Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Argumentation in Science Education Research

Perspectives from Europe

  • Chapter
Science Education Research and Practice in Europe

Part of the book series: Cultural Perpectives in Science Education ((CHPS,volume 5))

Abstract

Argumentation studies in science education are relatively young. It can be said that classroom-based research in scientific argumentation began in the 1990s. The first batch of studies focused on exploring whether science classroom environments favoured argumentation, an exploration with negative outcomes (e.g., Driver, Newton & Osborne, 2000), as well as on investigating students’ argumentation (e.g., Duschl, Ellenbogen, & Erduran, 1999; Jimenez-Aleixandre, Bugallo & Duschl, 2000; Kolste, 2006; Kortland, 1996). As the field continued to develop, the focus shifted towards an interest in the quality of arguments, or how to analyze the development of students’ argumentation competences (e.g., Erduran, 2008; Erduran, Simon & Osborne, 2004). In the last few years there is an emerging interest about how to support students’ engagement in argumentation, through the design of learning environments (e.g., Jimenez-Aleixandre, 2008; Mork, 2005) and professional development of science teachers (e.g, Erduran, Ardac & Yakmaci- Guzel, 2006; Erduran, 2006; Simon, Erduran & Osborne, 2006).

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 49.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  • Akiguet S., & Piolat A. (1996) Insertion of Connectives by 9- to 11-Year-Old Children in an Argumentative Text, Argumentation, Volume 10, No. 2, Kluwer Academic Publishers.

    Google Scholar 

  • Albe V. Un jeu de role sur une controverse socio-scientifique actuelle: une strategie pour favoriser la problematisation? Aster. 2005;40:67–94.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Albe V. When scientific knowledge, daily life experience, epistemological and social considerations intervene: students’ argumentation in group discussions on a socio-scientific issue. Research in Science Education. 2008a;38:67–90.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Albe V. Students’ positions and considerations of scientific evidence about a controversial socio-scientific issue. Science & Education. 2008b;17(8–9):805–827.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Albe V. Enseigner des controverses. Rennes: Presses Universitaires de Rennes; 2009.

    Google Scholar 

  • Andriessen, J., Baker, M., and Suthers, D. (2003) Argumentation, Computer Support, and the Educational Context of Confronting Cognitions, Arguing to Learn: Confronting Cognitions in Computer-supported Collaborative Learning Environments. Vol.1. Andriessen, J., Baker, M., and Suthers, D. (Eds.) Kluwer Academic Publishers. pp. 1–26.

    Google Scholar 

  • Balacheff N, Ludvigsen S, de Jong T, Lazonder A, Barnes S, Montandon L, editors. Technology-Enhanced Learning. Dordrecht: Springer; 2009.

    Google Scholar 

  • Baker, M.J., Quignard, M., Lund, K. & Séjourné, A. (2003) Computer-supported collaborative learning in the space of debate. In B. Wasson, S. Ludvigsen & U. Hoppe (Eds.) Designing for Change in Networked Learning Environments: Proceedings of the International Conference on Computer Support for Collaborative Learning 2003, pp. 11–20. Dordrecht : Kluwer Academic Publishers.

    Google Scholar 

  • Baker C. Foundations of Bilingual Education and Bilingualism. 4th ed. Clevedon: Multilingual Matters; 2006.

    Google Scholar 

  • Baruch, S., & Perret-Clermont, A-N. (Ed.). (2008). ESCALATE’s White Book on Argumentation and Enquiry-Based Science Learning. Project Report, Co-Funded by the European Commission within the Sixth Framework Programme. Project Number 020790(SAS6).

    Google Scholar 

  • Berland LK, Reiser B. Making sense of argumentation and explanation. Science Education. 2009;93(1):26–55.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brassart D. G. (1996) Didactique de l’argumentation écrite: Approches psycho cognitives, Argumentation, Volume 10, No. 1, Kluwer Academic Publishers.

    Google Scholar 

  • Braund M, Erduran S, Simon S, Taber J, Tweats R. Teaching ideas and evidence in science at key stage 3. Science Teacher Education. 2004;41:12–13.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bravo-Torija B, Jiménez-Aleixandre MP. Progression in compelxity: Contextualizing sustainable marine resources management in a 10 grade classroom. Research in Science Education. 2012;42(1):5–23.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bronckart J-P. Activité langagière, textes et discours: pour un interactionnisme socio-discursif. Paris: Delachaux & Niestlé; 1996.

