmarks for science literacy. New York: Oxford University Press.
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, 797-817.
3. Bereiter, C., & Scardamalia, M. (1987). The psychology of written composition. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
4. Connally, P. (1989). Writing and the ecology of learning. In P. Connally, & T. Vilardi (Eds.), Writing to learn mathematics and science (pp. 1-14). New York: Teachers College Press.
5. Driver, R., Newton, P., & Osborne, J. (2000). Establishing the norms of scientific argumentation in classrooms. Science Education, 84, 287-312.
6. Emig, J. (1977). Writing as a mode of learning. College Composition and Communication, 28, 122-128.
7. Fellows, N. J. (1994). A window into thinking: using student writing to understand conceptual change in science learning. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 31, 985-1001.
8. Greenbowe, T. J., & Hand, B. (2005). Using the science writing heuristic to improve students' understanding of chemistry. In N. J. Pienta, M. M. Cooper, & T. J. Greenbowe (Eds.), Chemists guide to effective teaching. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall.
9. Halliday, M. A. K., & Martin, J. R. (1993). Writing science: Literacy and discursive power. Pittsburgh, PA: University of Pittsburgh Press.
10. Hand, B., & Keys, C. W. (1999). Inquiry investigation: a new approach to laboratory reports. The Science Teacher, 66(4), 27-29.
11. Hand, B., Wallace, C. W., & Yang, E. (2004). Using a science writing heuristic to enhance learning outcomes from laboratory activities in seventh-grad science: quantitative and qualitative aspects. International Journal of Science Education, 26(2), 131-149.
12. Hand, B., Hohenshell, L., & Prain, V. (2007). Examining the effect of multiple writing tasks on Year 10 biology students' understandings of cell and molecular biology concepts. Instructional Science, 35, 343-373.
13. Hohenshell, L. M., & Hand, B. (2006). Writing-to-learn strategies in secondary school cell biology: a mixed method study. International Journal of Science Education, 28(2-3), 261-289.
14. Jimenez-Aleixandre, M. P., Bugallo-Rodriguez, A., & Duschl, R. A. (2000). "Doing the lesson" or "doing science": argument in high school genetics. Science Education, 84, 757-792.
15. Kelly, G. J., & Bazerman, C. (2003). How students argue scientific claims: a rhetorical-semantic analysis. Applied Linguistics, 24(1), 28-55.
16. Kelly, G. J., Drucker, S., & Chen, K. (1998). Students' reasoning about electricity: combining performance assessment with argumentation analysis. International Journal of Science Education, 20, 849-871.
17. Kelly, G. J., Chen, C., & Prothero, W. (2000). The epistemological framing of a discipline: writing science in university oceanography. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 37, 691-718.
18. Keys, C. W. (1994). The development of scientific reasoning skills in conjunction with collaborative writing assignment: an interpretive study of six ninth-graders. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 31, 1003-1022.
19. Keys, C. W. (1999a). Language as an indicator of meaning generation: an analysis of middle school students' written discourse about scientific investigations. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 36(9), 1044-1061.
20. Keys, C. W. (1999b). Revitalizing instruction in scientific genres: connecting knowledge production with writing to learn in science. Science Education, 83, 115-130.
21. Keys, C. W., Hand, B., Prain, V., & Collins, S. (1999). Using the science writing huerisitic as a tool for learning from laboratory investigations in secondary science. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 36(10), 1065-1084.
22. Klein, P. (2000). Elementary students' strategies for writing-to-learn in science. Cognition and Instruction, 18(3), 317-348.
23. Kuhn, D. (1991). The skills of argument. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
24. Kuhn, D. (1993). Science as argument: implications for teaching and learning scientific thinking. Science Education, 77, 319-337.
25. Kuhn, D. (2005). Education for thinking. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
26. Lemke, J. L. (1990). Talking science: Language, learning, and values. Norwood, NJ: Ablex.
27. National Research Council (NRC) (1996). National science education standards. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.
28. 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.
29. Osborne, R. J., & Wittrock, M. C. (1983). Learning science: a generative process. Science Education, 67, 489-508.
30. 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.
31. Prain, V., & Hand, B. (1999). Students perceptions of writing for learning in secondary school science. Science Education, 83, 151-162.
32. Richmond, G., & Striley, J. (1996). Making meaning in classrooms: social processes in small group discourse and scientific knowledge building. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 33(8), 839-858.
33. Rivard, L. P. (1994). A review of writing to learn in science: implication for practice and research. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 31, 969-983.
34. Rivard, L. P., & Straw, S. W. (2000). The effect of talk and writing on learning science: an exploratory study. Science Education, 84, 566-593.
35. Rutherford, F. J., & Ahlgren, A. (1990). Science for all Americans. New York: Oxford University Press.
36. Sandoval, W. A. (2003). Conceptual and epistemic aspects of students' scientific explanations. The Journal of the Learning Sciences, 12(1), 5-51.
37. Sandoval, W. A., & Reiser, B. J. (2004). Explanation-driven inquiry: integrating conceptual and epistemic scaffolds for scientific inquiry. Science Education, 88, 345-372.
38. Schwab, J. (1962). The teaching of science: The teaching of science as enquiry. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.
39. Shrout, P. E., & Fleiss, J. L. (1979). Intraclass Correlations: use in assessing rater reliability. Psychological Bulletin, 86(2), 420-428.
40. Takao, A. Y., & Kelly, G. J. (2003). Assessment of evidence in university students' scientific writing. Science & Education, 12, 341-363.
41. Toulmin, S., Rieke, R., & Janik, A. (1984). An introduction to reasoning (2nd ed.). New York: Macmillan.
42. Wallace, C. S. (2004). Evidence from the literature for writing as a mode of science learning. In C. S. Wallace (Ed.), Writing and learning in the science classroom (pp. 9-19). Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Kluwer Academic Press.
43. Wellington, J., & Osborne, J. (2001). Language and literacy in science education. Philadelphia, PA: Open University Press.
44. Wiggins, G., & McTighe, J. (1998). Understanding by design. Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision & Curriculum Development.
45. Wray, D., & Lewis, M. (1997). Extending literacy: Children reading and writing non-fiction. London: Routledge.
46. Yore, L. D., Bisanz, G. L., & Hand, B. M. (2003). Examining the literacy component of science literacy: 25 years of language arts and science research. International Journal of Science Education, 25(6), 689-725.
47. Zeidler, D. L. (1997). The central role of fallacious thinking in science education. Science Education, 81, 483-496.