Challenges and Remedies for Identifying and Classifying Argumentation Schemes
- 513 Downloads
The development of a framework for coding argumentations schemes in the transcripts of classroom dialogical deliberations on controversial, socioscientific topics is described. Arriving at a coding framework involved resolving a number of complex issues and challenges that are discussed in order to create practical remedies. The description of the development process is based on audio recordings and written exchanges between the authors as they attempted to resolve differences in the interpretation and application of argumentation schemes (Walton et al. 2008). These deliberations address theoretical and practical concerns for adapting notions of argumentation schemes to the practical context of analyzing authentic classroom interactions. The framework was developed to accommodate research and curriculum development in school science education. A practical framework for analyzing argumentation in authentic classroom contexts is proposed and implications for science education and argumentation theory are raised.
KeywordsArgumentation schemes Science education Scientific literacy
We are grateful to the three anonymous reviewers for useful suggestions and criticisms on earlier versions of this article.
- Alberta Education. 2006. Knowledge and employability science grades 8 and 9. http://education.alberta.ca/media/791899/sci89_06.pdf.
- American Association for the Advancement of Science. 2000. Designs for science literacy, Project 2061. Washington DC: National Science Teachers Association.Google Scholar
- Amgen Canada Incorporated and Let’s Talk Science. 2012. Spotlight on science learning—A benchmark of Canadian talent Accessed from Let’s Talk Science. http://www.letstalkscience.ca/component/flippingbook/book/3.html?tmpl=component.
- Aubusson, P.J., A.G. Harrison, and S.M. Ritchie (eds.). 2006. Metaphor and analogy in science education. Dordrecht, Netherlands: Springer.Google Scholar
- BC Ministry of Education. 2008. Science Grade 7-10. Victoria BC. http://www.bced.gov.bc.ca/irp/pdfs/sciences/2006sci_8.pdf.
- Çakmakci, G. and Taşar, M.F. (Eds.). 2010. Contemporary science education research: scientific literacy and social aspects of science. ESERA. Ankara, Turkey: Pegem Akademi. http://www.esera.org/media/conferences/Book5.pdf.
- Council of Ministers of Education. 1997. Common Framework of Science Learning Outcomes. http://publications.cmec.ca/science/framework/Pages/english/CMEC%20Eng.html.
- de Vreese, L. 2006. Causal pluralism and scientific knowledge: An underexposed problem. Philosophica 77 (2006) pp. 125–150. https://biblio.ugent.be/input/download?func=downloadFile&recordOId=732209&fileOId=762677. Accessed 27 Sept 2013.
- Duschl, R. 2008. Quality argumentation and epistemic criteria. In Argumentation in Science Education, ed. S. Erdurans, and M.P. Jimenez-Aleixandre, 159–175. Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Springer.Google Scholar
- Erdurans, S. 2008. Methodological foundations in the study of argumentation in science classrooms. In Argumentation in Science Education, ed. Sibel Erdurans, and M.P. Jimenez-Aleixandre, 47–69. Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Springer.Google Scholar
- Erduran, S., and M.P. Jimenez-Aleixandre (eds.). 2008. Argumentation in science education: recent development and future directions. Dordrecht: Springer.Google Scholar
- Fullan, M. 2001. The new meaning of educational change. New York: Teachers College Press.Google Scholar
- Garfield, J.B. 2003. Assessing statistical reasoning. Statistics Education Research Journal 2(1): 22–38. http://fehps.une.edu.au/serj. Accessed 19 Sept 2012.
- Godden, D., and D. Walton. 2007. Advances in the theory of argumentation schemes and critical questions. Informal Logic 27(3): 267–292.Google Scholar
- Kim, M., R. Anthony and D. Blades. 2012. Argumentation as a tool to understand complexity of knowledge integration. Proceedings 2nd International STEM in Education Conference http://stem2012.bnu.edu.cn/stem/paper.html. pp 153–161.
- Lemke, J.L. 1990. Talking science: Language, learning and values. Westport, CT: Ablex.Google Scholar
- National Research Council. 2012. A framework for K-12 science education: Practices, crosscutting concepts, and core ideas. Washington, D.C: The National Academies Press.Google Scholar
- OECD. 2007. PISA 2006: Science Competencies for Tomorrow’s World, Volume1: Analysis. http://www.pisa.oecd.org/dataoecd/30/17/39703267.pdf. Accessed 20 July 2012.
- Province of Manitoba. 2013. An Action plan for science education. http://www.edu.gov.mb.ca/k12/cur/science/action_plan/edu_initiative.html. Accessed 11 June 2013.
- Roberts, R., and R. Gott. 2010. A framework for practical work, argumentation and scientific literacy. In Contemporary Science Education Research: Scientific literacy and social aspects of science, eds. G. Çakmakci and M.F. Tașar, 99–106. ESERA. Ankara, Turkey: Pegem Akademi. http://www.esera.org/media/conferences/Book5.pdf.
- Sampson, V., and D. Clark. 2006. Assessment of argument in science education: A critical review of the Literature. In Proceedings of the Seventh International Conference of the Learning Sciences—Making a Difference, eds. S. A. Barab, K. E. Hay, and D. T. Hickey, 655–661. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum. http://dl.acm.org/citation.cfm?id=1150129. Accessed 20 July 2012.
- Sandoval, W. A., and P. Bell (Eds.). 2004. Design-based research methods for studying learning in context. [Introduction-Special Issue] Educational Psychologist, 39(4): 199-201.Google Scholar
- Scheid, N. 2010. Pre-service teachers’ ideas and knowledge about the notion of argument—a metacognitive approach. In Contemporary Science Education Research: Scientific literacy and social aspects of science, eds. G. Çakmakci and M.F. Tașar, 87–98. ESERA. Ankara, Turkey: Pegem Akademi.Google Scholar
- Toulmin, S. 1958/2003. The uses of argument (updated edition). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
- UNESCO. 1999 Science and Technology Education. http://unesdoc.unesco.org/images/0011/001180/118048eo.pdf. Accessed 9 Oct 2013.
- van Eemeren, F.H., and R. Grootendorst. 2004. A systematic theory of argumentation: The pragma-dialectical approach. Cambridge, MA: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
- Walton, D. 1996. Argumentation schemes for presumptive reasoning. Mahwah: Erlbaum Associates.Google Scholar
- Walton, D. 2006. Fundamentals of critical argumentation. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
- Wellington, J., and J. Osborne. 2001. Language and literacy in science education. Philadelphia, PA: Open University Press.Google Scholar