    Google Scholar 

  • Buty, C. & Plantin, C. (Eds.) (2008a). Introduction. L’argumentation à l’épreuve de l’enseignement des sciences et vice-versa [Introduction. Argumentation put to the test of science education and vice-versa]. In C. Buty, & C. Plantin (Eds.) Argumenter en classe de sciences [Engaging in argumentation in science classrooms] (pp 17–41). Lyon: Institut National de Recherche Pédagogique.

    Google Scholar 

  • Buty C, Plantin C, editors. Argumenter en classe de sciences. Lyon: Institut National de Recherche Pédagogique; 2008b.

    Google Scholar 

  • Castells, M., Konstantinidou, A., & Erduran, S. (2010). Argumentation and scientific conceptions: a comparison between Catalan and English students. M. F. Tasar & G. Cakmakci (Eds.), Contemporary science education research: international perspectives, (pp. 87–97). Ankara, Turkey: Pegem Akademi.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cetin PS, Erduran S, Kaya E. Understanding the nature of chemistry and argumentation: the case of pre-service chemistry teachers. Ahi Evran Universitesi Kirsehir Egitim Fakultesi Dergisi, Special Issue on Nature of Science in Science Education. 2010;11(4):41–59.

    Google Scholar 

  • Department of Education, South Africa. (2003). National curriculum statement grades 10-12 (General). Physical sciences. Pretoria: Author.

    Google Scholar 

  • DfES/QCA (2006). Science: The National Curriculum for England and Wales. London: HMSO.

    Google Scholar 

  • Driver R, Newton P, Osborne J. Establishing the norms of scientific argumentation in classrooms. Science Education. 2000;84(3):287–312.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ducrot, O. (1972). Dire et ne pas dire. Principes de sémantique linguistique [To say and not to say. Principles of linguistic semantics]. Paris: Hermann [3rd edition, revised, 1998].

    Google Scholar 

  • Ducrot O, Todorov T. Encyclopaedic dictionary of the sciences of language. Baltimore: The Johns Hopkins University Press; 1987.

    Google Scholar 

  • Duschl RA. Quality argumentation and epistemic criteria. In: Erduran S, Jiménez Aleixandre MP, editors. Argumentation in science education: Perspectives from classroom-based research. Dordrecht: Springer; 2008. p. 159–175.

    Google Scholar 

  • Duschl RA, Grandy RE, editors. Teaching scientific inquiry. Recommendations for research and implementation. Rotterdam: Sense Publishers; 2008.

    Google Scholar 

  • Duschl R, Erduran S, Grandy R, Rudolph J. Guest editorial: science studies and science education. Science Education. 2006;90(6):961–964.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Duschl R, Ellenbogen K, Erduran S. Understanding dialógica argumentation. Paper presented at the annual meeting of American Educational. Montreal: ResearchAssociation; 1999, April.

    Google Scholar 

  • Engeström Y. Developmental work research: Expanding activity theory in practice. Berlin: Lehmanns Media; 2005.

    Google Scholar 

  • Erduran S. The role of dialogue and argumentation. In: Oversby J, editor. Guide to Research in Science Education. Hatfield: Association for Science Education; 2012. p. 106–116.

    Google Scholar 

  • Erduran, S., Ingram, N., & Yee, W. (2012). Argumentation and Practical Work in Science Teachers? Professional Development. STEAM Project Resources. Bristol: University of Bristol. www.apisa.co.uk

  • Erduran S, Pabuccu A. Bonding chemistry and argument: promoting teaching and learning of argumentation through chemistry stories. Bristol: University of Bristol; 2012.

    Google Scholar 

  • Erduran S, Yan X. Salvar las brechas en la argumentacion: el desarrollo profesional en la ensenanza de la indagacion cientifica. Alambique. 2010;63:76–87.

    Google Scholar 

  • Erduran, S., & Villamanan, R. (2009). Cool argument: engineering students’ arguments about thermodynamics in the context of Peltier effect in refrigeration. Educación Química, 20(2), pp. 119–125. (Special Issue on Argumentation in Science Education)

    Google Scholar 

  • Erduran S, Yan X. Mind gaps in argument: continuing professional development to support the teaching of scientific inquiry. Booklet and DVD. Bristol: University of Bristol; 2009.

    Google Scholar 

  • Erduran S. Methodological foundations in the study of argumentation in science classrooms. In: Erduran S, Jiménez Aleixandre MP, editors. Argumentation in science education: Perspectives from classroom-based research. Dordrecht: Springer; 2008. p. 47–69.

