Argumentation in a Socioscientific Context and its Influence on Fundamental and Derived Science Literacies
- 617 Downloads
This study explored the effects of arguing to learn in a socioscientific context on the fundamental and derived components of reading, writing, and science understanding as integral parts of science literacy. We adopted mixed-methods in which the 1-group pretest–posttest design with supplemental interviews and questionnaires. The pretest evaluated the dependent variables (reading and writing scores), the treatment was arguing to learn about the global climate change issue, the posttest evaluated the dependent variables, and follow-up questionnaires and interviews informed the quantitative results. An intact grade six class (N = 28) at an urban elementary school located in central Taiwan was the participants. Analyses of the pretest–posttest gain scores and correlations between these outcomes revealed significant (p < 0.05) improvements in writing and associations among reading, writing, and arguing to learn. Interpretation of the qualitative data (interview and questionnaire responses) supported that argumentation as an instructional treatment focused on fundamental literacy could play a positive role in facilitating students’ enhanced science understanding (derived literacy).
KeywordsArgumentation Derived literacy Fundamental literacy Reading–writing activities
The authors would express our thanks to the grant sponsor: Ministry of Science and Technology in Taiwan (NSC96-2511-S-142-003-MY3), and Professor Larry Yore and Ms. Shari Yore for their kind and helpful advice in preparing this article.
- Chin, C.-C., Yang, W. C. & Tuan, H.-L. (2010). Exploring the impact of guided TAPping scientific reading-writing activity on sixth graders. Chinese Journal of Science Education, 18(5), 443–467.Google Scholar
- Jiménez-Aleixandre, M. P. & Erduran, S. (2008). Argumentation in science education: an overview. In S. Erduran & M. P. Jiménez-Aleixandre (Eds.), Argumentation in science education: perspectives from classroom-based research (pp. 3–27). Dordrecht, Netherlands: Springer.Google Scholar
- Saddler, B. & Andrade, H. (2004). The writing rubric. Educational Leadership, 10, 48–52.Google Scholar
- Strauss, A. L. & Corbin, J. M. (1998). Basics of qualitative research: techniques and procedures for developing grounded theory. Thousand Oaks, CA:Sage.Google Scholar
- Toulmin, S. (1958). The uses of argument. Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
- Wellington, J. & Osborne, J. (2001). Language and literacy in science education. Philadelphia: Open University Press.Google Scholar
- Yore, L. D. (2012). Science literacy for all—more than a slogan, logo, or rally flag! In K. C. D. Tan, M. Kim & S. Hwang (Eds.), Issues and challenges in science education research: moving forward (pp. 5–23). Dordrecht, Netherlands: Springer.Google Scholar
- Yore, L. D. & Tippett, C. D. (2015). Reading Science. In R. Gunstone (Ed.), Encyclopaedia of Science Education (pp. tba). Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Springer. doi: 10.1007/978-94-007-6165-0_130-2.