Perspectives on Scientific Argumentation: Theory, Practice and Research

Proceeding of the International Conference on Teacher Training and Education

---

Free download. Book file PDF easily for everyone and every device. You can download and read online Perspectives on Scientific Argumentation: Theory, Practice and Research file PDF Book only if you are registered here. And also you can download or read online all Book PDF file that related with Perspectives on Scientific Argumentation: Theory, Practice and Research book. Happy reading Perspectives on Scientific Argumentation: Theory, Practice and Research Bookeveryone. Download file Free Book PDF Perspectives on Scientific Argumentation: Theory, Practice and Research at Complete PDF Library. This Book have some digital formats such us :paperbook, ebook, kindle, epub, fb2 and another formats. Here is The CompletePDF Book Library. It's free to register here to get Book file PDF Perspectives on Scientific Argumentation: Theory, Practice and Research Pocket Guide.

Research in Science and Technological Education, 22 1 , Engaging junior college students in computer-mediated lessons using scaffolding strategies. Educational Media International, 29 2 , Strategic use of digital learning resources in designing e-lessons.

International Journal of Instructional Media, 33 2 , Chai, C. Epistemological beliefs on teaching and learning: a survey among pre-service teachers in Singapore. Educational Media International, 43 4 , An analysis of interaction and participation patterns in online community. Educational Technology and Society, 9 1 , Journal of Technology and Teacher Education. Gameplay habits among middle school students: A Descriptive Study.

Journal of Educational Technology Systems, 37 4 , Shalleh, M. Designing interactive learning: Lessons from video games. International Journal of Instructional Media, 36 4 , Issues in Educational Research, 20 2 , Afari, E. Global self-esteem and self-efficacy correlates: Relation of academic achievement and self-esteem among Emeriti students.

International Education Studies. Learning Environments Research, 16, — International Journal of Science and Environmental Education, 8, Facebook research from educational technology perspective: analysis of doctoral dissertations in US universities. Students' intention to use computer technology: a structural equation modelling analysis.

International Journal of Quantitative Research in Education, 3 , Liu, Y. Content analysis of the diagrammatic representations of primary science textbooks. Fullan, M. The new meaning of educational change 3rd ed. London: Routledge-Falmer.

Gilbert, J. Models and modelling: Routes to more authentic science education. International Journal of Science and mathematics Education, 2 2 , — Learning science through models and modelling. Tobin Eds. Dordrecht: Kluwer.

Emirates College for Advanced Education - Faculty Profile

Government of Rwanda GoR Poverty Reduction Strategy Paper, July. Hoban, G. Teacher learning for educational change. International Monetary Fund, Interim poverty reduction strategy paper for Rwanda. Jimenez-Aleixandre, M. Knowledge producers or knowledge consumers?

Argumentation and decision making about environmental management. International Journal of Science Education, 11, — Kaya, E. Adaptation of two argumentation tests in Turkish. Elementary Education Online, 13 3 , Pre-service science teachers understanding and evaluation of arguments. Puerto Rico. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 36 8 , Kuhn, D.

Coordinating own and other perspectives in argument. Thinking and Reasoning, 13, 90— Lave, J. Situated learning: Legitimate peripheral participation. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. La Velle, B. Argument and developments in the science curriculum. School Science Review, 88 , Lubben, F. International Journal of Science Education, 32 16 , — Mattern, N. Gender differences in science attitude- achievement relationships over time among white middle- school students.

Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 39, McNeill, K. Science Education, 93 2 , Table 1 exemplifies this interaction pattern.

S collected answers from the multiple students who raised their hands, here Matthew, Adam, Joseph, Jonathan, and Colby. That multiple students were raising their hands or calling out as Student 2 did suggests that they were eager to display their thinking, even when doing so was repetitive.

Publication details

For example, in line 8, Student 2 repeated Matthew's warrant that a bird that flies is alive. Moreover, students generally spoke directly to Mr. S, rather than to one another, which suggests they were mainly hoping to display their thinking to him. Throughout the discussion, Mr.

Staff Profile

S's feedback focused on recognizing and reiterating the students' ideas lines 5, 9, In some cases he clarified the students' contribution see line This move seemed to signal his understanding. In fact, Mr. The lack of a focus on accuracy was largely by design: His explicit purpose was to elicit students' ideas, not to drive them towards the canonical understanding. Still, the students' ideas were generally moving in that direction, so for the most part there was little tension between the objectives of eliciting student reasoning and making progress toward target concepts.

Occasionally Mr.

S emphasized the ideas that aligned more closely with the curricular objectives. S highlighted it: All right, lets talk about something he just said. He just said that you can be dead and still moving and his key thing was that it was moving by its own will or on its own accord, by itself line This validation of particular ideas brings Mr. For the most part, however, Mr. S focused on eliciting and clarifying student ideas, and he provided little validation. This introduces a sense of competition for opportunities to display understanding.

Within this competition, Mr. The chaining and focus on validation also made it possible for students to construct and display their own ideas, suggesting that this was a goal for Mr.

Quick links

Student participation in the discussion, such as Student 2 explaining that he had written an idea on his worksheet, suggests that they were also framing their role as knowledge construction and display. Within that student construction of ideas, Mr. S emphasized validation of particular ideas, suggesting he had an additional goal that students learn the canon.

S and the students understood that it was his role to choose the discussion topic by asking the questions and managing student contributions, including giving them permission to speak. Although these patterns appeared throughout the discussion, not all of the participants' actions align with them. This was divergent from the class's framing of the discussion in several ways: It was a student speaking to a student, without being recognized by the teacher; it was a challenge to a claim; and it requested that the student justify his thinking. Perhaps this unidentified student was questioning Jonathan's authority or perhaps he was looking for evidence.

In either case, we see a hint of another way the class might have framed a conversation: individuals could have challenged one another and supported their claims. However, the data suggest both individual and distributed mechanisms of framing and stability.

• Advances in Clinical Chemistry: 35
• Proceedings
• Case studies in participatory irrigation management, Page 273
• Information Technology and Business Process Reengineering: New Perspectives and Strategies
• Borel Equivalence Relations: Structure and Classification
• Japans New Middle Class: The Salary Man and His Family in a Tokyo Suburb