Science in writing: Learning scientific argument in principle and practice

E-Learning and Digital Media

Volumn 10, Issue 4, 2013, Pages 420-441

  Cope, Bill ^a   Kalantzis, Mary ^a   Abd El Khalick, Fouad ^a   Bagley, Elizabeth ^b  

^a UNIVERSITY OF ILLINOIS AT URBANA CHAMPAIGN   (United States)

^b UNIVERSITY OF WISCONSIN MADISON   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 84889586587     PISSN: 17418887     EISSN: 20427530     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.2304/elea.2013.10.4.420     Document Type: Article

References (83)

1. Abell, Michael (2006) Individualizing Learning Using Intelligent Technology and Universally Designed Curriculum, Journal of Technology, Learning, and Assessment, 5.
2. Abell, S., Anderson, G. & Chezem, J. (2000) Science as Argument and Explanation: exploring concepts of sound in third grade, pp. 100-119, in J. Minstrell & E.H.V. Zee (Eds) Inquiry into Inquiry Learning and Teaching in Science. Washington: AAAS.
3. Abi-El-Mona, Issam & Abd-El-Khalick, Fouad (2010) Perceptions of the Nature and 'Goodness' of Argument among College Students, Science Teachers, and Scientists, International Journal of Science Education, iFirst Article, 1-33.
4. American Association for the Advancement of Science (1993) Benchmarks for Science Literacy. New York: Oxford University Press.
5. Baker, Eva L. (2004) Aligning Curriculum, Standards, and Assessments: fulfilling the promise of school reform. Los Angeles: National Center for Research on Evaluation, Standards, and Student Testing (CRESST), University of California.
6. Baker, Eva L. (2007) Moving to the Next Generation System Design: integrating cognition, assessment, and learning. Los Angeles: National Center for Research on Evaluation, Standards, and Student Testing (CRESST), University of California.
7. Bass, Kristin M. & Glaser, Robert (2004) Developing Assessments to Inform Teaching and Learning. Los Angeles: National Center for Research on Evaluation, Standards, and Student Testing (CRESST), University of California.
8. Bell, P. & Linn, M. (2000) Scientific Arguments as Learning Artifacts: designing for learning from the web with KIE, International Journal of Science Education, 22, 797-817. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/095006900412284
9. Black, P. & Wiliam, D. (1998) Assessment and Classroom Learning, Assessment in Education, 5, 7-74. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/0969595980050102
10. Bowker, Geoffrey C. & Star, Susan Leigh (2000) Sorting Things Out: classification and its consequences. Cambridge MA: MIT Press.
11. Bransford, John D., Brown, Ann L. & Cocking, Rodney R. (2000) How People Learn: brain, mind, experience and school. N.R.C. Commission on Behavioral and Social Sciences and Education. Washington: National Academy Press.
12. Brown, J., Collins, A. & Duguid, P. (1989) Situated Cognition and the Culture of Learning, Educational Researcher, 18.
13. Cazden, Courtney B. (2001) Classroom Discourse: the language of teaching and learning. Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann.
14. Cetina, Karin Knorr (1999) Epistemic Cultures: how the sciences make knowledge. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
15. Chung, Gregory K.W.K., Baker, Eva L., Brill, David G., Sinha, Ravi, Saadat, Farzad & Bewley, William L. (2006) Automated Assessment of Domain Knowledge with Online Knowledge Mapping. Los Angeles: National Center for Research on Evaluation, Standards, and Student Testing (CRESST), University of California.
16. Common Core State Standards Initiative (2010) Common Core State Standards for English Language Arts and Literacy in History/Social Studies, Science, and Technical Subjects. National Governors Association Center for Best Practices, Council of Chief State School Officers, Washington DC. http://www.corestandards.org/
17. Cope, Bill, Kalantzis, Mary, McCarthey, Sarah, Vojak, Colleen & Kline, Sonia (2011) Technology-mediated Writing Assessments: paradigms and principles, Computers and Composition, 28, 79-96. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.compcom.2011.04.007
18. Darling-Hammond, Linda, Ancess, Jacqueline & Falk, Beverly (1995) Authentic Assessment in Action: studies of schools and students at work. New York: Teachers College Press.
19. Darling-Hammond, Linda & Wood, George H. (2008) Assessment for the 21st Century: using performance assessments to measure student learning more effectively. Stewart, OH: Forum for Education and Democracy.
