Discussions and Argumentation in Science Teaching: Teaching Practices and Challenges
Abstract
Scientific discussions in school classrooms are recent and scarce globally, with teaching characterized by unproductive patterns of interrogation-response-evaluation. Hence, knowing what can facilitate productive and argumentative discussions in science classrooms is critical. This study systematically reviews the literature and finds that such practices have dialogic/interactive purposes, assign roles, and specify participation structures, discourses, and teaching practices. The works reviewed also identify challenges in the curriculum, teacher education, and teacher beliefs in facilitating scientific discussions. Implications address pre-service and in-service teacher education, suggesting the inclusion of scientific argumentation, reinforcing scientific knowledge, and working on teacher beliefs about argumentation.
Keywords
Argumentation, Science education, Professional development, Teacher practicesReferences
Alexander, R. (2020). A Dialogic Teaching Companion. Taylor & Francis.
Alexander, R. (2018). Developing dialogic teaching: Genesis, process, trial. Research Papers in Education, 33(5), 561-598. https://doi.org/10.1080/02671522.2018.1481140
Alexander, R. (2015). Dialogic Pedagogy at Scale: Oblique Perspectives. En L. B. Resnick, C. S. C. Asterhan y S. N. Clarke (Eds.), Socializing Intelligence Through Academic Talk and Dialogue (pp. 429-439). American Educational Research Association. https://doi.org/10.3102/978-0-935302-43-1_33
Bardin, L. (2006). Análise de Conteúdo (3.ª ed.). [Análisis de contenido]. Edicoes 70.
Belland, B. R., Burdo, R. y Gu, J. (2015). A blended professional development program to help a teacher learn to provide one-to-one scaffolding. Journal of Science Teacher Education, 26, 263-289. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10972-015-9419-2
Bossér, U. y Lindahl, M. (2021). Teachers’ coordination of dialogic and authoritative discourses promoting specific goals in socioscientific issue-based teaching. International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 19, 461-482. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10763-020-10061-1
Borko, H., Gomez Zaccarelli, F., Reigh, E. y Osborne, J. (2021). Teacher Facilitation of Elementary Science Discourse after a Professional Development Initiative. The Elementary School Journal, 121(4), 561-585. https://doi.org/10.1086/714082
Campbell, T., Seok Oh, P. y Neilson, D (2012). Discursive Modes and Their Pedagogical Functions in Model-Based Inquiry (MBI) Classrooms. International Journal of Science Education, 34(15), 2393-2419. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500693.2012.704552
Chen, Y. C., Benus, M. J. y Yarker, M. B. (2016). Using models to support argumentation in the science classroom. The American Biology Teacher, 78(7), 549-559. https://doi.org/549-559. 10.1525/abt.2016.78.7.549
Chowning, J. T. (2022). Science teachers in research labs: Expanding conceptions of social dialogic dimensions of scientific argumentation. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 1-28. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.21760
Christodoulou, A. y Osborne, J. (2014). The science classroom as a site of epistemic talk: A case study of a teacher’s attempts to teach science based on argument. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 51(10). https://doi.org/1275-1300. 10.1002/tea.21166
Cofré, H., González-Weil, C., Vergara, C., Santibáñez, D., Ahumada, G., Furman, M., Podesta, M. E., Camacho, J., Gallego, R. y Pérez, R. (2015). Science Teacher Education in South America: The Case of Argentina, Colombia and Chile. Journal of Science Teacher Education, 26(1), 45-63. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10972-015-9420-9
Dohrn, S. W. y Dohn, N. B. (2018). The role of teacher questions in the chemistry classroom. Chemistry Education Research and Practice, 19(1), 352-363. https://doi.org/10.1039/C7RP00196G
Driver, R., Newton, P. y Osborne, J. (2000). Establishing the norms of scientific argumentation in classrooms. Science Education, 84(3), 287-312. https://doi.org/10.1002/(SICI)1098-237X(200005)84:3<287::AID-SCE1>3.0.CO;2-A
Duschl, R. (2008). Science Education in Three-Part Harmony: Balancing Conceptual, Epistemic, and Social Learning Goals. Review of Research in Education, 32(1), 268-291. https://doi.org/10.3102/0091732X07309371
Erduran, S. y Jiménez-Aleixandre, M. P. (2008). Argumentation in science education. Perspectives from classroom-Based Research. Springer.
