Argument as Professional Development: Impacting Teacher Knowledge and Beliefs About Science

Journal of Science Teacher Education

Volumn 23, Issue 8, 2012, Pages 847-866

  Crippen, Kent J ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF FLORIDA   (United States)

Author keywords

Argumentation; Nature of science; Professional development

Indexed keywords

EID: 84870393630     PISSN: 1046560X     EISSN: 15731847     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1007/s10972-012-9282-3     Document Type: Article

References (58)

1. Anderson, S. W., & Libarkin, J. C. (2006). The Geoscience Concept Inventory. Retrieved April, 27, 2007, from http://newton. bhsu. edu/eps/gci. html.
2. Andriessen, J. (2006). Arguing to learn. In K. Sawyer (Ed.), Handbook of the learning sciences (pp. 443-459). Cambridge: Cambridge University press.
3. Avraamidou, L., & Zembal-Saul, C. (2005). Giving priority to evidence in science teaching: A first-year elementary teacher's specialized practices and knowledge. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 42(9), 965-998.
4. 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.
5. Berland, L. K., & McNeill, K. L. (2010). A learning progression for scientific argumentation: Understanding student work and designing supportive instructional contexts. Science Education, 94(5), 765-793.
6. Bricker, L. A., & Bell, P. (2008). Argumentation from science studies and the learning sciences and their implications for the practices of science education. Science Education, 92(3), 473-498.
7. Cavagnetto, A. R. (2010). Argument to foster scientific literacy. Review of Educational Research, 80(3), 336-371.
8. Chinn, C. A. (2006). Learning to argue. In A. M. O'Donnell, C. E. Hmelo-Silver, & G. Erkens (Eds.), Collaborative learning, reasoning, and technology. Mahawah, NJ: Erlbaum.
9. Choi, A., Notebaert, A., Diaz, J., & Hand, B. (2010). Examining arguments generated by year 5, 7, and 10 students in science classrooms. Research in Science Education, 40(2), 149-169.
10. Creswell, J. W. (1997). Qualitative inquiry and research design: Choosing among five traditions (3rd ed.). Thousand Oaks: Sage.
11. Crippen, K. J., Biesenger, K. D., & Ebert, E. E. (2010). Using professional development to achieve classroom reform and science proficiency: An urban success story from Southern Nevada USA. Professional Development in Education, 36(4), 637-661.
12. Cross, D., Taasoobshirazi, G., Hendricks, S., & Hickey, D. T. (2008). Argumentation: A strategy for improving achievement and revealing scientific identities. International Journal of Science Education, 30(6), 837-861.
13. Driver, R., Newton, P., & Osborne, J. (2000). Establishing the norms of scientific argumentation in classrooms. Science Education, 84, 287-312.
14. Erduran, S., & Jimenez-Aleixandre, M.-P. (Eds.). (2007). Argumentation in Science Education. Berlin: Springer.
15. Erduran, S., Simon, S., & Osborne, J. (2004). TAPping into argumentation: Developments in the application of Toulmin's argumentation pattern for studying science discourse. Science Education, 88(6), 915-933.
16. Evans, D. L., & Hestenes, D. (2001, 2001). The concept of the concept inventory assessment instrument. Paper presented at the Frontiers in Education Conference, 2001. 31st Annual, Reno, NV.
17. ExamGen (2007). ExamGen: Test item databases for today's teachers. Retrieved June, 14, 2007, from http://www. examgen. com/.
18. Garet, M. S., Porter, A. C., Dismone, L., Birman, B. F., & Yoon, K. S. (2001). What makes professional development effective? Results from a national sample of teachers. American Educational Research Journal, 38(4), 915-945.
19. Gowin, B. D., & Alvarez, M. C. (2005). The art of educating with V diagrams. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
20. Hand, B., & Keys, C. W. (1999). Inquiry investigation: A new approach to laboratory reports. The Science Teacher(April), 27-29.
21. Keller, J. (2006). Eliciting and addressing student misconceptions regarding the atmospheric greenhouse effect and radiative equilibrium. Arizona: University of Arizona.
22. Kuhn, T. S. (1996). The structure of the scientific revolution (3rd ed.). Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
23. Kuhn, L., & Reiser, B. (2006). Structuring activities to foster argumentative discourse. Paper presented at the American Educational Research Association, San Francisco, CA.
24. Libarkin, J. C., & Anderson, S. W. (2005). Assessment of learning in entry-level geoscience courses: Results from the Geoscience Concept Inventory. Journal of Geoscience Education, 53(4), 394-401.
25. Lincoln, Y., & Guba, E. (1985). Naturalistic inquiry. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.
26. Linn, M. C., Bell, P., & Davis, E. A. (2005). Internet environments for science education. London: Lawrence Erlbaum.
27. Loucks-Horsley, S., & Matsumoto, C. (1999). Research on professional development for teachers of mathematics and science: The state of the scene. School Science and Mathematics, 99(5), 258-271.
28. Luft, J. A. (2001). Changing inquiry practices and beliefs: The impact of an inquiry-based professional development programme on beginning and experienced secondary science teachers. International Journal of Science Education, 23(5), 517-534.