20. Driver, Rosalind, Newton, Paul & Osborne, Jonathan (2000) Establishing the Norms of Scientific Argumentation in Classrooms, Science Education, 84, 287-312. http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/(SICI)1098-237X(200005)84:3%3C287::AID-SCE1%3E3.0.CO;2-A
21. Duschl, R. (1998) Research on the History and Philosophy of Science, in B.J. Fraser & K.G. Tobin (Eds) International Handbook of Science Education, pp. 443-465. Dordrecht: Kluwer.
22. Duschl, R. & Ellenbogen, K. (2001) Scaffolding and Assessing Argumentation Processes in Science Learning. Paper presented at the Bi-annual Meeting of the European Association for Research on Learning and Instruction, Friborg, September.
23. Duschl, R. & Osborne, J. (2002) Supporting and Promoting Argumentation Discourse in Science Education, Studies in Science Education, 38, 39-72. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/03057260208560187
24. Eurduran, S. & Jimenez-Aleixandre, M.P. (2008) Argumentation in Science Education: an overview, in S. Eurduran & M.P. Jimenez-Aleixandre (Eds) Argumentation in Science Education, pp. 3-28. New York: Springer.
25. Etkina, Eugenia, Mestre, Jose P. & O'Donnell, Angela (2005) The Impact of the Cognitive Revolution on Science Learning and Teaching, in J. Royer (Ed.) The Impact of the Cognitive Revolution on Educational Psychology, pp. 119-164. Greenwich, CT: Information Age Publishing.
26. Gee, James Paul (1992) The Social Mind: language, ideology, and social practice. New York: Bergin & Garvey.
27. Gee, James Paul (2004a) Language in the Science Classroom: academic social languages as the heart of school-based literacy, in E.W. Saul (Ed.) Crossing Borders in Literacy and Science Instruction, pp. 13-32. Arlington, VA: NSTA Press.
28. Gee, James Paul (2004b) Situated Language and Learning: a critique of traditional schooling. London: Routledge.
29. Gonzales, P., Williams, T., Jocelyn, L., Roey, S., Kastberg, D. & Brenwald, S. (2008) Highlights from TIMSS 2007: mathematics and science achievement of US fourth- and eighth-Grade students in an international context. Washington: National Center for Education Statistics, Institute of Education Sciences, US Department of Education.
30. Greeno, James G. (1998) The Situativity of Knowing, Learning, and Research, American Psychologist, 53, 5-26. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/0003-066X.53.1.5
31. Greeno, James G. & Hall, Rogers P. (1997) Practicing Representation: learning with and about representation, Phi Delta Kappan, 78, 361-367.
32. Grotzer, Tina (2009) Learning to Reason about Evidence and Explanations: promising directions in eduation, in E. Callan, T. Grotzer, J. Kagan, R.E. Nisbett, D.N. Perkins & L.S. Shulman, Education and a Civil Society: teaching evidence-based decision making, pp. 51-74. Washington: American Academy of Arts and Sciences.
33. Hacker, D. & Niederhauser, D. (2000) Promoting Deep and Durable Learning in the Online Classroom, New Directions for Teaching and Learning, 84, 53-63. http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/tl.848
34. Halliday, M.A.K. (2004) The Language of Science, in J.J. Webster (Ed.) The Collected Works of M.A.K. Halliday. London: Continuum.
35. Halliday, M.A.K. & Martin, J.R. (1993) Writing Science: literacy and discursive power. London: Falmer Press.
36. Hogan, K. & Fisherkeller, J. (2005) Dialogue as Data: assessing students' scientific reasoning with interactive protocols, in J.J. Mintzes, J.H.Wandersee & J.D. Novak (Eds) Assessing Science Understanding: a human constructivist view. Burlington, MA: Elsevier Academic Press. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/B978-012498365-6/50007-X
37. Jimenez-Aleixandre, Maria Pilar, Diaz de Bustamante, J. & Duschl, R. (1998) Scientific Culture and School Culture: epistemic and procedural components. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the National Association for Research in Science Teaching, San Diego, CA, March.
38. Jimenez-Aleixandre, Maria Pilar & Eurduran, Sibel (2008) Argumentation in Science Education: an overview, in S. Eurduran & M.P. Jimenez-Aleixandre (Eds) Argumentation in Science Education: perspectives from classroom-based research. Berlin: Springer.