Erduran, S., Guilfoyle, L. y Park, W. (2020). Science and religious education teachers’ views of argumentation and its teaching. Research in Science Education, 1-19. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11165-020-09966-2
Evagorou, M. y Dillon, J. (2011). Argumentation in the Teaching of Science. En D. Corrigan, J. Dillon y R. Gunstone (Eds.), The Professional Knowledge Base of Science Teaching (pp. 189-203). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-90-481-3927-9_11
Faize, F. A., Husain, W. y Nisar, F. (2017). A critical review of scientific argumentation in science education. Eurasia Journal of Mathematics, Science and Technology Education, 14(1), 475-483. https://doi.org/10.12973/ejmste/80353
Felton, M., Levin, D. M., De La Paz, S. y Butler, C. (2022). Scientific argumentation and responsive teaching: Using dialog to teach science in three middle‐school classrooms. Science Education, 1-21. https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.21740
Fishman, E. J., Borko, H., Osborne, J., Gomez, F., Rafanelli, S., Reigh, E., Tseng, A., Million, S. y Berson, E. (2017). A Practice-Based Professional Development Program to Support Scientific Argumentation From Evidence in the Elementary Classroom. Journal of Science Teacher Education, 28(3), 222-249. https://doi.org/10.1080/1046560X.2017.1302727
Gillies, R. M. (2020). Dialogic teaching during cooperative inquiry-based science: A case study of a year 6 classroom. Education Sciences, 10(11), 328. https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci10110328
Gomez Zaccarelli, F., Schindler, A.-K., Borko, H. y Osborne, J. (2018). Learning from professional development: A case study of the challenges of enacting productive science discourse in the classroom. Professional Development in Education, 44(5), 721-737. https://doi.org/10.1080/19415257.2017.1423368
González-Howard, M. y McNeill, K. L. (2019). Teachers’ framing of argumentation goals: Working together to develop individual versus communal understanding. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 56(6), 821-844. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.21530
González-Howard, M., McNeill, K. L., Marco-Bujosa, L. M. y Proctor, C. P. (2017). ‘Does it answer the question or is it French fries?’: an exploration of language supports for scientific argumentation. International Journal of Science Education, 39(5), 528-547. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500693.2017.1294785
Grossman, P. L., Compton, C., Igra, D., Ronfeldt, M., Shahan, E. y Williamson, P. (2009). Teaching practice: A cross-professional perspective. Teachers College Record, 111(9), 2055-2100.
Jiménez-Aleixandre, M. P. y Erduran, S. (2008). Argumentation in science education: An overview. En M. P. Jiménez-Aleixandre y S. Erduran (Eds.), Argumentation in science education: Perspectives from classroom-based research (pp. 47-70). Springer.
Jiménez-Aleixandre, M. P. y Pereiro-Muñoz, C. (2005). Argument Construction and Change while Working on a Real Environment Problem. En K. Boersma, M. Goedhart, O. de Jong y H. Eijkelhof (Eds.), Research and the Quality of Science Education (pp. 419-431). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/1-4020-3673-6_33
Kim, M. y Roth, W. M. (2018). Dialogical argumentation in elementary science classrooms. Cultural Studies of Science Education, 13, 1061-1085. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11422-017-9846-9
Kutluca, A. Y. (2021). An investigation of elementary teachers’ pedagogical content knowledge for socioscientific argumentation: The effect of a learning and teaching experience. Science Education, 105, 743-775. https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.21624
Larrain, A. (2009). El rol de la argumentación en la alfabetización científica. Estudios Públicos, 116, 167-193. https://www.estudiospublicos.cl/index.php/cep/article/view/417
Larrain, A., Freire, P. y Howe, C. (2014). Science teaching and argumentation: One-sided versus dialectical argumentation in Chilean middle-school science lessons. International Journal of Science Education, 36(6), 1017-1036. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/09500693.2013.832005
Larrain, A., Freire, P., López, P. y Grau, V. (2019). Counter-arguing during curriculum-supported peer interaction facilitates middle-school students’ science content knowledge. Cognition and Instruction, 37(4), 453-482. https://doi.org/10.1080/07370008.2019.1627360
Larrain, A., Howe, C. y Freire, P. (2018). ‘More is not necessarily better’: Curriculum materials support the impact of classroom argumentative dialogue in science teaching on content knowledge. Research in Science & Technological Education, 36(3), 282-301. https://doi.org/10.1080/02635143.2017.1408581
Larraín, A., Moreno, C., Grau, V., Freire, P., Salvat, I., López, P. y Silva, M. (2017). Curriculum materials support teachers in the promotion of argumentation in science teaching: A case study. Teaching and Teacher Education, 67, 522-537. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2017.07.018
Larrain, A., Singer, V., Strasser, K., Howe, C., López, P., Pinochet, J. et al, (2021). Argumentation skills mediate the effect of peer argumentation on content knowledge in middle-school students. Journal of Educational Psychology, 113(4), 736. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/edu0000619
Lefstein, A. y Snell, J. (2013). Better Than Best Practice: Developing Teaching and Learning Through Dialogue. Taylor & Francis.
