The Quality of Students' Use of Evidence in Written Scientific Explanations

Sandoval, William A.; Millwood, Kelli A.

doi:10.1207/s1532690xci2301_2

Cited by 515 publications

(440 citation statements)

References 36 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

364

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Similar findings have been reported by Kuhn and Reiser (2006). Sandoval and Millwood (2005) propose that learners may believe data are self-evident, not requiring interpretation, or justification; or alternatively they may believe the teacher / instructor already know why the data are important, and therefore it only matters to include the data. Thus, engagement in argumentation in this task may have been influenced by whether participants perceived a need to explain their data.…”

Section: Task-specific Factorsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Sandoval and Millwood (2005) investigated high school students' selection and use of data in their scientific explanations, with results indicating that students had difficulties citing sufficient data and providing warrants for claims. Implications from this research suggest that students who display na¨ıve views of NOS may not provide explanations or warrants for their claims, thus influencing their ability to engage in scientific argumentation effectively.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

The influence of explicit nature of science and argumentation instruction on preservice primary teachers' views of nature of science

McDonald

2010

J Res Sci Teach

151

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

There exists a general consensus in the science education literature around the goal of enhancing learners' views of nature of science (NOS). An extensive body of research in the field has highlighted the effectiveness of explicit NOS instructional approaches in improving learners' NOS views. Emerging research has suggested that engaging learners in argumentation may aid in the development of their NOS views, although this claim lacks empirical support. This study assessed the influence of a science content course incorporating explicit NOS and argumentation instruction on five preservice primary teachers' views of NOS using multiple sources of data including questionnaires and surveys, interviews, audio-and video-taped class sessions, and written artifacts. Results indicated that the science content course was effective in enabling four of the five participants' views of NOS to be improved. A critical analysis of the

show abstract

Section: Task-specific Factorsmentioning

confidence: 99%

mentioning

confidence: 99%

The influence of explicit nature of science and argumentation instruction on preservice primary teachers' views of nature of science

McDonald

2010

J Res Sci Teach

151

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Given that studies of argumentation explained that even students in middle and high schools demonstrated the lack of high level components of argumentation such as warrants and backing (e.g. Sandoval and Millwood 2005), analyzing young children's argumentation by adapting the TAP analytical framework might not provide us meaningful understandings of young children's argumentation skills. As a result, there is a paucity of studies focusing on early elementary school students' argumentation in school science.…”

Section: Critique Of Toulmin's Argument Pattern: Is It Justified?mentioning

confidence: 99%

Toulmin’s argument pattern as a “horizon of possibilities” in the study of argumentation in science education

Erduran

2018

Cult Stud of Sci Educ

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Kim and Roth (this issue) purport to draw on the social-psychological theory of L. S. Vygotsky in order to investigate social relations in children's argumentation in science topics. The authors argue that the argumentation framework offered by Stephen Toulmin is limited in addressing social relations. The authors thus criticize Toulmin's Argument Pattern (TAP) as an analytical tool and propose to investigate the genesis of evidence-related practices (especially burden of proof) in second-and third-grade children by studying dialogical interactions. In this paper, I illustrate how Toulmin's framework can contribute to (a) the study of "social relations", and (b) provide an example utilizing a theoretical framework on social relations, namely Engeström's Activity Theory framework, and (c) describe how we have used the Activity Theory along with TAP in order to understand the development of argumentation in the practices of science educators. Overall, I will argue that TAP is not inherently incapable of addressing social relational aspects of argumentation in science education but rather that science education researchers can transform theoretical tools such as Toulmin's framework intended for other purposes for use in science education research.

show abstract

“…Such argumentation facilitates students in addressing reasons against problems or related issues [1]. The implementation practice of argumentation activities played an important role in developing the understanding of students towards science concepts [7].…”

Section: Argumentation For Science Learningmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Communication skills can be demonstrated through argumentation skills done by learners [1]. Modern reform in science education is to accentuate the context, activities, and scientific communication.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Improving Students’ Argumentation by Providing Analogical Mapping-Based Through Lab Inquiry for Science Class

Diniya

Rusdiana

2018

IOP Conf. Ser.: Mater. Sci. Eng.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract. Science education researchers will never stop looking for the best way in learning. This is based on the fact that research on this issue has been mostly conducted in 21 century, the present science subject is not only about transferring knowledge but also how the students obtain a knowledge directly. This paper is concerned with one kind of the learnings that can support the students to get a knowledge called as a learning-based on lab inquiry. In Lab Inquiry learning, the students directly experience and look for the solution from a phenomenon through particular ways thus the learning will be more meaningful. Those steps are as follows; observation, asking, conducting an experiment, concluding and communicating. All of them are mainly important includes the communicating step. Communication ability can be viewed from how a student can provide an argument. Argumentation ability of a student will be crucially better if there is a use of analogical mapping-based. In this literature study, it is therefore argued that the students' argumentation ability by that analogical mapping-based can be improved through Lab Inquiry.

show abstract

The Quality of Students' Use of Evidence in Written Scientific Explanations

Cited by 515 publications

References 36 publications

The influence of explicit nature of science and argumentation instruction on preservice primary teachers' views of nature of science

The influence of explicit nature of science and argumentation instruction on preservice primary teachers' views of nature of science

Toulmin’s argument pattern as a “horizon of possibilities” in the study of argumentation in science education

Improving Students’ Argumentation by Providing Analogical Mapping-Based Through Lab Inquiry for Science Class

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About