• Journal of The Korean Association For Science Education
• /
• v.30 no.3
• /
• pp.323-336
• /
• 2010

The purpose of this study was to evaluate students' written arguments embedded in scientific inquiry investigations using the Science Writing Heuristic (SWH) approach. Argument components defined in this study are questions, claims, questions-claims relationship, evidence, claims-evidence relationship, multiple modal representations, and reflection. A set of criteria for evaluating each argument component was developed to evaluate writing samples of students from college freshman general chemistry laboratory classes. Results indicate that students produced, on average, moderate to powerful questions, claims, and evidence. They also constructed reasonable questions-claims relationship and claims-evidence relationship. Compared to other component scores, the average score for reflection was relatively low. Overall, the average Total Argument score was 21.4 out of a possible 36, that is, the quality of the written arguments using the SWH approach during a series of inquiry-based chemistry laboratory investigations was moderate to powerful. The findings of this study suggest that students, on average, developed reasonable scientific arguments generated as part of scientific inquiry. In other words, students are capable of putting together reasonable arguments as they participate in inquiry-based laboratory classrooms.

• Journal of The Korean Association For Science Education
• /
• v.32 no.7
• /
• pp.1099-1108
• /
• 2012

The purpose of this study was to examine the effects of argument structure on students' writing in implementation of argument-based inquiry using the Science Writing Heuristic (SWH) approach. Participants of this study were 108 8th grade students (three classes). Two classes (68 students) were assigned to an experimental group, and the other class (35 students) was assigned to a comparative group. The experimental group was taught argument-based inquiry using the Science Writing Heuristic (SWH) approach, while the comparative group was taught with the traditional teaching strategy. After implementing this program, the two groups were asked to write summaries using structured argumentation in their writing. The result of this study showed that the experimental group used better argument structure and multimodal representation such as pictures, graphs and examples in evidence than the comparative group. The quality of evidence used in the students' writing was different between two groups. Students of the comparative group only listed fragments of science concepts for evidence to support their claims, but students of the experimental group explained science concepts by giving specific examples. The findings show that argument-based inquiry using the SWH approach was effective on argument structure in students' writing.

• Journal of the Korean Chemical Society
• /
• v.58 no.6
• /
• pp.658-666
• /
• 2014

This study was designed to explore pre-service secondary science teachers' understanding and views of argument-based inquiry approach. Participants were 17 pre-service secondary science teachers enrolled in chemistry curricular materials and teaching methods course for majors in the college of education at a university in Seoul. Main data sources included each student responses to an open ended survey and individual interviews. Data analyses indicated that the pre-service teachers had very limited and biased understanding on scientific inquiry at the beginning of the semester. While the pre-service teachers understood that scientific inquiry should be an essential component of science teaching, a few pre-service teachers mentioned 'argumentation' or 'discussions' when they defined what scientific inquiry is. The majority of the pre-service teachers mentioned that science should be taught through scientific inquiry since science is inquiry itself. However, the pre-service teachers expressed several potential barriers and their concerns on implementing argumentation in scientific inquiry. While they concerned about students' lack of participation at the beginning of the semester, they concerned more about the teachers' ability of leading student argumentation at the end of the semester.

• Journal of The Korean Association For Science Education
• /
• v.32 no.9
• /
• pp.1470-1488
• /
• 2012

This study examined changes in the quality of written arguments produced by freshman students in general chemistry laboratory classes using the SWH approach over a semester; difference in the quality of written argument between the original writing template (year I) and the extended writing template (year II); and any difference between Total Argument and Holistic Argument scores. 140 writing samples from 14 students on the year I and 228 samples from 19 students on the year II were collected. Results indicated that despite fluctuations, the students were producing stronger argument by the end of semester compared to the beginning of the semester. Original SWH template group received significantly higher argument scores than extended SWH template group. For the most of year I laboratory investigations, there was no significant difference in the quality of argument between Total Argument and Holistic Argument scores. An implication of this study would be to provide opportunities for students to practice constructing arguments using the original SWH writing template including questions, claims, evidence, and reflection.

