Supporting use of evidence in argumentation through practice in argumentation and reflection in the context of SOCRATES learning environment

Science Education

Volumn 99, Issue 2, 2015, Pages 282-311

  Iordanou, Kalypso ^a   Constantinou, Costas P ^b  

^a UNIVERSITY OF CENTRAL LANCASHIRE   (Cyprus)

^b UNIVERSITY OF CYPRUS   (Cyprus)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 84923226361     PISSN: 00368326     EISSN: 1098237X     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1002/sce.21152     Document Type: Article

References (51)

1. Asterhan, C. S., & Schwarz, B. B. (2007). The effects of monological and dialogical argumentation on concept learning in evolutionary theory. Journal of Educational Psychology, 99(3), 626-639.
2. Bell, P., & Linn, M. (2000). Scientific arguments as learning artifacts: designing for learning from the web with KIE. International Journal of Science Education, 2(8), 797-817.
3. Berland, L., & Reiser, B. (2009). Making sense of argumentation and explanation. Science Education, 93(1), 26-55.
4. Berland, L. K., & Reiser, B. J. (2011). Classroom communities' adaptations of the practice of scientific argumentation. Science Education, 95(2), 191-216.
5. Billig, M. (1987). Arguing and thinking: A rhetorical approach to social psychology. Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press.
6. Cardinal, R. N., & Aitken, M. R. (2013). ANOVA for the behavioral sciences researcher. Oxford, England; Psychology Press.
7. Chinn, C. A., Buckland, L. A., & Samarapungavan, A. (2011). Expanding the dimensions of epistemic cognition: Arguments from philosophy and psychology. Educational Psychologist, 46(3), 141-167.
8. Clark, D. B., Stegmann, K., Weinberger, A., Menekse, M., & Erkens, G. (2008). Technology enhanced learning environments to support students' argumentation. In S. Erduran & M. P. Jiménez-Aleixandre (Eds.), Argumentation in science education: Perspectives from classroom-based research (pp. 217-243). Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Springer.
9. Duschl, R. A. (2008a). Quality argumentation and epistemic criteria. In S. Erduran & M. P. Jiménez-Aleixandre (Eds.), Argumentation in science education: Perspectives from classroom-based Research (pp. 137-157). Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Springer.
10. Duschl, R. A. (2008b). Science education in 3 part harmony: Balancing conceptual, epistemic and social goals. Review of Research in Education, 32, 268-291.
11. Erduran, S., & Jiménez-Aleixandre, M. P. (Eds.). (2008). Argumentation in science education: Perspectives from classroom-based research. Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Springer.
12. Erduran, S., Simon, S., & Osborne, J. (2004). TAPping into argumentation: Developments in the application of Toulmin's argument pattern for studying science discourse. Science Education, 88, 915-933.
13. Felton, M. (2004). The development of discourse strategies in adolescent argumentation. Cognitive Development, 19, 35-52.
14. Graff, G. (2003). Clueless in academe: How schooling obscures the life of the mind. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.
15. Hogan, K., & Maglienti, M. (2001). Comparing the epistemological underpinnings of students' and scientists' reasoning about conclusions. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 38(6), 663-687.
16. Iordanou, K. (2010). Developing argument skills across scientific and social domains. Journal of Cognition and Development, 11(3), 293-327.
17. Iordanou, K. (2013). Developing face-to-face argumentation skills: Does arguing on the computer help? Journal of Cognition and Development, 14(2), 292-320.
18. Jiménez-Aleixandre, M. P., Rodriguez, A. B., & Duschl, R. A. (2000). "Doing the lesson" or" doing science": Argument in high school genetics. Science Education, 84(6), 757-792.
19. Kolstø, S. D., Bungum, B., Arnesen, E., Isnes, A., Kristensen, T., Mathiassen, K., et al. (2006). Science students' critical examination of scientific information related to socioscientific issues. Science Education, 90(4), 632-655.
20. Koslowski, B. (1996). Theory and evidence: The development of scientific reasoning. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
21. Kelly, G. J., & Takao, A. (2002). Epistemic levels in argument: An analysis of university oceanography students' use of evidence in writing. Science Education, 86(3), 314-342.
22. Kuhn, D. (1991). The skills of argument. New York: Cambridge University Press.
23. Kuhn, D. (1995). Microgenetic study of change: What has it told us? Psychological Science, 6, 133-139.
