Activating Students' Argumentative Resources on Socioscientific Issues by Indirectly Instructed Reasoning and Negotiation Processes

Autor/inn/en	Jafari, Maria; Meisert, Anke
Titel	Activating Students' Argumentative Resources on Socioscientific Issues by Indirectly Instructed Reasoning and Negotiation Processes
Quelle	In: Research in Science Education, 51 (2021), S.913-934 (22 Seiten)Infoseite zur Zeitschrift PDF als Volltext Verfügbarkeit
Sprache	englisch
Dokumenttyp	gedruckt; online; Zeitschriftenaufsatz
ISSN	0157-244X
DOI	10.1007/s11165-019-09869-x
Schlagwörter	Science Instruction; Teaching Methods; Persuasive Discourse; Science and Society; Abstract Reasoning; Thinking Skills; Biodiversity; Science Process Skills; Student Centered Learning; Decision Making + Suchen Sie Ihr Suchwort? Teaching of science; Science education; Natural sciences Lessons; Naturwissenschaftlicher Unterricht; Teaching method; Lehrmethode; Unterrichtsmethode; Persuasion; Persuasive Kommunikation; Abstraktes Denken; Denken; Denkfähigkeit; Biodiversität; Group work; Student-entered learning; Student-centred learning; Student centred learning; Schülerorientierter Unterricht; Schülerzentrierter Unterricht; Gruppenarbeit; Decision-making; Entscheidungsfindung
Abstract	The present study analyses the impact of negotiation processes on activating argumentative resources for decision-making in a socioscientific issue (SSI) in biology classes. The research focuses on the potential of group-based negotiation processes to activate the use of relevant argumentative resources without any prescribed or explicit instructions on these resources and arguments. In the corresponding intervention with a pre-post-design, students are encouraged to reason and weight their own arguments, which are based on protecting local biodiversity. The students have to reason and weight individually (pre-phase) immediately before they discuss their own reasoning and weighting with others in groups (treatment). The students have to then, once again, reason and weight their arguments individually (post-phase). The students are instructed, during these three steps (pre-phase, treatment, post-phase), using an educational tool, target-mat, which structures the reasoning and weighting visually, but does not prescribe the way of argumentation. By analysing the students' argumentative resources, normative and fact-based elements can be measured immediately before and after the negotiation process. In terms of the pre-phase, the use of differing and appropriate argumentative resources can be analysed in relation to different arguments. The pre- and post-comparison reveals relevant changes leading to a substantial increase of the quality of reasoning. Therefore, in a student-centred decision-making process with minimal guidance, students are encouraged to become aware of the appropriateness of different argumentative resources. (As Provided).
Anmerkungen	Springer. Available from: Springer Nature. One New York Plaza, Suite 4600, New York, NY 10004. Tel: 800-777-4643; Tel: 212-460-1500; Fax: 212-460-1700; e-mail: customerservice@springernature.com; Web site: https://link.springer.com/
Erfasst von	ERIC (Education Resources Information Center), Washington, DC
Update	2024/1/01