Are preservice science teachers (PSTs) prepared for teaching argumentation? Evidence from a university teacher preparation program in China

References

• Anderson, L. W., D. R. Krathwohl, P. W. Airasian, K. A. Cruikshank, R. E. Mayer, P. R. Pintrich, J. Raths, and M. C. Wittrock. 2001. A Taxonomy for Learning, Teaching, and Assessing: A Revision of Bloom’s Taxonomy of Educational Objectives. New York, NY: Longman.
   Google Scholar
• Aydeniz, M., and G. Deniz. 2013. “Assessing Quality of Pre-Service Physics Teachers’ Written Arguments.” Research in Science & Technological Education 31 (3): 269–287. doi:10.1080/02635143.2013.834883.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Berland, L. K., and B. J. Reiser. 2009. “Making Sense of Argumentation and Explanation.” Science Education 93 (1): 26–55. doi:10.1002/sce.20286.
   Web of Science ®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. doi:10.3102/0034654310376953.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cebrián-Robles, D., A.-J. Franco-Mariscal, and B.-L. Ángel. 2018. “Preservice Elementary Science Teachers’ Argumentation Competence: Impact of a Training Programme.” Instructional Science 46 (5): 789–817. doi:10.1007/s11251-018-9446-4.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cetin, P. S. 2014. “Explicit Argumentation Instruction to Facilitate Conceptual Understanding and Argumentation Skills.” Research in Science & Technological Education 32 (1): 1–20. doi:10.1080/02635143.2013.850071.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cetin, P. S., N. Dogan, and A. Y. Kutluca. 2014. “The Quality of Pre-Service Science Teachers’ Argumentation: Influence of Content Knowledge.” Journal of Science Teacher Education 25 (3): 309–331. doi:10.1007/s10972-014-9378-z.
   Google Scholar
• Council, N. R. 2012. A Framework for K-12 Science Education: Practices, Crosscutting Concepts, and Core Ideas. Washington, DC: National Academies Press.
   Google Scholar
• Council of the European Union. 2018. “Council Recommendation of 22 May 2018 on Key Competences for Lifelong Learning.” Official Journal of the European Union 4 (6): 2018.
   Google Scholar
• Cowie, H., and J. Rudduck. 1990. “Learning through Discussion.” In Handbook of Educational Ideas and Practices, 803–812. London: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Cross, D., G. Taasoobshirazi, S. Hendricks, and D. T. Hickey. 2008. “Argumentation: A Strategy for Improving Achievement and Revealing Scientific Identities.” International Journal of Science Education 30 (6): 837–861. doi:10.1080/09500690701411567.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Dawson, V., and G. J. Venville. 2009. “High-School Students’ Informal Reasoning and Argumentation about Biotechnology: An Indicator of Scientific Literacy?” International Journal of Science Education 31 (11): 1421–1445. doi:10.1080/09500690801992870.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• DeBoer, G. E. 2000. “Scientific Literacy: Another Look at Its Historical and Contemporary Meanings and Its Relationship to Science Education Reform.” Journal of Research in Science Teaching 37 (6): 582–601. doi:10.1002/1098-2736(200008)37:6<582::AID-TEA5>3.0.CO;2-L.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Driver, R., P. Newton, and J. Osborne. 2000. “Establishing the Norms of Scientific Argumentation in Classrooms.” Science Education 84 (3): 287–312. doi:10.1002/(SICI)1098-237X(200005)84:3<287::AID-SCE1>3.0.CO;2-A.
   Web of Science ®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. doi:10.1002/sce.20012.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Glassner, A. 2017. “Evaluating Arguments in Instruction: Theoretical and Practical Directions.” Thinking Skills and Creativity 24 (June): 95–103. doi:10.1016/j.tsc.2017.02.013.
   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.
   Google Scholar
• Grooms, J., P. Enderle, and V. Sampson. 2015. “Coordinating Scientific Argumentation and the Next Generation Science Standards through Argument Driven Inquiry.” Science Educator 24 (1): 45–50. National Science Education Leadership Association https://eric.ed.gov/?id=EJ1069981
   Google Scholar
• Gürel, C., and S. Erol. 2017. “Pre-Service Physics Teachers’ Argumentation in a Model Rocketry Physics Experience.” Educational Sciences: Theory & Practice 17 (1): 83–104.
