How Science Teachers DiALoG Classrooms: Towards a Practical and Responsive Formative Assessment of Oral Argumentation (original) (raw)
Related papers
2018
We present lessons learned from an ongoing collaboration between researchers and practitioners to test and refine a teacher formative assessment tool named DiALoG (Diagnosing Argumentation Levels of Groups). DiALoG is a tablet-based instrument that enables teachers to score oral classroom argumentation in real time across multiple dimensions. Coupled with the DiALoG tool are Responsive Mini Lessons (RMLs), which provide follow-up lessons for teachers to act on assessment information from the tool to increase proficiency with the dimensions of argumentation assessed. Lessons learned include evidence that teachers’ use of DiALoG promotes attention to particular aspects of classroom interactions during argumentation sessions that the teachers had not previously considered, and along with the RMLs, may help fill gaps in their pedagogical content knowledge. Teacher feedback on the user interface has informed the design of future iterations of the formative assessment instrument.
Promoting Discourse and Argumentation in Science Teacher Education
Journal of Science Teacher Education, 2006
Given a sociocultural framework of teaching and learning, argumentation and discourse become central elements of education, particularly in science education because of argumentation's key role in scientific communities. This study documents preservice teachers' perceptions of and aptitudes related to argumentation as they participated in a science methods course designed to promote discourse and argumentation. Data sources consisted of instructor reflections, course documents, and student work. Participants tended to view argumentation as a central element of science and as a means for promoting conceptual development in science classrooms. They were generally adept in the construction of arguments, particularly with respect to the evidentiary support of claims and demonstrated improved practice as the course progressed. Implications for using this course as a model and suggestions for its improvement are discussed.
The Use and Effectiveness of an Argumentation and Evaluation Intervention in Science Classes
Journal of Science Education and Technology, 2014
This study explored teachers' use of the Argumentation and Evaluation Intervention (AEI) and associated graphic organizer to enhance the performance of students in middle and secondary science classrooms. The results reported here are from the third year of a design study during which the procedures were developed in collaboration with teachers. A quasi-experimental pretestposttest design with 8 experimental and 8 control teachers was used with a total of 282 students. An open-ended test assessed students' abilities to evaluate a scientific argument made in an article. The students were asked to identify the claim and its qualifiers, identify and evaluate the evidence given for the claim, examine the reasoning in support of the claim, consider counterarguments, and construct and explain a conclusion about the claim. The quality of students' responses was assessed using a scoring rubric for each step of the argumentation process. Findings indicated a significantly higher overall score and large effect size in favor of students who were instructed using the AEI compared to students who received traditional lecturediscussion instruction. Subgroup and subscale scores are also presented. Teacher satisfaction and student satisfaction and confidence levels are reported.
Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 2013
This article reports the outcomes of a project in which teachers' sought to develop their ability to use instructional practices associated with argumentation in the teaching of science-in particular, the use of more dialogic approach based on small group work and the consideration of ideas, evidence, and argument. The project worked with four secondary school science departments over 2 years with the aim of developing a more dialogic approach to the teaching of science as a common instructional practice within the school. To achieve this goal, two lead teachers in each school worked to improve the use of argumentation as an instructional practice by embedding activities in the school science curriculum and to develop their colleague's expertise across the curriculum for 11-to 16-yearold students. This research sought to identify: (a) whether such an approach using minimal support and professional development could lead to measurable difference in student outcomes, and (b) what changes in teachers' practice were achieved (reported elsewhere). To assess the effects on student learning and engagement, data were collected of students' conceptual understanding, reasoning, and attitudes toward science from both the experimental schools and a comparison sample using a set of standard instruments. Results show that few significant changes were found in students compared to the comparison sample. In this article, we report the findings and discuss what we argue are salient implications for teacher professional development and teacher learning. ß 2013 Wiley Periodicals, Inc. J Res Sci Teach 50: 2013
Education Sciences, 2020
In many studies, the focus has been on students' written scientific argumentation rather than on their spoken argumentation. The main aim of this study was to relate the quality of spoken argumentation to groups' learning achievement during a collaborative inquiry task. The data included video recordings of six groups of three upper secondary students performing a collaborative inquiry task in a virtual learning environment. The target groups were selected from a larger sample of 39 groups based on their group outcome: two low, two average, and two high-outcome groups. The analysis focused on argumentation chains during the students' discussions in the planning, experimentation, and conclusion phases of the inquiry task. The core of the coding scheme was based on Toulmin's levels of argumentation. The results revealed differences between the different groups of students, with the high-performing groups having more argumentation than the average and low-performing groups. In high-performing groups, the students asked topic-related questions more frequently, which started the argumentative discussion. Meanwhile, there were few questions in the low-performing groups, and most did not lead to discussion. An evaluation scheme for the quality of the arguments was created and the spoken argumentation was analyzed using a computer-based program. The results may be used to benefit subject teacher education and to raise teachers' awareness of their students' scientific, topic-related discussions.
