Preservice Elementary Teachers’ Knowledge Resources for Blending Arguments and Representations in Science

References

• Achieve, Inc. (2013). The next generation science standards, for states, by states. Retrieved September 30, 2021, from https://www.nextgenscience.org/
   Google Scholar
• Ainsworth, S. (2008). The educational value of multiple-representations when learning complex scientific concepts. In J. K. Gilbert, M. Reiner, & M. Nakhleh (Eds.), Visualization: Theory and practice in science education. Models and modeling in science education (pp. 191–208). Springer.
   Google Scholar
• Arcavi, A. (2002). Chapter 2: The everyday and the academic in mathematics. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education Monograph, 11, 12–29. https://doi.org/10.2307/749962
   Google Scholar
• Asterhan, C. S., & Resnick, M. S. (2020). Refutation texts and argumentation for conceptual change: A winning or a redundant combination?. Learning & Instruction, 65, 101265.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Asterhan, C. S., & Schwarz, B. B. (2007). The effects of monological and dialogical argumentation on concept learning in evolutionary theory. Journal of Educational Psychology, 99(3), 626. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-0663.99.3.626
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ball, D. L., Thames, M. H., & Phelps, G. (2008). Content knowledge for teaching. Journal of Teacher Education, 59(5), 389–407. https://doi.org/10.1177/0022487108324554
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Barth-Cohen, L. (2018). Threads of local continuity between centralized and decentralized causality: The emergence of an emergent explanation. Instructional Science, 46(5), 681–705.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Barth-Cohen, L., & Braden, S. (2021). Unpacking the complexity in learning to observe in field geology. Cognition & Instruction, 40(2), 233–265. https://doi.org/10.1080/07370008.2021.1934683
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Berland, L. K., & McNeill, K. L. (2010). A learning progression for scientific argumentation: Understanding student work and designing supportive instructional contexts. Science Education, 94(5), 765–793. https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.20402
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bowers, J., & Kenyon, L. (2020). Planting 3D instruction in your classroom. Science Scope, 43(8), 22–34.
   Google Scholar
• Cavagnetto, A. R. (2010). Argument to foster scientific literacy: A review of argument interventions in K–12 science contexts. Review of Educational Research, 80(3), 336–371. https://doi.org/10.3102/0034654310376953
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Chang, H. (2018). Students’ representational competence with drawing technology across two domains of science. Science Education, 102(5), 1129–1149. https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.21457
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Chang, P. S., Lee, S. H., & Wen, M. L. (2022). Developing an inquiry-based laboratory curriculum to engage students in planning investigations and argumentation. International Journal of Science Education, 44(18), 2659–2684. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500693.2022.2141083
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Chen, Y. C., Benus, M. J., & Yarker, M. B. (2016). Using models to support argumentation in the science classroom. The American Biology Teacher, 78(7), 549–559. https://doi.org/10.1525/abt.2016.78.7.549
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Chin, C., & Osborne, J. (2010). Supporting argumentation through students’ questions: Case studies in science classrooms. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 19(2), 230–284. https://doi.org/10.1080/10508400903530036
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cook, S. D., & Brown, J. S. (1999). Bridging epistemologies: The generative dance between organizational knowledge and organizational knowing. Organization Science, 10(4), 381–400. https://doi.org/10.1287/orsc.10.4.381
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Creswell, J. W., & Poth, C. N. (2017). Qualitative inquiry and research design: Choosing among five approaches. SAGE.
   Google Scholar
• Crippen, K. J. (2012). Argument as professional development: Impacting teacher knowledge and beliefs about science. Journal of Science Teacher Education, 23(8), 847–866. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10972-012-9282-3
   Google Scholar
• Dalvi, T., Silva Mangiante, E., & Wendell, K. (2021). Identifying pre-service teachers’ conceptions about the NGSS practices using a curriculum critique and revision (CCR) task. Journal of Science Teacher Education, 32(2), 123–147. https://doi.org/10.1080/1046560X.2020.1791465
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• diSessa, A. A. (1993). Toward an epistemology of physics. Cognition & Instruction, 10(2–3), 105–225. https://doi.org/10.1080/07370008.1985.9649008
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• diSessa, A. A. (2004). Metarepresentation: Native competence and targets for instruction. Cognition & Instruction, 22(3), 293–331.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• diSessa, A. A. (2006). A history of conceptual change research: Threads and fault lines. In K. Sawyer (Ed.), Cambridge handbook of the learning sciences (pp. 265–282). Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• diSessa, A. A., & Cobb, P. (2004). Ontological innovation and the role of theory in design experiments. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 13(1), 77–103. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15327809jls1301_4
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• DuBois, J., Cumming, S., Schuetze-Coburn, S., & Paolino, D. (1992). Discourse transcription. Santa Barbara Papers in linguistics: Volume 4. University of California, Santa Barbara, Department of Linguistics.
