Browse > Article
http://dx.doi.org/10.14697/jkase.2013.33.2.486

Epistemic Level in Middle School Students' Small-Group Argumentation Using First-Hand or Second-Hand Data  

Cho, Hyun-A (Seoul National University)
Chang, Ji-Eun (Seoul National University)
Kim, Heui-Baik (Seoul National University)
Publication Information
Journal of The Korean Association For Science Education / v.33, no.2, 2013 , pp. 486-500 More about this Journal
Abstract
This study is conducted to examine how epistemic reasoning and argument structures of students vary according to data sources used in the process of argumentation implemented in the context of inquiry. To this end, three argument tasks using first-hand data and three argument tasks using second-hand data were developed and applied to the unit on 'Nutrition of Plants' for first year middle school students. According to the results of this study, epistemic reasoning of students manifested during the process of argumentation and varied according to data sources. While most students composed explanations with phenomenon-based or relation-based reasoning in argumentation using first-hand data, all the small groups composed explanations that included model-based reasoning in argumentation using second-hand data. In the case of arguments including phenomenon-based or relation-based reasoning, students described only observable characteristics, with warrants omitted from arguments in many cases. On the other hand, in the case of arguments that included model-based reasoning, explanations were composed by combining the results of observations with theoretical knowledge, with warrants more apparent in their arguments.
Keywords
scientific argument; epistemic reasoning; first-hand data; second-hand data;
Citations & Related Records
연도 인용수 순위
  • Reference
1 Driver, R., Leach, J., Miller, R. & Scott, P. (1996). Young people's image of science. Philadelphia: Open University Press.
2 Driver, R., Newton, P., & Osborne, J. (2000). Establishing the norms of scientific argumentation in classrooms. Science Education, 84(3), 287-313   DOI   ScienceOn
3 Giere, R. N. (1991). Understanding scientific reasoning (3rd ed.). Fourth Worth, TX: Holt, Rinehart & Winston.
4 Hodson, D. (1996). Practical work in school science: Exploring some directions for change. International Journal of Science Education, 18(7), 755-760.   DOI   ScienceOn
5 Hug, B. & McNeill, K. L. (2008). Use of first-hand and second-hand data in science: Does data type influence classroom conversations? International Journal of Science Education, 30(13), 1725-1751.   DOI   ScienceOn
6 Jimenez-Aleixandre, M., Rodriguez, M., & Duschl, R. A. (2000)". Doing the lesson"or" doing science": Argument in high school genetics. Science Education, 84(6), 757 792
7 Kelly, G. J. & Takao, A. (2002). Epistemic levels in argument : an analysis of university oceanography students' use of evidence in writing. Science Education, 86(3). 314- 342.
8 Kelly, G. J., Drucer, S. & Chen, C. (1998). Students' reasoning about electricity: combining performance assessments with argumentation analysis. International Journal of Science Education, 20(7), 849-871.   DOI   ScienceOn
9 Kind, P. M., Kind, V., Hofstein, A., & Wilson, J. (2012). Peer argumentation in the school science laboratoryexploring effects of task features. International Journal of Science Education, 33(18), 2527-2558.
10 National Research Council (1996). National Science education standards. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.
11 National Research Council (2000). Inquiry and the National Science education standards: A Guide for Teaching and Learning. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.
12 Newton, P., Dirver, R., & Osborne, J. (1999). The place of argumentation in the pedagogy of school science. International Journal of Science Education, 21(5), 553-576.   DOI   ScienceOn
13 Pera, M. (1994). The discourse of Science. trans. C. Botsford. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.
14 Schauble, L. Klopfer, L. E., & Raghavan, K. (1991). Students'transition form an engineering model to a science model of experiment. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 28, 859-882.   DOI
15 Schauble, L., Glaser, R., Duschl, R. A., Schulze, S., & John, J. (1995). Students'understanding of the objectives and procedure of experimentation in the science classroom. The Journal of The Learning Sciences, 4(2), 131-166.   DOI   ScienceOn
16 Toulmin, S. (1958). The use of argument. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
17 Walton, D. M. (1990). What is reasoning? What is an argument? The Journal of Philosophy, 87, 399-419.   DOI   ScienceOn
18 Watson, J. R., Swain, J. R. L., & McRobbie, C. (2004). Students'discussion in practical scientific inquiries. International Journal of Science Education, 26(1), 24-45.