Learning to argue: A study of four schools and their attempt to develop the use of argumentation as a common instructional practice and its impact on students

Journal of Research in Science Teaching

Volumn 50, Issue 3, 2013, Pages 315-347

  Osborne, Jonathan ^a   Simon, Shirley ^b   Christodoulou, Andri ^c   Howell Richardson, Christina ^d   Richardson, Katherine ^b  

^a STANFORD UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^b UNIVERSITY OF LONDON   (United Kingdom)

^c UNIVERSITY OF SOUTHAMPTON   (United Kingdom)

^d KING'S COLLEGE LONDON   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

argumentation; dialogic teaching; epistemic learning; student engagement; teacher professional development

Indexed keywords

ARGUMENTATION; CONCEPTUAL UNDERSTANDING; EPISTEMIC LEARNING; GROUP WORK; INSTRUCTIONAL PRACTICES; MINIMAL SUPPORTS; PROFESSIONAL DEVELOPMENT; SCIENCE CURRICULUM; SECONDARY SCHOOLS; STUDENT ENGAGEMENT; STUDENT LEARNING; STUDENT OUTCOMES; TEACHER LEARNING; TEACHER PROFESSIONAL DEVELOPMENT; TEACHERS';

PROFESSIONAL ASPECTS; STUDENTS; TEACHING;

CURRICULA;

EID: 84873717680     PISSN: 00224308     EISSN: 10982736     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1002/tea.21073     Document Type: Article

References (124)