   Google Scholar
• Duncan, R. G., Chinn, C. A., & Barzilai, S. (2018). Grasp of evidence: Problematizing and expanding the next generation science standards’ conceptualization of evidence. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 55(7), 907–937.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Fishman, E. J., Borko, H., Osborne, J., Gomez, F., Rafanelli, S., Reigh, E., Tseng, A., Million, S., & 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
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gutiérrez, J. F., Barth-Cohen, L. A., Francom, R., Greenberg, K., MacArthur, K., & Dobie, T. (2019). An emerging methodology for the study of preservice teachers’ learning about equity in STEM education. In S. Otten, Z. de Araujo, A. Candela, & C. Munter (Eds.), Proceedings of the 41st annual meeting of the North-American Chapter of the International Group for.
   Google Scholar
• Hammer, D. (2000). Student resources for learning introductory physics. American Journal of Physics, 68(S1), S52–S59. https://doi.org/10.1119/1.19520
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hammer, D., & van Zee, E. (2006). Seeing the science in children’s thinking: Case studies of student inquiry in physical science ( Chapter 2). Heinemann.
   Google Scholar
• Henderson, J. B., McNeill, K. L., González‐Howard, M., Close, K., & Evans, M. (2018). Key challenges and future directions for educational research on scientific argumentation. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 55(1), 5–18. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.21412
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kali, Y., Goodyear, P., & Markauskaite, L. (2011). Researching design practices and design cognition: Contexts, experiences and pedagogical knowledge‐in‐pieces. Learning, Media and Technology, 36(2), 129–149. https://doi.org/10.1080/17439884.2011.553621
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kang, R., & Liu, D. (2018). The importance of multiple representations of mathematical problems: Evidence from Chinese preservice elementary teachers’ analysis of a learning goal. International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 16(1), 125–143. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10763-016-9760-8
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kapon, S., & diSessa, A. A. (2012). Reasoning through instructional analogies. Cognition and Instruction, 30(3), 261–310. https://doi.org/10.1080/07370008.2012.689385
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Larrain, A., Freire, P., López, P., & 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
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Liu, Q. T., Liu, B. W., & Lin, Y. R. (2019). The influence of prior knowledge and collaborative online learning environment on students’ argumentation in descriptive and theoretical scientific concept. International Journal of Science Education, 41(2), 165–187. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500693.2018.1545100
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Li, X., Wang, W., & Li, Y. (2022). Systematically reviewing the potential of scientific argumentation to promote multidimensional conceptual change in science education. International Journal of Science Education, 44(7), 1165–1185. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500693.2022.2070787
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• McHugh, M. L. (2012). Interrater reliability: The kappa statistic. Biochemia Medica, 22(3), 276–282. https://doi.org/10.11613/BM.2012.031
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• McNeill, K., González‐Howard, M., Katsh‐Singer, R., & 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
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Namdar, B., & Shen, J. (2016). Intersection of argumentation and the use of multiple representations in the context of socioscientific issues. International Journal of Science Education, 38(7), 1100–1132. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500693.2016.1183265
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• National Research Council. (2013). Next generation science standards: For states, by states. The National Academies Press. https://doi.org/10.17226/18290
   Google Scholar
• NGSS Lead States. (2013). Next generation science standards: For states, by states. The National Academies Press.
   Google Scholar
• Ogunniyi, M. B. (2011). Exploring science educators' cosmological worldviews through the binoculars of an argumentation framework. South African Journal of Higher Education, 25(3), 542–553.
