Learning argumentation through role-playing: should we install a nuclear deposit?
Abstract
This paper analyses the argumentative operations performed by pre-service teachers during a role play about setting down a nuclear waste deposit. The types of knowledge used for constructing their arguments when they try to reach a final agreement are also studied. The participants are undergraduate students from the degree of Pre-school and Primary Teacher Training at three different Spanish universities. Data collection includes video recordings of the role play. The findings point to the students’ ability to make statements and justify their arguments, although they find it difficult to use other argumentative elements in their speech. Moreover, social and scientific-technological knowledge are proved to be the most used types of knowledge in the participants’ search of a consensual decision about setting down the nuclear deposit.Keywords
Argumentation, Decision-making, Role play, Socio-scientific issues, Teacher trainingReferences
Acar, O., Turkmen, L. y Roychoudhury, A. (2009). Student Difficulties in Socio‐scientific Argumentation and Decision‐making Research Findings: Crossing the borders of two research lines. International Journal of Science Education, 32(9), 1191-1206. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500690902991805
Aikenhead, G. S. (1985). Collective decision-making in the social context of science. Science Education, 69(4), 453-475. https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.3730690403
Albe, V. (2008). Students’ positions and considerations of scientific evidence about a controversial socioscientific issue. Science & Education, 17, 805-827. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11191-007-9086-6
Archila, P. A. (2015). Using history and philosophy of science to promote students’ argumentation. A teaching-learning sequence based on the discovery of oxygen. Science & Education, 24(9), 1201-1226.
Archila, P. A. (2016). ¿Cómo formar profesores de ciencias que promuevan la argumentación?: lo que sugieren avances actuales de investigación. Profesorado: Revista de Currículum y Formación del Profesorado, 20(3), 399-432.
Baytelman, A. y Constantinou, C. P. (2018). Investigating the relationship between content knowledge and the construction of ethical arguments on socioscientific issues. En O. E. Finlayson, E. McLoughlin, S. Erduran y P. Childs (Eds.), Electronic Proceedings of the ESERA 2017 Conference. Research, Practice and Collaboration in Science Education, Part 8: Scientific Literacy and Socio Scientific Issues (co-ed. J. Alexis y M. Lindahl) (pp. 1031-1038). Dublín: Dublin City University.
Bell, P. (2004). Promoting students’ argument construction and collaborative debate in the science classroom. En M. Linn, E. Davis y P. Bell (Eds.), Internet environments for science education (pp. 115-143). New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum.
Berland, L. K. y Reiser, B. J. (2009). Making sense of argumentation and explanation. Science Education, 93(1), 26-55. https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.20286
Blanco Anaya, P. y Díaz de Bustamante, J. (2014). Argumentación y uso de pruebas: realización de inferencias sobre una secuencia de icnitas. Enseñanza de las Ciencias, 32(2), 35-52. https://doi.org/10.5565/rev/ensciencias.1009
Bravo-Torija, B. y Jiménez-Aleixandre, M. P. (2014). Articulación del uso de pruebas y el modelo de flujo de energía en los ecosistemas en argumentos de alumnado de bachillerato. Enseñanza de las Ciencias, 32(3), 425-442. https://doi.org/10.5565/rev/ensciencias.1281
Byrne, J., Ideland, M., Malmberg, C. y Grace, M. (2014). Climate Change and Everyday Life: Repertoires children use to negotiate a socio-scientific issue. International Journal of Science Education, 36(9), 1491-1509. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500693.2014.891159
Cavagnetto, A., Hand, B. M. y Norton‐Meier, L. (2010). The nature of elementary student science discourse in the context of the science writing heuristic approach. International Journal of Science Education, 32(4), 427-449. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500690802627277
Cakici, Y. y Bayir, E. (2012). Developing Children’s Views of the Nature of Science Through Role Play. International Journal of Science Education, 34(7), 1075-1091. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500693.2011.647109
Cebrián-Robles, D., España-Ramos, E. y Franco-Mariscal, J. (2018). Diseño de un juego de rol sobre un problema socio-científico relacionado con las centrales nucleares para iniciar en el activismo y el uso de pruebas a maestros de primaria en formación inicial. En C. Martínez Losada y S. García Barros (Coords.), 28 encuentros de didáctica de las ciencias experimentales. Iluminando el cambio educativo (pp. 1241-1246). A Coruña: Universidade da Coruña.
Christenson, N., Chang Rundgreen, S. N. y Höglund, H. O. (2012). Using the SEE-SEP Model to Analyze Upper Secondary Students’ Use of Supporting Reasons in Arguing Socioscientific Issues. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 21, 342-352. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10956-011-9328-x
Dorion, K. R. (2009). Science through drama: A multiple case exploration of the characteristics of drama activities used in secondary science lessons. International Journal of Science Education, 31(16), 2247-2270. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500690802712699
Driver, R., Newton, P. y Osborne, J. (2000). Establishing the Norms of Scientific Argumentation in Classrooms. Science Education, 84, 287-312.
Drumond Vieira, R., da Rocha Bernardo, J. R., Evagorou, M. y Florentino de Melo, V. (2015). Argumentation in Science Teacher Education: The simulated jury as a resource for teaching and learning. International Journal of Science Education, 37(7), 1113-1139. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500693.2015.1022623
Erduran, S. y Jimenez-Aleixandre, M. P. (2007). Research in argumentation in science education: perspectives from classroom-based research. Dordrecht: Springer.
Evagorou, M., Jiménez-Aleixandre, M. P. y Osborne, J. (2012). «Should We Kill the Grey Squirrels?». A Study Exploring Students’ Justifications and Decision-Making, International Journal of Science Education, 34(3), 401-428. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500693.2011.619211
Evagorou, M. y Osborne, J. (2013). Exploring Young Students’ Collaborative Argumentation Within a Socioscientific Issue. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 50(2), 209-237. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.21076
Furman, M., Luzuriaga, M., Taylor, I., Anauati, M. V. y Podestá, M. E. (2018). Abriendo la"caja negra"del aula de ciencias: un estudio sobre la relación entre las prácticas de enseñanza sobre el cuerpo humano y las capacidades de pensamiento que se promueven en los alumnos de séptimo grado. Enseñanza de las ciencias, 36(2), 81-103. https://doi.org/10.5565/rev/ensciencias.2519
Grace, M., Lee, Y. C., Asshoff, R. y Wallin, A. (2015). Student Decision-Making about a Globally Familiar Socioscientific Issue: The value of sharing and comparing views with international counterparts. International Journal of Science Education, 37(11), 1855-1874. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500693.2015.1054000
Jiménez-Aleixandre, M. P. (2008). Designing argumentation learning environments. En S. Erduran y M. P. Jiménez-Aleixandre (Eds.), Argumentation in science education: Perspectives from classroom- based research (pp. 91-115). Dordrecht: Springer.
Jin, H., Mehl, C. E. y Lan, D. H. (2015). Developing an analytical framework for argumentation on energy consumption issues. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 52(8), 1132-1162. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.21237
Kaya, E. (2013). Argumentation Practices in Classroom: Pre-service teachers' conceptual understanding of chemical equilibrium. International Journal of Science Education, 35(7), 1139-1158. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500693.2013.770935
Kifshe, R. (2012) Nature of Science and Decision Making. International Journal of Science Education, 34(1), 67-100. https://doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199856800.003.0013
Kolstø, S. D., Bungum, B., Arnesen, E., Isnes, A., Kristensen, T., Mathiassen, K., Mestad, I., Quale, A., Tonning, V. y Ulvik, M. (2006). Science students’ critical examination of scientific information related to socioscientific issues. Science Education, 90, 632-655. https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.20133
Ladrousse, G. P. (1989). Role play. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Matas, A. (2003). Los juegos de rol como recurso formativo. Una aplicación en educación ambiental. Bordón. Revista de Pedagogía, 55(2), 281-291.
Martín-Gámez, C. y Erduran, S. (2018). Understanding argumentation about socioscientific issues on energy: a quantitative study with primary pre-service teachers in Spain. Research in Science & Technological Education, 36(4), 463-483. https://doi.org/10.1080/02635143.2018.1427568
McKeachie, W. J. (1986). Teaching tips: A guidebook for the beginning college teacher. Lexington, MA: DC. Heath & Co.
McNeill, K. L. (2011). Elementary students’ views of explanation, argumentation, and evidence, and their abilities to construct arguments over the school year. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 48(7), 793-823. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.20430
McSharry, G. y Jones, S. (2000). Role-play in Science teaching and learning. School Science Review, 82, 73-82.
Ministerio de Educación, Cultura y Deporte (MECD) (2014). Real Decreto 126/2014, de 28 de febrero, por el que se establece el currículo básico de la Educación Primaria. Madrid: MECD. Obtenido de https://www.boe.es/boe/dias/2014/03/01/pdfs/BOE-A-2014-2222.pdf
Ministerio de Educación, Cultura y Deporte (MECD) (2016). PISA 2015. Programa para la Evaluación Internacional de los Alumnos. Informe español. Madrid: MECD. Obtenido de http://iaqse.caib.es/documentos/avaluacions/pisa/pisa_2015/pisa_2015_preliminar_espanya.pdf
National Research Council (NRC) (2012). A framework for K12 Science Education: practices, crosscutting concepts and core ideas. Washington DC: National Academy Press.
OECD (2017). PISA 2015. Assessment and Analytical Framework: Science, Reading, Mathematic, Financial Literacy and Collaborative Problem Solving, revised edition. París: OECD Publishing.
Osborne, J. (2012). The role of argument: Learning how to learn in school science. En B. J. Fraser, K. Tobin y C. McRobbie (Eds.), Second international handbook of science education (pp. 933-949). Dordrecht: Springer.
Osborne, J., Erduran, S., Simon, S. y Monk, M. (2001). Enhancing the quality of argument in school science. School Science Review, 82(301), 63-70.
Osborne, J., Erduran, S. y Simon, S. (2004). Enhancing the quality of argumentation in school science. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 41(10), 994-1020. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.20035
Real Decreto 126/2104, de 28 de febrero, por el que se establece el currículo básico de la Educación Primaria. Ministerio de Educación, Cultura y Deporte, BOE núm. 52, de 1 de marzo de 2014, pp. 19349-19420.
Ryu, S. y Sandoval, W. A. (2015). The influence of group dynamics on collabortive argumentation. Eurasia Journal of Mathematics, Science and Technology Education, 11(2), 335-351. https://doi.org/10.12973/eurasia.2015.1338a
Sadler, T. D. (2004). Informal reasoning regarding socioscientific issues: A critical review of research. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 41, 513-536. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.20009
Schreirer, M. (2012). Qualitative content analysis in practice. Londres: Sage.
Simonneaux, L. (2001). Role-play or debate to promote students’ argumentation and justification on an issue in animal transgenesis. International Journal of Science Education, 23(9), 903-927. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500690010016076
Toulmin, S. (1958). The uses of argument. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
Wesselink, R., Dekker-Groen, A. M., Biemans, H. J. A. y Mulder, M. (2010). Using an instrument to analyse competence-based study programmes: Experiences of teachers in Dutch vocational education and training. Journal of Curriculum Studies, 42(6), 813-829. https://doi.org/10.1080/00220271003759249
Zeidler, D. L. (2014). Socioscientific issues as a curriculum emphasis: Theory, research, and practice. En N. G. Lederman y S. K. Abel (Eds.), Handbook of Research on Science Education, volumen II (pp. 711-740). Routledge.
Zeidler, D. L. y Nichols, B. H. (2009). Socioscientific Issues: Theory and Practice. Journal of Elementary Science Education, 21(2), 49-58. https://doi.org/10.1007/bf03173684
Zeidler, D. L., Sadler, T. D., Simmons, M. L. y Howes, E. V. (2005). Beyond STS: A research based framework for socioscientific issues education. Science Education, 89(3), 357-377. https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.20048
Zohar, A. y Nemet, F. (2002). Fostering students’ knowledge and argumentation skills through dilemmas in human genetics. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 30(1), 35-62. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.10008
Published
Downloads
Copyright (c) 2020 Autor
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
