Baker, M. J. (2003). Computer-mediated argumentative interactions for the co-elaboration of scientific notions. In J. Andriessen, M. Baker, & D. Suthers (Eds.), Arguing to learn: Confronting cognitions in computer-supported collaborative learning environments (pp. 47–78). Dordrecht: Kluwer.
Bell, P. (2004). Promoting students’ argument construction and collaborative debate in the science classroom. In M. C. Linn, E. A. Davis, & P. Bell (Eds.), Internet environments for science education (pp. 115–144). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
Braet, A. (1999). The enthymeme in Aristotle’s rhetoric: From argumentation theory to logic. Informal Logic,
Bransford, J., Brown, A., & Cocking, R. (Eds.). (2000). How people learn: Brain, mind, experience and school. Washington, DC: National Research Council.
Carey, S. (2000). Science education as conceptual change. Journal of Applied Developmental Psychology,
Champagne, A., Klopfer, L., & Anderson J. (1980). Factors influencing the learning of classical mechanics. American Journal of Physics,
Chi, M. T. H., & Roscoe, R. D. (2002). The process and challenges of conceptual change. In M. Limon & L. Mason (Eds.), Reconsidering conceptual change: Issues in theory and practice (pp. 3–27). Dordrecht: Kluwer.
Damer, T. E. (2001). Attacking faulty reasoning (4th ed.). Belmont, CA: Wadsworth Thomson Learning.
Driver, R., Newton, P., & Osborne, J. (2000). Establishing the norms of scientific argumentation in classrooms. Science Education,
Duit, R. (1999). Conceptual change approaches in science education. In W. Schnotz, S. Vosniadou, & M. Carretero (Eds.), New perspectives on conceptual change (pp. 263–282). Oxford: Pergamon.
Duschl, R. (2007). Quality argumentation and epistemic criteria. In S. Erduran & M. Jiménez-Aleixandre (Eds.), Argumentation in science education: Perspectives from classroom-based research (pp. 159–175). Amsterdam: Springer.
Duschl, R. A., Ellenboger, K., & Erduran, S. (1999). Promoting argumentation in middle school science classrooms: A project SEPIA evaluation. Annual meeting of the national association for research in science teaching (March 28–31), Boston, MA.
Erduran, S. (2008). Methodological foundation of the study of argumentation in science classroom. In S. Erduran & M. P. Jimenez-Aleixandre (Eds.), Argumentation in science education: Perspectives from classroom-based research (pp. 47–69). Dordrecht: Springer.
Erduran, S., & Jimenez-Aleixandre, M. P. (Eds.). (2008). Argumentation in science education: Perspectives from classroom-based research. Dordrecht: Springer.
Guzzetti, B., Synder, T., Glass, G., & Gamas, W. (1993). Promoting conceptual change in science: A comparative meta-analysis of instructional interventions from reading education and science education. Reading Research Quarterly,
Hastings, A. C. (1963). A reformulation of the modes of reasoning in argumentation. PhD dissertation. Evanston, IL: Northwestern University.
Hewson, P. (1992). Conceptual change in science teaching and teacher education. Paper presented at a meeting on “research and curriculum development in science teaching”. Madrid, Spain: National Center for Educational Research, Documentation, and Assessment, Ministry for Education and Science.
Jimenez-Aleixandre, M. P., Rodriguez, A. B., & Duschl, R. A. (2000). “Doing the lesson’ or “doing science’: Argument in high school genetics. Science Education,
Juthe, A. (2005). Argument by analogy. Argumentation,
Juthe, A. (2009). Refutation by parallel argument. Argumentation,
Kelly, G. J., & Takao, A. (2002). Epistemic levels in argument: An analysis of university oceanography students’ use of evidence in writing. Science Education,
Keogh, B., & Naylor, S. (1996). Scientists and primary schools. Sandbach: Millgate House.
Koballa, T. (1992). Persuasion and attitude change in science education. Journal of Research in Science Teaching,
Konstantinidou, A. (2013). A new approach of middle school students’ spontaneous reasoning in science, using argumentation schemes as an analytical framework. PhD thesis.
