Understanding argumentation about socio-scientific issues on energy: a quantitative study with primary pre-service teachers in Spain

References

• Aydeniz, M., A. Pabuccu, P. S. Cetin, and E. Kaya. 2012. “Impact of Argumentation on College Students’ Conceptual Understanding of Properties and Behaviors of Gases.” International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education 10: 1303–1324.10.1007/s10763-012-9336-1
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Balsley, H. L. 1970. Quantitative Research Methods for Business and Economics. New York, NY: Random House.
   Google Scholar
• Berland, L. K., and B. J. Reiser. 2009. “Making Sense of Argumentation and Explanation.” Science Education 93 (1): 26–55.10.1002/sce.v93:1
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Borko, H. 2004. “Professional Development and Teacher Learning: Mapping the Terrain.” Educational Researcher 33 (8): 3–15.10.3102/0013189X033008003
   Google Scholar
• Bybee, R. W., and B. Fuchs. 2006. “Preparing the 21st Century Workforce: A New Reform in Science and Technology Education.” Journal of Research in Science Teaching 43 (4): 349–352.10.1002/(ISSN)1098-2736
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cetin, P. 2014. “Explicit Argumentation Instruction to Facilitate Conceptual Understanding and Argumentation Skills.” Research in Science & Technological Education 32 (1): 1–20.10.1080/02635143.2013.850071
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Chen, Y.-C., B. Hand, and S. Park. 2016. “Examining Elementary Students’ Development of Oral and Written Argumentation Practices through Argument-Based Inquiry.” Science & Education 25 (3): 277–320.10.1007/s11191-016-9811-0
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Chin, C. S. 2008. Current Practices of Scientific Discourse and Argumentation in Science Education: A Mixed Methods Investigation Based in Brunei Darussalam. Unpublished master’s thesis, University of Bristol, UK.
   Google Scholar
• Colucci-Gray, L., E. Camino, G. Barbiero, and D. Gray. 2006. “From Scientific Literacy to Sustainability Literacy: An Ecological Framework for Education.” Science Education 90: 227–252.10.1002/(ISSN)1098-237X
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Crippen, K. J. 2012. “Argument as Professional Development: Impacting Teacher Knowledge and Beliefs about Science.” Journal of Science Teacher Education 23 (8): 847–866.10.1007/s10972-012-9282-3
   Google Scholar
• Cronbach, L. J. 1951. “Coefficient Alpha and the Internal Structure of Tests.” Psychometrika 16: 297–334.10.1007/BF02310555
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cross, D., G. Taasoobshirazi, S. Hendrick, and D. Hickey. 2008. “Argumentation: A Strategy for Improving Achievement and Revealing Scientific Identities.” International Journal of Science Education 30 (6): 837–861.10.1080/09500690701411567
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Dawson, V., and K. Carson. 2017. “Using Climate Change Scenarios to Assess High School Students’ Argumentation Skills.” Research in Science & Technological Education 35 (1): 1–16.10.1080/02635143.2016.1174932
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• DeBoer, G. E. 2011. “The Globalization of Science Education.” Journal of Research in Science Teaching 48 (6): 567–591.10.1002/tea.v48.6
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Driver, R., P. Newton, and J. Osborne. 2000. “Establishing the Norms of Scientific Argumentation in Classrooms.” Science Education 84: 287–312.10.1002/(ISSN)1098-237X
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Duggan, S., and R. Gott. 2002. “What Sort of Science Education Do We Really Need?” International Journal of Science Education 24: 661–679.10.1080/09500690110110133
   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: 39–72.10.1080/03057260208560187
   Google Scholar
• Erduran, S., A. Dilek, and B. Yakmaci-Guzel. 2006. “Learning to Teach Argumentation: Case Studies of Pre-Service Secondary Science Teachers.” Eurasia Journal of Mathematics, Science and Technology Education 2 (2): 1–14.