39. Jonassen, David H. & Kim, Bosung (2009) Arguing to Learn and Learning to Argue: design justifications and guidelines, Educational Technology Research and Development, 58, 439-457. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11423-009-9143-8
40. Kalantzis, Mary & Cope, Bill (2012a) Literacies. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781139196581
41. Kalantzis, Mary & Cope, Bill (2012b) New Learning: elements of a science of education. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781139248532
42. Knowlton, D. (2001) Promoting Durable Knowledge Construction through Online Discussion, in Proceedings of the Annual Mid-South Instructional Technology Conference, Murfreesboro TN, April, pp. 1-13.
43. Kolsto, S. & Ratcliffe, M. (2008) Social Aspects of Argumentation, in S. Eurduran & M.P. Jimenez-Aleixandre (Eds) Argumentation in Science Education, pp. 91-116. New York: Springer.
44. Krajcik, Joseph S. & Sutherland, LeeAnn M. (2010) Supporting Students in Developing Literacy in Science, Science, 328, 456-459. http://dx.doi.org/10.1126/science.1182593
45. Kuhn, D. (1991) The Skills of Argument. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511571350
46. Kuhn, D. (1993) Science as Argument: implications for teaching and learning scientific thinking, Science Education, 77, 257-272.
47. Kuhn, D. (2004) What is Scientific Thinking and How Does it Develop?, in U. Goswami (Ed.) Blackwell Handbook of Childhood Cognitive Development, pp. 371-393. Malden, MA: Blackwell.
48. Kuhn, Deanna, Goh, Wendy, Iordanou, Kalypso & Shaenfield. David (2008) Arguing on the Computer: a microgenetic study of developing argument skills in a computer-supported environment, Child Development, 79, 1310-1328. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-8624.2008.01190.x
49. Latour, Bruno & Woolgar, Steve (1986) Laboratory Life: the construction of scientific facts. Princeton NJ: Princeton University Press.
50. Lave, Jean & Wenger, Etienne (1991) Situated Learning: legitimate peripheral participation. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511815355
51. Lemke, Jay L. (1990) Talking Science: language, learning and values. Westport, CN: Ablex.
52. Lemke, Jay L. (2004) The Literacies of Science, in E.W. Saul (Ed.) Crossing Borders in Literacy and Science Instruction, pp. 33-47. Arlington VA: NSTA Press.
53. Mason, L. & Santi, M. (1994) Argumentation Structure and Metacognition in Shared Knowledge at School. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the American Educational Research Association, New Orleans, LA, April.
54. Meltzoff, Andrew N., Kuhl, Patricia K., Movellan, Javier & Sejnowski, Terrence J. (2009) Foundations for a New Science of Learning, Science, 325, 284-288. http://dx.doi.org/10.1126/science.1175626
55. Mestre, Jose P., Ross, Brian H., Brookes, David T., Smith, Adam D. & Nokes, Timothy (2009) How Cognitive Science Can Promote Conceptual Understanding in Physics Classrooms, in I.M. Saleh & M.S. Khine (Eds) Fostering Scientific Habits of Mind: pedagogical knowledge and best practices in science education, pp. 145-171. Rotterdam: Sense.
56. Mislevy, Robert J. (2006a) Cognitive Psychology and Educational Assessment, in R.L. Brennan (Ed.) Educational Measurement, pp. 257-305. New York: Praeger.
57. Mislevy, Robert J. (2006b) Issues of Structure and Issues of Scale in Assessment from a Situative/Sociocultural Perspective. Los Angeles: Center for the Study of Evaluation National Center for Research on Evaluation, University of California.
58. Mislevy, Robert J., Behrens, John T., Bennett, Randy E., Demark, Sarah F., Frezzo, Dennis C., Levy, Roy et al (2007) On the Roles of External Knowledge Representations in Assessment Design. Los Angeles: National Center for Research on Evaluation, Standards, and Student Testing (CRESST), University of California.
59. Munford, D. & Zembal-Saul, C. (2002) Learning Science through Argumentation: prospective teacher's experiences in an innovative science course. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the National Association for Research in Science Teaching, New Orleans, LA, April.
60. National Research Council (2011) A Framework for K-12 Science Education: practices, crosscutting concepts, and core ideas. Washington: Committee on a Conceptual Framework for New K-12 Science Education Standards, Board on Science Education, Division of Behavioral and Social Sciences and Education.
61. National Science Board (2010) Science and Engineering Indicators 2010. Arlington, VA: National Science Foundation.