    Google Scholar 

  • Erduran S, Jiménez-Aleixandre MP, editors. Argumentation in science education. Perspectives from classroom-based research. Dordrecht: Springer; 2008.

    Google Scholar 

  • Erduran, S. (Ed.) (2007). Editorial: Special Issue on Argument, Discourse and Interactivity. School Science Review, 88(324), 31–40.

    Google Scholar 

  • Erduran S, Dagher Z. Exemplary teaching of argumentation: a case study of two science teachers. In: Pinto R, Couso D, editors. Contributions from science education research. Dordrecht: Springer; 2007. p. 403–415.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Erduran S. Breaking the law: promoting domain-specificity in science education in the context of arguing about the Periodic Law in chemistry. Foundations of Chemistry. 2007b;9(3):247–263.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Erduran S. Promoting ideas, evidence and argument in initial science teacher training. School Science Review. 2006;87(321):45–50.

    Google Scholar 

  • Erduran, S., Ardac, D. & Yakmaci-Guzel, B.(2006). Learning to teach argumentation: case studies of pre-service secondary science teachers. Eurasia Journal of Mathematics Science and Technology Education, 2(2).

    Google Scholar 

  • Erduran S, Simon S, Osborne J. TAPping into argumentation: developments in the use of Toulmin’s Argument Pattern for studying science discourse. Science Education. 2004;88(6):915–933.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • European Union (2006). Recommendation of the European Parliament and of the Council of 18 December 2006 on key competences for lifelong learning. Official Journal of the European Union, 30-12-2006, L 394/10-L 394/18. (http://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=OJ:L:2006:394:0010:0018:en:PDF)

  • Evagorou, M. (2009). Argue-WISE: Exploring young students’ features of collaborative argumentation. Unpublished Ph.D. Thesis. King’s College London.

    Google Scholar 

  • Evagorou M, Osborne J. Argue-WISE: using technology to support argumentation in science. School Science Review. 2007;89(327):103–109.

    Google Scholar 

  • Evagorou,M. Jiménez-Aleixandre, M.P.,& Osborne, J. (2012). ‘Should we kill the grey squirrels?’ study expliring students’ justifications and decision-making .International Journal of Science Education, 34(3), 401–428.

    Google Scholar 

  • Garratt J, Overton T, Threlfall T. A Question of Chemistry: Creative Problems for Critical Thinkers. Harlow: Pearson; 1999.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gilbert JK, Watts DM. Concepts, Misconceptions and alternative conceptions: Changing perspective in Science Education. Studies in Science Education. 1983;10:61–98.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Goldsworthy A, Watson R, Wood-Robinson V. Developing understanding in scientific enquiry. Hatfield: Association for Science Education; 2000.

    Google Scholar 

  • Grace M. Developing high quality decision-making discussions about biological conservation in a normal classroom setting. International Journal of Science Education. 2009;31(4):551–570.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Grace M, Ratcliffe M. The science and values that young people draw upon to make decisions about biological conservation issues. International Journal of Science Education. 2002;24(11):1157–1169.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Grize J-B. Logique naturelle et communication. Paris: Presses Universitaires de France; 1996.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jiménez Aleixandre MP. Designing argumentation learning environments. In: Erduran S, Jiménez Aleixandre MP, editors. Argumentation in science education: Perspectives from classroom- based research. Dordrecht: Springer; 2008. p. 91–115.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jiménez-Aleixandre, M. P. (2010). 10 Ideas Clave. Competencias en argumentación y uso de pruebas (10 key ideas. Competences on argumentation and use of evidence). Barcelona: Graó.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jiménez Aleixandre MP, Erduran S. Argumentation in science education: An overview. In: Erduran S, Jiménez Aleixandre MP, editors. Argumentation in science education: Perspectives from classroom-based research. Dordrecht: Springer; 2008. p. 91–115.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jiménez-Aleixandre MP, López Rodríguez R. Designing a field code: environmental values in primary school. Environmental Education Research. 2001;7(1):5–22.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jiménez-Aleixandre, M. P., Agraso, M. F., & Eirexas, F. (2004, April). Scientific authority and empirical data in argument warrants about the Prestige oil spill. Paper presented at the National Association for Research in Science Teaching (NARST) Annual Meeting. Vancouver.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jiménez Aleixandre MP, Bugallo A, Duschl RA. “Doing the lesson” or “doing science”: Argument in high school genetics. Science Education. 2000;84(6):757–792.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jiménez Aleixandre MP, Díaz J, Duschl RA. Plant, animal or thief? Solving problems under the microscope. In: Bandiera M, Caravita S, Torracca E, Vicentini M, editors. Research in Science Education in Europe. Dordrecht: Kluwer; 1999. p. 31–39.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jiménez-Aleixandre, M. P., Puig, B. & Gallástegui, J. R. (2010). Report on Argumentation and Teacher Education in Europe. Trondheim: S-TEAM (Science Teacher Education Advanced Methods) /NTNU.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jiménez-Aleixandre, M. P., Gallástegui-Otero, J. R., Eirexas-Santamaría, F. & Puig-Mauriz, B. (2009) Resources for introducing argumentation and the use of evidence in science classrooms. Santiago de Compostela: Danú. Project Mind the Gap [Available in Galician and Spanish]. Downloadable in www.rodausc.eu