   Google Scholar
• Erduran, S., and A. Msimanga. 2014. “Science Curriculum Reform in South Africa: Lessons for Professional Development from Research on Argumentation in Science Education.” Education as Change 18 (S1): S33–S46.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Erduran, S., and M. P. Jimenez-Aleixandre. 2007. Argumentation in Science Education: Perspectives from Classroom-Based Research. Dordrecht: Springer.
   Google Scholar
• Erduran, S., and M. P. Jimenez-Aleixandre. 2012. “Research on Argumentation in Science Education in Europe.” In Science Education Research and Practice in Europe: Retrospective and Prospective, edited by D. Jorde and J. Dillon, 253–289. Rotterdam: Sense Publishers.
   Google Scholar
• Erduran, S., and R. Villamanan. 2009. “Cool Argument: Engineering Students’ Written Arguments about Thermodynamics in the Context of the Peltier Effect in Refrigeration.” Educación Química 20 (2): 119–125.
   Google Scholar
• Erduran, S., S. Simon, and J. Osborne. 2004. “TAPping into Argumentation: Developments in the Application of Toulmin's Argument Pattern for Studying Science Discourse.” Science Education 88 (6): 915–933.10.1002/(ISSN)1098-237X
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Erduran, S., Y. Ozdem, and J. Y. Park. 2015. “Research Trends on Argumentation in Science Education: A Journal Content Analysis from 1998 to 2014.” International Journal of STEM Education 2015 2 (5): 12. doi:10.1186/s40594-015-0020-1
   Google Scholar
• Fensham, P. 2011. “Globalization of Science Education: Comment and a Commentary.” Journal of Research in Science Teaching 48 (6): 698–709.10.1002/tea.v48.6
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Forman, E. A. 1992. “Discourse, Intersubjective and the Development of Peer Collaboration: A Vygotskian Approach.” In Children’s Development within Social Contexts: Metatheoretical, Theoretical and Methodological Issues, edited by L. T. Winegar and J. Valsiner, 143–159. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Inc.
   Google Scholar
• Fourez, G. 1994. Alfabetización Científica y Tecnológica. Acerca de las Finalidades de la Enseñanza de las Ciencias [Scientific and Technological Literacy. about the Purposes of Science Education]. Buenos Aires: Colihue Ediciones. Colección Nuevos caminos.
   Google Scholar
• Garritz, A. 2010. “La Enseñanza de la Ciencia en una Sociedad con Incertidumbre y Cambios Acelerados [Science Education in an Uncertain and Briskly Changing Society].” Enseñanza de las Ciencias 28 (3): 315–326.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gott, R., and S. Duggan. 2007. “A Framework for Practical Work in Science and Scientific Literacy through Argumentation.” Research in Science & Technological Education 25 (3): 271–291.10.1080/02635140701535000
   Google Scholar
• Hodson, D. 2003. “Time for Action: Science Education for an Alternative Future.” International Journal of Science Education 25 (6): 645–670.10.1080/09500690305021
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Jimenez-Aleixandre, M., A. Rodriguez, and R. Duschl. 2000. “‘Doing the Lesson’ or ‘Doing Science’: Argument in High School Genetics.” Science Education 84 (6): 757–792.10.1002/(ISSN)1098-237X
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kaya, E., S. Erduran, and P. S. Cetin. 2010. “High School Students’ Perceptions of Argumentation.” Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences 2 (2): 3971–3975.
   Google Scholar
• Kaya, E., S. Erduran, and P. S. Cetin. 2012. “Discourse, Argumentation, and Science Lessons: Match or Mismatch in High School Students’ Perceptions and Understanding?” Mevlana International Journal of Education (MIJE) 2 (3): 1–32.
   Google Scholar
• Kelly, G. J., S. Druker, and C. Chen. 1998. “Students’ Reasoning about Electricity: Combining Performance Assessments with Argumentation Analysis.” International Journal of Science Education 20 (7): 849–871.10.1080/0950069980200707
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kelly, G. J., and A. Takao. 2002. “Epistemic Levels in Argument: An Analysis of University Oceanography Students’ Use of Evidence in Writing.” Science Education 84 (6): 757–792.