Investigating the impact of automated feedback on students’ scientific argumentation
International Journal of Science Education, 2017
This study investigates the role of automated scoring and feedback in supporting students' construction of written scientific arguments while learning about factors that affect climate change in the classroom. The automated scoring and feedback technology was integrated into an online module. Students' written scientific argumentation occurred when they responded to structured argumentation prompts. After submitting the open-ended responses, students received scores generated by a scoring engine and written feedback associated with the scores in realtime. Using the log data that recorded argumentation scores as well as argument submission and revisions activities, we answer three research questions. First, how students behaved after receiving the feedback; second, whether and how students' revisions improved their argumentation scores; and third, did item difficulties shift with the availability of the automated feedback. Results showed that the majority of students (77%) made revisions after receiving the feedback, and students with higher initial scores were more likely to revise their responses. Students who revised had significantly higher final scores than those who did not, and each revision was associated with an average increase of 0.55 on the final scores. Analysis on item difficulty shifts showed that written scientific argumentation became easier after students used the automated feedback.
The pedagogy of argumentation in science education: science teachers’ instructional practices
International Journal of Science Education, 2017
Argumentation has been a prominent concern in science education research and a common goal in science curriculum in many countries over the past decade. With reference to this goal, policy documents burden responsibilities on science teachers, such as involving students in dialogues and being guides in students' spoken or written argumentation. Consequently, teachers' pedagogical practices regarding argumentation gain importance due to their impact on how they incorporate this scientific practice into their science classrooms. In this study, therefore, we investigated the instructional strategies adopted by science teachers for their argumentation-based science teaching. Participants were 1 elementary science teacher, 2 chemistry teachers, and 4 graduate students, who have a background in science education. The study took place during a graduate course, which was aimed at developing science teachers' theory and pedagogy of argumentation. Data sources included the participants' video-recorded classroom practices, audiorecorded reflections, post-interviews, and participants' written materials. The findings revealed three typologies of instructional strategies towards argumentation. They are named as argumentation specific pedagogical knowledge, meta-level pedagogical knowledge specific to argumentation, and meta-strategic knowledge specific to argumentation. Based on the findings of this study, it was concluded that through a cycle of reflective practice, the teachers adapted and developed instructional strategies to promote argumentation in their teaching practice. Moreover, the study provided a detailed coding framework for the exploration of science teachers' instructional practices while they are implementing argumentationbased lessons.
Learning to Teach Argumentation: Research and Development In the Science Classroom
International Journal of …, 2006
The research reported in this study focuses on an investigation into the teaching of argumentation in secondary science classrooms. Over a one-year period, a group of 12 teachers from schools in the greater London area attended a series of workshops to develop materials and strategies to support the teaching of argumentation in scientific contexts. Data were collected at the beginning and end of the year by audio and video recording lessons where the teachers attempted to implement argumentation. To assess the quality of argumentation, analytical tools derived from Toulmin"s argument pattern (TAP) were developed and applied to classroom transcripts. Analysis shows there was development in teachers" use of argumentation across the year. Results indicate that the pattern of use of argumentation is teacher-specific, as is the nature of change. To inform future professional development programmes, transcripts of five teachers, three showing a significant change and two no change, were analysed in more detail to identify features of teachers" oral contributions that facilitated and supported argumentation. The analysis showed that all teachers attempted to encourage a variety of processes involved in argumentation and that the teachers whose lessons included the highest quality of Argumentation -2 argumentation (TAP analysis) also encouraged higher order processes in their teaching.
Enhancing the quality of argumentation in school science
… of Research in Science …, 2004
The research reported in this paper focussed on the design of learning environments that support the teaching and learning of argumentation in a scientific context. The research took place over two years between 1999 and 2001 in junior high schools in the greater London area. The research was conducted in two phases. In the first developmental phase, working with a group of 12 science teachers, the main emphasis was to develop sets of materials and strategies to support argumentation in the classroom and to assess teachers' development with teaching argumentation. Data were collected by videoing and audio recording the teachers attempts to implement these lessons at the beginning and end of the year. During this phase, analytical tools for evaluating the quality of argumentation were developed based on Toulmin's argument pattern. Analysis of the data shows that there was significant development in the majority of teachers use of argumentation across the year. Results indicate that the pattern of use of argumentation is teacher specific, as is the nature of the change.
Eurasia Journal of Mathematics, Science and Technology Education, 2021
This article focuses on the integration of argumentation and digital technologies in science teacher education. We present theoretical reflections, results of empirical research, and description of innovative experiences with pre- and in-service biology teachers. Regarding argumentation, we analyse what defending a claim in science entails for teachers, the teaching strategies they (would) use in the classroom in relation to argumentation, the relevance that they attribute to the performance of different tasks for arguing, the subject content where argumentation fits more suitably, and the reasons they would consider in favour of arguing in science classes. For the analysis of educational practices that involve use of technologies, we adopt a perspective that looks at their complexity and recognises teachers as their creative authors. We discuss the way in which teachers (would) use technologies in their practice, their expectations around this, and the foreseen results with student...