  • Jiménez-Aleixandre M.P., López Rodríguez R. & Erduran, S. (2005, April). Argumentative quality and intellectual ecology: A case study in primary school. Paper presented at the National Association for Research in Science Teaching (NARST) Annual Meeting. Dallas, TX.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jiménez-Aleixandre MP, Federico-Agraso M. Justification and persuasion about cloning: Arguments in Hwang’s paper and journalistic reported versions. Research in Science Education. 2009;39(3):331–347. doi:10.1007/s11165-008-9113-x.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jiménez-Aleixandre MP, Pereiro-Muñoz C. Knowledge producers or knowledge consumers? Argumentation and decision making about environmental management. International Journal of Science Education. 2002;24(11):1171–1190.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jorde D, Mork S. The contribution of information technology for inclusion of socio-scientific issues in science: the case of wolves in Norway. In: Corrigan D, Dillon J, Gunstone R, editors. The Re-Emergance of Values in Science. Rotterdam: Sense Publishers; 2007.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jorde, D., Strømme, A., Sørborg, ø., Erlien, W., & Mork, S. M. (2003). Virtual Environments in Science. Viten.no (No. 17). Oslo: ITU.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kaya E, Erduran S, Cetin P. High school students’ perceptions of argumentation. Elsevier: Procedia Social and Behavioral Sciences. 2010;2:3971–3975.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • La Velle BL, Erduran S. Argument and developments in the science curriculum. School Science Review. 2007a;88(324):31–40.

    Google Scholar 

  • Keil FC. Biology and beyond: domain specificity in a broader developmental context. Human Development. 2007;50:31–38.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Keogh B, Naylor S. Concept Cartoons, teaching and learning in science: an evaluation. International Journal of Science Education. 1999;21(4):431–446.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kelly G. Inquiry, activity and epistemic practice. In: Duschl R, Grandy R, editors. Teaching Scientific Inquiry: Recommendations for research and implementation. Rotterdam, Netherlands: Sense Publishers; 2008. p. 99–117.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kelly GJ, Bazerman C. How students argue scientific claims: A rhetorical-semantic analysis. Applied Linguistics. 2003;24(1):28–55.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kolsto DD. To trust or not to trust: pupils’ ways of judging information encountered in a socio-scientific issue. International Journal of Science Education. 2001;23(9):877–901.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kolstø SD. “To trust or not to trust, …” - pupils’ ways of judging information encountered in a socio-scientific issue. International Journal of Science Education. 2001;23(9):877–901.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kolstø SD. Patterns in students’ argumentation confronted with a risk-focused socio-scientific issue. International Journal of Science Education. 2006;28(14):1689–1716.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kolstø SD, Ratcliffe M. Social aspects of argumentation. In: Erduran S, Jiménez- Aleixandre MP, editors. Argumentation in science education: perspectives from classroom-based research. Dordrecht: Springer; 2008. p. 117–136.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kortland, J. (2001). A problem posing approach to teaching decision making about the waste issue. Doctoral dissertation. Utrecht: Centre for Science and Mathematic Education (Cdß), Utrecht University.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kortland K. An STS case study about students’ decision making on the waste issue. Science Education. 1996;80:673–689.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kyza E, Erduran S, Tiberghien A. Technology-enhanced learning in science. In: Balacheff N, Ludvigsen S, de Jong T, Lazonder A, Barnes S, Montandon L, editors. Technology- Enhanced Learning. Dordrecht: Springer; 2009. p. 121–134.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Lazarou, D. (in press). The utilisation of cultural-historical activity theory for designing, developing and evaluating an educational game in primary science education. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning.

