SUCCESS, DIFFICULTY, AND INSTRUCTIONAL STRATEGY TO ENACT AN ARGUMENT-BASED INQUIRY APPROACH: EXPERIENCES OF ELEMENTARY TEACHERS

International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education

Volumn 13, Issue 5, 2015, Pages 991-1011

  Choi, Aeran ^a   Klein, Vanessa ^b   Hershberger, Susan ^c  

^a Ewha Womans University   (South Korea)

^b KENT STATE UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^c MIAMI UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

argument based inquiry approach; elementary teachers; Science Writing Heuristic approach

Indexed keywords

EID: 84941876204     PISSN: 15710068     EISSN: 15731774     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1007/s10763-014-9525-1     Document Type: Article

References (54)

1. Abd-EL-Khalick, F., Boujaoude, S., Duschl, R., Lederman, N., Hofstein, R., Niaz, M., Treagust, D. & Tuan, H. (2004). Inquiry in science education: International perspectives. International Journal of Science Education, 88, 397–419.
2. Akkus, R., Gunel, M. & Hand, B. (2007). Comparing an inquiry-based approach known as the science writing heuristic to traditional science teaching practices: Are there differences? International Journal of Science Education, 29(14), 1745–1765.
3. Asay, L. D., & Orgill, M. (2010). Analysis of essential features of inquiry found in articles published in The Science Teacher, 1998–2007. Journal of Science Teacher Education, 21, 57–79.
4. Burke, K. A., Greenbowe, T. J. & Hand, B. M. (2006). Implementing the science writing heuristic in the chemistry laboratory. Journal of Chemical Education, 83(7), 1032–1038.
5. Cavagnetto, A., Hand, B. & Norton-Meier, L. (2010). The nature of elementary student science discourse in the context of the Science Writing Heuristic approach. International Journal of Science Education, 32(4), 427–449.
6. Choi, A., Hand, B. & Greenbowe, T. (2013). Students’ written arguments in general chemistry laboratory investigations. Research in Science Education, 43, 1763–1783.
7. Choi, A., Notebaert, A., Diaz, J. & Hand, B. (2010). Examining arguments generated by year 5, 7, and 10 students in science classrooms. Research in Science Education, 40(2), 149–169.
8. Corbin, J. & Strauss, A. (2008). Basics of qualitative research. London: Sage.
9. Crawford, B. A. (2000). Embracing the essence of inquiry: New roles for science teachers. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 37(9), 916–937.
10. Driver, R., Newton, P. & Osborne, J. (2000). Establishing the norms of scientific argumentation in classrooms. Science Education, 84, 287–312.
11. Duschl, R. A. (1990). Restructuring science education: The importance of theories and their development. New York: Teacher’s College Press.
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(6), 915–933.
13. Ford, M. (2008). ‘Grasp of practice’ as a reasoning resource for inquiry and nature of science understanding. Science & Education, 17, 147–177.
14. Glen, N. J. & Dotger, S. (2013). Writing like a scientist: Exploring elementary teachers’ understandings and practices of writing in science. Journal of Science Teacher Education. doi:10.1007/s10972-013-9348-x.
15. Greenbowe, T. J. & Hand, B. (2005). Using the science writing heuristic to improve students’ understanding of chemistry. In N. J. Pienta, M. M. Cooper & T. J. Greenbowe (Eds.), Chemists guide to effective teaching. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall.
16. Halliday, M. A. K. & Martin, J. R. (1993). Writing science: Literacy and discursive power. Pittsburgh, PA: University of Pittsburgh Press.
17. Hand, B. & Prain, V. (2002). Teachers implementing writing-to-learn strategies in junior secondary science: A case study. Science Education, 86(6), 737–755.
18. Hand, B., Wallace, C. W. & Yang, E. (2004). Using a Science Writing Heuristic to enhance learning outcomes from laboratory activities in seventh-grade science: Quantitative and qualitative aspects. International Journal of Science Education, 26(2), 131–149.
19. Hohenshell, L. M. & Hand, B. (2006). Writing-to-learn strategies in secondary school cell biology: A mixed method study. International Journal of Science Education, 28(2–3), 261–289.
20. Jimenez-Aleixandre, M. P., Bugallo-Rodriguez, A. & Duschl, R. A. (2000). “Doing the lesson” or “doing science”: Argument in high school genetics. Science Education, 84, 757–792.
21. Kelly, G. J. & Bazerman, C. (2003). How students argue scientific claims: A rhetorical-semantic analysis. Applied Linguistics, 24(1), 28–55.
22. Kelly, G. J., Drucker, S. & Chen, K. (1998). Students’ reasoning about electricity: Combining performance assessment with argumentation analysis. International Journal of Science Education, 20, 849–871.
23. Keys, C. W. (1999). Revitalizing instruction in scientific genres: Connecting knowledge production with writing to learn in science. Science Education, 83, 115–130.
24. Keys, C. W. & Bryan, L. A. (2001). Co-constructing inquiry-based science with teachers: Essential research for lasting reform. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 38(6), 631–645.
