Argumentation Practices in Classroom: Pre-service teachers' conceptual understanding of chemical equilibrium

International Journal of Science Education

Volumn 35, Issue 7, 2013, Pages 1139-1158

  Kaya, Ebru ^a  

^a SELCUK UNIVERSITY   (Turkey)

Author keywords

Argumentation; Conceptual understanding; Pre service teachers

Indexed keywords

EID: 84877584966     PISSN: 09500693     EISSN: 14645289     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1080/09500693.2013.770935     Document Type: Article

References (48)

1. Abi-El-Mona, I. and Abd-El-Khalick, F. 2006. Argumentative discourse in a high school chemistry classroom. School Science and Mathematics, 106 (8): 349 - 361. (doi:10.1111/j.1949-8594.2006.tb17755.x)
2. Aydeniz, M., Pabuccu, A., Cetin, P. S. and Kaya, E. 2012. Impact of argumentation on college students' conceptual understanding of properties and behaviors of gases. International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 10: 1303 - 1324. (doi:10.1007/s10763-012-9336-1)
3. Banerjee, A. C. 1995. Teaching chemical equilibrium and thermodynamics in undergraduate general chemistry classes. Journal of Chemical Education, 72 (10): 879 - 881. (doi:10.1021/ed072p879)
4. Bergquist, W. and Heikkinen, H. 1990. Student ideas regarding chemical equilibrium. Journal of Chemical Education, 67: 1000 - 1003. (doi:10.1021/ed067p1000)
5. Bilgin, I. (2002). The effect of cooperative learning approach based on conceptual change conditions on students' understanding of chemical equilibrium (Unpublished Doctorate Thesis). The Middle East Technical University, Ankara.
6. Bilgin, I. and Geban, O. 2006. The effect of cooperative learning approach based on conceptual change condition on students' understanding of chemical equilibrium concepts. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 15 (1): 31 - 46. (doi:10.1007/s10956-006-0354-z)
7. Chambers, S. and Andre, T. 1997. Gender, prior knowledge, interest, and experience in electricity and conceptual change text manipulations in learning about direct current. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 34 (2): 107 - 123. (doi:10.1002/(SICI)1098-2736(199702)34:2107::AID-TEA23.0.CO;2-X)
8. Cross, D., Taasoobshirazi, G., Hendricks, S. and Hickey, D. T. 2008. Argumentation: A strategy for improving achievement and revealing scientific identities. International Journal of Science Education, 30 (6): 837 - 861. (doi:10.1080/09500690701411567)
9. de Lima Tavares, M., Jimenez-Aleixandre, M. P. and Mortimer, E. F. 2010. Articulation of conceptual knowledge and argumentation practices by high school students in evolution problems. Science & Education, 19: 573 - 598. (doi:10.1007/s11191-009-9206-6)
10. Driver, R., Newton, P. and Osborne, J. 2000. Establishing the norms of scientific argumentation in classrooms. Science Education, 84: 287 - 312. (doi:10.1002/(SICI)1098-237X(200005)84:3287::AID-SCE13.0.CO;2-A)
11. Duschl, R. A. and Osborne, J. 2002. Supporting and promoting argumentation discourse in science education. Studies in Science Education, 38: 39 - 72. (doi:10.1080/03057260208560187)
12. Erduran, S., Simon, S. and Osborne, J. 2004. TAPping into argumentation: Developments in the application of Toulmin's argument pattern for studying science discourse. Science Education, 88 (6): 915 - 933. (doi:10.1002/sce.20012)
13. Gay, L. R. and Airasian, P. 2000. Educational research: Competencies for analysis and application, Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
14. Gorodetsky, M. and Gussarksy, E. 1986. Misconceptualization of the chemical equilibrium concept as revealed by different evaluation methods. European Journal of Science Education, 8 (4): 427 - 441. (doi:10.1080/0140528860080409)
15. Gussarksy, E. and Gorodetsky, M. 1990. On the concept 'chemical equilibrium': The associative framework. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 27 (3): 197 - 204. (doi:10.1002/tea.3660270303)
16. Hackling, W. M. and Garnett, J. P. 1985. Misconception of chemical equilibrium. European Journal of Science Education, 7: 205 - 214. (doi:10.1080/0140528850070211)
17. Huddle, P. A. and Pillay, A. E. 1996. An in-depth study of misconceptions in stoichiometry and chemical equilibrium at a South African University. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 33 (1): 65 - 77. (doi:10.1002/(SICI)1098-2736(199601)33:165::AID-TEA43.0.CO;2-N)
18. Jimenez-Aleixandre, M. P. and Erduran, S. 2008. " Argumentation in science education: An overview. Chapter ". In Argumentation in science education: Perspectives from classroom-based research, Edited by: Erduran, S. and Jimenez-Aleixandre, M. P. 3 - 27. Dordrecht: Springer.
19. Jimenez-Aleixandre, M. P. and Pereiro-Munhoz, C. 2002. Knowledge producers or knowledge consumers? Argumentation and decision making about environmental management. International Journal of Science Education, 24 (11): 1171 - 1190. (doi:10.1080/09500690210134857)
20. Jimenez-Aleixandre, M., Rodriguez, A. and Duschl, R. 2000. 'Doing the lesson' or 'doing science': argument in high school genetics. Science Education, 84 (6): 757 - 792. (doi:10.1002/1098-237X(200011)84:6757::AID-SCE53.0.CO;2-F)
21. Kaya, E., Erduran, S. and Cetin, P. S. 2012. Discourse, argumentation, and science lessons: Match or mismatch between students' perceptions and understanding?. Mevlana International Journal of Education, 2 (3): 1 - 32.