   Google Scholar
• Kim, H., and J. Song. 2006. “The Features of Peer Argumentation in Middle School Students’ Scientific Inquiry.” Research in Science Education 36 (3): 211–233.10.1007/s11165-005-9005-2
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kolstø, S. D. 2001. “Scientific Literacy for Citizenship: Tools for Dealing with the Science Dimension of Controversial Socio-Scientific Issues.” Science Education 85: 291–310.10.1002/sce.v85:3
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Konstantinidou, A., and F. Macagno. 2013. “Understanding Students’ Reasoning: Argumentation Schemes as an Interpretation Method in Science Education.” Science & Education 22: 1069–1087.10.1007/s11191-012-9564-3
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kuhn, D. 1992. “Thinking as Argument.” Harvard Educational Review 62: 155–178.10.17763/haer.62.2.9r424r0113t670l1
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kuhn, D. 2010. “Teaching and Learning Science as Argument.” Science Education 94 (5): 810–824.10.1002/sce.v94:5
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lazarou, D., S. Erduran, and R. Sutherland. 2017. “Argumentation in Science Education as an Evolving Concept: Following the Object of Activity.” Learning, Culture and Social Interaction 14: 51–66.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lemke, J. L. 2006. “Investigar para El Futuro de la Educación Científica: Nuevas Formas de Aprender, Nuevas Formas de Vivir [Research for the Future of Science Education: New Ways of Learning, New Ways of Living].” Enseñanza de las Ciencias 24 (1): 5–12.
   Google Scholar
• Liarakou, G., C. Gavrilakis, and E. Flouri. 2009. “Secondary School Teachers’ Knowledge and Attitudes towards Renewable Energy Sources.” Journal of Science Education and Technology 18: 120–129.10.1007/s10956-008-9137-z
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Manz, E. 2015. “Representing Student Argumentation as Functionally Emergent from Scientific Activity.” Review of Educational Research 85 (4): 553–590. doi:10.3102/0034654314558490.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Martín-Gámez, C., T. Prieto, and M. A. Jiménez. 2013. “Algunas creencias de profesorado de ciencias en formación sobre la enseñanza del problema de la energía [Beliefs about the Energy Problem in Preservice Science Teachers of Secondary Schools].” Eureka: Enseñanza y Divulgación de las Ciencias 10 (Núm. Extr.): 649–663.
   Google Scholar
• Martín-Gámez, C., T. Prieto, and M. A. Jiménez. 2015. “Tendencias del profesorado de ciencias en formación inicial sobre las estrategias metodológicas en la enseñanza de las ciencias. Estudio de un caso en Málaga [Trends Among Pre-Service Science Teachers about Methodological Strategies in Science Teaching: A Case Study in Malaga].” Enseñanza de las ciencias 33 (1): 167–184.
   Google Scholar
• Martin-Gámez, C., and S. Erduran. 2016. “Pre-Service Primary Teachers’ Perceptions and Understanding of Argumentation in Science.” In Electronic Proceedings of the ESERA 2015 Conference. Science Education Research: Engaging Learners for a Sustainable Future, edited by n J. Lavonen, K. Juuti, J. Lampiselkä, A. Uitto, and K. Hahl. Part 7 (co-ed. M. Andrée and M. P. Jimenez-Aleixandre, 1018–1023. Helsinki: University of Helsinki.