1. Adey, P., &, Shayer, M., (1993). An exploration of long-term far-transfer effects following an extended intervention program in the high school science curriculum. Cognition & Instruction, 11 (1), 1.
2. Alexander, R., (2005). Towards dialogic teaching. York: Dialogos.
3. Allen, J. P., Pianta, R. C., Gregory, A., Mikami, A. Y., &, Lun, J., (2011). An interaction-based approach to enhancing secondary school instruction and student achievement. Science, 333 (6045), 1034-1037.
4. Alverman, D. E., Qian, G., &, Hynd, C. E., (1995). Effects of interactive discussion and text type on learning counterintuitive science concepts. Journal of Educational Research, 88, 146-154.
5. Ames, G. J., &, Murray, F. B., (1982). When two wrongs make a right: Promoting cognitive change by social conflict. Developmental Psychology, 18, 894-897.
6. Andrews, R., (1995). Teaching and learning argument. London: Cassell.
7. Applebee, A., Langer, J., Nystrand, M., &, Gamoran, A., (2003). Discussion-based approaches to developing understanding: Classroom instruction and student performance in middle and high school English. American Educational Research Journal, 40 (3), 685.
8. Avvisati, F., &, Vincent-Lancrin, S. P., (in press). Effective teaching for improving students' motivation, curiosity, and self-confidence in science: A comparative approach. Paris: Centre for Educational Research and Innovation, OECD.
9. Ball, D. L., &, Bass, H., (2000). Interweaving content and pedagogy in teaching and learning to teach: Knowing and using mathematics. In, J. Boaler, (Ed.), Multiple perspectives on the teaching and learning of mathematics (pp. 83-104). Wesport, CT: Ablex.
10. Bassey, M., (2001). A solution to the problem of generalisation in educational research: Fuzzy prediction. Oxford Review of Education, 27 (1), 5-22.
11. Billig, M., (1996). Arguing and thinking (2nd ed.). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
12. Birman, B. F., Le Floch, K. C., Klekotka, A., Ludwig, M., Taylor, J., Walters, K.,., Yoon, K. S., (2007). State and Local Implementation of the "No Child Left Behind Act." Volume II-Teacher Quality under"NCLB": Interim Report.
13. Blalock, C. L., Lichtenstein, M. J., Owen, S., Pruski, L., Marshall, C., &, Toepperwein, M., (2008). In pursuit of validity: A comprehensive review of science attitude instruments. International Journal of Science Education, 30 (7), 961-977.
14. Boaler, J., &, Staples, M., (2008). Creating mathematical futures through an equitable teaching approach: The case of Railside School. The Teachers College Record, 110 (3), 608-645.
15. Borko, H., (2004). Professional development and teacher learning: Mapping the terrain. Educational Researcher, 33 (8), 3-15.
16. Brown, A. L., &, Campione, J. C., (1994). Guided discovery in a community of learners. In, K. McGilly, (Ed.), Classroom lessons: Integrating cognitive theory and classroom practice (pp. 229-270).
17. Cerini, B., Murray, I., &, Reiss, M., (2003). Student review of the science curriculum. London: NESTA.
18. Chi, M., (2009). Active-constructive-interactive: A conceptual framework for differentiating learning activities. Topics in Cognitive Science, 1, 73-105.
19. Christodoulou, A., (2011). The science classroom as a site of epistemic talk: two case studies of teachers and their students. Unpublished PhD Thesis. King's College London.
20. Clark, D., &, Hollingsworth, H., (2002). Elaborating a model of teacher professional growth. Teaching and Teacher Education, 18, 947-967.
21. Claxton, G., (1988). Live and Learn: An introduction to the psychology of growth and change in everyday life. Milton Keynes: Open University Press.
22. Cobb, P., Wood, T., Yackel, E., Nicholls, J., Wheatley, G., Trigatti, B., et al. (1991). Assessment of a problem-centered second-grade mathematics project. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 22, 3-29.
23. Conley, A. M., Pintrich, P. R., Vekiri, I., &, Harrison, D., (2004). Changes in epistemological beliefs in elementary science students. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 29 (2), 186-204.
24. Csikszentmihalyi, M., &, Hermanson, K., (1995). Intrinsic motivation in museums: Why does one want to learn? In, J. H. Falk, &, L. D. Dierking, (Eds.), Public institutions for personal learning: Establishing a research agenda (pp. 67-77). Washington, DC: American Association of Museums.
25. Csikszentmihalyi, M., &, Schneider, B., (2000). Becoming adult: Preparing teenagers for the world of work. New York: Basic Books.
26. Damon, W., &, Phelps, E., (1989). Critical distinctions among three approaches to peer education. International Journal of Educational Research, 5, 331-343.
27. Desimone, L. M., (2009). Improving impact studies of teachers' professional development: Toward better conceptualizations and measures. Educational Researcher, 38 (3), 181-199.
28. Dillon, J., Osborne, J. F., Fairbrother, R., &, Kurina, L., (2000). A study into the professional views and needs of science teachers in primary & secondary schools in England. London: King's College London.
29. Doise, W., &, Mugny, G., (1984). The social development of the intellect. Oxford: Pergamon.
30. Driver, R., Leach, J., Millar, R., &, Scott, P., (1996). Young people's images of science. Buckingham: Open University Press.
