Gauging students' untutored ability in argumentation about experimental data: A South African case study

International Journal of Science Education

Volumn 32, Issue 16, 2010, Pages 2143-2166

  Lubben, Fred ^a   Sadeck, Melanie ^a   Scholtz, Zena ^a   Braund, Martin ^a  

^a CAPE PENINSULA UNIVERSITY OF TECHNOLOGY   (South Africa)

Author keywords

Argumentation; Critical thinking; Experimental evidence; Science resource level; Secondary education; Small group discussions; South Africa

Indexed keywords

EID: 78149277459     PISSN: 09500693     EISSN: 14645289     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1080/09500690903331886     Document Type: Article

References (69)

1. Abd-El-Khalick, F., Lederman, N. G., Bell, R. L., & Schwartz, R. S. (2002). Views of nature of science questionnaire (VNOS): Towards valid and meaningful assessment of learners' conceptions of the nature of science. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 39(6), 497-521.
2. Andrews, R. (1995). Teaching and learning argument. London: Cassell.
3. Andrews, R. (2007). Argumentation, critical thinking and the postgraduate dissertation. Educational Review, 59(1), 1-18.
4. Braund, M., Lubben, F., Scholtz, Z., Sadeck, M., & Hodges, M. (2007). Comparing the effect of scientific and socio-scientific argumentation tasks: Lessons from South African classrooms. School Science Review, 88(324), 67-76.
5. Chan, C. (2001). Peer collaboration and discourse patterns in learning from incompatible information. Instructional Science, 29, 443-479.
6. Dagher, Z., Brickhouse, N., Shipman, H., & Letts, W. (2004). How some college students represent their understandings of the nature of scientific theories. International Journal of Science Education, 26, 735-755.
7. Department of Education (DoE). (2004). Further education and training: G10-12 (General): Overview. Pretoria: Department of Education.
8. De Vries, E., Lund, K., & Baker, M. (2002). Computer-mediated epistemic dialogue: Explanation and argumentation as vehicles for understanding scientific notions. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 11, 63-103.
9. Driver, R., Asoko, H., Leach J., Mortimer, E., & Scott, P. (1994). Constructing scientific knowledge in the classroom. Educational Researcher, 23, 5-12.
10. Duschl, R. (2008). Quality argumentation and epistemic criteria. In S. Erduran & M. Jiménez-Aleixandre (Eds.), Argumentation in science education (pp. 159-175). Dordrecht: Springer.
11. Duschl, R., & Osborne, J. (2002). Supporting and promoting argumentation discourse in science education. Studies in Science Education, 38, 39-72.
12. Erduran, S., Osborne, J., & Simon, S. (2004). TAPping into argumentation: Developments in the application of Toulmin's argumentation pattern for studying science discourse. Science Education, 88(6), 915-933.
13. Facione, P., & Facione, N. (1992). The California Critical Thinking Disposition Inventory (CCTDI). Millbrae, CA: California Academic Press.
14. Finkel, E. (1996). Making sense of genetics: Students' learning in classrooms: Reframing classroom research. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 33, 345-368.
15. Forman, A., Larreamendy-Joerns, J., Stein, M., & Brown, C. (1998). "You are going to want to find out which and prove it": Collective argumentation in a mathematics classroom. Learning and Instruction, 8(6), 527-548.
16. Glassner, A., & Schwarz, B. (2007). What stands and develops between creative and critical thinking? Argumentation? Thinking Skills and Creativity, 2, 10-18.
17. Gott, R., & Duggan, S. (1996). Practical work: Its role in the understanding of evidence in science. International Journal of Science Education, 18, 791-806.
18. Harris, R. (1998). Introduction to creative thinking. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
19. Hogan, K. (1999). Thinking aloud together: A test of an intervention to foster students' collaborative scientific reasoning. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 36, 1085-1109.
20. Hudicourt-Barnes, J. (2003). The use of argumentation in Haitian Creole science classes. Harvard Educational Review, 73(1), 73-93.
21. Jiménez-Aleixandre, M., & Erduran, S. (2008). Argumentation in science education: An overview. In S. Erduran & M. Jiménez-Aleixandre (Eds.), Argumentation in science education (pp. 3-27). Dordrecht: Springer.
22. Jiménez-Aleixandre, M., Rodríguez, A., & Duschl, R. (2000). "Doing the lesson" or "doing science": Argument in high school genetics. Science Education, 84(6), 757-792.
23. Kanari, Z., & Millar, R. (2004). Reasoning from data: How students collect and interpret data in science investigations. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 41(7), 748-769.
24. Kelly, G., & Chen, C. (1999). The sound of music: Constructing science as a socio-cultural practice through oral and written discourse. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 36(8), 883-915.
25. Kelly, G., & Takao, A. (2002). Epistemic levels in argument: An analysis of university oceanography students' use of evidence in writing. Science Education, 86(3), 314-342.
26. Keogh, B., & Naylor, S. (1999). Concept cartoons, teaching and learning in science: An evaluation. International Journal of Science Education, 21(4), 431-446.
27. Keogh, B., & Naylor, S. (2007). Talking and thinking in science. School Science Review, 88(324), 85-90.
28. Khan, M. (2004). For whom the school bell tolls: Disparities in performance in senior certificate mathematics and physical science. Perspectives in Education, 22(10), 149-156.
29. Koosimile, A. (2004). Out-of-school experiences in science classes: Problems, issues and challenges in Botswana. International Journal of Science Education, 26(4), 483-496.
30. Kuhn, D. (1993). Science as argument: Implications for teaching and learning of scientific thinking. Science Education, 77, 319-337.
31. Kuhn, D. (1999). A developmental model of critical thinking. Educational Researcher, 28(2), 16-26.
32. Lajoie, S., Lavigne, N., Guerrera, C., & Munsie, S. (2001). Constructing knowledge in the context of BioWorld. Instructional Science, 29, 155-186.
33. 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.
34. Leach, J., Driver, R., Millar, R., & Scott, P. (1997). A study of the progression in learning about "the nature of science": Issues of conceptualization and methodology. International Journal of Science Education, 19, 147-166.
35. Lemke, J. (1997). Cognition, context and learning: A social semiotic perspective. In D. Kirschner & P. Whitson (Eds.), Situated cognition: Social, semiotic and psychological perspectives (pp. 37-46). Mahweh, NJ: Erlbaum.
36. Liu, L. (2005). Rhetorical education through writing instruction across cultures: A comparative analysis of select on-line instructional materials on argumentative writing. Journal of Second Language Writing, 14(1), 1-18.
37. Lubben, F., Campbell, B., Buffler, A., & Allie, S. (2001). Point and set reasoners in practical science measurement by entering university freshmen. Science Education, 85(4), 311-327.
38. Maloney, J., & Simon, S. (2006). Mapping children's discussions of evidence in science to assess collaboration and argumentation. International Journal of Science Education, 28(15), 1817-1841.
39. Mercer, N., Dawes, L., Wegerif, W., & Sams, C. (2004). Reasoning as a scientist: Ways of helping children to use language to learn science. British Educational Research Journal, 30(3), 359-377.
40. Mortimer, E., & Scott, P. (2003). Meaning making in secondary science classrooms. Buckingham: Open University Press.
41. Nsamenang, B. (1999). An image of the self in African social thought. Newberry Park, CA: Sage.
42. Osana, H., & Seymour, J. (2004). Critical thinking in pre-service teachers: A rubric for evaluating argumentation and statistical reasoning. Educational Research and Evaluation, 10(4), 473-498.
43. Osborne, J., Erduran, S., & Simon, S. (2004). Ideas, evidence and argument in science (IDEAS PROJECT). London: Kings College, University of London.
44. Paul, R. (1990). Critical thinking: What every person needs to survive in a rapidly changing world. Santa Rosa, CA: Foundation for Critical Thinking.
45. Paul, R., & Elder, L. (2004). The miniature guide to critical thinking concepts and tools. Dillon Beach, CA: Foundation for Critical Thinking.
46. 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, 839-858.
47. Rollnick, M. (2000). Current issues and perspectives on second language learning in science. Studies in Science Education, 35, 93-122.
48. Ryder, J., Leach, J., & Driver, R. (1999). Undergraduate science students' images of science. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 36, 201-219.
49. Sampson, V., & Clark, D. (2008). Assessment of the ways students generate arguments in science education: Current perspectives and recommendations for future directions. Science Education, 92(3), 447-472.
50. Sampson, V., & Clark, D. (2009). The impact of collaboration on the outcomes of scientific argumentation. Science Education, 93(3), 448-484.
51. Sandoval, W., & Millwood, K. (2005). The quality of students' use of evidence in written scientific explanations. Cognition and Instruction, 23(1), 23-55.
52. Sandoval, W., & Reiser, B. (2004). Explanation driven inquiry: Integrating conceptual and epistemic scaffolds for scientific inquiry, Science Education, 88(3), 345-372.
53. Scanlon, E. (2000). How gender influences learners working collaboratively with science simulations. Learning and Instruction, 10, 463-481.
54. Scholtz, Z., Braund, M., Hodges, M., Koopman, R., & Lubben, F. (2008). South African teachers' ability to argue: The emergence of inclusive argumentation. International Journal of Educational Development, 28(1), 21-34.
55. Schwarz, B., Neuman, Y., Gil, J., & Ilya, M. (2003). Construction of collective and individual knowledge in argumentation activity. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 12(2), 219-256.
56. Sherman, G., & Klein, J. (1995). The effect of cued interaction and ability grouping during cooperative computer-based science instruction. Educational Technology Research and Development, 43, 5-24.
57. 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), 235-260.
58. Soudien, C. (2007). The "A" factor: Coming to terms with the question of legacy in South African education. International Journal of Educational Development, 27, 182-193.
59. Steyn, J. (2000). Quality education and equality in education: A dilemma for democratic South Africa. South African Journal of Education, 20(1), 46-49.
60. Tabulawa, R. (1997). Pedagogical classroom practice and the social context: the case of Botswana. International Journal of Educational Development, 17(2), 189-204.
61. Tao, P. (2003). Eliciting and developing junior secondary students' understanding of the nature of science through a peer collaboration instruction in science stories. International Journal of Science Education, 25, 147-171.
62. Tolmie, A., & Howe, C. (1993). Gender and dialogue in secondary school physics. Gender and Education, 5, 191-209.
63. Toulmin, S. (2003). The uses of argument (Updated ed.) Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
64. Tsai, C.-C. (1999). "Laboratory exercises help me memorize the scientific truths": A study of eight graders' scientific epistemological views and learning in laboratory activities. Science Education, 25, 147-171.
65. Tsai, C.-C., & Liu, S.-Y. (2005). Developing a multi-dimensional instrument for assessing students' epistemological views towards science. International Journal of Science Education, 27(13), 127-149.
66. Venter, E. (2004). The notion of Ubuntu and communalism in African educational discourse. Studies in Philosophy of Education, 23, 149-160.
67. Webb, P., Williams, Y., & Meiring, L. (2008). Concept cartoons and writing frames: Developing argumentation in South African science classrooms? African Journal of Research in Mathematics, Science and Technology Education, 12(1), 5-18.
68. Wray, D., & Lewis, M. (1997). Extending literacy: Children reading and writing non-fiction. London: Routledge.
69. 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.