Chapter 7. Research and Practice on Science Teachers’ Continuous Professional Development in Argumentation

Zembal‐Saul, Carla; Vaishampayan, Abha

doi:10.1039/9781788012645-00142

Cited by 6 publications

(3 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Another research and development strand has emerged from the work of McNeil & Krajcik (2008, 2009, 2012) and McNeil et al (2006). Drawing from Toulmin’s (1958) argument pattern, McNeill & Krajcik (2008) developed a framework of claims, evidence, and reasoning (CER) to construct scientific explanations, 3 and this framework has received considerable attention in the literature and in school districts and schools (Anderson et al, 2018; Zembal-Saul &Vaishampayan, 2019). The claim is an assertion or conclusion that answers the original question, and the evidence is the data that supports the claim.…”

Section: Literature Review: Argumentation In Science and In Schoolsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Addressing an Unfulfilled Expectation: Teaching Students With Disabilities to Write Scientific Arguments

Paz

Levin

Butler

2023

Written Communication

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Students with disabilities (SWD) in general education science classes are expected to engage in the scientific practices and potentially in the writing of arguments drawn from evidence. Currently, however, there are few research-based instructional approaches for teaching argument writing for these students. The present article responds to this need through the application of an instructional model that promises to improve the ability of SWDs to write scientific arguments. We approach this work in multiple ways. First, we clarify our target group, students with high incidence disabilities (learning disability, ADHD, and students with speech and language impairments), and discuss common cognitive challenges they experience. We then explore the role of argumentation in science, review research on both experts’ (scientists’) and novices’ (students’) argument writing and highlight successful cognitive strategies for teaching argument writing with neurotypical learners. We further discuss SWDs’ general writing challenges and how researchers have improved their abilities to comprehend and evaluate scientific information and improve their domain-general writing. Cognitive apprenticeships appear advantageous for teaching SWDs science content and how to write scientific arguments, as this form of instruction begins with problem solving tasks that connect literacy (e.g., reading, writing, argumentation discourse) with epistemic reasoning in a given domain. We illustrate the potential of such apprenticeships by analyzing the conceptual quality of arguments written by three SWDs who participated in a larger quantitative study in which they and others showed improvement in the structure of their arguments. We end with suggestions for further research to expand the use of cognitive apprenticeships.

show abstract

Section: Literature Review: Argumentation In Science and In Schoolsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Addressing an Unfulfilled Expectation: Teaching Students With Disabilities to Write Scientific Arguments

Paz

Levin

Butler

2023

Written Communication

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…This revelation echoed the claim that the teacher is a facilitator and not an authority in teaching argumentation (Zohar, 2007 ). Understanding how teachers themselves engage with argumentation is paramount to its adoption in science education because “one must experience what it is like to come to understand the big ideas in science and the nature of science before s/he can be receptive to imagining the possibilities for designing opportunities for students’ science learning” (Zembal-Saul & Vaishampayan, 2019 , p.168). Recent research has also shown that science teachers’ professional learning, their pedagogical content knowledge, and students’ understanding of scientific concepts are positively correlated (Yang et al, 2020 ).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Some research has argued that teachers’ own experiences of learning science are limited to textbooks or exam syllabi and they have not learnt argumentation in their education trajectory (Sampson & Blanchard, 2012 ; Zembal-Saul & Vaishampayan, 2019 ). Since teaching argumentation is a higher-order skill which demands challenging one’s instructional practice in conceptual understanding as well as epistemic and social beliefs about learning (Zembal-Saul & Vaishampayan, 2019 ), it would not be prudent to rely on teachers to promote argumentation in classrooms if they themselves have no experience in engaging in scientific argumentation, or they are not supported to explore and understand this model and its potential for effective learning (Sampson & Blanchard, 2012 ; Zohar, 2007 ). Unsurprisingly, lack of pedagogical knowledge of teaching and supporting students in argumentation has been a common problem (Sampson & Blanchard, 2012 ).…”

Section: Literature Reviewmentioning

confidence: 99%

The Impact of Collaboration Between Science and Religious Education Teachers on Their Understanding and Views of Argumentation

Chan

Erduran

2022

Res Sci Educ

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Teachers’ understanding and teaching of argumentation is gaining more attention in science education research. However, little is known about how science teachers engage in argumentation with teachers of different subject taking an interdisciplinary perspective that may inspire new pedagogical ideas or strategies. In particular, the positioning of argumentation at the juncture of science and religion is rare. This paper reports an empirical study involving science and religious education (RE) teachers who collaborated on teaching argumentation in three secondary schools in England. Their interdisciplinary collaboration was sustained by a series of professional development sessions over 18 months. Analysis of the interview data unfolds how the teachers’ collaboration impacted their understanding of argumentation and views of teaching their subject. Through working relationally in exploring and teaching argumentation, the science teachers reflected more notable changes than their RE counterparts. Science teachers came to appreciate student voice in the learning process and the role of argumentation in fostering students’ scientific reasoning. The paper is a salient step to researching argumentation in a cross-curricular terrain, particularly in relation to RE. It also sheds light on how collaborating with teachers of another subject bolstered science teachers’ professional development and broke subject barriers.

show abstract

Recalibrating the evolution versus creationism debate for student learning: towards students’ evaluation of evidence in an argumentation task

Guilfoyle

Erduran

2021

International Journal of Science Education

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

There is substantial body of literature in science education focusing on students' understanding of the theory of evolution by natural selection. However, despite decades of research on the evolution versus creationism debate there is still widespread concern that particular misconceptions about evolution persist. The study aimed to recalibrate the evolution versus creationism debate by engaging students in an argumentation task where students can interpret evidence and reasons for why either position is justified or not, and on what basis. A card sort activity used to investigate the students' use of evidence and reasons. A sample of 77 students with an average age of 13 participated in the study in England in the context of a funded research project. The findings pointed to challenges and opportunities in teaching and learning of evolution through an argumentation task where alternative perspectives are drawn from both science and religious education. Furthermore, they illustrated how argumentation tasks can potentially provide a context for students to explore crosssubject topics. Research about the immersion of students in tasks that support their argumentation can generate understanding of students' reasoning, and ultimately such research may lead to the design of lesson resources to support students' engagement in science.

show abstract

Chapter 7. Research and Practice on Science Teachers’ Continuous Professional Development in Argumentation

Cited by 6 publications

References 0 publications

Addressing an Unfulfilled Expectation: Teaching Students With Disabilities to Write Scientific Arguments

Addressing an Unfulfilled Expectation: Teaching Students With Disabilities to Write Scientific Arguments

The Impact of Collaboration Between Science and Religious Education Teachers on Their Understanding and Views of Argumentation

Recalibrating the evolution versus creationism debate for student learning: towards students’ evaluation of evidence in an argumentation task

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About