Argue Like a Scientist with Technology: The Effect of Within-Gender versus Cross-Gender Team Argumentation on Science Knowledge and Argumentation Skills among Middle-Level Students

Autor/inn/en	Hsu, Pi-Sui; Van Dyke, Margot; Smith, Thomas J.; Looi, Chee-Kit
Titel	Argue Like a Scientist with Technology: The Effect of Within-Gender versus Cross-Gender Team Argumentation on Science Knowledge and Argumentation Skills among Middle-Level Students
Quelle	In: Educational Technology Research and Development, 66 (2018) 3, S.733-766 (34 Seiten)Infoseite zur Zeitschrift PDF als Volltext Verfügbarkeit
Sprache	englisch
Dokumenttyp	gedruckt; online; Zeitschriftenaufsatz
ISSN	1042-1629
DOI	10.1007/s11423-018-9574-1
Schlagwörter	Persuasive Discourse; Science Process Skills; Gender Differences; Middle School Students; Grade 7; Mixed Methods Research; Science Instruction; Computer Assisted Instruction; Cooperative Learning; Teamwork; Experimental Groups; Control Groups; Essays; Scientific Literacy; Multivariate Analysis; Outcomes of Education; Concept Mapping + Suchen Sie Ihr Suchwort? Persuasion; Persuasive Kommunikation; Geschlechterkonflikt; Middle school; Middle schools; Student; Students; Mittelschule; Mittelstufenschule; Schüler; Schülerin; School year 07; 7. Schuljahr; Schuljahr 07; Teaching of science; Science education; Natural sciences Lessons; Naturwissenschaftlicher Unterricht; Computer based training; Computerunterstützter Unterricht; Kooperatives Lernen; Essay; Aufsatzunterricht; Multivariate Analyse; Lernleistung; Schulerfolg; Concept Map
Abstract	The purpose of this mixed-methods study was to explore the effect of within-gender and cross-gender team argumentation on seventh graders' science knowledge and argumentation skills in a computer-assisted learning environment in the United States. A total of 58 students were engaged in the collaborative within-gender team argumentation process (the treatment condition), while 46 students were engaged in the collaborative cross-gender team argumentation process (the control condition). Verbal collaborative argumentation was recorded and the students' post essays were collected. There were no statistically significant differences in science knowledge between the treatment and control conditions either for the combined set of students, or for females and males considered separately. For the combined set of male and female students, MANOVA indicated no statistically significant within-gender/cross-gender team argumentation differences in argumentation skills. Similarly, no significant within-gender/cross-gender team argumentation differences were observed among females. However, this study found a marginally significant difference in argumentation skills between male students in the within-gender team argumentation (treatment condition) and male students in the cross-gender team argumentation (control condition). A qualitative analysis was conducted to examine how the computer-assisted application supported students' development of argumentation skills in within-gender and cross-gender team argumentation. Female teams, regardless of within-gender or cross-gender team argumentation, demonstrated balanced participation in the construction of argumentation maps in the application. Male teams in within-gender team argumentation (the treatment condition) demonstrated unbalanced participation in the construction of argumentation maps in the application. (As Provided).
Anmerkungen	Springer. 233 Spring Street, New York, NY 10013. Tel: 800-777-4643; Tel: 212-460-1500; Fax: 212-348-4505; e-mail: service-ny@springer.com; Web site: http://www.springerlink.com
Erfasst von	ERIC (Education Resources Information Center), Washington, DC
Update	2020/1/01