31. Driver, R., Newton, P., &, Osborne, J. F., (2000). Establishing the norms of scientific argumentation in classrooms. Science Education, 84 (3), 287-312.
32. Dweck, C., (2000). Self-theories: Their role in motivation, personality, and development (essays in social psychology). Philadelphia, PA: Psychology Press.
33. Elder, A. D., (2002). Characterizing fifth grade students' epistemological beliefs in science. In, B. K. Hofer, &, P. R. Pintrich, (Eds.), Personal epistemology (pp. 347-364). Mahwah, New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum.
34. Ennis, R. H., Millman, J., &, Tomko, T., (1985). Cornell critial thinking tests, level X and Z. Pacific Grove, California: MidWest Publications.
35. Erduran, S., &, Jiménex-Aleixandre, M. P., (2008). Argumentation in science education: Perspectives from classroom-based research. Dordrecht: Springer.
36. Ericsson, K. A., Krampe, R. T., &, Tesch-Römer, C., (1993). The role of deliberate practice in the acquisition of expert performance. Psychological Review, 100 (3), 363.
37. Ford, M. J., (2008). Disciplinary authority and accountability in scientific practice and learning. Science Education, 92 (3), 404-423.
38. Garet, M., Wayne, A., Stancavage, F., Taylor, J., Eaton, M., Walters, K., et al. (2011). Middle School Mathematics Professional Development Impact Study: Findings After the Second Year of Implementation (NCEE 2011-4024). Washington, DC: National Center for Education Evaluation and Regional Assistance, Institute of. Education Sciences, U.S.
39. Gawande, A., (2007). Better: A surgeon's notes on performance. New York: Henry Holt.
40. Goldberg, T., Schwarz, B. B., &, Porat, D., (2008). Living and dormant collective memories as contexts of history learning. Learning and Instruction, 18, 223-237.
41. Graff, G., &, Birkenstein, C., (2007). They say/I say: The moves that matter in persuasive writing: WW Norton & Company Incorporated.
42. Greenleaf, C., Litman, C., Hanson, T. L., Rosen, R., Boscardin, C. K., Herman, J., et al. (2011). Integrating literacy and science in biology: Teaching and learning impacts of reading apprenticeship professional development. American Educational Research Journal, 48 (3), 647-717.
43. Greeno, J., (1998). The situativity of knowing, learning and research. American Psychologist, 53 (1), 5-26.
44. Guskey, T. R., &, Yoon, K. S., (2009). What works in professional development. Phi Delta Kappan, 90 (7), 495-500.
45. Hannover, B., &, Kessels, U., (2004). Self-to-prototype matching as a strategy for making academic choices. Why high school students do not like math and science. Learning and Instruction, 14 (1), 51-67.
46. Harré, R., (1984). The philosophies of science: An introductory survey (2nd ed.). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
47. Heller, J. I., Daehler, K. R., Wong, N., Shinohara, M., &, Miratrix, L. W., (2012). Differential effects of three professional development models on teacher knowledge and student achievement in elementary science. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 49 (3), 333-362, DOI: 10.1002/tea.21004
48. Hoban, G., (2002). Teacher Learning for Educational Change. Buckingham: Open University Press.
49. Hofer, B. K., &, Pintrich, P. R., (1997). The development of epistemological theories: Beliefs about knowledge and knowing and their relation to learning. Review of Educational Research, 67 (1), 88-140.
50. Horton, R., (1967). African traditional thought and western science. Africa, 37, 157.
51. Howe, C., Tolmie, A., &, Mackenzie, M., (1995). Computer support for collaborative learning of physics concepts. In, C. O'Malley, (Ed.), Computer-supported collaborative learning. Berlin: Springer.
52. Howson, C., &, Urbach, P., (2006). Scientific reasoning: A Bayesian approach (3rd ed.). Chicago: Open Court.
53. Hynd, C., &, Alvermann, D. E., (1986). The role of refutation text in overcoming difficulty with science concepts. Journal of Reading, 29 (5), 440-446.
54. Johnson, A., (2009). Hitting the brakes: Engineering design and the production of knowledge. Durham: Duke University Press.
55. Khine M., (Ed.). (2011). Perspectives on scientific argumentation: Theory, practice and research. Dordrecht: Springer.
56. Klahr, D., Zimmerman, C., &, Jirout, J., (2011). Educational interventions to advance children's scientific thinking. Science, 333, 971-975.
57. Kuhn, D., (1992). Thinking as argument. Harvard Educational Review, 62 (2), 155-178.
58. Kuhn, D., (1993). Science as argument: Implications for teaching and learning scientific thinking. Science Education, 77 (3), 319-337.
59. Kuhn, D., (1999). A developmental model of critical thinking. Educational Researcher, 28 (2), 16-46.
60. Kuhn, D., Cheney, R., &, Weinstock, M., (2000). The development of epistemological understanding. Cognitive Development, 15, 309-328.
61. Lampert, M., (1990). When the problem is not the question and the solution is not the answer: Mathematical knowing and teaching. American Educational Research Journal, 27 (1), 29-63.
62. Lawson, A. E., (1978). The development and validation of a classroom test of formal reasoning. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 15 (1), 11-24.
63. Lederman, N. G., &, O'Malley, M., (1990). Students' perceptions of tentativeness in science: Development, use, and sources of change. Science Education, 74, 225-239.
