Quality, Evolution, and Positional Change of University Students’ Argumentation Patterns About Organic Agriculture During an Argument–Critique–Argument Experience
- 459 Downloads
The purpose of this study was to investigate the quality, evolution, and position of university students’ argumentation about organic agriculture over a 4-week argument–critique–argument e-learning experience embedded in a first year university biology course. The participants (N = 43) were classified into three groups based on their epistemological views. Data collected from individual arguments, group deliberations, and individual critiques were coded and analyzed to establish the quality and evolution of argumentation. Results indicated significant improvement in the quality of their justifications between the first and second arguments. Post-hoc comparison of epistemological groups indicated that the more constructivist-oriented students had a greater significant evolution of their justifications than the more empiricist-oriented students, but there was no significant main effect for epistemological orientation. Qualitative analysis of the intervening critiques indicated that some students incorporated or used other students’ arguments or counter-arguments to change their position or to enhance the justification of their original position on organic agriculture, while others appeared to be locked into a confirmation-bias stance and search for evidence that supported their original position and disregarded contradictory evidence.
KEY WORDSargument–critique–argument e-learning organic agriculture socio-scientific issue
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
- Aydeniz, M., Pabuccu, A., Cetin, P. S. & Kaya, E. (2012). Argumentation and students’ conceptual understanding of properties and behaviors of gases. International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education. doi: 10.1007/s10763-012-9336-1. Advance online publication.
- Berland, L. K. & Lee, V. R. (2012). In pursuit of consensus: Disagreement and legitimization during small-group argumentation. International Journal of Science Education. doi: 10.1080/09500693.2011.645086. Advance online publication.
- Clark, D. B., Sampson, V., Chang, H.-Y., Zhang, H., Tate, E. D. & Schwendimann, B. (2012). Research on critique and argumentation from the technology enhanced learning in science center. In M. Khine (Ed.), Perspectives on scientific argumentation: Theory, practice and research (pp. 157–199). Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Creswell, J. W. (2012). Educational research: Planning, conducting, and evaluating quantitative and qualitative research. Boston: Pearson.Google Scholar
- Day, S. P. & Bryce, T. G. K. (2012). The benefits of cooperative learning to socio-scientific discussion in secondary school science. International Journal of Science Education. doi: 10.1080/09500693.2011.642324. Advance online publication.
- Erduran, S. & Jiménez-Aleixandre, M. P. (2008). Argumentation in science education: Perspectives from classroom-based research. Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Springer.Google Scholar
- Erduran, S., Ozdem, Y. & Park, J.Y. (2012, April). Research on argumentation in science education: A content analysis of key journals. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the American Educational Research Association, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada.Google Scholar
- Erduran, S. & Villamanan, R. (2009). Cool argument: Investigating the epistemic levels and argument quality in engineering students’ written arguments about the peltier effect in refrigeration. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the National Association for Research in Science Teaching, Garden Grove, CA, USA.Google Scholar
- Ford, C. L. & Yore, L. D. (2012). Toward convergence of metacognition, reflection, and critical thinking: Illustrations from natural and social sciences teacher education and classroom practice. In A. Zohar & J. Dori (Eds.), Metacognition in science education: Trends in current research (pp. 251-271). Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Springer.Google Scholar
- Gilabert, S., Garcia-Mila, M. & Felton, M. K. (2012). The effect of task instructions on students’ use of repetition in argumentative discourse. International Journal of Science Education. doi: 10.1080/09500693.2012.663191. Advance online publication.
- Horng, R. Y., Lu, P. H., Chen, P. H. & Hou, S. H. (2012). The effects of argument stance on scientific knowledge inquiry skills. International Journal of Science Education. doi: 10.1080/09500693.2012.671558. Advance online publication.
- Jiménez-Aleixandre, M. P. & Pereiro-Munoz, C. (2005). Argument construction and change while working on a real environment problem. In K. Boersma, M. Goedhart, O. de Jong & H. Eijkelhof (Eds.), Research and the quality of science education. Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Springer.Google Scholar
- National Research Council (2012). In H. Quinn, H. A. Schweingruber & T. Keller (Eds.), A framework for K-12 science education: Practices, crosscutting concepts, and core ideas. Washington, DC: National Academies Press.Google Scholar
- Osborne, J., Henderson, B., MacPherson, A. & Szu, E. (2012, April). Assessing scientific argumentation by middle school pupils and testing a learning progression for argumentation. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the American Educational Research Association, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada.Google Scholar
- Teed, S. M., Zandvliet, D. V. & Ormond, C. G. A. (2011). Enhancing science education through an online repository of controversial, socioscientific news stories. In L. D. Yore, E. Van der Flier-Keller, D. W. Blades, T. W. Pelton & D. B. Zandvliet (Eds.), Pacific CRYSTAL centre for science, mathematics, and technology literacy: Lessons learned (pp. 149–163). Rotterdam, The Netherlands: Sense.Google Scholar
- Toulmin, S. (1958). The uses of argument. Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
- Wu, Y.-T. & Tsai, C.-C. (2012). The effects of university students’ argumentation on socio-scientific issues via on-line discussion in their informal reasoning regarding this issue. In M. Khine (Ed.), Perspectives on scientific argumentation: Theory, practice and research (pp. 221–234). Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Springer.CrossRefGoogle 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, The Netherlands: Springer.Google Scholar
- Yore, L. D., Bisanz, G. L. & Hand, B. M. (2003). Examining the literacy component of science literacy: 25 years of language arts and science research. International Journal of Science Education, 25(6), 689-725.Google Scholar
- Zeidler, D. L. & Sadler, T. D. (2008). The role of moral reasoning in argumentation: Conscience, character, and care. In S. Erduran & M.-P. Jiménez-Aleixandre (Eds.), Argumentation in science education: Recent developments and future directions (pp. 201–216). New York, NY: Springer.Google Scholar