The analysis of classroom discourse: Elementary school science curricula advancing reasoning with evidence

Educational Assessment

Volumn 15, Issue 3, 2010, Pages 197-221

  Hardy, Ilonca ^a   Kloetzer, Birgit ^b   Moeller, Kornelia ^c   Sodian, Beate ^b  

^a GOETHE UNIVERSITY   (Germany)

^b UNIVERSITY OF MUNICH   (Germany)

^c UNIVERSITY OF MÜNSTER   (Germany)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 78650143796     PISSN: 10627197     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1080/10627197.2010.530556     Document Type: Article

References (47)

1. American Association for the Advancement of Science. (1993). Benchmarks for science literacy. New York: Oxford University Press.
2. Bullock, M., Sodian, B., & Koerber, S. (2009). Doing experiments and understanding science. Development of scientific reasoning from childhood to adulthood. In W. Schneider & M. Bullock (Eds.), Human development from early childhood to early adulthood: Findings from a 20-year longitudinal study (pp. 173-197). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
3. Bullock, M., & Ziegler, A. (1999). Scientific reasoning: Developmental and individual differences. In F. E. Weinert, & W. Schneider (Eds.), Individual development from 3 to 12. Findings from the Munich Longitudinal Study (pp. 38-54). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
4. Bybee, R. W. (2002). Scientific literacy: Mythos oder Realität? In W. Gräber (Ed.), Scientific literacy. Der Beitrag der Naturwissenschaften zur allgemeinen Bildung (pp. 21-43). Opladen, Germany: Leske und Budrich.
5. 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 junior high school students' understanding of the construction of scientific knowledge. International Journal of Science Education, 11, 514-529.
6. Carey, S., & Smith, C. (1993). On understanding the nature of scientific knowledge. Educational Psychologist, 28, 235-251.
7. Chinn, C. A., & Malhotra, B. A. (2002). Children's responses to anomalous scientific data: How is conceptual change impeded? Journal of Educational Psychology, 94, 327-343.
8. diSessa, A. (2006). A history of conceptual change research. In K. Sawyer (Ed.), The Cambridge handbook of the learning sciences (pp. 265-281). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
9. Driver, R., Leach, J., Millar, R., & Scott, P. (1996). Young people's images of science. Bristol, UK: Open University Press.
10. Driver, R., Newton, P., & Osborne, J. (2000). Establishing the norms of scientific argumentation in classrooms. Science Education, 84, 287-312.
11. Dunbar, K. (1994). How scientists really reason: Scientific reasoning in real-world laboratories. In R. J. Sternberg & J. Davidson (Eds.). Mechanisms of insight (pp. 365-395). Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
12. Duschl, R. A. (2003). Assessment of inquiry. In J. M. Atkin & J. Coffey (Eds.), Everyday assessment in the science classroom (pp. 41-59). Arlington, VA: NSTA Press.
13. Duschl, R. A. (2008). Science education in three-part harmony: Balancing conceptual, epistemic, and social learning goals. Review of Research in Education, 32, 268-291.
14. Duschl, R. A., & Gitomer, D. H. (1997). Strategies and challenges to changing the focus of assessment and instruction in science classrooms. Educational Assessment, 4, 37-73.
15. Erduran, S., & Jimenez-Aleixandre, M. (Eds.). (2007). Argumentation in science education: Perspectives from classroombased research. Dordrecht, the Netherlands: Springer.
16. Grygier, P. (2008). Wissenschaftsverständnis von Grundschülern im Sachunterricht [Nature of science in elementary school classrooms]. Bad Heilbrunn, Germany: Klinkhardt.
17. Hardy, I., Jonen, A., Möller, K., & Stern, E. (2006) Effects of instructional support within constructivist learning environments for elementary school students' understanding of "floating and sinking. " Journal of Educational Psychology, 98, 307-326.
18. Inhelder, B., & Piaget, J. (1958). The growth of logical thinking from childhood to adolescence. New York: Basic Books.
19. Jimenez-Aleixandre, M. P., Rodriguez, A. B., & Duschl, R. A. (2000). "Doing the Lesson" or "Doing Science": Argument in high school genetics. Science Education, 84, 757-792.
20. Koerber, S., Sodian, B., Thoermer, C., & Nett, U. (2005). Scientific reasoning in young children. Preschoolers' ability to evaluate covariation evidence. Swiss Journal of Psychology, 64, 141-152.
21. Kuhn, D. (2010). Teaching and learning science as argument. Science Education, 94, 1-15.
22. Kuhn, D., Amsel, E., & O'Loughlin, M. (1988). The development of scientific thinking skills. Orlando, FL: Academic Press.
23. Kuhn, D., & Franklin, S. (2006). The second decade: What develops (and how). In D. Kuhn & R. Siegler (Eds.), Handbook of child psychology. Volume 2: Cognition, perception, and language (pp. 953-994). Hoboken, NJ: Wiley.