   Google Scholar
• Oliveira, D. K. B., Justi, R., & Mendonça, P. C. C. (2015). The use of representations and argumentative and explanatory situations. International Journal of Science Education, 37(9), 1402–1435. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500693.2015.1039095
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• 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
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Osborne, J., Simon, S., Christodoulou, A., Howell-Richardson, C., & Richardson, K. (2013). Learning to argue: A study of four schools and their attempt to develop the use of argumentation as a common instructional practice and its impact on students. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 50(3), 315–347. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.21073
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Park, J., Tang, K. S., & Chang, J. (2021). Plan‐draw‐evaluate (PDE) pattern in students’ collaborative drawing: Interaction between visual and verbal modes of representation. Science Education, 105(5), 1013–1045. https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.21668
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rapanta, C., & Felton, M. K. (2022). The cognitive-affective-social theory of learning in digital environments (CASTLE). Educational Psychology Review, 34(1), 1–38. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-021-09626-5
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Robertson, A. D., Goodhew, L. M., Scherr, R. E., & Heron, P. R. (2021). University student conceptual resources for understanding forces. Physical Review Physics Education Research, 17(1), 010121. https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevPhysEducRes.17.010121
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ryu, S., & Sandoval, W. A. (2012). Improvements to elementary children’s epistemic understanding from sustained argumentation. Science Education, 96(3), 488–526. https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.21006
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Saldaña. (2009). Coding manual for qualitative researchers. SAGE.
   Google Scholar
• Sampson, V., & Schleigh, S. (2013). Scientific argumentation in biology: 30 classroom activities. NSTA Press.
   Google Scholar
• Schwarz, C. V., Reiser, B. J., Davis, E. A., Kenyon, L., Achér, A., Fortus, D., Shwartz, Y., Hug, B., & Krajcik, J. (2009). Developing a learning progression for scientific modeling: Making scientific modeling accessible and meaningful for learners. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 46(6), 632–654. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.20311
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Selling, S. K., Garcia, N., & Ball, D. L. (2016). What does it take to develop assessments of mathematical knowledge for teaching? Unpacking the mathematical work of teaching. The Mathematics Enthusiast, 13(1), 35–51. https://doi.org/10.54870/1551-3440.1364
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Simon, S., Erduran, S., & Osborne, J. (2006). Learning to teach argumentation: Research and development in the science classroom. International Journal of Science Education, 28(2–3), 235–260. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500690500336957
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Southerland, S. A., & Gess‐Newsome, J. (1999). Preservice teachers’ views of inclusive science teaching as shaped by images of teaching, learning, and knowledge. Science Education, 83(2), 131–150. https://doi.org/10.1002/(SICI)1098-237X(199903)83:2<131:AID-SCE3>3.0.CO;2-X
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Taber, K. S., & Garcia-Franco, A. (2010). Learning processes in chemistry: Drawing upon cognitive resources to learn about the particulate structure of matter. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 19(1), 99–142. https://doi.org/10.1080/10508400903452868
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Tang, K. S., Won, M., & Treagust, D. (2019). Analytical framework for student-generated drawings. International Journal of Science Education, 41(16), 2296–2322. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500693.2019.1672906
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Toulmin, S. (1958). The uses of argument. Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Vosniadou, S., Lawson, M. J., Wyra, M., Van Deur, P., Jeffries, D., & Ngurah, D. I. G. (2020). Pre-service teachers’ beliefs about learning and teaching and about the self-regulation of learning: A conceptual change perspective. International Journal of Educational Research, 99, 101495. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijer.2019.101495
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Waldrip, B. (2014). Impacts of a representational approach on students’ reasoning and conceptual understanding in learning mechanics. International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 12(4), 741–765. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10763-013-9431-y
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Young, D. E., & Meredith, D. C. (2017). Using the resources framework to design, assess, and refine interventions on pressure in fluids. Physical Review Physics Education Research, 13(1), 010125. https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevPhysEducRes.13.010125
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Zembal-Saul, C., McNeill, K. L., & Hershberger, K. (2013). What’s your evidence? Engaging K-5 children in constructing explanations in science. Pearson Higher Ed.
   Google Scholar