Argument Structure in the Science Writing Heuristic (SWH) Approach
2
조회
0
다운로드
3
인용
0
참고문헌
키워드
초록
The purpose of this study was to evaluate students’ written arguments embedded in scientific inquiry investigations using the Science Writing Heuristic (SWH) approach. Argument components defined in this study are questions, claims, questions-claims relationship, evidence, claims-evidence relationship, multiple modal representations, and reflection. A set of criteria for evaluating each argument component was developed to evaluate writing samples of students from college freshman general chemistry laboratory classes. Results indicate that students produced, on average, moderate to powerful questions, claims, and evidence. They also constructed reasonable questions-claims relationship and claims-evidence relationship. Compared to other component scores, the average score for reflection was relatively low. Overall, the average Total Argument score was 21.4 out of a possible 36, that is, the quality of the written arguments using the SWH approach during a series of inquiry-based chemistry laboratory investigations was moderate to powerful. The findings of this study suggest that students, on average, developed reasonable scientific arguments generated as part of scientific inquiry. In other words, students are capable of putting together reasonable arguments as they participate in inquiry-based laboratory classrooms.
Abstract
The purpose of this study was to evaluate students’ written arguments embedded in scientific inquiry investigations using the Science Writing Heuristic (SWH) approach. Argument components defined in this study are questions, claims, questions-claims relationship, evidence, claims-evidence relationship, multiple modal representations, and reflection. A set of criteria for evaluating each argument component was developed to evaluate writing samples of students from college freshman general chemistry laboratory classes. Results indicate that students produced, on average, moderate to powerful questions, claims, and evidence. They also constructed reasonable questions-claims relationship and claims-evidence relationship. Compared to other component scores, the average score for reflection was relatively low. Overall, the average Total Argument score was 21.4 out of a possible 36, that is, the quality of the written arguments using the SWH approach during a series of inquiry-based chemistry laboratory investigations was moderate to powerful. The findings of this study suggest that students, on average, developed reasonable scientific arguments generated as part of scientific inquiry. In other words, students are capable of putting together reasonable arguments as they participate in inquiry-based laboratory classrooms.
참고문헌 (42)
- American Association for the Advancement, "Benchmarks for science literacy" (1993), Oxford University Press
- Bazerman, C., "Shaping written knowledge: The genre and activity of the experimental article in science" (1988), University of Wisconsin Press
- Bell, P., "Scientific arguments as learning artifacts: Designing for learning from the web with KIE", International Journal of Science Education, 22, pp.797~817 (2000)
- Burke, K. A., "Implementing the Science Writing Heuristic in the chemistry laboratory", Journal of Chemical Education, 83(7), pp.1032~1038 (2006)
- Choi, A., "Examining Arguments Generated by Year 5, 7, and 10 Students in Science Classrooms", Research in Science Education, 40(2), pp.149~169 (2010)
- Driver, R., "Establishing the norms of scientific argumentation in classrooms", Science Education, 84, pp.287~312 (2000)
- Duschl, R. A., "Restructuring science education: The importance of theories and their development" (1990), Teacher's College Press
- Gardner, P. L., "identification of specific difficulties with logical connectives in science among secondary school students", Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 17(3), pp.223~229 (1980)
- Giere, R. N., "Understanding scientific reasoning (3rd ed.)" (1991), Rinehart & Winston
- Halliday, M. A. K., "Writing science: Literacy and discursive power" (1993), University of Pittsburgh Press
- Hand, B., "Inquiry Investigation: A new approach to laboratory reports", The Science Teacher, 66(4), pp.27~29 (1999)
- Hand, B., "Teachers implementing writing to learn strategies in junior secondary science: A case study", Science Education, 86(6), pp.737~755 (2002)
- Hand, B., "Using a Science Writing Heuristic to enhance learning outcomes from laboratory activities in seventh grad science: quantitative and qualitative aspects", International Journal of Science Education, 26(2), pp.131~149 (2004)
- Hohenshell, L. M., "Writing to learn strategies in secondary school cell biology: A mixed method study", International Journal of Science Education, 28(2-3), pp.261~289 (2006)
- Keys, C. W., "Revitalizing instruction in scientific genres: Connecting knowledge production with writing to learn in science", Science Education, 83, pp.115~130 (1999)
- Keys, C. W., "Investigating the thinking processes of eighth grade writers during the composition of a scientific laboratory report", Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 37(7), pp.676~690 (2000)
- Keys, C. W., "Using the Science Writing Huerisitic as a tool for learning from laboratory investigations in secondary science", Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 36(10), pp.1065~1084 (1999)
- Kelly, G. J., "The epistemological framing of a discipline: Writing science in university oceanography", Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 37, pp.691~718 (2000)
- Kelly, G. J., "Epistemic levels in argument: an analysis of university oceanography students' use of evidence in writing", Science Education, 86, pp.314~342 (2002)
- Klein, P., "Elementary students' strategies for writing to learn in science", Cognition and Instruction, 18(3), pp.317~348 (2000)
- Kuhn, D., "Science as argument: Implications for teaching and learning scientific thinking", Science Education, 77, pp.319~337 (1993)
- Lemke, J. L., "Talking science: language, learning, and values" (1990), Ablex
- National Research Council (NRC), "National science education standards" (1996), National Academy Press
- National Research Council (NRC), "Inquiry and the national science education standards" (2000), National Academy Press
- Newton, P., "The place of argumentation in the pedagogy of school science", International Journal of Science Education, 21(5), pp.553~576 (1999)
- Norris, S. P., "How literacy in its fundamental sense is central to scientific literacy", Science Education, 87, pp.224~240 (2003)
- Osborne, J., "Science without literacy: A ship without a sail?", Cambridge Journal of Education, 32(2), pp.203~218 (2002)
- Osborne, J., "Enhancing the quality of argumentation in school science", Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 41(10), pp.994~1020 (2004)
- Sandoval, W. A., "The quality of students' use of evidence in written scientific explanation", Cognition and Instruction, 23(1), pp.23~55 (2005)
- Sandoval, W. A., "Explanation driven inquiry: Integrating conceptual and epistemic scaffolds for scientific inquiry", Science Education, 88, pp.345~372 (2004)
- Shymansky, J. A., "The effects of new science curricula on student performance", Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 20, pp.387~404 (1983)
- Taylor, C., "Defining science" (1996), University of Wisconsin Press
- Toulmin, S., "The uses of argument" (1958), Cambridge University Press
- Toulmin, S., "An introduction to reasoning (2nd Ed.)" (1984), Macmillan
- Wallace, C. S., "An illumination of the roles of hands on activities, discussion, text reading, and writing in constructing biology knowledge in seventh grade", School Science and Mathematics, 104(2), pp.70~78 (2004)
- Wallace, C. S., "Introduction: Does writing promote learning in science?. in: Writing and learning in the science classroom", pp.1~8 (2004), Kluwer Academic Press
- Wellington, J., "Language and literacy in science education" (2001), Open University Press
- Willett, J. B., "A meta analysis of instructional systems applied in science teaching", Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 20, pp.405~417 (1983)
- Wise, K. C., "A meta analysis of the effects of various science teaching strategies on achievement", Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 20, pp.419~435 (1983)
- Wu, H., "Exploring visuospatial thinking in chemistry learning", Science Education, 88, pp.465~492 (2004)
- Yore, L. D., "Examining the literacy component of science literacy: 25 years of language arts and science research", International Journal of Science Education, 25(6), pp.689~725 (2003)
- Yore, L. D, "Current realities and future possibilities: Language and science literacy empowering research and informing instruction", International Journal of Science Education, 28, pp.291~314 (2006)