Konstantinidou, A., Cerveró, J. M., & Castells, M. (2010). Argumentation and scientific reasoning: The “double hierarchy” argument. In M. F. Taşar & G. Çakmakcı (Eds.), Contemporary science education research: Scientific literacy and social aspects of science (pp. 61–70). Ankara, Turkey: Pegem Akademi.
Levi, D. (1995). The case of the missing premise. Informal Logic,
Limón, M. (2001). On the cognitive conflict as an instructional strategy for conceptual change: A critical appraisal. Learning and Instruction,
Macagno, F., & Walton, D. (2009). Argument from analogy in law, the classical tradition, and recent theories. Philosophy and Rhetoric,
Martins, I., et al. (2001). Rhetoric and science education. In H. Behrendt, et al. (Eds.), Research in science education—Past, present, and future (pp. 189–198). Amsterdam: Kluwer.
Mestre, J. P. (1994). Cognitive aspects of learning and teaching science. In S. J. Fitzsimmons & L. C. Kerpelman (Eds.), Teacher enhancement for elementary and secondary science and mathematics: Status, issues, and problems (pp. 31–53). Arlington: National Science Foundation.
Nussbaum, M. (2011). Argumentation, dialogue theory, and probability modeling: Alternative frameworks for argumentation research in education. Educational Psychologist,
Osborne, J. (2005). The role of argument in science education. Research and the Quality of Science Education,
Osborne, J. (2010). Arguing to learn in science: The role of collaborative, critical discourse. Science,
Osborne, J., Erduran, S., & Simon, S. (2004). Enhancing the quality of argumentation in school science. Journal of Research in Science Teaching,
Ozdem, Y., Ertepinar, H., Cakiroglu, J., & Erduran, S. (2011). The nature of pre-service science teachers’ argumentation in inquiry-oriented laboratory context. International Journal of Science Education. doi:10.1080/09500693.2011.611835.
Pera, M., & Sahea, W. (1991). Persuading science. Canton, MA: Science History.
Posner, G., Strike, K., Hewson, P., & Gertzog, W. (1982). Accommodation of s scientific conception: Towards a theory of conceptual change. Science Education,
Roschelle, J. (1995). Learning in interactive environments: Prior knowledge and new experience. In J. H. Falk & L. D. Dierking (Eds.), Public institutions for personal learning: Establishing a research agenda (pp. 37–51). Washington, DC: American Association of Museums.
Sampson, V., & Clark, D. (2008). Assessment of the ways students generate arguments in science education: Current perspectives and recommendations for future directions. Science Education,
Sandoval, W., & Millwood, K. (2005). The quality of students’ use of evidence in written scientific explanations. Cognition and Instruction,
Schwarz, B., & De Groot, R. (2007). Argumentation in a changing world. Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning,
Simon, S. (2008). Using Toulmin’s argument pattern in the evaluation of argumentation in school science. International Journal of Research and Method in Education,
Simon, S., & Richardson, K. (2009). Argumentation in school science: Breaking the tradition of authoritative exposition through a pedagogy that promotes discussion and reasoning. Argumentation,
Songer, N. B., & Linn, M. C. (1991). How do students’ views of science influence knowledge integration? Journal of Research in Science Teaching,
Southerland, S., Sinatra, G., & Matthews, M. (2001). Belief, knowledge, and science education. Educational Psychology Review,
Stump, E. (trans.) (1988). In Ciceronis Topica. New York: Cornell University Press.
Sutton, C. (1996). The scientific model as a form of speech. In G. Welford, J. Osborne, & P. Scott (Eds.), Research in science education in Europe (pp. 143–152). London: Falmer Press.
Toulmin, S. E. (1958). The uses of argument. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Toulmin, S. E., Rieke, R., & Janik, A. (1984). An introduction to reasoning (2nd ed.). New York: Macmillan.
Walton, D. (1995). A pragmatic theory of fallacy. Tuscaloosa and London: The University of Alabama Press.
Walton, D., & Macagno, F. (2006). Argumentative reasoning patterns. In Proceedings of ECAI conference 2006 (pp. 1–5). Riva del Garda, 28 August–2 September 2006. Amsterdam: IOS Press.
Walton, D., & Reed, C. (2005). Argumentation schemes and enthymemes. Synthese,
Walton, D., Reed, C., & Macagno, F. (2008). Argumentation schemes. New York: Cambridge University Press.