22. Kelly, G. and Takao, A. 2002. Epistemic levels in argument: An analysis of university oceanography students' use of evidence in writing. Science Education, 86 (3): 314 - 342. (doi:10.1002/sce.10024)
23. Kuhn, D. 1991. The skills of argument, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
24. Leach, J. 1999. Students' understanding of the co-ordination of theory and evidence in science. International Journal of Science Education, 21 (8): 789 - 806. (doi:10.1080/095006999290291)
25. Lingwood, M. H. 1993. Directed line segments, reaction rates and chemical equilibrium. Spectrum, 31 (2): 9 - 11.
26. Maskill, R. and Cachapuz, A. F. C. 1989. Learning about the chemistry topic of equilibrium: The use of word association tests to detect developing conceptualizations. International Journal of Science Education, 11 (1): 57 - 69. (doi:10.1080/0950069890110106)
27. Newton, P., Driver, R. and Osborne, J. 1999. The place of argumentation in the pedagogy of school science. International Journal of Science Education, 21 (5): 553 - 576. (doi:10.1080/095006999290570)
28. Niaz, M., Aguilera, D., Maza, A. and Liendo, G. 2002. Arguments, contradictions, resistances and conceptual change in students understanding of atomic structure. Science Education, 86 (4): 505 - 525. (doi:10.1002/sce.10035)
29. Ozdem, Y., Ertepinar, H., Cakiroglu, J. and Erduran, S. 2011. The nature of pre-service science teachers' argumentation in inquiry-oriented laboratory context. International Journal of Science Education,: iFirst, 1 - 28. doi:10.1080/09500693.2011.611835
30. Passmore, C. M. and Svoboda, J. 2012. Exploring opportunities for argumentation in modeling classrooms. International Journal of Science Education, 34 (10): 1535 - 1554. (doi:10.1080/09500693.2011.577842)
31. Quilez-Pardo, J. and Solaz-Portoles, J. J. 1995. Students' and teachers' misapplication of Le Chatelier's principle: Implications for the teaching of chemical equilibrium. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 32 (9): 939 - 957. (doi:10.1002/tea.3660320906)
32. Sadler, T. D. and Donnelly, L. A. 2006. Socioscientific argumentation: The effects of content knowledge and morality. International Journal of Science Education, 28 (12): 1463 - 1488. (doi:10.1080/09500690600708717)
33. Sadler, T. D. and Fowler, S. R. 2006. A threshold model of content knowledge transfer for socioscientific argumentation. Science Education, 90 (6): 986 - 1004. (doi:10.1002/sce.20165)
34. Simon, S., Erduran, S. and Osborne, J. 2006. Learning to teach argumentation: Research and development in the science classroom. International Journal of Science Education, 28 (2-3): 235 - 260. (doi:10.1080/09500690500336957)
35. Toulmin, S. 1958. The uses of argument, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
36. Van Driel, J. H. 2002. Students' corpuscular conceptions in the context of chemical equilibrium and chemical kinetics. Chemistry Education: Research and Practice in Europe, 3 (2): 201 - 213. (doi:10.1039/b2rp90016e)
37. Venville, G. J. and 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.
38. von Aufschnaiter, C., Erduran, S., Osborne, J. and 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. (doi:10.1002/tea.20213)
39. Voska, K. W. and Heikkinen, H. W. 2000. Identification and analysis of student conceptions used to solve chemical equilibrium problems. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 37 (2): 160 - 176. (doi:10.1002/(SICI)1098-2736(200002)37:2160::AID-TEA53.0.CO;2-M)
40. Walker, J., Sampson, V., Grooms, J., Anderson, B., & Zimmerman, C. (2010, March). Argument-driven inquiry: An instructional model for use in undergraduate chemistry labs. Paper presented at the 2010 Annual International Conference of the National Association of Research in Science Teaching (NARST). Philadelphia, PA.
41. Walker, J., Sampson, V. and Zimmerman, C. O. 2011. Argument-driven inquiry: An introduction to a new instructional model for use in undergraduate chemistry labs. Journal of Chemical Education, 88 (8): 1048 - 1056. (doi:10.1021/ed100622h)
42. Walton, D. (1996). Argumentation schemes for presumptive reasoning. Mahvah, NJ: Erlbaum Press.
43. Wheeler, A. E. and Kass, H. 1978. Student misconceptions in chemical equilibrium. Science Education, 62 (2): 223 - 232. (doi:10.1002/sce.3730620212)
44. Zeidler, D. L. 1997. The central role of fallacious thinking in science education. Science Education, 81 (4): 483 - 496. (doi:10.1002/(SICI)1098-237X(199707)81:4483::AID-SCE73.0.CO;2-8)
45. Zembal-Saul, C. 2009. Learning to teach elementary school science as argument. Science Education, 93 (4): 687 - 719. (doi:10.1002/sce.20325)
46. Zembal-Saul, C., Munford, D., Crawford, B., Friedrichsen, P. and Landi, S. 2002. Scaffolding preservice science teachers' evidence-based arguments during an investigation of natural selection. Research in Science Education, 32 (4): 437 - 463. (doi:10.1023/A:1022411822951)
47. Zohar, A. 2008. " Science teacher education and professional development in argumentation ". In Argumentation in science education: Perspectives from classroom-based research, Edited by: Erduran, S. and Jimenez-Aleixandre, M. P. 245 - 268. Dordrecht: Springer.
48. Zohar, A. and Nemet, F. 2002. Fostering students' knowledge and argumentation skills through dilemmas in human genetics. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 39 (1): 35 - 62. (doi:10.1002/tea.10008)