Argument-Driven Inquiry: An Introduction to a New Instructional Model for Use in Undergraduate Chemistry Labs

Walker, Joi Phelps; Sampson, Victor; Zimmerman, Carol O.

doi:10.1021/ed100622h

Cited by 108 publications

(117 citation statements)

References 34 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

107

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…The current study also shows that after argumentation training, students' argumentation skills had statistically changed. In Walker et al (2010), it was found that after the study applied the ADI method, there was a significant difference between students using the ADI method and those using the traditional laboratory method regarding their use of evidence and reasoning skills. But unlike these studies, Osborne et al (2004) found no significant difference between the groups at the end of the study in terms of argumentation levels.…”

Section: Discussion On the Argumentation Levelmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…It was believed that this study could help individuals with difficulties in scientific inquiry, argumentation, and their use in the classroom by providing information about scientific inquiry and argumentation. Although science laboratory practices aim to provide concrete experiences, activate experiential learning, increase student knowledge, and provide meaningful and permanent learning, the "cookbook" approach in traditional laboratory practices hinders science classes from reaching their goals (Hoffstein & Lunetta, 2004;Schen, 2007;Walker, Sampson, Grooms, Anderson, & Zimmerman, 2010). Similarly, the traditional deductive laboratory approach which explicitly gives information on how to carry out an experiment, collect and analyze the data, and indirectly tells what results should be found in relation to the theoretical knowledge is also widely used in Turkey (Aydoğdu & Ergin, 2008;Feyzioğlu et al, 2011;Yağbasan & Kanlı, 2008).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…It creates a classroom atmosphere that provides a cultural process for the teaching of science (Sampson, 2009). This model is designed to make laboratory instruction more informative and to plan scientific inquiry which includes argument development through research questions (Sampson, 2009;Sampson & Gleim, 2009;Walker et al, 2010). This method gives students an opportunity to generate an argument in the direction of their own questions, to assert methods for finding answers to those questions, and to design the research through group work.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…This method gives students an opportunity to generate an argument in the direction of their own questions, to assert methods for finding answers to those questions, and to design the research through group work. It provides students with an opportunity to evaluate the validity and reliability of their data, and to spend time on key concepts and ideas in order to form a deep understanding (Sampson, 2009;Sampson & Gleim, 2009;Walker et al, 2010). ADI is different from other methods in that it provides students with a chance to design their research and find results on their own, as well as to engage in the argumentation process where they can share and support their ideas.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

Investigating the Effect of Argument-Driven Inquiry in Laboratory Instruction

2015

EDUC SCI-THEOR PRACT

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The aim of this study is to investigate the effect of argument-driven inquiry (ADI) based laboratory instruction on the academic achievement, argumentativeness, science process skills, and argumentation levels of pre-service science teachers in the General Physics Laboratory III class. The study was conducted with 79 pre-service science teachers. The participants in the control group (n = 38) participated in traditional laboratory activities, and the participants in the experimental group (n = 41) participated in laboratory activities based on argumentdriven inquiry. Data was collected through the Optical Achievement Test (OAT), Argumentative Scale (AS), Science Process Skills Test (SPST) and the individual reports of the participants. Qualitative and quantitative techniques were used together to analyze the data. The results showed that argument-driven inquiry was more effective in improving the academic achievement and science process skills of pre-service science teachers compared to traditional laboratory instruction, but no significant difference was observed in the Argumentative Scale scores between the groups that had ADI instruction and those that had traditional laboratory instruction. Towards the end of the treatment, there was an improvement in the argumentative quality of the experimental group, but there was no change in the argumentation quality of the control group. ADI is an effective method for improving the academic achievement and science process skills of students, and it could be adapted for other laboratory classes. Argumentativeness might be improved with a longer argumentation session and more laboratory activities.

show abstract

Section: Discussion On the Argumentation Levelmentioning

confidence: 99%

mentioning

confidence: 99%

mentioning

confidence: 99%

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Investigating the Effect of Argument-Driven Inquiry in Laboratory Instruction

