Abstract
The teaching of argumentation has been advocated as a significant goal for science education worldwide. Argumentation involves the coordination of evidence and theory to support or refute an explanatory conclusion, model or prediction. Even though argumentation has gained popularity as a pedagogical strategy, there is limited understanding of how enculturation into pedagogical practices around argumentation influences science teachers. The main objective of this chapter is to present a case study of two middle-school science teachers who participated, over 5 years, in various school-based research projects on argumentation ranging from basic research in teaching and learning to the development of professional development programs for training teachers in argumentation. The projects took place between 1999 and 2004 in the United Kingdom. The teachers were asked to reflect as a pair on various aspects of teaching and learning of argumentation. The results address the teachers’ views and knowledge of argumentation, their perceptions of the goals, constraints and successes in their teaching of argumentation, their perceptions of themselves as learners and teachers, and their reflections on the professional development that they received. Implications for professional development of pre-service and in-service teachers are discussed
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Preview
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
References
Billig, M. (1987). Arguing and thinking: A rhetorical approach to social psychology Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Cochran-Smith, M., & Lytle, S. L. (1999). Relationships of knowledge and practice: Teacher learning in communities. In, A. Iran-Nejad, & C. D. Pearson (Eds.), Review of research in education, vol. 24, pp. 249–305. Washington, DC: American Educational Research Association.
Driver, R., Newton, P., & Osborne, J. (2000). Establishing the norms of argumentation in classrooms. Science Education, 84(3), 287–312.
Duschl, R., & Osborne, J. (2002). Supporting and promoting argumentation discourse. Studies in Science Education, 38, 39–72.
Erduran, S. (Ed.) (2007). Argument, discourse and interactivity. Special Issue. School Science Review, 88(324).
Erduran, S. (2006a). Argumentation in initial teacher training: Empowering prospective chemistry teachers with evidence and justification. In, I. Eilks, & B. Ralle (Eds.), Towards research-based science teacher education, pp. 41–52. Aachen: Shaker Verlag.
Erduran, S. (2006b). Promoting ideas, evidence and argument ininitial teacher training. School Science Review, 87(321), 45–50.
Erduran, S., & Jimenez-Aleixandre, M. P. (Eds.) (in press). Argumentation in science education: Perspectives from Classroom-Based Research. Dordrecht: Springer Academic Publishers.
Erduran, S., & Osborne, J. (2005). Developing arguments. In, S. Alsop, L. Bencze, & E. Pedretti (Eds.), Analysing exemplary science teaching: Theoretical lenses and a spectrum of possibilities for practice. Buckingham: Open University Press.
Erduran, S., Simon, S., & Osborne, J. (2004). TAPping into argumentation: developments in the use of Toulmin’s Argument Pattern for studying science discourse. Science Education, 88(6), 915–933.
Erduran, S., Osborne, J., & Simon, S. (2005). The role of argument in developing scientific literacy. In, K. Boersma, O. de Jong, H. Eijkelhof, & M. Goedhart (Eds.), Research and the quality of science education. Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publishers.
Erduran, S., Ardac, D., & Yakmaci-Guzel, B. (2006). Learning to teach argumentation: case studies of preservice secondary science teachers. Eurasia Journal of Mathematics, Science and Technology Education, 2(2), 1–14.
Fullan, M. (1991). The new meaning of educational change (2nd ed.). London: Cassell.
Gee, J. P. (1994, April). Science talk: How do you start to do what you don’t know how to do? Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the American Educaitonal Research Association, New Orleans, LA.
Giere, R. (1991). Understanding scientific reasoning (3rd ed.). Fort Worth, TX: Holt, Rinehart, and Winston.
Jimenez-Aleixandre, M., Rodrigues, A., & Duschl, R. (2000). “Doing the Lesson” or “Doing Science”: Argument in high school genetics. Science Education, 84(6), 757–792.
Kelly, G. J., & Chen, C. (1999). The sound of music: Constructing science as sociocultural practices through oral and written discourse. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 36(8), 883–915.
Kuhn, D. (1992). Thinking as argument. Harvard Educational Review, 62, 155–178.
Kuhn, T. E. (1962). The structure of scientific revolutions. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Latour, B., & Woolgar, S. (1986). Laboratory life: The construction of scientific facts (2nd ed.). Princetown, NJ: Princetown University Press.
Lave, J., & Wenger, E. (1991). Situated learning: Legitimate peripheral participation. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Lemke, J. (1990). Talking science: Language, learning and values. Norwood, NJ: Ablex.
Loucks-Horsley, S., Hewson, P., Love, N., & Stiles, K. E. (1998). Designing professional development for teachers of science and mathematics. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press.
Magnusson, S., Krajcik, J., & Borko, H. (1999). Nature, sources and development of pedagogical content knowledge. In, J. Gess-Newsome, & N. G. Lederman (Eds.), Examining pedaogical content knowledge, pp. 95–132. Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publishers.
Mitchell, S. (1996). Improving the quality of argument in higher education interim report. London: Middlesex University, School of Education.
Osborne, J., Erduran, S., & Simon, S. (2004a). Enhancing the quality of argumentation in school science. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 41(10), 994–1020.
Osborne, J., Erduran, S., & Simon, S. (2004b). Ideas, evidence and argument in science. In-service Training Pack, Resource Pack and Video. London: King’s College London.
Pontecorvo C., & Girardet H. (1993). Arguing and reasoning in understanding historical topics. Cognition and Instruction, 11(3 & 4), 365–395.
Quinn, V. (1997). Critical thinking in young minds. London: David Fulton.
Simon, S., Erduran, S., & Osborne, J. (2006). Learning to teach argumentation: Research and development in the science classroom. International Journal of Science Education, 28(2–3), pp. 235–260.
Toulmin, S. (1958). The uses of argument. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Vygotsky, L. (1978). Mind in society. London: Harvard University Press.
Zohar, A., & Nemet, F. (2002). Fostering students’ knowledge and argumentation skills through dilemmas in human genetics. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 39(1), 35–62.
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2007 Springer
About this paper
Cite this paper
Erduran, S., Dagher, Z.R. (2007). Exemplary Teaching of Argumentation: A Case Study of Two Science Teachers. In: Pintó, R., Couso, D. (eds) Contributions from Science Education Research. Springer, Dordrecht. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4020-5032-9_31
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4020-5032-9_31
Publisher Name: Springer, Dordrecht
Print ISBN: 978-1-4020-5031-2
Online ISBN: 978-1-4020-5032-9
eBook Packages: Humanities, Social Sciences and LawEducation (R0)