25. Keys, C. W., Hand, B., Prain, V. & Collins, S. (1999). Using the Science Writing Heuristic as a tool for learning from laboratory investigations in secondary science. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 36(10), 1065–1084.
26. Kingir, S., Geban, O. & Gunel, M. (2012). How does the science writing heuristic approach affect students’ performance of different academic achievement levels? A case for high school chemistry. Chemistry Education Research and Practice, 13(4), 428–436.
27. Kuhn, D. (1993). Science as argument: Implications for teaching and learning scientific thinking. Science Education, 77, 319–337.
28. Lederman, N., Abd-El-Khalick, F., Bell, R. & Schwartz, R. (2002). Views of nature of science questionnaire: Toward valid and meaningful assessment of learners’ conceptions of nature of science. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 39(6), 497–521.
29. Lemke, J. L. (1990). Talking science: Language, learning, and values. Norwood, NJ: Ablex.
30. 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, 17–38.
31. Marx, R. W., Blumenfeld, P. C., Krajcik, J. S., Blunk, M., Crawford, B., Kelly, B. & Meyer, K. M. (1994). Enacting project-based science: Experiences of four middle grade teachers. The Elementary School Journal, 94(5), 517–538.
32. Nam, J., Choi, A. & Hand, B. (2011). Implementation of the Science Writing Heuristic (SWH) approach in the 8th grade science classrooms. International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 9, 1111–1133.
33. National Research Council (NRC). (1996). National science education standards. Washington, D.C.: National Academy Press.
34. National Research Council (NRC). (2000). Inquiry and the national science education standards. Washington, D. C.: National Academy Press.
35. National Research Council (NRC). (2013). Next generation science standards. Washington, D. C.: National Academy Press.
36. Newton, P., Driver, R. & Osborne, J. (1999). The place of argumentation in the pedagogy of school science. International Journal of Science Education, 21(5), 553–576.
37. Opfer, V. D. & Pedder, D. (2011). Conceptualizing teacher professional learning. Review of Educational Research, 81(3), 376–407.
38. Osborne, J. (2010). Arguing to learn in science: The role of collaborative, critical discourse. Science, 328, 463–466.
39. Osborne, J., Erduran, S. & Simon, S. (2004). Enhancing the quality of argumentation in school science. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 41(10), 994–1020.
40. 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.
41. Patterson, E. W. (2001). Structuring the composition process in scientific writing. International Journal of Science Education, 23, 1–16.
42. Rivard, L. P. & Straw, S. W. (2000). The effect of talk and writing on learning science: An exploratory study. Science Education, 84, 566–593.
43. Rudd, J. A., Greenbowe, T. J. & Hand, B. M. (2001a). Recrafting the general chemistry laboratory report. Journal of College Science Teaching, 31(4), 230–234.
44. Rudd, J. A., Greenbowe, T. J., Hand, B. M. & Legg, M. J. (2001b). Using the Science Writing Heuristic (SWH) to move toward an inquiry-based laboratory curriculum: An example from physical equilibrium. Journal of Chemical Education, 78(12), 1680–1686.
45. Sampson, V. & Blanchard, M. R. (2012). Science teachers and scientific argumentation: Trends in views and practice. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 49(9), 1122–1148.
46. Sampson, V. & Clark, D. (2008). Assessment of the ways students generate arguments in science education: current perspectives and recommendations for future directions. Science Education, 92, 447–472.
47. Sampson, V., Grooms, J. & Walker, J. (2011). Argument-driven inquiry as a way to help students learn how to participate in scientific argumentation and craft written arguments: An exploratory study. Science Education, 95, 217–257.
48. Simon, S., Erduran, S. & Osborne, J. (2006). Learning to teach argumentation: Research and development in the science classroom. International Journal of Science Education, 28(2–3), 235–260.
49. Strauss, A. & Corbin, J. (1990). Basics of qualitative research: Grounded theory procedures and techniques. London: Sage.
50. Tobin, K., Tippins, D. J. & Gallard, A. J. (1994). Research on instructional strategies for teaching science. In D. L. Gabel (Ed.), Handbook of research on science teaching and learning (pp. 45–93). New York: Macmillan.
51. Vygotshy, L. S. (1962). Thought and language. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
52. Wallace, C. S., Hand, B. & Prain, V. (2004). Introduction: Does writing promote learning in science? In C. S. Wallace, B. Hand & V. Prain (Eds.), Writing and learning in the science classroom (pp. 1–8). Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Kluwer Academic Press.
53. Wellington, J. & Osborne, J. (2001). Language and literacy in science education. Philadelphia, PA: Open University Press.
54. Windschitl, M., Thompson, J. & Braaten, M. (2008). Beyond the scientific method: Model-based inquiry as a new paradigm of preference for school science investigations. Science Education, 1–27.