Argumentation and students' conceptual understanding of properties and behaviors of gases

International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education

Volumn 10, Issue 6, 2012, Pages 1303-1324

  Aydeniz, Mehmet ^a   Pabuccu, Aybuke ^b   Cetin, Pinar Seda ^b   Kaya, Ebru ^c  

^a UNIVERSITY OF TENNESSEE   (United States)

^b ABANT IZZET BAYSAL UNIVERSITY   (Turkey)

^c SELCUK UNIVERSITY   (Turkey)

Author keywords

alternative misconceptions; argumentation; college science; gases

Indexed keywords

EID: 84871102315     PISSN: 15710068     EISSN: 15731774     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1007/s10763-012-9336-1     Document Type: Article

References (48)

1. Aldridge, J. M., Fraser, B. J., Taylor, P. C. & Chen, C. C. (2000). Constructivist learning environments in a cross-national study in Taiwan and Australia. International Journal of Science Education, 22, 37-55.
2. Anderson, C. (2007). Perspectives on science learning. In S. K. Abell & N. Lederman (Eds.), Handbook of research in science education (pp. 3-30). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
3. Baker, M. J. (1999). Argumentation and constructive interactions. In P. Coirer & J. Andriessen (Eds.), Foundations of argumentative text processing (pp. 179-202). Amsterdam, the Netherlands: University of Amsterdam Press.
4. Beall, H. (1994). Probing student misconceptions in thermodynamics with in-class writing. Journal of Chemical Education, 71(12), 1056-1057.
5. Beeth, M. E. (1998). Teaching for conceptual change: Using status as a metacognitive tool. Science Education, 82, 343-356.
6. 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.
7. Benson, D. L., Wittrock, M. & Baur, M. E. (1993). Students' preconceptions of the nature of gases. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 30, 558-597.
8. Bonder, G. M. (1991). I have found you an argument. Journal of Chemical Education, 68, 385-388.
9. Bricker, L. & Bell, P. (2008). Conceptualizations of argumentation from science studies and the learning sciences and their implications for the practices of science education. Science Education, 92(3), 473-498.
10. Cetin, P., Kaya, E. & Geban, O. (2009). Facilitating conceptual change in gases concepts. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 18, 130-137.
11. 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.
12. Driver, R., Newton, P. & Osborne, J. (2000). Establishing the norms of scientific argumentation in classrooms. Science Education, 84, 287-312.
13. Duschl, R. & Grandy, R. (Eds.). (2008). Teaching scientific inquiry: Recommendations for research and implementation. Rotterdam, the Netherlands: Sense.
14. Erduran, S., Ardac, D. & Yakmaci-Guzel, B. (2006). Learning to teach argumentation: Case studies of pre-service secondary science teachers. Eurasia Journal of Mathematics, Science and Technology Education, 2(2), 1-14.
15. Erduran, S. & Jimenez-Aleixandre, M. P. (Eds.). (2008). Argumentation in science education: Perspectives from classroom-based research. Dordrecht, the Netherlands: Springer.
16. Griffiths, A. K. & Preston, K. R. (1992). Grade 12 students' alternative conceptions relating to fundamental characteristics of atoms and molecules. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 29(6), 611-628.
17. Hwang, B., & Chiu, S. (2004). The effect of a computer instructional model in bringing about a conceptual change in students' understanding of particulate concepts of gas. In Paper presented in Informing Science and IT Education Joint Conference, Rockhampton, Australia.
18. Jimenex-Aleixandre, M. P. & Pereiro-Munoz, C. (2002). Knowledge producers or knowledge consumers? Argumentation and decision making about environmental management. International Journal of Science Education, 24, 1171-1190.
19. 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(6), 757-792.
20. Kautz, C. H., Heron, P. R. L., Loverude, M. E. & McDermott, L. C. (2005a). Student understanding of the ideal gas law, part I: A macroscopic perspective. American Journal of Physics, 73, 1055-1063.
21. Kautz, C. H., Heron, P. R. L., Shaffer, P. S. & McDermott, L. C. (2005b). Student understanding of the ideal gas law, part II: A microscopic perspective. American Journal of Physics, 73, 1064-1071.