64. Lee, M.-H., Wu, Y.-T., &, Tsai, C.-C., (2009). Research Trends in Science Education from 2003 to 2007: A content analysis of publications in selected journals. International Journal of Science Education, 31 (15), 1999-2020.
65. Lehrer, J., (2010). The truth wears off. New Yorker, 52-57.
66. Lord Sainsbury of Turville. (2007). The race to the top: A review of government's science and innovation policies. London: HM Treasury.
67. Loucks-Horsley, S., Hewson, P., Love, N., &, Stiles, K. E., (2003). Designing professional development for teachers of science and mathematics (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, California: Corwin Press, Inc.
68. Martin, A., &, Hand, B., (2009). Factors affecting the implementation of argument in the elementary science classroom. A longitudinal case study. Research in Science Education, 39 (1), 17-38.
69. McLaughlin, M. W., &, Talbert, J. E., (1993). Teaching for understanding: Challenges for policy and practice. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
70. Mercer, N., Dawes, L., Wegerif, R., &, Sams, C., (2004). Reasoning as a scientist: Ways of helping children to use language to learn science. British Education Research Journal, 30 (3), 359-377.
71. Mercer, N., Wegerif, R., &, Dawes, L., (1999). Children's talk in the development of reasoning. British Educational Research Journal, 25 (1), 95-111.
72. Michaels, S., O'Connor, C., &, Resnick, L., (2008). Deliberative discourse idealized and realized: Accountable talk in the classroom and in civic life. Studies in the Philosophy of Education, 27, 283-297.
73. Millar, R., &, Osborne, J. F., (2009). Research and practice: A complex relationship? In, M. C. Shelley II, L. Yore, &, B. Hand, (Eds.), Quality research in literacy and science education. (pp. 41-61). Dordrecht: Springer.
74. Moller, A. P., &, Jennions, M. D., (2001). Testing and adjusting for publication bias. Trends in Ecology & Evolution, 16 (10), 580-586.
75. National Academies of Sciences. (2010). Rising above the gathering storm revisited. Washington, DC: National Academy of Sciences.
76. National Research Council. (2007). Taking science to school: Learning and teaching in grades K-8. Washington, DC: National Research Council.
77. National Research Council. (2012). A framework for K-12 science education: Practices, crosscutting concepts, and core ideas. Washington, DC: Committee on a Conceptual Framework for New K-12 Science Education. Standards. Board on Science Education, Division of Behavioral and Social Sciences and Education.
78. Newton, P., Driver, R., &, Osborne, J. F., (1999). The place of argumentation in the pedagogy of school science. International Journal of Science Education, 21 (5), 553-576.
79. Nolen, S. B., (2003). Learning environment, motivation and achievement in high school science. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 40 (4), 347-368.
80. Nystrand, M., Gamoran, A., Kachur, R., &, Prendegarst, C., (1997). Opening dialogue: Understanding the dynamics of language and learning in the English classroom. New York: Teachers College Press.
81. O'Donnell, C. L., (2008). Defining, conceptualizing, and measuring fidelity of implementation and its relationship to outcomes in K-12 curriculum intervention research. Review of Educational Research, 78 (1), 33-84.
82. Oaksford, M., &, Chater, N., (2007). Bayesian Rationality: The probalistic approach to human reasoning. New York: Oxford University Press.
83. Ogborn, J., (2002). Ownership and transformation: Teachers using Curriculum Innovation. Physics Education, 37 (2), 142-146.
84. Opfer, V. D., &, Pedder, D., (2011). Conceptualizing teacher professional learning. Review of Educational Research, 81 (3), 376-407.
85. Osborne, J. F., &, Collins, S., (2001). Pupils' views of the role and value of the science curriculum: A focus-group study. International Journal of Science Education, 23 (5), 441-468.
86. Osborne, J. F., Erduran, S., &, Simon, S., (2004a). Enhancing the quality of argument in school science. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 41 (10), 994-1020.
87. Osborne, J. F., Erduran, S., &, Simon, S., (2004b). The IDEAS project. London: King's College London.
88. Paris, S. G., (1998). Situated motivation and informal learning. Journal of Museum Education, 22 (2 & 3), 22-26.
89. Pell, T., &, Jarvis, T., (2001). Developing attitude to science scales for use with children of ages from five to eleven years. International Journal of Science Education, 23 (8), 847-862.
90. Perkins, D. N., &, Salomon, G., (1989). Are cognitive skills context-bound ? Educational Researcher, 18 (1), 16-25.
91. Perry, W. G., (1970). Forms of intellectual and ethical development in the college years. A scheme. New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston.
92. Petroski, H., (1996). Engineering by design: How engineers get from thought to thing. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.
93. Pontecorvo, C., (1987). Discussing and reasoning: The role of argument in knowledge construction. In, E. De Corte, H. Lodewïjks, R. Parmentier, &, P. Span, (Eds.), Learning and instruction: European Research in an International Context (pp. 239-250). Oxford: Pergamon Press.
94. Pontecorvo, C., &, Girardet, H., (1993). Arguing and Reasoning in understanding historical topics. Cognition and Instruction, 11 (3 & 4), 365-395.