29. McNeill, K. L., Lizotte, D. J., Krajcik, J., & Marx, R. W. (2006). Supporting students' construction of scientific explanations by fading scaffolds in instructional materials. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 15(2), 153-191.
30. NRC. (1996). National science education standards. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.
31. NRC. (2000). Inquiry and the national science education standards: A guide for teaching and learning. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.
32. 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.
33. Passmore, C. M. (2007). Argumentation in modeling classrooms. Paper presented at the National Association for Research in Science Teaching, New Orleans, LA.
34. Pew (2007). Climate Change 101: Understanding and Responding to Global Climate Change. Retrieved 12/5, 2010, from http://www. pewclimate. org/global-warming-basics/climate_change_101.
35. Quintana, C., Reiser, B. J., Davis, E. A., Krajcik, J., Fretz, E., Duncan, R. G., et al. (2004). A scaffolding design framework for software to support science inquiry. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 13(3), 337-386.
36. Roehrig, G. H., & Luft, J. A. (2004). Constraints experienced by beginning secondary science teachers in implementing scientific inquiry lessons. International Journal of Science Education, 26(1), 3-24.
37. Roth, W.-M., & McGinn, M. K. (1998). Inscriptions: Toward a theory of representing as social practice. Review of Educational Research, 68(1), 35-59.
38. Sadler, T. D. (2004). Informal reasoning regarding socioscientific issues: A critical review of research. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 41(5), 513-536.
39. Sadler, T. D. (2006). Promoting discourse and argumentation in science teacher education. Journal of Science Teacher Education, 17(4), 323-346.
40. Sadler, T. D., Chambers, W. F., & Zeidler, D. L. (2004). Student conceptualizations of the nature of science in response to a socioscientific issue. International Journal of Science Education, 26(4), 387-409.
41. Sadler, T. D., & Zeidler, D. L. (2005a). Patterns of informal reasoning in the context of socioscientific decision making. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 42(1), 112-138.
42. Sadler, T. D., & Zeidler, D. L. (2005b). The significance of content knowledge for informal reasoning regarding socioscientific issues: Applying genetics knowledge to genetic engineering issues. Science Education, 89(1), 71-93.
43. Sampson, V., & Clark, D. B. (2008). Assessment of the ways students generate arguments in science education: Current perspectives and recommendations for future directions. Science Education, 92(3), 447-472.
44. Sandoval, W. A. (2005). Understanding students' practical epistemologies and their influence on learning through inquiry. Science Education, 89(4), 634-656.
45. Sandoval, W. A., & Millwood, K. A. (2005). The quality of students' use of evidence in written scientific explanations. Cognition and Instruction, 23(1), 23-55.
46. Schwarz, B., & Glassner, A. (2003). The blind and the paralytic: Supporting argumentation in everyday and scientific issues. In J. Andriessen, M. Baker, & D. Suthers (Eds.), Arguing to learn: Confronting cognitions in computer-supported collaborative learning environments (pp. 227-260). Dordrecht: Kluwer.
47. Schworm, S., & Renkl, A. (2007). Learning argumentation skills through the use of prompts for self-explaining examples. Journal of Educational Psychology, 99(2), 285-296.
48. 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.
49. Singer, J., Lotter, C., Feller, R., & Gates, H. (2011). Exploring a model of situated professional development: Impact on classroom practice. Journal of Science Teacher Education, 22(3), 203-227.
50. Taylor, J. A., & Dana, T. M. (2003). Secondary school physics teachers' conceptions of scientific evidence: An exploratory case study. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 40(8), 721-736.
51. Toth, E. E., Suthers, D. D., & Lesgold, A. M. (2002). Mapping to know: The effects of representational guidance and reflective assessment on scientific inquiry. Science Education, 86(2), 264-286.
52. Toulmin, S. (1958). The uses of argument. Cambridge, MA: Cambridge University Press.
53. Toulmin, S., Rieke, R., & Janik, A. (1984). An introduction to reasoning (2nd ed.). New York, NY: Macmillan.
54. Tytler, R., Duggan, S., & Gott, R. (2001). Dimensions of evidence, the public understanding of science and science education. International Journal of Science Education, 23(8), 815-832.
55. Venville, G. J., & Dawson, V. M. (2010). The impact of a classroom intervention on grade 10 students' argumentation skills, informal reasoning, and conceptual understanding of science. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 47(8), 952-977.
56. Voss, J. F., & Means, M. L. (1991). Learning to reason via instruction in argumentation. Learning and Instruction, 1(4), 337-350.
57. Wallace, C. S., Hand, B., & Yang, E.-M. (2004). The science writing heuristic: Using writing as a tool for learning in the laboratory. In E. W. Saul (Ed.), Crossing borders in literacy and science instruction: Perspectives on theory and practice (pp. 355-368). Newark, DE: International Reading Association.
58. Zimmerman, C. (2000). The development of scientific reasoning skills. Developmental Review, 20(1), 99-149.