22. Kelly, G. & Chen, C. (1999). The sound of music: Constructing science as sociocultural practices through oral and written discourse. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 36(8), 883-915.
23. 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.
24. Keys, C. W. (1999). 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), 1044-1106.
25. Kuhn, D. (1993). Science as argument: Implications for teaching and learning scientific thinking. Science Education, 77(3), 319-337.
26. Kuhn, D. (2010). Teaching and learning science as argument. Science Education, 94(5), 810-824.
27. Latour, B. & Woolgar, S. (1986). Laboratory life: The construction of scientific facts. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
28. Leach, J. (1999). Students' understanding of the co-ordination of theory and evidence in science. International Journal of Science Education, 21(8), 789-806.
29. Liu, X. (2006). Effects of combined hands-on laboratory and computer modeling on student learning of gas laws: A quasi-experimental study. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 15(1), 89-100.
30. Lustick, D. (2010). The priority of the question: Focus questions for sustained reasoning in science. Journal of Science Teacher Education, 21(5), 495-511.
31. Madden, S. P., Jones, L. L. & Rahm, J. (2011). The role of multiple representations in the understanding of ideal gas problems. Chemistry Education Research and Practice, 12, 283-293.
32. Mason, L. (1996). An analysis of children's construction of new knowledge through their use of reasoning and arguing in classroom discussions. Qualitative Studies in Education, 9(4), 411-433.
33. McNeill, K. L., & Knight, A. M. (2011). The effect of professional development on teachers' beliefs and pedagogical content knowledge for scientific argumentation. In Paper presented at the annual meeting of the National Association for Research in Science Teaching, Orlando, FL.
34. Mercer, C. D., Jordan, L. & Miller, S. P. (1996). Constructivistic math instruction for diverse learners. Learning Disabilities Research and Practice, 11, 147-156.
35. Newton, P., Driver, R. & Osborne, J. (1999). The place of argumentation in the pedagogy of school science. International Journal of Science Education, 21, 553-576.
36. Osborne, J., Erduran, S. & Simon, S. (2004). Enhancing the quality of argument in school science. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 41, 994-1020.
37. Prain, V. (2006). Learning from writing in secondary science: Some theoretical and practical implications. International Journal of Science Education, 28(2), 179-201.
38. Sampson, V. (2009). Science teachers and scientific argumentation: Trends in practice and beliefs. In Paper presented at the Annual International Conference of the National Association of Research in Science Teaching (NARST), Garden Grove, CA.
39. Şenocak, E., Taşkesenligil, Y. & Sözbilir, M. (2007). A study on teaching gases to prospective primary science teachers through problem-based learning. Research in Science Education, 37, 279-290.
40. Shemwell, J. T. & Furtak, E. M. (2010). Science classroom discussion as scientific argumentation: A study of conceptually rich (and poor) student talk. Educational Assessment, 15(3-4), 222-250.
41. Toulmin, S. (1958). The uses of argument. Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press.
42. 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, 952-977. doi: 10. 1002/tea. 20358.
43. 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.
44. Vosniadou, S., Ioannides, C., Dimitrakopoulou, A. & Papademetriou, E. (2001). Designing learning environments to promote conceptual change in science. Learning and Instruction, 11, 381-419.
45. Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Mind and society: The development of higher psychological processes. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
46. Walker, J., Sampson, V., Grooms, J., Anderson, B., & Zimmerman, C. (2010). Argument-driven inquiry: An instructional model for use in undergraduate chemistry labs. In Paper presented at the 2010 Annual International Conference of the National Association of Research in Science Teaching (NARST), Philadelphia, PA.
47. Wiebe, R. & Stinner, A. (2010). Using story to help students' understanding of gas behavior. Interchange, 41(4), 347-361.
48. 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.