    Google Scholar 

  • Legardez A, Simonneaux L. L’école à l’épreuve de l’actualité. Enseigner les questions vives. Paris: ESF; 2006.

    Google Scholar 

  • Linn MC, Hsi S. Computers, Teachers, Peers: Science Learning Partners. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Earlbaum Associates; 2000.

    Google Scholar 

  • López Rodríguez, R., & Jiménez-Aleixandre, M. P. (2002). Sharing the authority to evaluate environmental attitudes: a case study in primary school. In J. Lewis, A. Magro, L. Simonneaux (Eds.) Biology education for the real world, Proceedings of the IV ERIDOB Conference, (pp. 319333). Toulouse: École Nationale de Formation Agronomique (ENFA) Université de Toulouse.

    Google Scholar 

  • La Velle BL, Erduran S. Argument and developments in the science curriculum. School Science Review. 2007b;88(324):31–40.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mena Marcos JJ, Sánchez Miguel E, Tillema H. Teacher reflection on action: What is said (in research) and what is done (in teaching). Reflective Practice. 2009;10(2):191–204.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ministerio de Educación y Ciencia, Republic of Chile (MEC). (2004). Estudio y comprensión de la naturaleza. Santiago de Chile: Author.

    Google Scholar 

  • Monteserin A, Schiaffino S, Amandi A. Assisting students with argumentation plans when solving problems in CSCL. Computers and Education. 2010;54:416–426.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mork SM. Argumentation in science lessons: focusing on the teacher’s role. Nordic Studies in Science Education. 2005a;1(1):17–30.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mork, S. (2005b). ICT in science education: exploring the digital learning materials at viten.no. Unpublished Doctoral Dissertation, Oslo: University of Oslo.

    Google Scholar 

  • OECD (2006). PISA 2006. Assessing scientific, reading and mathematical literacy: A framework for PISA 2006. Paris: Author.

    Google Scholar 

  • Osborne J, Erduran S, Simon S. Enhancing the quality of argumentation in school science. Journal of Research in Science Teaching. 2004a;41(10):994–1020.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Osborne J, Erduran S, Simon S. Ideas, evidence and argument in science education. DVD and Resource Pack, London: King’s College London; 2004b.

    Google Scholar 

  • Osborne JF. Practical Alternatives. School Science Review. 1997;78(285):61–66.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ozdem, Y., Ertepinar, H., Cakiroglu, J., & Erduran, S. (in press). The nature of pre-service science teachers’ argumentation in inquiry-oriented laboratory context. International Journal of Science Education.

    Google Scholar 

  • Patronis T, Potari D, Spiliotopoulou V. Students’ argumentation in decision-making on a socio-scientific issue: implications for teaching. International Journal of Science Education. 1999;21:745–754.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Plantin, C. (2004). On the inseparability of emotion and reason in argumentation In E. Weigand (Ed.) Emotions in Dialogic Interactions (pp 265–276). Amsterdam: Benjamin.

    Google Scholar 

  • Plantin, C. (2005) L’Argumentation. Histoire, théories et perspectives [Argumentation. History, theories and perspectives]. Paris: Presses Universitaires de France.

    Google Scholar 

  • Puig B, Jiménez-Aleixandre MP. What do 9th grade students consider as evidence for or against claims about genetic differences in intelligence between black and white “races”? In: Hammann M, Waarlo AJ, Boersma KT, editors. The Nature of Research in Biological Education. Utrecht: University of Utrecht; 2010. p. 137–151.

    Google Scholar 

  • Puig B, Jiménez-Aleixandre MP. Different music to the same score: Teaching about genes, environment and human performances. In: Sadler T, editor. Socio-scientific issues in the classroom: Teaching, learning and research. Dordrecht: Springer; 2011. p. 201–238.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Ratcliffe M. Pupil decision-making about socio-scientific issues, within the science curriculum. International Journal of Science Education. 1997;19(2):167–182.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sadler TD. Situated learning in science education: socio-scientific issues as contexts for practice. Studies in Science Education. 2009;45(1):1–42.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Scerri E. Has chemistry been at least approximately reduced to quantum mechanics? In: Hull D, Forbes M, Burian R, editors. Philosophy of Science Association, app, vol. 1. East Lansing, MI: Philosophy of science association; 1994. p. 160–170.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schunn CD, Anderson JR. The generality/specificity of expertise in scientific reasoning. Cognitive Science. 1999;23:337–370.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Simon S, Maloney J. Learning to teach ‘ideas and evidence’ in science: a study of school mentors and trainee teachers. School Science Review. 2006;87(321):75–82.