24. Kuhn, D., Garcia-Mila, M., Zohar, A., & Andersen, C. (1995). Strategies of knowledge acquisition. Monographs of the Society for Research in Child Development, 60(4, Serial No. 245).
25. Kuhn, D., & Pearsall, S. (2000). Developmental origins of scientific thinking. Journal of Cognition and Development, 1, 113-129.
26. Lederman, N. G. (1992). Students' and teachers' conceptions of the nature of science: A Review of the Research. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 29, 331-359.
27. McComas, W. F. (1998). The nature of science in science education. Dordrecht, the Netherlands: Kluwer.
28. Möller, K. (1999).Konstruktivistisch orientierte Lehr-Lernprozessforschung im naturwissenschaftlich-technischenBereich des Sachunterrichts [Research of constructivist learning and teaching processes in science and technical domains of science instruction]. In W. Köhnlein (Ed.), Vielperspektivisches Denken im Sachunterricht (pp. 125-191). Bad Heilbrunn, Germany: Klinkhardt.
29. National Research Council. (1996). National science education standards. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.
30. National Research Council. (2001). National science education standards. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.
31. Osborne, J., Erduran, S., & Simon, S. (2004). Enhancing the quality of argumentation in school science. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 41, 994-1020.
32. Sampson, V., & Clark, D. (2006). Assessment of argument in science education: A critical review of literature. In S. Barab, K. Hay, & D. Hickey (Eds.), Proceedings of the 7th International Conference of the Learning Sciences (pp. 655-661). Bloomington, IN: International Society of the Learning Sciences.
33. Schauble, L. (1990). Belief revision in children: The role of prior knowledge and strategies for generating evidence. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 49, 31-57.
34. Simon, S., Erduran, S., & Osborne, J. (2006). Learning to teach argumentation: Research and development in the science classroom. International Journal of Science Education, 28, 235-260.
35. Simon, S., Osborne, J., & Erduran, S. (2003). Systematic teacher development to enhance the use of argumentation in school science activities. In J. Wallace & J. Loughran (Eds.), Leadership and professional development in science education: New possibilities for enhancing teacher learning (pp. 198-217). London: Routledge Falmer.
36. Smith, C., Carey, S., & Wiser, M. (1985). On differentiation: A case study of the development of the concepts of size, weight, and density. Cognition, 21, 177-237.
37. Smith, C., Maclin, D., Houghton, C., & Hennessey, M. G. (2000). Sixth-grade students' epistemologies of science: The impact of school science experiences on epistemological development. Cognition & Instruction, 18, 349-422.
38. Sodian, B., Jonen, A., Thoermer, C., & Kircher, E. (2006). Die Natur der Naturwissenschaften verstehen-Implementierung wissenschaftstheoretischenUnterrichts in der Grundschule [Understanding the nature of science-Implementing instruction on the nature of science in elementary school]. In M. Prenzel & L. Allolio-Näcke (Eds.), Untersuchungen zur Bildungsqualität von Schule.Abschlussbericht des DFG-Schwerpunktprogramms. Münster: Waxmann.
39. Sodian, B., Thoermer, C., Kircher, E., Grygier, P., & Günther, J. (2002). Vermittlung von Wissenschaftsverständnis in der Grundschule [Instruction on the nature of science in elementary school]. Zeitschrift für Pädagogik, 45. Beiheft, 192-206.
40. Sodian, B., Zaitchik, D., & Carey, S. (1991). Young children's differentiation of hypothetical beliefs from evidence. Child Development, 62, 753-766.
41. Strand-Cary, M., & Klahr, D. (2008). Developing elementary science skills: Instructional effectiveness and independence. Cognitive Development, 23, 488-511.
42. Thoermer, C., & Sodian, B. (2002). Science undergraduates' and graduates' epistemologies of science: The notion of interpretive frameworks. New Ideas in Psychology, 26, 263-283.
43. Toulmin, S. E. (1958). The uses of argument. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
44. Tytler, R., & Peterson, S. (2004). From "try it and see" to strategic exploration: Characterizing young children's scientific reasoning. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 41, 94-118.
45. von Aufschnaiter, C., Erduran, S., Osborne, J., & Simon, S. (2008). Arguing to learn and learning to argue: Case studies of how students' argumentation relates to their scientific knowledge. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 45, 101-131.
46. Vosniadou, S., Ioannides, C., Dimitrakopoulou, A., & Papademetriou, E. (2001). Designing learning environments to promote conceptual change in science. Learning and Instruction, 15, 317-419.
47. Zimmerman, C. (2007). The development of scientific thinking skills in elementary and middle school. Developmental Review, 27, 172-223.