   Google Scholar
• McNeill, K. L. 2009. “Teachers’ Use of Curriculum to Support Students in Writing Scientific Arguments to Explain Phenomena.” Science Education 93 (2): 233–268.10.1002/sce.v93:2
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• McNeill, K. L., and A. M. Knight. 2013. “Teachers’ Pedagogical Content Knowledge of Scientific Argumentation: The Impact of Professional Development on K–12 Teachers.” Science Education 97 (6): 936–972.10.1002/sce.2013.97.issue-6
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Myers, R. E., and J. T. Fouts. 1992. “A Cluster Analysis of High School Science Classroom Environments and Attitude toward Science.” Journal of Research in Science Teaching 29: 929–937.10.1002/(ISSN)1098-2736
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Nespor, J. 1987. “The Role of Beliefs in the Practice of Teaching.” Journal of Curriculum Studies 19: 317–328.10.1080/0022027870190403
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Newton, P., R. Driver, and J. Osborne. 1999. “The Place of Argumentation in the Pedagogy of School Science.” International Journal of Science Education 21 (5): 553–576.10.1080/095006999290570
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Nussbaum, E. M., G. Sinatra, and A. Poliquin. 2008. “Role of Epistemic Beliefs and Scientific Argumentation in Science Learning.” International Journal of Science Education 30: 1977–1999.10.1080/09500690701545919
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• OECD (Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development). 2006. Assessing Scientific Reading and Mathematical Literacy: A Framework for PISA 2006. Paris: OECD.
   Google Scholar
• OECD (Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development). 2009. Assessing Scientific, Reading and Mathematical Literacy: A Framework for PISA. Paris: OECD.
   Google Scholar
• Oliva, J. M., and J. A. Acevedo. 2005. “La Enseñanza de las Ciencias en Primaria y Secundaria Hoy. Algunas Propuestas de Futuro [The Science Education in Primary and Secondary School Today. Some Proposals for the Future].” Revista Eureka sobre Enseñanza y Divulgación de las Ciencias 2 (2): 241–250.10.25267/Rev_Eureka_ensen_divulg_cienc
   Google Scholar
• Pabuccu, A., and S. Erduran. 2017. “Beyond Rote Learning in Organic Chemistry: The Infusion and Impact of Argumentation in Tertiary Education.” International Journal of Science Education 39 (9): 1154–1172.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Osborne, J., S. Erduran, and S. Simon. 2004. “Enhancing the Quality of Argumentation in School Science.” Journal of Research in Science Teaching 41 (10): 994–1020.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ozdem, Y., J. Cakiroglu, H. Ertepinar, and S. Erduran. 2013. “The Nature of Pre-Service Science Teachers’ Argumentation in Inquiry-Oriented Laboratory Context.” International Journal of Science Education 35 (15): 2559–2586.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Porlán, R., and R. Martín del Pozo. 2004. “The Conceptions of Inservice and Prospective Primary School Teachers about the Teaching and Learning of Science.” Journal of Science Teacher Education 15: 39–62.10.1023/B:JSTE.0000031462.40615.56
   Google Scholar
• Porlán, R., R. Martín del Pozo, A. Rivero, J. Harres, P. Azcárate, and M. Pizzato. 2010. “El Cambio del Profesorado de Ciencias I: Marco Teórico y Formativo [The Change of Science Teachers I: Theoretical Framework].” Enseñanza de las Ciencias 28 (1): 31–46.
   Google Scholar
• Ratcliffe, M. 1997. “Pupil Decision‐Making about Socio‐Scientific Issues within the Science Curriculum.” International Journal of Science Education 19 (2): 167–182.10.1080/0950069970190203
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ratcliffe, M., and M. Grace. 2003. Science Education for Citizenship: Teaching Socio-Scientific Issues. Maidenhead: Open University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Sadler, T. D. 2004. “Informal Reasoning regarding Socio-Scientific Issues: A Critical Review of the Literature.” Journal of Research in Science Teaching 41 (4): 513–536.10.1002/(ISSN)1098-2736
   Google Scholar
• Sadler, T. D. 2006. “Promoting Discourse and Argumentation in Science Teacher Education.” Journal of Science Teacher Education 17: 323–346.10.1007/s10972-006-9025-4
   Google Scholar
• Sadler, T. D., and D. L. Zeidler. 2005. “Patterns of Informal Reasoning in the Context of Socio-Scientific Decision Making.” Journal of Research in Science Teaching 42 (1): 112–138.10.1002/(ISSN)1098-2736
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sampson, V., and M. Blanchard. 2012. “Science Teachers and Scientific Argumentation: Trends in Views and Practice.” Journal of Research in Science Teaching 49: 1122–1148.10.1002/tea.v49.9
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sampson, V., and D. Clark. 2006. The Development and Validation of the Nature of Science as Argument Questionnaire (NSAAQ). Paper presented at the Annual Conference of the National Association for Research in Science Teaching, San Francisco, CA.