Lehesvuori, S., Viiri, J., Rasku‐Puttonen, H., Moate, J. y Helaakoski, J. (2013). Visualizing communication structures in science classrooms: Tracing cumulativity in teacher‐led whole class discussions. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 50(8), 912-939. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.21100
Lehesvuori, S., Chan, K. K. H., Ramnarain, U., Viiri, J. (2017). In Search of Dialogicity: A Comparison of Curricular Documents and Classroom Interactions from Finland and Hong Kong. Educ. Sci., 7, 76. https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci7040076
Mansour, N. (2020). The dissonance between scientific evidence, diversity and dialogic pedagogy in the science classroom. International Journal of Science Education, 42(2), 190-217. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500693.2019.1706114
McNeill, K. L. y Knight, A. M. (2013). Teachers’ pedagogical content knowledge of scientific argumentation: The impact of professional development on K-12 teachers. Science Education, 97(6), 936-972. https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.21081
McNeill, K. L. y Pimentel, D. S. (2010). Scientific discourse in three urban classrooms: The role of the teacher in engaging high school students in argumentation. Science Education, 94(2), 203-229. https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.20364
McNeill, K. L., González‐Howard, M., Katsh‐Singer, R. y Loper, S. (2016). Pedagogical content knowledge of argumentation: Using classroom contexts to assess high‐quality PCK rather than pseudoargumentation. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 53(2), 261-290. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.21252
McNeill, K. L., González‐Howard, M., Katsh‐Singer, R. y Loper, S. (2017). Moving beyond pseudoargumentation: Teachers’ enactments of an educative science curriculum focused on argumentation. Science Education, 101(3), 426-457. https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.21274
Mercer, N. y Littleton, K. (2007). Dialogue and the development of children’s thinking: A sociocultural approach. Routledge.
Mork, S. M. (2005). Argumentation in science lessons: Focusing on the teacher’s role. Nordic Studies in Science Education, 1(1), 17-30. https://doi.org/10.5617/nordina.463
Mortimer, E. y Scott, P. (2003). Meaning making in secondary science classrooms. McGraw-Hill Education.
Murphy, P. K., Greene, J. A., Allen, E., Baszczewski, S., Swearingen, A., Wei, L. y Butler, A. M. (2018). Fostering high school students’ conceptual understanding and argumentation performance in science through Quality Talk discussions. Science Education, 102(6), 1239-1264. https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.21471
Nystrand, M. y Gamoran, A. (1991). Instructional Discourse, Student Engagement, and Literature Achievement. Research in the Teaching of English, 25(3), 261-290. https://www.jstor.org/stable/40171413
Nunez-Oviedo M. C. y Clement, J. J. (2019). Large Scale Scientific Modeling Practices That Can Organize Science Instruction at the Unit and Lesson Levels. Front. Educ., 4(68). https://doi.org/10.3389/feduc.2019.00068
Onrubia, J., Roca, B. y Minguela, M. (2022). Assisting teacher collaborative discourse in professional development: An analysis of a facilitator’s discourse strategies. Teaching and Teacher Education, 113, 103667. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2022.103667
Osborne, J. (2010). Arguing to learn in science: The role of collaborative, critical discourse. Science, 328(5977), 463-466. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1183944
Osborne, J., Borko, H., Fishman, E., Gomez Zaccarelli, F., Berson, E., Busch, K. C., Reigh, E. y Tseng, A. (2019). Impacts of a Practice-Based Professional Development Program on Elementary Teachers’ Facilitation of and Student Engagement With Scientific Argumentation. American Educational Research Journal, 56(4), 1067-1112. https://doi.org/10.3102/0002831218812059
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
Osborne, J., Henderson, J. B., MacPherson, A., Szu, E., Wild, A. y Yao, S. (2016). The development and validation of a learning progression for argumentation in science. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 53(6), 821–846. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.21316
Park, J., Michaels, S., Affolter, R. y O’Connor, C. (2017). Traditions, Research, and Practice Supporting Academically Productive Classroom Discourse. En Oxford Research Encyclopedia of Education.