95. Ratcliffe, M., Hanley, P., &, Osborne, J. F., (2007). Evaluation of Twenty First Century Science GCSE Strand 3: The teaching of Twenty First Century Science GCSE, and teachers' and students' views of the course. Southampton: University of Southampton.
96. Raven, J., Raven, J. C., &, Court, J. H., (updated 2004). (2004). Manual for Raven's Progressive Matrices and Vocabulary Scales. San Antonio, TX: Harcourt Assessment.
97. Renninger, K. A., Hidi, S., &, Krapp, A., (1992). The role of interest in learning and development. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
98. Resnick, L., Michaels, S., &, O'Connor, C., (in press). How (well-structured) talk builds the mind. In, R. Sternberg, &, D. Preiss, (Eds.), From genes to context: New discoveries about learning from educational research and their applications. New York: Springer.
99. Roth, K. J., Garnier, H. E., Chen, C., Lemmens, M., Schwille, K., &, Wickler, N. I. Z., (2011). Videobased lesson analysis: Effective science PD for teacher and student learning. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 48 (2), 117-148, DOI: 10.1002/tea.20408
100. Sandoval, W. A., (2003). Conceptual and epistemic aspects of students' scientific explanations. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 12 (1), 5-51.
101. Sandoval, W. A., &, Morrison, K., (2003). High school students' ideas about theories and theory change after a biological inquiry unit. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 40 (4), 369-392.
102. Sandoval, W. A., &, Millwood, K., (2005). The quality of students' use of evidence in written scientific explanations. Cognition and Instruction, 23 (1), 23-55.
103. Sartre, J.-P., (1969). Being and Nothingness. Northampton: John Dickens and Co.
104. Sfard, A., (2008). Thinking as communicating: Human development, the growth of discourses, and mathematizing. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
105. Shayer, M., Wylam, H., Adey, P., &, Kuchemann, D., (1979). CSMS Science Reasoning Tasks. NFER, Nelson, Windsor.
106. Simon, S., Erduran, S., &, Osborne, J. F., (2006). Learning to teach argumentation: Research and development in the science classroom. International Journal of Science Education, 28 (2-3), 235-260.
107. Sisk-Hilton, S., (2009). Teaching and learning in public. New York: Teachers College Press.
108. Spillane, J., (1999). External reform initiatives and teachers' efforts to reconstruct their practice: The mediating role of teachers' zones of enactment. Journal of Curriculum Studies, 31 (2), 143-175.
109. Spillane, J., (2006). Distributed leadership. San Francisco: John Wiley & Sons.
110. Stein, M. K., Engle, R. A., Smith, M. S., &, Hughes, E. K., (2008). Orchestrating productive mathematical discussions: Five practices for helping teachers move beyond show and tell. Mathematical Thinking and Learning, 10 (4), 313-340.
111. Sterling, T. D., (1959). Publication decisions and their possible effects on inferences drawn from tests of significance-Or vice versa. Journal of the American Statistical Association, 54, 30-34.
112. Szu, E., &, Osborne, J. F., (2011). Scientific reasoning and argumentation from a Bayesian perspective. In, M. S. Khine, (Ed.), Perspectives on scientific argumentation (pp. 55-71). Dordrecht: Springer.
113. Taconis, R., &, Kessels, U., (2009). How choosing science depends on students' individual fit to 'Science Culture'. International Journal of Science Education, 31 (8), 1115-1132.
114. Tytler, R., Osborne, J. F., Williams, G., Tytler, K., Clark, J. C., Tomei, A., et al. (2008). Opening up pathways: Engagement in STEM across the Primary-Secondary school transition. A review of the literature concerning supports and barriers to Science, Technology, Engineering and Mathematics engagement at Primary-Secondary transition. Commissioned by the Australian Department of Education, Employment and Workplace Relations. Melbourne: Deakin University.
115. van Lier, L., (1996). Interaction in the language curriculum. New York: Longman.
116. 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.
117. Waring, R., &, Takaki, M., (2003). At what rate do learners learn and retain new vocabulary from reading a graded reader ? Reading in a Foreign Language, 15 (3), 130-163.
118. Watson, J. D., &, Crick, F. H. C., (1953). A Structure for deoxyribose nucleic acid. Nature, 171, 737-738.
119. Weiss, I. R., Pasley, J. D., Sean Smith, P., Banilower, E. R., &, Heck, D. J., (2003). A Study of K-12 Mathematics and Science Education in the United States. Chapel Hill, NC: Horizon Research.
120. Wertsch, J., (1991). Voices of the Mind: A sociocultural approach to mediated action. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
121. Windschitl, M., (2009). Cultivating 21st Century Skills in Science Learners: How Systems of Teacher Preparation and Professional Development will have to evolve. Paper presented at the National Academies of Science Workshop on 21st Century Skills.
122. Yoon, K. S., Ducan, T., Lee, S. W.-Y., Scarloss, B., &, Shapley, K. L., (2007). Reviewing the evidence on how teacher professional development affects student achievement. Washington, DC: US Department of Education, Institute of Education Sciences.
123. Zohar, A., (2004). Higher order thinking in science classrooms: Students' Learning and Teachers Professional Development. Dordrecht: Kluwer.
124. 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.