   Google Scholar
• Sandoval, W. A. 2005. “Understanding Students' Practical Epistemologies and Their Influence on Learning through Inquiry.” Science Education 89 (4): 634–656.10.1002/(ISSN)1098-237X
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sandoval, W. A., and K. A. Millwood. 2005. “The Quality of Students’ Uses of Evidence in Written Scientific Explanations.” Cognition and Instruction 23 (1): 23–55.10.1207/s1532690xci2301_2
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Schwarz, B. B., Y. Neuman, J. Gil, and M. Ilya. 2003. “Construction of Collective and Individual Knowledge in Argumentation Activity.” Journal of the Learning Sciences 12 (2): 219–256.10.1207/S15327809JLS1202_3
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Shymansky, J. A. 1992. “Using Constructivist Ideas to Teach Science Teachers about Constructivist Ideas, or Teachers Are Students Too!.” Journal of Science Teacher Education 3: 53–57.10.1007/BF02614740
   Google Scholar
• Simon, S., S. Erduran, and J. Osborne. 2006. “Learning to Teach Argumentation: Research and Development in the Science Classroom.” International Journal of Science Education 28 (2–3): 235–260.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Solbes, J., A. Vilches, and D. Gil. 2001. “El Enfoque CTS y la Formación del Profesorado [The STS Approach and the Teacher Training].” In Enseñanza de las Ciencias desde la Perspectiva Ciencia- Tecnologìa-Sociedad [Science Education from the Science-Technology-Society Approach], edited by P. Membiela, 163–175. Madrid: Narcea.
   Google Scholar
• Solomon, J. 1992. “The Classroom Discussion of Science‐Based Social Issues Presented on Television: Knowledge, Attitudes and Values.” International Journal of Science Education 14: 431–444.10.1080/0950069920140406
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Toulmin, S. 1958. The Uses of Argument. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
   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 in Science Teaching 47 (8): 952–977.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Von Aufschnaiter, C., S. Erduran, J. Osborne, and S. Simon. 2008. “Arguing to Learn and Learning to Argue: Case Studies of How Students’ Argumentation Relates to their Scientific Knowledge.” Journal of Research in Science Teaching 45 (1): 101–131.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Zeidler, D. L. 1997. “The Central Role of Fallacious Thinking in Science Education.” Science Education 81: 483–496.10.1002/(ISSN)1098-237X
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Zeidler, D. L., T. D. Sadler, M. L. Simmons, and E. V. Howes. 2005. “A Research Based Framework for Socio-Scientific Issues Education.” Science Education 89 (3): 357–377.10.1002/(ISSN)1098-237X
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Zembal-Saul, C. 2009. “Learning to Teach Elementary School Science as Argument.” Science Education 93: 687–719.10.1002/sce.v93:4
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Zembal-Saul, C., D. Munford, B. Crawford, P. Friedrichsen, and S. Land. 2002. “Scaffolding Preservice Science Teachers’ Evidence-Based Arguments during an Investigation of Natural Selection.” Research in Science Education 32 (4): 437–463.10.1023/A:1022411822951
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Zohar, A. 2008. “Science Teacher Education and Professional Development in Argumentation.” In Argumentation in Science Education: Perspectives from Classroom-Based Research, edited by S. Erduran and M. P. Jimenez-Aleixandre, 245–268. Dordrecht: Springer Academic Publishers.
   Google Scholar