Pekel, F. O. (2019). Effectiveness of argumentation-based concept cartoons on teaching global warming, ozone layer depletion, and acid rain. Journal of Environmental Protection and Ecology, 20(2), 945-953.
Pimentel, D. S. y McNeill, K. L. (2013). Conducting talk in secondary science classrooms: Investigating instructional moves and teachers’ beliefs. Science Education, 97(3), 367-394. https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.21061
Polo, C., Plantin, C., Lund, K. y Niccolai, G. P. (2017). Emotional positioning as a cognitive resource for arguing: Lessons from the study of Mexican students debating about drinking water management. Pragmatics and Society, 8(3), 323-354. https://doi.org/10.1075/ps.8.3.01pol
Rapanta, C. (2021). Can teachers implement a student-centered dialogical argumentation method across the curriculum? Teaching and Teacher Education, 105, 103404. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2021.103404
Resnick, L. B., Michaels, S. y O’Connor, M. C. (2010). How (well-structured) talk builds the mind. En R. Sternberg y D. Preiss (Eds.), Innovations in educational psychology: Perspectives on learning, teaching and human development (pp. 163-194). Springer.
Ruiz Ortega, F. J., Márquez, C. y Tamayo Alzate, Ó. E. (2014). Cambio en las concepciones de los docentes sobre la argumentación y su desarrollo en clase de ciencias. Enseñanza de las Ciencias, 32(3), 0053-70. https://doi.org/10.5565/rev/ensciencias.985
Sanmartí, N. (2007). Hablar, leer y escribir para aprender ciencia. En T. Á. Angulo y M. P. F. Martínez (Eds.), La competencia en comunicación lingüística en las áreas del currículo (pp. 103-128). Ministerio de Educación.
Schindler, A. K., Gröschner, A. y Seidel, T. (2018). Teaching science effectively: a case study on student verbal engagement in classroom dialogue. Orbis Scholae, 9(2) 9-34. https://doi.org/10.14712/23363177.2015.78
Scott, P., Mortimer, E. y Aguiar, O. (2006). The tension between authoritative and dialogic discourse: A fundamental characteristic of meaning making interactions in high school science lessons. Science Education, 90, 605-631. https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.20131
Simon, S., Erduran, S. y Osborne, J. (2006). Learning to Teach Argumentation: Research and development in the science classroom. International Journal of Science Education, 28(2), 235. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500690500336957
Soysal, Y. (2021). An exploration of the determinants of middle school students’ argument quality by classroom discourse analysis. Research in Science & Technological Education, 1-29. https://doi.org/10.1080/02635143.2021.1908981
Tasker, T. Q. y Herrenkohl, L. R. (2016). Using peer feedback to improve students’ scientific inquiry. Journal of Science Teacher Education, 27, 35-59. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10972-016-9454-7
Watkins, J. y Manz, E. (2022). Characterizing pedagogical decision points in sense‐making conversations motivated by scientific uncertainty. Science Education, 1-34. https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.21747
Wess, R., Priemer, B. y Parchmann, I. (2023). Professional development programs to improve science teachers’ skills in the facilitation of argumentation in science classroom –A systematic review. Disciplinary and Interdisciplinary Science Education Research, 5(1), 9. https://doi.org/10.1186/s43031-023-00076-3
Zafrani, E. y Yarden, A. (2022). Dialog‐constraining institutional logics and their interactional manifestation in the science classroom. Science Education, 106, 142-171. https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.21687
Published
Downloads
Copyright (c) 2024 Florencia Gómez Zaccarelli, Natalia Cándido Vendrasco, Victoria Arriagada Jofré
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