• Journal of The Korean Association For Science Education
• /
• v.33 no.3
• /
• pp.569-580
• /
• 2013

This study examined how a Structured Reading Framework (SRF) is related to improving students' critical thinking ability in an argument-based inquiry approach, called the Science Writing Heuristic (SWH) approach. A total of 75 $8^{th}$ graders participated in the study, with 34 in the control group and 41 in the treatment group. The gains in critical thinking skills were compared between two groups, and relationships among the components of the reading framework and the critical thinking skills were explored at the group level. Result indicates that the treatment group who used the SRF had larger gains in critical thinking scores than control group who used the Original Reading Framework (ORF). In addition, results show that the correlations between Reading Framework (RF) components and critical thinking scores are statistically significant in the treatment group, while no correlations exist in the control group. It appears that using the SRF have an impact on developing students' critical thinking ability by providing a scaffold to assist argumentation practice.

• Journal of The Korean Association For Science Education
• /
• v.34 no.8
• /
• pp.787-794
• /
• 2014

The purpose of this study was to examine the science writing and perception of students who experienced the argument-based claim and evidence writing approach. One hundred and eight grade 11 students were assigned to an experimental group, while 99 grade 12 students were assigned to a comparative group in their earth science classes. Students' science writings on two science topics were scored using an analytic rubric developed in this study. The comparison of experimental and comparative groups in science writing was carried out using an independent two samples t-test. Students' perception on the instruction was examined using an open-ended survey. Science writing by the experimental group scored significantly higher than that by the comparative group, except for the big idea of 'green energy'. For six concepts in 'green energy' and four concepts in 'plate tectonics, there were more students in the experimental group than the comparative group who indicated them in their science writing. Students' perception on the instruction was positive in that they mentioned planning and conducting inquiry, citing of claims and evidence, and developing inquiry questions were helpful in science learning. The results of this study imply that the argument-based claim and evidence writing approach should be implemented in science classrooms for students to develop a conceptual framework for science.

• Research in Mathematical Education
• /
• v.24 no.3
• /
• pp.175-199
• /
• 2021

The Science Writing Heuristic (SWH) approach is described as an immersive argument-based science inquiry focusing particularly on learning through epistemic practices. In the literature, several previous studies indicate how academic achievement is positively influenced by the SWH. In addition to these previous studies, several meta-syntheses of qualitative data have been conducted on this particular topic. With these literatures in mind, a quantitative meta-analysis was conducted with ten studies (N = 724) to examine the effectiveness of the SWH on student achievement in Turkey. To present a thoroughly detailed report, this study also examined the following moderators: grade level, subject area, school location, intervention length, and report source. Overall, this study found that in Turkey, the SWH classrooms performed better in academic achievement tests than traditional lecture-based classrooms. Additionally, the SWH is more likely to be effective regardless of grade levels, subject areas, and school locations.

• Journal of The Korean Association For Science Education
• /
• v.32 no.1
• /
• pp.146-159
• /
• 2012

The purpose of this study was to examine the relation between students' reflective thinking and providing the reading framework in implementation of argument-based inquiry using the Science Writing Heuristic (SWH) approach. Participants of this study were 60 $8^{th}$ grade students (two classes). One class (31 students) was assigned to an experimental group and the other class (29 students) was assigned to a comparative group. For the experimental group, five activities using the reading framework with SWH writing template were implemented, while three activities using the reading framework with the SWH writing template and two SWH activities without the reading framework were implemented for the comparative group. The result of this study showed that there was no significant difference in students' reflective thinking between both groups. However, results indicated that providing the reading framework with SWH approach facilitated students' reflective thinking. Therefore, the findings show that providing the reading framework consistently in the SWH approach was effective when it came to facilitating students' reflective thinking.