   Google Scholar
• Ho, Huei-Ying, Tzyh-Lee Chang, Tsu-Nan Lee, Chin-Cheng Chou, Shih-Hui Hsiao, Yu-Hsiang Chen, and Yu-Ling Lu. 2019. “Above- and below-Average Students Think Differently_ Their Scientific Argumentation Patterns.” Thinking Skills and Creativity 34 (December): 1–10. doi:10.1016/j.tsc.2019.100607.
   Google Scholar
• Howard, María, G., and K. L. McNeill. 2019. “Teachers’ Framing of Argumentation Goals: Working Together to Develop Individual versus Communal Understanding.” Journal of Research in Science Teaching 56 (6): 821–844.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Jiménez-Aleixandre, M. P., and S. Erduran. 2007. “Argumentation in Science Education: An Overview.” In Argumentation in Science Education: Perspectives from Classroom-Based Research, edited by S. Erduran and M. P. Jiménez-Aleixandre. Science & Technology Education Library, 3–27. Dordrecht: Springer Netherlands.
   Google Scholar
• Johnson-Laird, P. N. 1986. Mental Models: Towards a Cognitive Science of Language, Inference, and Consciousness. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Kaya, E. 2013. “Argumentation Practices in Classroom: Preservice Teachers’ Conceptual Understanding of Chemical Equilibrium.” International Journal of Science Education 35 (7): 1139–1158. Routledge.
   Web of Science ®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.
   Web of Science ®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.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kuhn, D. 1993. “Science as Argument: Implications for Teaching and Learning Scientific Thinking.” Science Education 77 (3): 319–337. US: John Wiley & Sons.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kuhn, D. 2005. Education for Thinking. Cambridge, Massachusetts: Harvard University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Kutluca, A. Y., and A. Aydın. 2017. “Changes in Pre-Service Science Teachers’ Understandings after Being Involved in Explicit Nature of Science and Socioscientific Argumentation Processes.” Science & Education 26 (6): 637–668.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lead States, N. G. S. S. 2013. Next Generation Science Standards: For States, by States. Washington, DC: National Academies Press.
   Google Scholar
• Lin, S.-S. 2014. “Science and Non-Science Undergraduate Students’ Critical Thinking and Argumentation Performance in Reading a Science News Report.” International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education 12 (5): 1023–1046.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Liu, C., and Z. Yingzhi. 2018. “From STS to SSI: Implications, Educational Values, and Perspectives for Socio-Scientific Issues.” Theory and Practice of Education 38 (29): 7–9.
   Google Scholar
• Lytzerinou, E., and K. Iordanou. 2020. “Teachers’ Ability to Construct Arguments, but Not Their Perceived Self-Efficacy of Teaching, Predicts Their Ability to Evaluate Arguments.” International Journal of Science Education 42 (4): 617–634. Routledge.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Martín-Gámez, C., and S. Erduran. 2018. “Understanding Argumentation about Socio-Scientific Issues on Energy: A Quantitative Study with Primary Pre-Service Teachers in Spain.” Research in Science & Technological Education 36 (4): 463–483.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• McCurdy, R. C. 1958. “Toward a Population Literate in Science.” The Science Teacher 25 (7): 366–408. JSTOR.
   Google Scholar
• McDonald, C. V. 2010. “The Influence of Explicit Nature of Science and Argumentation Instruction on Preservice Primary Teachers’ Views of Nature of Science.” Journal of Research in Science Teaching 47 (9): 1137–1164.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• McNeill, K. L., and J. S. Krajcik. 2011. Supporting Grade 5-8 Students in Constructing Explanations in Science: The Claim, Evidence, and Reasoning Framework for Talk and Writing. New York, NY: Pearson.
