Investigating students' engagement in epistemic and narrative practices of chemistry in the context of a story on gas behavior

Chemistry Education Research and Practice

Volumn 17, Issue 3, 2016, Pages 523-531

  Pabuccu, A ^a   Erduran, S ^b  

^a ABANT IZZET BAYSAL UNIVERSITY   (Turkey)

^b UNIVERSITY OF LIMERICK   (Ireland)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 85016615079     PISSN: None     EISSN: 11094028     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1039/c6rp00011h     Document Type: Article

References (50)

1. Abd-El-Khalick F., Bell R. L. and Lederman N. G., (1998), The nature of science and instructional practice: making the unnatural natural, Sci. Educ., 82 (4), 417-436
2. Alexopoulou E. and Driver R., (1996), Small-group discussion in physics: Peer interaction modes in pairs and fours, J. Res. Sci. Teach., 33 (10), 1099-1114
3. Aydeniz M., Pabuccu A., Cetin P. S. and Kaya E., (2012), Argumentation and students' conceptual understanding of properties and behaviors of gases, Int. J. Sci. Math. Educ., 10 (6), 1303-1324
4. Bachelard G., (1940), The philosophy of no, Paris: Paris University Press
5. Barron B., (2003), When smart groups fail, J. Learn. Sci., 12 (3), 307-359
6. Benson D. L., Wittrock M. C. and Baur M. E., (1993), Students' preconceptions of the nature of gases, J. Res. Sci. Teach., 30, 587-597
7. Bloome D., Puro P. and Theodorou E., (1989), Procedural display and classroom lessons, Curriculum Inq., 19, 265-291
8. Bostrom A., (2008), Narratives as tools in designing the school chemistry curriculum, Interchange, 39 (4), 391-423
9. Bruner J., (1990), Acts of Meaning, Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press
10. Cavagnetto A. R., (2010), Argument to foster scientific literacy, Rev. Educ. Res., 80 (3), 336-371
11. Cetin P. S., (2009), Effects of conceptual change oriented instruction on understanding of gases concepts, (Unpublished Doctorate Thesis), Ankara: The Middle East Technical University
12. Cetin P. S., (2014), Explicit argumentation instruction to facilitate conceptual understanding and argumentation skills, Research in Science & Technological Education, 32 (1), 1-20, DOI: 10.1080/02635143.2013.850071
13. Clough M. P., (2011), The story behind the science: bringing science and scientists to life in post-secondary science education, Sci. Educ., 20 (7), 701-717
14. Dinan F. J., (2005), Laboratory based case studies: closer to the real world, J. Coll. Sci. Teach., 35 (2), 27
15. Driver R., Newton P. and Osborne J., (2000), Establishing the norms of scientific argumentation in classrooms, Sci. Educ., 84 (3), 287-312
16. Duschl R. A. and Osborne J., (2002), Supporting and promoting argumentation discourse in science education, Studies in Science Education, 38 (1), 39-72
17. Erduran S., (2007), Special editorial: argument, discourse and interactivity, Sch. Sci. Rev., 88 (324), 29-30
18. Erduran S. and Garcia-Mila M., (2015), Epistemic practices and thinking in science: fostering teachers' development in scientific argumentation, in Wegeriff R., Kaufman P. and Li L. (ed.) Routledge Handbook of Research on Teaching Thinking, London: Routledge, pp. 388-401
19. Erduran S. and Jimenez-Aleixandre M. P. (ed.), (2008), Argumentation in Science Education: Perspectives from Classroom-Based Research, Dordrecht: Springer, p. 285
20. Erduran S. and Kaya E., (in press), Scientific argumentation and democratic values: an incompatible mix in school science curricula? Theor. Pract
21. Erduran S. and Msimanga A., (2014), Science curriculum reform in South Africa: lessons for professional development from research on argumentation in science education, Education as Change, 18 (S1), S33-S46
22. Erduran S. and Pabuccu A., (2012), Bonding chemistry and argument: supporting the teaching and learning of argumentation through chemistry storie's. Teacher and Student Resource, retrieved October 4th, 2015, from http://www.bristol.ac.uk/education/news/2012/63.html
23. Erduran S. and Pabuccu A., (2015), Promoting argumentation in the context of chemistry stories, in Eilks I. and Hofstein A. (ed.) Book Chapter in Relevant Chemistry Education, Rotterdam: Sense Publishers, ISBN Hardcover: 9789463001748, pp. 143-161
24. Erduran S., Simon S. and Osborne J., (2004), TAPping into argumentation: developments in the application of Toulmin's argument pattern for studying science discourse, Sci. Educ., 88 (6), 915-933