    Google Scholar 

  • Simon S, Erduran S, Osborne J. Learning to teach argumentation: Research and development in the science classroom. International Journal of Science Education. 2006;28(2–3):235–260.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Simmonneaux L. Role-play or debate to promote students’ argumentation and justification on an issue in animal transgénesis. International Journal of Science Education. 2001;23(9):903–928.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Simonneaux L. Argumentation in socio-scientific contexts. In: Erduran S, Jiménez Aleixandre MP, editors. Argumentation in science education: Perspectives from classroom-based research. Dordrecht: Springer; 2008. p. 179–199.

    Google Scholar 

  • Solomon J, Duveen J, Scott L. Exploring the Nature of Science: Key Stage 4. Hatfield: Association for Science Education; 1992.

    Google Scholar 

  • Suppovitz JA, Turner HM. The effects of professional development on science teaching practices and classroom cultures. Journal of Research in Science Teaching. 2000;37(9):963–980.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Toulmin S. The Uses of Argument. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press; 1958.

    Google Scholar 

  • Uskola A, Maguregi G, Jiménez-Aleixandre MP. The use of criteria in argumentation and the construction of environmental concepts: A university case study. International Journal of Science Education. 2010;32(17):2311–2333.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • van Driel JH, de Jong O, Verloop N. The development of pre-service chemistry teachers’ PCK. Science Education. 2002;86(4):572–590.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • van Eemeren FH, Grootendorst R, Henkemans FS, Blair JA, Johnson RH, Krabbe ECW, Plantin C, Walton DN, Willard CA, Woods J, Zarefsky D. Fundamentals of argumentation theory; A handbook of historical backgrounds and contemporary developments. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates; 1996.

    Google Scholar 

  • Venville GJ, Dawson VM. The impacto f a classroom intervention on Grade 10 students’ argumentation skills, informal reasoning and conceptual understanding of science. Journal of Research in Science Teaching. 2010;47(8):952–977.

    Google Scholar 

  • von Aufschnaiter C, Erduran S, Osborne J, Simon S. Arguing to learn and learning to argue: Case studies of how students’ argumentation relates to their scientific knowledge. Journal of Research in Science Teaching. 2008;45(1):101–131.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Walton DN. Argumentation schemes for presumptive reasoning. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Earlbaum; 1996.

    Google Scholar 

  • White R, Gunstone R. Probing Understanding. London: Falmer Press; 1992.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wickman P-O, Östman L. Learning as discourse change: A sociocultural mechanism. Science Education. 2002;86:601–623.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Yan X, Erduran S. Arguing Online: Case Studies of Pre-Service Science Teachers’ Perceptions of Online Tools in Supporting the Learning of Arguments. Turkish Journal of Science Education. 2008;5(3):2–31.

    Google Scholar 

  • Zohar A. Science teacher education and professional development in argumentation. In: Erduran S, Jimenez-Aleixandre MP, editors. Argumentation in science education: perspectives from classroom-based research. Dordrecht: Springer Academic Publishers; 2008. p. 245–268.

    Google Scholar 

  • Zohar A. Higher order thinking in science classrooms: students’ learning and teachers’ professional development. Dordrect: Kluwer; 2004.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Zohar A, Nemet F. Fostering students’ argumentation skills through bioethical dilemmas in genetics. Journal of Research in Science Teaching. 2002;30:35–72.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. University of Bristol, United Kingdom

    Sibel Erduran

  2. Visiting Professor, Kristianstad University, Sweden

    Sibel Erduran

  3. Universidade de Santiago de Compostela, Spain

    Maria Pilar Jiménez Aleixandre

Authors
  1. Sibel Erduran
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Maria Pilar Jiménez Aleixandre
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Universiity of Oslo, Norway

    Doris Jorde

  2. King’s College London, London, UK

    Justin Dillon

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2012 Sense Publishers

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Erduran, S., Jiménez Aleixandre, M.P. (2012). Argumentation in Science Education Research. In: Jorde, D., Dillon, J. (eds) Science Education Research and Practice in Europe. Cultural Perpectives in Science Education, vol 5. SensePublishers, Rotterdam. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-6091-900-8_11

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation