‘More is not necessarily better’: curriculum materials support the impact of classroom argumentative dialogue in science teaching on content knowledge

References

• Alexander, R. J. 2004. Towards Dialogic Teaching: Rethinking Classroom Talk . Cambridge: Dialogos.
   Google Scholar
• Anderson, R. C. , K. Nguyen-Jahiel , B. McNurlen , A. Archodidou , S. Y. Kim , A. Reznitskaya , and L. Gilbert . 2001. “The Snowball Phenomenon: Spread of Ways of Talking and Ways of Thinking across Groups of Children.” Cognition and Instruction 19 (1): 1–46. doi:10.1207/S1532690XCI1901_1.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Arias, A. M. , P. S. Smith , E. A. Davis , J. C. Marino , and A. S. Palincsar . 2017. “Justifying Predictions: Connecting Use of Educative Curriculum Materials to Students’ Engagement in Science Argumentation.” Journal of Science Teacher Education 28 (1): 11–35. doi:10.1080/1046560X.2016.1277597.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Asterhan, C. S. C. 2013. “Epistemic and Interpersonal Dimensions of Peer Argumentation: Conceptualization and Quantitative Assessment.” In Affective Learning Together , edited by M. Baker , J. Andriessen , and S. Jarvela , 251–272. New York : Routledge, Advances in Learning & Instruction Series.
   Google Scholar
• Asterhan, C. S. C. , and B. B. Schwarz . 2007. “The Effects of Monological and Dialogical Argumentation on Concept Learning in Evolutionary Theory.” Journal of Educational Psychology 99: 626–639. doi:10.1037/0022-0663.99.3.626.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Asterhan, C. S. C. , and B. B. Schwarz . 2016. “Argumentation for Learning: Well-Trodden Paths and Unexplored Territories.” Educational Psychologist 51 (2): 164–187. doi:10.1080/00461520.2016.1155458.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Aydeniz, M. A. , and A. Dogan . 2016. “Exploring the Impact of Argumentation on Pre-Service Science Teachers’ Conceptual Understanding of Chemical Equilibrium.” Chemistry Education Research and Practice 17: 111–119. doi:10.1039/c5rp00170f.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bakhtin, M. 1986. “The Problem of Speech Genres.” In (Trans) Speech Genres and Others Late Essays , edited by V. W. McGee , 60–102. Texas: University of Texas Press.
   Google Scholar
• Berland, L. K. , and K. L. McNeill . 2010. “A Learning Progression for Scientific Argumentation: Understanding Student Work and Designing Supportive Instructional Contexts.” Science Education 94 (5): 765–793. doi:10.1002/sce.20402.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Billig, M. 1987. Arguing and Thinking: A Rhetorical Approach to Social Psychology . Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Che, C. H. , and H. C. She . 2012. “The Impact of Recurrent on-Line Synchronous Scientific Argumentation on Students’ Argumentation and Conceptual Change.” Educational Technology & Society 15 (1): 197–210.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Chi, M. T. , S. Kang , and D. L. Yaghmourian . 2016. “Why Students Learn More from Dialogue than Monologue Videos: Analyses of Peer Interactions.” Journal of the Learning Sciences 26: 1–41.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Driver, R. , P. Newton , and J. Osborne . 2000. “Establishing the Norms of Scientific Argumentation in Classrooms.” Science Education 84: 287–312. doi:10.1002/(SICI)1098-237X(200005)84:3<287::AID-SCE1>3.0.CO;2-A.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Duschl, R. A. , and J. Osborne . 2002. “Supporting and Promoting Argumentation Discourse in Science Education.” Studies in Science Education 38: 39–72. doi:10.1080/03057260208560187.
   Google Scholar
• van Eemeren, F. H. , and R. Grootendorst . 1992. Argumentation, Communication, and Fallacies: A Pragma-Dialectical Perspective . Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
   Google Scholar
• Greco, S. 2016. “Using Argumentative Tools to Understand Inner Dialogue.” Argumentation 2 (31): 331–358. doi:10.1007/s10503-016-9408-4.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Grossman, P. , and C. Thompson . 2008. “Learning from Curriculum Materials: Scaffolds for New Teachers?” Teaching and Teacher Education 24 (8): 2014–2026.10.1016/j.tate.2008.05.002
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Henderson, J. B. , A. MacPherson , J. Osborne , and A. Wild . 2015. “Beyond Construction: Five Arguments for the Role and Value of Critique in Learning Science.” International Journal of Science Education 37 (10): 1668–1697.10.1080/09500693.2015.1043598
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Howe, C. , D. McWilliam , and G. Cross . 2005. “Chance Favours Only the Prepared Mind: Incubation and the Delayed Effects of Peer Collaboration.” British Journal of Psychology 96: 67–93. doi:10.1348/000712604X15527.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Howe, C. , S. Luthman , K. Ruthven , N. Mercer , R. Hofmann , S. Ilie , and P. Guardia . 2015. “Rational Number and Proportional Reasoning in Early Secondary School: Towards Principled Improvement in Mathematics.” Research in Mathematics Education 17: 38–56.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Howe, C. , S. Ilie , P. Guardia , R. Hofmann , N. Mercer , and F. Riga . 2015. “Principled Improvement in Science: Forces and Proportional Relations in Early Secondary-School Teaching.” International Journal of Science Education 37 (1): 162–184.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• IBM Corporation . 2015. IBM SPSS Statistics . Version 24, [Windows]. New York : IBM Corporation. Accessed http://www.ibm.com
   Google Scholar
• Jiménez-Aleixandre, M. P. , and S. Erduran . 2008. “Argumentation in Science Education: An Overview.” In Argumentation in Science Education: Perspectives from Classroom-Based Research , edited by M. P. Jiménez-Aleixandre and S. Erduran , 47–70. Dordrecht: Springer.
   Google Scholar
• Kaya, E. 2013. “Argumentation Practices in Classroom: Pre-Service Teachers’ Conceptual Understanding of Chemical Equilibrium.” International Journal of Science Education 35 (7): 1139–1158. doi:10.1080/09500693.2013.770935.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kiemer, K. , A. Gröschner , A. K. Pehmer , and T. Seidel . 2015. “Effects of a Classroom Discourse Intervention on Teachers’ Practice and Students’ Motivation to Learn Mathematics and Science.” Learning and Instruction 35: 94–103.10.1016/j.learninstruc.2014.10.003
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kuhn, D. 2015. “Thinking Together and Alone.” Educational Researcher 44: 46–53. doi:10.3102/0013189X15569530.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kuhn, D. , and A. Crowell . 2011. “Dialogic Argumentation as a Vehicle for Developing Young Adolescents’ Thinking.” Psychological Science 22: 545–552. doi:10.1177/0956797611402512.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kuhn, D. , V. Shaw , and M. Felton . 1997. “Effects of Dyadic Interaction on Argumentive Reasoning.” Cognition and Instruction 15: 287–315. doi:10.1207/s1532690xci1503_1.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Larrain, A. , P. Freire , and C. Howe . 2014. “Science Teaching and Argumentation: One-Sided Versus Dialectical Argumentation in Chilean Middle School Science Lessons.” International Journal of Science Education 36: 1017–1036. doi:10.1080/09500693.2013.832005.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Larrain, A. , P. Freire , and T. Olivos . 2014. “Habilidades de argumentación escrita: una propuesta de medición para estudiantes de quinto básico.” Psicoperspectivas 13 (1): 94–107.
   Google Scholar
• Larraín, A. , C. Moreno , V. Grau , P. Freire , I. Salvat , P. López , and M. Silva . 2017. “Curriculum Materials Support Teachers in the Promotion of Argumentation in Science Teaching: A Case Study.” Teaching and Teacher Education 67: 522–537. doi:10.1016/j.tate.2017.018.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Leitão, S. 2000. “The Potential of Argument in Knowledge Building.” Human Development 43: 332–360.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Leitão, S. 2009. “Arguing and Learning.” In Challenges and Strategies for Studying Human Development in Cultural Contexts , edited by C. Lightfoot and M. Lyra , 251–252. Rome: Firera Publishing.
   Google Scholar
• Leiva, D. , C. Cardemil , S. Ritterhaussen , M. Latorre , and E. Rodríguez . 2000. El Texto Escolar: Una Alternativa Para Aprender En La Escuela Y En La Casa . Santiago: Facultad de Educación PUC, CIDE y MINEDUC.
   Google Scholar
• Loper, S. , K. L. McNeill , and M. González-Howard . 2017. “Multimedia Educative Curriculum Materials (MECMs): Teachers’ Choices in Using MECMs Designed to Support Scientific Argumentation.” Journal of Science Teacher Education 28 (1): 36–56. doi:10.1080/1046560X.2016.1277600.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Marco-Bujosa, L. M. , K. L. McNeill , M. González-Howard , and S. Loper . 2017. “An Exploration of Teacher Learning from an Educative Reform-Oriented Science Curriculum: Case Studies of Teacher Curriculum Use.” Science Education 101 (3): 426–457. doi:10.1002/sce.21274.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Matusov, E. 2009. Journey into Dialogic Pedagogy . Hauppauge, NY: Nova Publishers.
   Google Scholar
• McNeill, K. , M. González-Howard , R. Katsh-Singer , and S. Loper . 2017. “Moving beyond Pseudo Argumentation: Teachers’ Enactment of an Educative Science Curriculum Focused on Argumentation.” Journal of Research in Science Teaching 53: 261–290.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mercer, N. 2009. Developing Argumentation: Lessons Learned in the Primary School. In Argumentation and Education , edited by N. Muller Mirza and A. N. Perret-Clermont , 177–194. New York, NY : Springer. 10.1007/978-0-387-98125-3
   Google Scholar
• Mercer, N. 2013. “The Social Brain, Language, and Goal-Directed Collective Thinking: A Social Conception of Cognition and Its Implications for Understanding How We Think, Teach, and Learn.” Educational Psychologist 48 (3): 148–168. doi:10.1080/00461520.2013.804394.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mercer, N. , and K. Littleton . 2007. Dialogue and the Development of Children’s Thinking . London: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Mercer, N. , R. Dawes , R. Wegerif , and C. Sams . 2004. “Reasoning as a Scientist: Ways of Helping Children to Use Language to Learn Science.” British Educational Research Journal 30: 367–385.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mortimer, E. , and P. Scott . 2003. Meaning Making in Secondary Science Classrooms . Maidenhead and Philadelphia: Open University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Nussbaum, E. M. , and G. M. Sinatra . 2003. “Argument and Conceptual Engagement.” Contemporary Educational Psychology 28: 384–395. doi:10.1016/S0361-476X(02)00038-3.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Nystrand, M. 1997. “Dialogic Instruction: When Recitation Becomes Conversation.” In Opening Dialogue: Understanding the Dynamics of Language and Learning in the English Classroom , edited by M. Nystrand , A. Gamoran , R. Kachur , and C. Prendergast , 1–29. New York : Teachers College Press.
   Google Scholar
• Osborne, J. F. , S. Erduran , and S. Simon . 2004. “Enhancing the Quality of Argument in School Science.” Journal of Research in Science Teaching 41: 994–1020. doi:10.1002/tea.20035.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Osborne, J. , S. Simon , A. Christodoulou , C. Howell-Richardson , and K. Richardson . 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): 315–347.10.1002/tea.v50.3
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Reznitskaya, A. , and M. Gregory . 2013. “Student Thought and Classroom Language: Examining the Mechanisms of Change in Dialogic Teaching.” Educational Psychologist 48 (2): 114–133. doi:10.1080/00461520.2013.775898.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ruthven, K. , and R. Hofmann . 2013. “Chance by Design: Devising an Introductory Probability Module for Implementation at Scale in English Early-Secondary Education.” ZDM Mathematics Education 45 (3): 409–423.10.1007/s11858-012-0470-6
   Google Scholar
• Ruthven, K. , N. Mercer , K. Taber , P. Guardia , R. Hofmann , S. Ilie , S. Luthman , and F. Riga . 2017. “A Research-Informed Dialogic-Teaching Approach to Early Secondary School Mathematics and Science: The Pedagogical Design and Field Trial of the epiSTEMe Intervention.” Research Papers in Education 32: doi:10.1080/02671522.2015.1129642.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Schwarz, B. B. , and L. Linchevski . 2007. “The Role of Task Design and of Argumentation in Cognitive Development during Peer Interaction. the Case of Proportional Reasoning.” Learning and Instruction 17: 510–531. doi:10.1016/j.learninstruc.2007.09.009.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Taber, K. , K. Ruthven , C. Howe , N. Mercer , F. Riga , R. Hofmann , and S. Luthman . 2015. “Developing a Research-Informed Teaching Module for Learning about Electrical Circuits at Lower Secondary School Level: Supporting Personal Learning about Science and the Nature of Science.” Cases on Research-Based Teaching Methods in Science Education 122–156.10.4018/AETID
   Google Scholar
• Tolmie, A. , C. Howe , M. Mackenzie , and K. Greer . 1993. “Task Design as an Influence on Dialogue and Learning: Primary School Group Work with Object Flotation.” Social Development 2 (3): 183–201. doi:10.1111/j.1467-9507.1993.tb00013.x.
   Google Scholar
• Valenzuela, J. P. , C. Bellei , and D. D. L. Ríos . 2014. “Socioeconomic School Segregation in a Market-Oriented Educational System. the Case of Chile.” Journal of Education Policy 29 (2): 217–241. doi:10.1080/02680939.2013.806995.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Venville, G. J. , and V. M. Dawson . 2010. “The Impact of a Classroom Intervention on Grade 10 Students’ Argumentation Skills, Informal Reasoning, and Conceptual Understanding of Science.” Journal of Research on Science Teaching 47: 952–977. doi:10.1002/tea.20358.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wegerif, R. 2013. Dialogic: Education for the Internet Age . London: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Wells, G. 1999. Dialogic Inquiry: Towards a Sociocultural Practice and Theory of Education . Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.10.1017/CBO9780511605895
   Google Scholar