25. Erduran S., Ozdem Y. and Park J. Y., (2015), Research trends on argumentation in science education: A journal content analysis from 1998-2014, International Journal of STEM Education, 2 (5), 1-12, DOI: 10.1186/s40594-015-0020-1
26. Folino D. A., (2001), Stories and anecdotes in the chemistry classroom, J. Chem. Educ., 78 (12), 1615-1618
27. Gillies R. M. and Khan A., (2009), Promoting reasoned argumentation, problem-solving and learning during small-group work, Cambridge Journal of Education, 39 (1), 7-27
28. Gray R. and Kang N. H., (2014), The structure of scientific arguments by secondary science teachers: comparison of experimental and historical science topics, Int. J. Sci. Educ., 36 (1), 46-65
29. Hodson D., (1992), Assessment of practical work, Int. J. Sci. Educ., 14 (5), 541-562
30. Jimenez-Aleixandre M., (2008), Designing argumentation learning environments, in Erduran S. and Jimenez-Aleixandre M. (ed.) Argumentation in science education: perspectives from classroom-based research, New York, NY: Springer, pp. 91-116
31. Jimenez-Aleixandre M. P., Rodriguez A. B. and Duschl R. A., (2000), "Doing the Lesson" or "Doing Science": Argument in high school genetics, Sci. Educ., 84 (6), 757-792
32. John-Steiner V. (2000). Creative collaboration, New York: Oxford University Press
33. Jun-Young O., (2014), Understanding the alternative conceptions of pre-service secondary science teachers about tidal phenomena based on Toulmin's argumentation, Int. J. Sci. Math. Educ., 12 (2), 353-370
34. Kelly G. J. and Takao A., (2002), Epistemic levels in argument: an analysis of university oceanography students' use of evidence in writing, Sci. Educ., 86, 314-342
35. King D., Bellocchi A. and Ritchie S. M., (2008), Making connections: learning and teaching chemistry in context, Research in Science Education, 38 (3), 365-384
36. Norris S. and Phillips L., (2003), How literacy in its fundamental sense is central to scientific literacy, Sci. Educ., 87, 224-240
37. NRC, (2000), Inquiry and the National Science Education Standards, Washington DC: National Academy Press
38. Osborne J., Erduran S. and Simon S., (2004), Enhancing the quality of argumentation in school science, J. Res. Sci. Teach., 41 (10), 994-1020
39. Patricia Y. M. and Barry A. T., (1986), Grounded theory and organizational research, J. Appl. Behav. Sci., 22 (2), 141
40. Ricoeur P., (1981), Narrative time, in Mitchell W. J. T. (ed.) On Narrative, Chicago: Chicago University Press, pp. 165-186
41. Salomon G. and Globerson T., (1989), When teams do not function the way they ought to, Int. J. Educ. Res., 13 (1), 89-99
42. Sampson V. and Clark D. B., (2009), The impact of collaboration on the outcomes of scientific argumentation, Sci. Educ., 93 (3), 448-484
43. Sampson V. and Clark D. B., (2011), A comparison of the collaborative scientific argumentation practices of two high and two low performing groups, Research in Science Education, 41 (1), 63-97
44. Sandoval W. A., Bell P., Coleman E., Enyedy N. and Suthers D., (2000), Designing knowledge representations for learning epistemic practices of science, Paper presented at American Educational Research Association Conference, New Orleans, LA
45. Schank R. C. and Berman T. R., (2002), The pervasive role of stories in knowledge and action, in Green M. C., Strange J. J. and Brock T. C. (ed.), Narrative Impact: Social and Cognitive Foundations, Mahwah, New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, 287-314
46. Simon S., Erduran S. and Osborne J., (2006), Learning to teach argumentation; research and development in the science classroom, Int. J. Sci. Educ., 28 (2), 235-260
47. Strube P., (1996), Chemistry and narrative: Short stories and school chemistry, Research in Science Education, 26 (2), 247-255
48. Venville G. J. and Dawson V. M., (2010), The impact of a classroom intervention on grade 10 students' argumentation skills, informal reasoning, and conceptual understanding of science, J. Res. Sci. Teach., 47, 952-977
49. Wiebe R. and Stinner A., (2010), Using story to help student understanding of gas behavior, Interchange, 41 (4), 347-361
50. Xolocotzin U., Yeh S.-H. and Erduran S., (2016), Emotional modulation of perspective taking: implications for computer supported argumentation, in Tettegah S. and Espelage D. L. (ed.), Emotions, Technology and Behaviors, Communication of Feelings For, With and Through Media, Elsevier, pp. 3-20.