Argument-driven inquiry: Using the laboratory to improve undergraduates' science writing skills through meaningful science writing, peer-review, and revision

Journal of Chemical Education

Volumn 90, Issue 10, 2013, Pages 1269-1274

  Walker, Joi Phelps ^a   Sampson, Victor ^b  

^a Tallahassee Community College   (United States)

^b FLORIDA STATE UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

Chemical Education Research; Communication Writing; First Year Undergraduate General; Laboratory Instruction

Indexed keywords

EID: 84885398068     PISSN: 00219584     EISSN: 19381328     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1021/ed300656p     Document Type: Article

References (17)

1. Kelly, G., Regev, J., and Prothero, W. Analysis of Lines of Reasoning in Written Argumentation. In Argumentation in Science Education: Perspectives from Classroom-Based Research; Erduran, S. and Jimenez-Aleixandre, M., Eds.; Springer Academic Publishers: Dordrecht, 2007.
2. National Commission on Mathematics and Science Teaching for the 21st Century. Before It's Too Late: A Report to the Nation; National Commission on Mathematics and Science Teaching: Washington, DC, 2000.
3. Gerdeman, R.; Russell, A.; Worden, K. Web-Based Student Writing and Reviewing in a Large Biology Lecture Course J. Coll. Sci. Teach. 2007, 36 (5) 46-52
4. Gragson, D.; Hagen, J. Developing Technical Writing Skills in the Physical Chemistry Laboratory: A Progressive Approach Employing Peer Review J. Chem. Educ. 2010, 87 (1) 62-65
5. Walvoord, M.; Hoefnagels, M.; Gaffin, D.; Chemchal, M.; Long, D. An Analysis of Calibrated Peer Review (CPR) in a Science Lecture Classroom J. Coll. Sci. Teach. 2008, 37 (4) 66-73
6. Falchikov, N.; Goldfinch, J. Student Peer Assessment in Higher Education: A Meta-Analysis for Comparing Peer and Teacher Marks Rev. Educ. Res. 2000, 70 (3) 287-322
7. Walker, J.; Sampson, V.; Grooms, J.; Zimmerman, C.; Anderson, B. Argument-Driven Inquiry in Undergraduate Chemistry Labs: The Impact on Students' Conceptual Understanding, Argument Skills, and Attitudes toward Science J. Coll. Sci. Teach. 2012, 41 (4) 74-81
8. Walker, J.; Sampson, V.; Zimmerman, C. Argument-Driven Inquiry: An Introduction to a New Instructional Model for Use in Undergraduate Chemistry Labs J. Chem. Educ. 2011, 88 (10) 1048-1056
9. Brillhart, L.; Debs, M. Teaching Writing-A Scientist's Responsibility J. Coll. Sci. Teach. 1981, 303-304
10. Flynn, E.; McCulley, G.; Gratz, R. Writing in Biology: Effects of Peer Critiquing and Analysis of Models on the Quality of Biology Laboratory Reports. In Writing across the Disciplines: Research into Practice; Young, A.; Fulwiler, T., Eds.; Boynton/Cook: Upper Montclair, NJ, 1986.
11. Powell, A. A Chemist's View of Writing, Reading, and Thinking across the Curriculum Coll. Compos. Commun. 1985, 36 (4) 414-418
12. Carter, M.; Ferzli, M.; Wiebe, E. Writing To Learn by Learning To Write in the Disciplines J. Bus. Tech. Commun. 2007, 21, 278-302
13. Carter, M. Ways of Knowing, Doing, and Writing in the Disciplines Coll. Compos. Commun. 2007, 58 (3) 385-418
14. Sampson, V.; Walker, J. Learning To Write in the Undergraduate Chemistry Laboratory: The Impact of Argument-Driven Inquiry Inter. J. Sci. Educ. 2012, 34 (10) 1443-1485
15. Seymour, E.; Wiese, D. J.; Hunter, A. B.; Daffinrud, S. M. Creating a Better Mousetrap: On-line Student Assessment of Their Learning Gains. Paper presented at the National Meeting of the American Chemical Society, San Francisco, CA, 2000.
16. Pintrich, P. R.; Marx, R. W.; Boyle, R. A. Beyond Cold Conceptual Change: The Role of Motivational Beliefs and Classroom Contextual Factors in the Process of Conceptual Change Rev. Educ. Res. 1993, 63, 167-200
17. Bransford, J. D.; Brown, A. L.; Cocking, R. R.; Donovan, M. S.; Pellegrino, J. W. How People Learn: Brain, Mind, Experience, and School, expanded ed.; National Academy Press: Washington, DC, 2000.