   Google Scholar
• Michael, N. E., G. M. Sinatra, and A. Poliquin. 2008. “Role of Epistemic Beliefs and Scientific Argumentation in Science Learning.” International Journal of Science Education 30 (15): 1977–1999.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Münchow, H., T. Richter, S. von der Mühlen, and S. Schmid. 2019. “The Ability to Evaluate Arguments in Scientific Texts: Measurement, Cognitive Processes, Nomological Network, and Relevance for Academic Success at the University.” British Journal of Educational Psychology 89 (3): 501–523.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• OECD. 2017. “PISA 2015 Assessment and Analytical Framework: Science, Reading, Mathematic, Financial Literacy and Collaborative Problem Solving.” Paris: PISA, OECD Publishing. https://www.oecd-ilibrary.org/content/publication/9789264281820-en
   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. Wiley Online Library.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Osborne, J. F., J. Bryan Henderson, A. MacPherson, E. Szu, A. Wild, and S.-Y. Yao. 2016. “The Development and Validation of a Learning Progression for Argumentation in Science.” Journal of Research in Science Teaching 53 (6): 821–846. Wiley Online Library.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ozdem, Y., H. Ertepinar, J. Cakiroglu, 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
• Sampson, V., and D. Clark. 2006a. “Assessment of Argument in Science Education: A Critical Review of the Literature,” June.” International Society of the Learning Sciences. https://repository.isls.org//handle/1/3571
   Google Scholar
• Sampson, V., and D. B. Clark. 2006b. The Development and Validation of the Nature of Science as Argument Questionnaire (NSAAQ). Annual Conference of the National Association for Research in Science Teaching. San Francisco, CA.
   Google Scholar
• Sampson, V., and D. B. Clark. 2008. “Assessment of the Ways Students Generate Arguments in Science Education: Current Perspectives and Recommendations for Future Directions.” Science Education 92 (3): 447–472.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sampson, V., J. Grooms, and J. P. Walker. 2011. “Argument-Driven Inquiry as a Way to Help Students Learn How to Participate in Scientific Argumentation and Craft Written Arguments: An Exploratory Study.” Science Education 95 (2): 217–257.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sandoval, W. A., and K. A. Millwood. 2007. “What Can Argumentation Tell Us about Epistemology?” In Argumentation in Science Education, 71–88. Berlin: Springer.
   Google Scholar
• Singer, K., K. L. Rebecca, M. Neill, and S. Loper. 2016. “Scientific Argumentation for All? Comparing Teacher Beliefs about Argumentation in High, Mid, and Low Socioeconomic Status Schools.” Science Education 100 (3): 410–436.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Toulmin, S. E. 1958. The Uses of Argument. Cambridge, UK: 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 der Mühlen, S., T. Richter, S. Schmid, E. M. Schmidt, and K. Berthold. 2016. “Judging the Plausibility of Arguments in Scientific Texts: A Student–Scientist Comparison.” Thinking & Reasoning 22 (2): 221–249. Routledge.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wind, S. A., P. Y. Jami, and B. Mansouri. 2021. Exploring the Psychometric Properties of the Empathy Quotient for Farsi Speakers. Current Psychology 40 (1): 306–320.
   Google Scholar
• Woolgar, S., and B. Latour. 1986. Laboratory Life: The Construction of Scientific Facts. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Yesiloglu, H. N. 2007. “Teaching Gases Topic to High School Students through Argumentation.” Unpublished Master Dissertation, Gazi University, Ankara.
   Google Scholar
• Yilmaz, Y. Ö., J. Cakiroglu, H. Ertepinar, and S. Erduran. 2017. “The Pedagogy of Argumentation in Science Education: Science Teachers’ Instructional Practices.” International Journal of Science Education 39 (11): 1443–1464. Routledge.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Zhang, W. J. 2017. Assessing High School Students’ Argumentation Abilities on Socio-Scientific Issues. Master, Nanjing, China: Nanjing Normal University.
   Google Scholar
• Zohar, A. 2007. “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. Jiménez-Aleixandre. Science & Technology Education Library, 245–268. Dordrecht: Springer Netherlands.
   Google Scholar