62. Newell, George E., Beach, Richard, Smith, Jamie & VanDerHeide, Jennifer (2011) Teaching and Learning Argumentative Reading and Writing: a review of research, Reading Research Quarterly, 46, 273-304.
63. Next Generation Science Standards (2013) Washington DC: The National Academies Press. http://nextgenscience.org/next-generation-science-standards
64. OECD (2010) PISA 2009: program for international student assessment results. Paris: OECD Centre for Educational Research and Innovation.
65. OECD Centre for Educational Research and Innovation (2005) Formative Assessment: improving learning in secondary classrooms. Paris: Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development.
66. Osborne, Jonathan (2005) The Role of Argumentation in Science Education, in K. Boersma (Ed.) Research and the Quality of Science Education, pp. 367-380. Springer: Amsterdam.
67. Palinscar, Annemarie Sullivan & Brown, Ann L. (1984) Reciprocal Teaching of Comprehension-fostering and Comprehension-monitoring Activities, Cognition and Instruction, 1, 117-175. http://dx.doi.org/10.1207/s1532690xci0102_1
68. Patronis, T. & Spiliotopoulou, V. (1999) Students' Argumentation in Decision Making on a Socio-Scientific Issue: implications for teaching, International Journal of Science Education, 21, 745-754. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/095006999290408
69. Pellegrino, James W., Chudowsky, Naomi & Glaser, Robert (2001) Knowing What Students Know: the science and design of educational assessment. Washington: National Academies Press.
70. Pontecorvo, C. (1987) Discussing for Reasoning: the role of argument in knowledge construction, in E.D. Corte, H. Lodew, R. Parmentier & P. Span, Learning and Instruction: European research in an international context, pp. 239-250. Oxford: Pergamon.
71. Scardamalia, Marlene & Bereiter, Carl (1996) Student Communities for the Advancement of Knowledge, Communications of the ACM, 39, 36-37. http://dx.doi.org/10.1145/227210.227220
72. Shepard, Lorrie A. (2000) The Role of Classroom Assessment in Teaching and Learning. Los Angeles: National Center for Research on Evaluation, Standards, and Student Testing, University of California.
73. Toulmin, Stephen (2003) The Uses of Argument. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511840005
74. Van Eemeren, Frans H. & Grootendorst, Rob (2004) A Systematic Theory of Argumentation: the pragmadialectical approach. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
75. Vygotsky, L.S. (1978) Mind in Society: the development of higher psychological processes. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. (Original work published 1962.)
76. Vygotsky, Lev (1986) Thought and Language. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. (Original work published 1934.)
77. Wagner, Tony (2008) The Global Achievement Gap: why even our best schools don't teach the new survival skills our children need, and what we can do about it. New York: Basic Books.
78. Wenger, Etienne, McDermott, Richard & Snyder, William M. (2002) Cultivating Communities of Practice: a guide to managing knowledge. Cambridge MA: Harvard Business School Press.
79. Windschitl, Mark (2002) Framing Constructivism in Practice as the Negotiation of Dilemmas: an analysis of the conceptual, pedagogical, cultural, and political challenges facing teachers, Review of Educational Research, 72, 131-175. http://dx.doi.org/10.3102/00346543072002131
80. Zeidler, D. (1997) The Central Role of Fallacious Thinking in Science Education, Science Education, 81, 483-496. http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/(SICI)1098-237X(199707)81:4%3C483::AID-SCE7%3E3.0.CO;2-8
81. Zembal-Saul, C. (2005) Pre-service Teachers' Understanding of Teaching Elementary School Science as Argument. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the National Association for Research in Science Teaching, Dallas, TX, April 4-7.
82. Zembal-Saul, C. & Land, S. (2002) Scaffolding the Construction of Scientific Arguments by Preservice Teachers in a Problem-based Environment. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the American Educational Research Association, New Orleans, LA, April.
83. Zohar, A. & Nemet, F. (2002) Fostering Students' Knowledge and Argumentation Skills through Dilemmas in Human Genetics, Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 39, 35-62. http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/tea.10008