Concept cartoons and writing frames: Developing argumentation in South African science classrooms?

African Journal of Research in Mathematics, Science and Technology Education

Volumn 12, Issue 1, 2008, Pages 5-17

  Webb, Paul ^a   Williams, Yvette ^a   Meiring, Les ^a  

^a NELSON MANDELA METROPOLITAN UNIVERSITY   (South Africa)

Author keywords

Argumentation; Concept cartoons; Science education; Toulmin Argumentation Programme (TAP); Writing frame

Indexed keywords

EID: 85006367599     PISSN: 24697656     EISSN: 18117295     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1080/10288457.2008.10740625     Document Type: Article

References (38)

1. Barnes, D., & Todd, F., (1977). Communication and Learning in Small Groups. London:Routledge and Kegan Paul.
2. Chalmers, A. F., (1976). What Is This Thing Called Science? Australia:University of Queensland Press.
3. Department of Education. (2002). Revised National Curriculum Statement Grades R-9 (Schools). Republic of South Africa, Pretoria:Government Printer.
4. Driver, R., Newton, P., & Osborne, J., (1998). Establishing the norms of scientific argumentation in classrooms. Science Education, 84, 287–312.
5. Edwards, D., & Mercer, N., (1987). Common Knowledge:The Development of Understanding in the Classroom. London:Methuen.
6. Erduran, S., Simon, S., & Osborne, J., (2004). Tapping into argumentation:developments in the application of Toulmin's Argumentation Pattern for studying science discourse. Science Education, 88, 915–933.
7. Harlen, W., (2005). Teaching, Learning and Assessing Science. London:Sage
8. Keogh, B., & Naylor, S., (2007). Talking and thinking in science. School Science Review, 88, 85–90.
9. Keogh, B., Naylor, S., & Downing, B., (2003). Children's interactions in the classroom:argumentation in primary school science. European Science Education Research Association Conference, Noordwijkkerhout, the Netherlands.
10. Kuhn, D., (1993). Science as argument:Implications for teaching and learning scientific thinking. Science Education, 77, 319–337.
11. Kuhn, T., (1970). The structure of Scientific Revolution. Chicago:University of Chicago Press.
12. Lawson, A., (2003). The nature and development of hypothetico-predictive argumentation with implications for science teaching. International Journal of Science Education, 11, 1387–1408.
13. Lemke, J. L., (1990). Talking Science:Language, Learning and Values. New Jersey:Ablex.
14. Lipman, M., (1991). Thinking in Education. Cambridge:Cambridge University Press.
15. Lipman, M., Sharp, A. M., & Oscanyan, F. S., (1980). Philosophy in the Classroom. Philadelphia:Temple University Press.
16. Macdonald, C. A., (1990). School-based Learning Experience. Pretoria:Human Sciences Research Council. Pretoria, South Africa
17. Macdonald, C. A., (1991). Eager to Talk, Learn and Think:Bilingual Primary Education in South Africa. Cape Town:Maskew Miller Longman.
18. Mercer, N., Wegerif, R., & Dawes, L., (1999). Children's talk and the development of reasoning in the classroom. British Educational Research Journal, 25, (1) 95–111.
19. Naylor, S., & Keogh, B., (2000). Concept Cartoons in Science Education (the ConCISE Project). Sandbach, Cheshire:Millgate House.
20. Naylor, S., Downing, B., & Keogh, B., (2001). An empirical study in primary science, using Concept cartoons as the stimulus. European Science Education Research Association Conference, Thesssaloniki, Greece. www.conceptcartoons.com/2004/07/04. Downloaded April 2005.
21. Newton, P., Driver, R., & Osborne, J., (1999). The place of argumentation in the pedagogy of school science. International Journal of Science Education, 5, 553–576.
22. Norris, S. P., & Phillips, L. M., (2003). How literacy in its fundamental sense is central to scientific literacy. Science Education, 87, 224–240.
23. Osborne, J., Erduran, S., Simon, S., & Monk, M., (2001). Enhancing the quality of argument in school science. School Science Review, 82, 63–70.
24. Parvanno, C., (1990). Quoted in Hands On by J.Elder in Education Life, New York Times, Special supplement, January 7.
25. Perkins, D., (1994). The Hidden Order of Open-Ended Thinking. In J., Edwards (Ed.). Thinking:International Disciplinary Perspectives (83–96), Victoria:Hawker Brownlow Educational.
26. Popper, K., (1972). Conjectures and Refutations:The Growth of Scientific Knowledge. London:Routledge and Kegan Paul.
27. Russell, T., & Osborne, J., (1993). Constructivist research, curriculum development and practice in primary classrooms:Reflections on five years of activity in the Science Processes and Concept Exploration (SPACE) project. Paper presented at Third International Seminar on Misconceptions and Educational Strategies in Science and Mathematics. Cornell University, USA.
28. Selley, N., (2000). Wrong answers are welcome. School Science Review, 82, 41–44.
29. Shakespeare, D., (2003). Starting an argument in science lessons. School Science Review, 85, 103–108.
30. Simon, S., Erduran, S., & Osborne, J., (2002). Enhancing the quality of argumentation in school science. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the National Association for Research in Science Teaching. New Orleans, USA.
31. Toulmin, S., (1958). The uses of argument. United Kingdom:Cambridge University Press.
32. Webb, P., & Glover, H., (2004). Perspectives in Science and Mathematics Education. Port Elizabeth, South Africa:Bay Books.
33. Webb, P., & Treagust, D., (2006). Using exploratory talk to enchance problem-solving and reasoning skills in grade-7 science classrooms. Research in Science Education, 36 (4), 381–401.
34. Wegerif, R., Mercer, N., & Dawes, L., (1999). From social interaction to individual reasoning:An empirical investigation of a possible socio-cultural model of cognitive development. Learning and Instruction, 9, 493–516.
35. Wegrif, R., Mercer, N., & Dawes, L., (1999). Children's talk and development of reasoning in the classroom, British Educational Research Journal, (25) (1), 95–11.
36. Williams, Y., (2006). Concept cartoons and the development of argumentation in science classrooms. Unpublished MEd dissertation, Nelson Mandela Metropolitan University, Port Elizabeth.
37. Yore, L. D., & Treagust, D. F., (2006). Current realities and future possibilities:Language and science literacy—empowering research and informing instruction. Int. J. Sci. Educ., 29 (2–3), 291–314.
38. Yore, L. D., Bisanz, G. L., & Hand, B. M., (2003). Examining the literacy component of science literacy:25 years of language arts and science research. Int. J. Sci. Educ., 25 (6), 689–725.