Assessing student's arguments made in socio-scientific contexts: The considerations of structural complexity and the depth of content knowledge

Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences

Volumn 9, Issue , 2010, Pages 1120-1127

  Foong, Chan Choong ^a   Daniel, Esther G S ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF MALAYA   (Malaysia)

Author keywords

Analytical framework; Argumentation; Assessment; Socio scientific issues

Indexed keywords

EID: 79951936812     PISSN: 18770428     EISSN: None     Source Type: Conference Proceeding    
DOI: 10.1016/j.sbspro.2010.12.294     Document Type: Conference Paper

References (37)

1. Andow, D. A., & Hilbeck, A. (2004). Science-based risk assessment for non-target effects of transgenic crops. BioScience, 54, 637-649. (Pubitemid 38940961)
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. Castano, C. (2008). Socio-scientific discussions as a way to improve the comprehension of science and the understanding of the interrelation between species and the environment. Research in Science Education, 38, 565-587.
4. Chang, S. N., & Chiu, M. H. (2008). Lakatos' scientific research programmes as a framework for analysing informal argumentation about socioscientific issues. International Journal of Science Education, 30(13), 1753-1773.
5. Chen, L. J., Lee, D. S., Song, Z. P., Suh, H. S., & Lu, B. R. (2004). Gene flow from cultivated rice (Oryza sativa) to its weedy and wild relatives. Annals of Botany, 93, 67-73.
6. Chilcutt, C. F., & Tabashnik, B. E. (2004). Contamination of refuges by Bacillus thuringiensis toxin genes from transgenic maize. Proceeding of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 101, 7526-7529. (Pubitemid 38658062)
7. Cleveland, D. A., & Soleri, D. (2005). Rethinking the risk management process for genetically engineered crop varieties in small-scale, traditionally based agriculture. Ecology and Society, 10(1), 9.
8. Dawson, V., & Venville, G. J. (2009). High-school Students' informal reasoning and argumentation about biotechnology: An indicator of scientific literacy? International Journal of Science Education, 31(11), 1421-1455.
9. Ekborg, M. (2008). Opinion building on a socio-scientific issue: The case of genetically modified plants. Journal of Biological Education, 42(2), 60-65. (Pubitemid 351440037)
10. Erduran, S., Simon, S., & Osborne, J. (2004). TAPing into argumentation: Developments in the use of Toulmin's Argument Pattern in studying science discourse. Science Education, 88(6), 915-933. (Pubitemid 39558160)
11. Eskin, H., & Ogan-Bekiroglu, F. (2009). Investigation of a pattern between students' engagement and their science content knowledge: A case study. Eurasia Journal of Mathematics, Science & Technology Education, 5(1), 63-70.
12. Gealy, D. R., Mitten, D. H., & Rutger, J. N. (2003). Gene flow between red rice (Oryza sativa) and herbicide-resistant rice (O. sativa): Implications for weed management. Weed Technology, 17, 627-645.
13. Goodman, M. M. (2004). Plant breeding requirements for applied molecular biology. Crop Science, 44, 1913-1914. (Pubitemid 39484307)
14. Halverson, K. L., Siegel, M. A., & Freyermuth, S. K. (2009). Lenses for framing decisions: Undergraduates' decision making about stem cell research. International Journal of Science Education, 31(9), 1249-1268.
15. Hong Kong Environmental Protection Department. (2006). Environmental Asbestos Control. Retrieved 19 September, 2010, from http://www.epd.gov.hk/epd/ english/environmentinhk/air/guide-ref/asbestos-control-01.html#whyhazardous
16. Huang, J., Hu, R., Rozelle, S., & Pray, C. (2005). Insect-Resistant GM Rice in Farmers' Fields: Assessing Productivity and Health Effects in China. Science, 308(5722), 688-690. (Pubitemid 40594388)
17. Jauhar, P. P. (2006). Modern Biotechnology as an Integral Supplement to Conventional Plant Breeding: The Prospects and Challenges. Crop Science, 46(5), 1841-1859. (Pubitemid 44525346)
18. 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. (Pubitemid 37230322)
19. Kelly, G. J., Drunker, S., & Chen, C. (1998). Students' reasoning about electricity: Combining performance assessments with argumentation analysis. International Journal of Science Education, 20(7), 849-871. (Pubitemid 128691682)
20. Kolsto, S. D. (2006). Patterns in students' argumentation confronted with a risk-focused socio-scientific issue. International Journal of Science Education, 28(14), 1689-1716. (Pubitemid 44688430)
21. Kuhn, D. (1991). The skills of argument. New York: Cambridge University Press.
22. Maloney, J. (2007). Children's role and use of evidence on science: an analysis of decision-making in small groups. British Educational Research Journal, 33(3), 371-401.
23. Maloney, J., & Simon, S. (2006). Mapping children's discussion of evidence in science to assess collaboration and argumentation. International Journal of Science Education, 28(15), 1817-1841. (Pubitemid 44803841)
24. Miles, M. B., & Huberman, A. M. (1994). Qualitative data analysis (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.
25. Osborne, J., Erduran, S., & Simon, S. (2004). Enhancing the quality of argument in school science. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 41(10), 994-1020. (Pubitemid 40002954)
26. Patronis, T., & Potari, D., & Spiliotopoulou, V. (1999). Students' argumentation in decision-making on a socio-scientific issue: Implications for teaching. International Journal of Science Education, 21(7), 745-754.
27. Perkins, D. N., & Salomon, G. (1989). Are cognitive skills context-bound? Educational Researcher, 18(1), 16-25.
28. Qaim, M., & Zilberman, D. (2003). Yield Effects of Genetically Modified Crops in Developing Countries. Science, 299(5608), 900-902. (Pubitemid 36182450)
29. Sadler, T. D. (2004). Informal reasoning regarding socioscientific issues: A critical review of research. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 41(5), 513-536.
30. Sadler, T. D., & Donnelly, L. A. (2006). Socioscientific argumentation: The effects of content knowledge and morality. International Journal of Science Education, 28(12), 1463-1488. (Pubitemid 44688439)
31. Sampson, V., & Clark, D. B. (2008). Assessment of the ways students generate arguments in science education: Current perspectives and recommendations for future direction. Science Education, 92(3), 447-472.
32. Simonneaux, L. (2001). Role-play or debate to promote students' argumentation and justification on an issue in animal transgenesis. International Journal of Science Education, 23(9), 903-927. (Pubitemid 33595825)
33. Toulmin, S. E. (1958). The uses of argument. Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press.
34. U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, National Institute of Health, National Cancer Institute. (2009). Asbestos Exposure and Cancer Risk. Retrieved 20 September, 2010, from http://www.cancer.gov/cancertopics/factsheet/ risk/asbestos
35. Von Aufschnaiter, C., Erduran, S., Osborne, J., & Simon, S. (2007). Argumentation and the learning of science. In R. Pinto, & D. Couso (Eds.), Contributions from science education research (pp. 377-388). Dordrect: Springer.
36. 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(1), 101-131. (Pubitemid 351189813)
37. 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.