2015

EDUC SCI-THEOR PRACT

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Students are given information on how to do this type of experiment. Most of the time they do not even think about the steps (Hofstein et al, 2008;Hofstein & Lunetta, 2004;Walker, Sampson, Grooms, Anderson, & Zimmerman, 2010;Walker, Sampson, Grooms, & Zimmerman, 2011;Walker, 2011).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Effect of Argumentation on Prospective Science Teachers' Scientific Process Skills and Their Understanding of Nature of Scientific Knowledge in Chemistry Laboratory

Şekerci¹,

Canpolat²

2015

UNIBULLETIN

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The aim of this research is to analyze the effect of Argumentation on prospective science teachers' scientific process skills and their understanding of the nature of scientific knowledge in the chemistry laboratory. In this study, non-equivalent pre-test post-test control group approach, which is one of the quasi-experimental methods, is used. The study group contains 91 college freshmen students studying in the Department of Science Education of the Kazim Karabekir Education Faculty, Ataturk University, which is located in the Eastern Anatolian Region of Turkey. Data of the study is collected through scientific process skill test (SPST) and the nature of scientific knowledge test (NSKT). Data from SPST and NSKT are analyzed through inferential statistics method. A statistically significant difference is found between experimental and control groups' SPS post-test mean scores (t (89) = 4.943; p= .000). A statistically significant difference is found between experimental and control groups' NSK post-test mean scores (t(89)= .819; p= .05). It is shown in this study that the argumentation contributes to the scientific process skills of the students, but does not have a significant influence on their understanding of the nature of scientific knowledge.

show abstract

Changing Perspectives on the Undergraduate Chemistry Curriculum

Goedhart¹

2015

Chemistry Education

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In this chapter, I will discuss the role of universities in this changing world, and more particularly how we can train future chemists in such a way that they are adequately equipped to contribute to meet these future challenges. This chapter describes how ideas about teaching and curriculum in universities have changed over the last decades. Although some ideas have influenced the way we teach chemistry in the undergraduate curriculum, the way the curriculum is structured in courses has stayed more or less unchanged. I will present a new division of chemistry from a competency-based perspective, which can be used as the basis for the structure of a new curriculum. The Traditional Undergraduate CurriculumI begin this chapter with a characterization of what I call the "traditional curriculum" for undergraduate chemistry programs at colleges and universities. Hake [1] defines traditional courses as "[courses that] make little or no use of IE [interactive-engagement] methods, relying primarily on passive-student lectures, recipe labs, and algorithmic-problem exams" (p. 65). Hake's wordings make clear that the word "traditional" has a negative connotation, but I will use the word "traditional" in a more neutral sense to describe teaching methods that have a long history. In this meaning, the word "traditional" opposes "modern" teaching methods, which have become popular during the last decades, but I realize that a sharp distinction between "traditional" and "recent" cannot be made.In this chapter, I will use the description of curriculum given by Hass [2]. Hass states that a curriculum means "all of the experiences that individual learners have in a program of education whose purpose is to achieve broad goals and related specific objectives, which is planned in terms of a framework of theory and research or past and present professional practice" (p. 5). Also, other authors define curriculum broadly, including all decisions taken in a school to enable the learning of students. This involves the attainment targets of the entire program and objectives of individual courses, the organization of the program in subjects and courses, the

show abstract

Argument-Driven Inquiry: An Introduction to a New Instructional Model for Use in Undergraduate Chemistry Labs

Cited by 108 publications

References 34 publications

Investigating the Effect of Argument-Driven Inquiry in Laboratory Instruction

Investigating the Effect of Argument-Driven Inquiry in Laboratory Instruction

Effect of Argumentation on Prospective Science Teachers' Scientific Process Skills and Their Understanding of Nature of Scientific Knowledge in Chemistry Laboratory

Changing Perspectives on the Undergraduate Chemistry Curriculum

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About