24. Kuhn, D. (2010). Teaching and learning science as argument. Science Education, 94(5), 810-824.
25. Kuhn, D., Goh, W., Iordanou, K., & Shaenfield, D. (2008). Arguing on the computer: A microgenetic study of developing argument skills in a computer-supported environment. Child Development, 79(5), 1310-1328.
26. Kuhn, D., Iordanou, K., Pease, M., & Wirkala, C. (2008). Beyond control of variables: What needs to develop to achieve skilled scientific thinking? Cognitive Development, 23(4), 435-451.
27. Kuhn, D., & Moore, W. (in press). Argument as core curriculum. Learning: Research and Practice.
28. Kuhn, D., Shaw, V., & Felton, M. (1997). Effects of dyadic interaction on argumentative reasoning. Cognition and Instruction, 15, 287-315.
29. Kuhn, D., Zillmer, N., Crowell, A., & Zavala, J. (2013). Developing norms of argumentation: Metacognitive, Epistemological, and social dimensions of developing argumentive competence. Cognition and Instruction, 31(4), 456-496.
30. Kyza, E. A., & Constantinou, C. P. (2007). STOCHASMOS: A web-based platform for reflective, inquiry-based teaching and learning. [Computer software]. Cyprus: Learning in Science Group.
31. Lawson, A. (2003). The nature and development of hypothetico-predictive argumentation with implications for science teaching. International Journal of Science Education, 25(11), 1387-1408.
32. Mason, L., & Scirica, F. (2006). Prediction of students' argumentation skills about controversial topics by epistemological understanding. Learning and Instruction, 16(5), 492-509.
33. McNeill, K. L. (2009), Teachers' use of curriculum to support students in writing scientific arguments to explain phenomena. Science Education, 93(2), 233-268.
34. McNeill, K. L., Lizotte, D. J, Krajcik, J., & Marx, R. W. (2006). Supporting students' construction of scientific explanations by fading scaffolds in instructional materials. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 15(2), 153-191.
35. McNeill, K. L., Pimentel, D. S., & Strauss, E. G. (2013) The impact of high school science teachers' beliefs, curricular enactments and experience on student learning during an inquiry-based urban ecology curriculum. International Journal of Science Education, 35(15), 2608-2644.
36. NGSS Lead States. (2013). Next generation science standards: For states, by states. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press.
37. Nussbaum, E. M., Sinatra, G. M., & Poliquin, A. (2008). Role of epistemic beliefs and scientific argumentation in science learning. International Journal of Science Education, 30(15), 1977-1999.
38. Osborne, G., Erduran, S., & Simon, S. (2004). Enhancing the quality of argumentation in school science. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 41(10), 994-1020.
39. Osborne, J., Simon, S., Christodoulou, A., Howell-Richardson, C., & Richardson, K. (2013). 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, 50(3), 315-347.
40. Ryu, S., & Sandoval, W. A. (2012). Improvements to elementary children's epistemic understanding from sustained argumentation. Science Education, 96(3), 488-526.
41. Sadler, T. D., Chambers, W. F., & Zeidler, D. L. (2004). Student conceptualizations of the nature of science in response to a socioscientific issue. International Journal of Science Education, 26(4), 387-409.
42. Sadler, T. D., & Zeidler, D. L. (2005). Knowledge for informal reasoning regarding socioscientific issues: Applying genetics knowledge to genetic engineering issues. International Journal of Science Education, 89, 71-93.
43. Sampson, V., & Clark, D. (2009). The impact of collaboration on the outcomes of scientific argumentation. Science Education, 93(3), 448-484.
44. Sandoval, W. A. (2005). Understanding students' practical epistemologies and their influence on learning through inquiry. Science Education, 89(4), 634-656.
45. Sandoval, W. A. (2014). Science education's need for a theory of epistemological development. Science Education, 98(3), 383-387.
46. Sandoval, W. A., & Çam, A. (2011). Elementary children's judgments of the epistemic status of sources of justification. Science Education, 95(3), 383-408.
47. Sandoval, W. A., & Reiser, B. J. (2004). Explanation-driven inquiry: Integrating conceptual and epistemic supports for science inquiry. Science Education, 88(3), 345-372.
48. Toulmin, S. (1958). The uses of argument. Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press.
49. 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.
50. Walton, D. N. (1989). Dialogue theory for critical thinking. Argumentation, 3, 169-184.
51. 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.