Teachers' knowledge in argumentation: contributions from an explicit teaching in an initial teacher education programme

References

• Baker, M. (2009). Argumentative interactions and the social construction of knowledge. In N. M. Mirza & A.-N. Perret-Clermont (Eds.), Argumentation and education: Theoretical foundations and practices (pp. 127–144). Dordrecht: Springer.
   Google Scholar
• Berry, A., Loughran, J., & van Driel, J. (2008). Revisiting the roots of pedagogical content knowledge. International Journal of Science Education, 30(10), 1271–1279. doi: 10.1080/09500690801998885
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bertram, A., & Loughran, J. (2014). Planting the seed: Scaffolding the PCK development of pre-service science teachers. In H. Venkat, M. Rollnick, J. Loughran, & M. Askew (Eds.), Exploring mathematics and science teachers’ knowledge: Windows into teacher thinking (pp. 144–161). Abingdon: Routledge.
   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
• van Driel, J., & Berry, A. (2012). Teacher professional development focusing on pedagogical content knowledge. Educational Researcher, 41(1), 26–28. doi: 10.3102/0013189X11431010
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• van Driel, J., de Jong, O., & Verloop, N. (2002). The development of preservice chemistry teachers’ pedagogical content knowledge. Science Education, 86(4), 572–590. doi: 10.1002/sce.10010
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• van Driel, J., de Vos, W., Verloop, N., & Dekkers, H. (1998). Developing secondary students’ conceptions of chemical reactions: The introduction of chemical equilibrium. International Journal of Science Education, 20(4), 379–392. doi: 10.1080/0950069980200401
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Driver, R., Newton, P., & Osborne, J. (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
• Duschl, R., & Osborne, J. (2002). Supporting and promoting argumentation discourse in science education. Studies in Science Education, 38, 39–72. doi: 10.1080/03057260208560187
   Google Scholar
• Erduran, S., & Pabuccu, A. (2012). Bonding chemistry and argument: Teaching and learning argumentation through chemistry stories. Bristol: University of Bristol.
   Google Scholar
• Evagorou, M., & Dillon, J. (2011). Argumentation in the teaching of science. In D. Corrigan, J. Dillon, & R. Gunstone (Eds.), The professional knowledge base of science teaching (pp. 189–203). Dordrecht: Springer.
   Google Scholar
• Giere, R. N. (2001). A new framework for teaching scientific reasoning. Argumentation, 15(1), 21–33. doi: 10.1023/A:1007880010975
   Google Scholar
• Gilbert, J. K. (2004). Models and modelling: Routes to a more authentic science education. International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 2, 115–130. doi: 10.1007/s10763-004-3186-4
   Google Scholar
• Grossman, P. L. (1990). The making of a teacher: Teacher knowledge and teacher education. New York: Teachers College Press.
   Google Scholar
• Jiménez-Aleixandre, M. P. (2010). 10 ideas Clave: Competencias en argumentación y uso de pruebas [10 key ideas: Competences in argumentations and use of evidence]. Barcelona: Graó.
   Google Scholar
• Jiménez-Aleixandre, M. P., & Erduran, S. (2008). Argumentation in science education: An overview. In S. Erduran & M. P. Jiménez-Aleixandre (Eds.), Argumentation in science education – Perspectives from classroom-based research (pp. 3–27). Dordrecht: Springer.
   Google Scholar
• Jiménez-Aleixandre, M. P., Gallástegui Otero, J. R., Eirexas Santamaría, F., & Puig Mauriz, B. (2009). Resources for introducing argumentation and the use of evidence in science classrooms. Santiago de Compostela: Danú.
   Google Scholar
• Jiménez-Aleixandre, M. P., & Pereiro Muñoz, C. (2002). Knowledge producers or knowledge consumers? Argumentation and decision making about environmental management. International Journal of Science Education, 24(11), 1171–1190. doi: 10.1080/09500690210134857
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kuhn, D. (1991). The skills of argument. New York: Cambridge University.
   Google Scholar
• Loughran, J., Berry, A., & Mulhall, P. (Eds.). (2006). Understanding and developing science teachers’ pedagogical content knowledge. Rotterdam: Sense.
   Google Scholar
• Magnusson, S., Krajcik, J., & Borko, H. (1999). Nature, sources and development of pedagogical content knowledge for science teaching. In J. Gess-Newsome & N. G. Lederman (Eds.), Examining pedagogical content knowledge – The construct and its implications for science education (pp. 95–132). Dordrecht: Kluwer.
   Google Scholar
• Mavhunga, E. (2014). Improving PCK and CK in preservice teachers. In H. Venkat, M. Rollnick, J. Loughran, & M. Askew (Eds.), Exploring mathematics and science teachers’ knowledge: Windows into teacher thinking (pp. 45–64). Abingdon: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• McNeill, K. L., & Knight, A. M. (2013). Teachers’ pedagogical content knowledge of scientific argumentation: The impact of professional development on K-12 teachers. Science Education, 97(6), 936–972. doi: 10.1002/sce.21081
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• McNeill, K. L., & Pimentel, D. S. (2010). Scientific discourse in three urban classrooms: The role of the teacher in engaging high school students in argumentation. Science Education, 94(2), 203–229.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mendonça, P. C. C., & Justi, R. (2013). The relationships between modelling and argumentation from the perspective of the model of modelling diagram. International Journal of Science Education, 35(14), 2007–2034. doi: 10.1080/09500693.2013.811615
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mortimer, E. F., & Scott, P. (2003). Meaning making in secondary science classrooms. Maidenhead: Open University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Osborne, J., Erduran, S., & Simon, S. (2004). Ideas, evidence & argument in science – In-service training pack. London: King’s College London.
   Google Scholar
• Sampson, V., Enderle, P., Grooms, J., & Witte, S. (2013). Writing to learning to write during the school science laboratory: Helping middle and high school student develop argumentative writing skills as they learn core ideas. Science Education, 97(5), 643–670. doi: 10.1002/sce.21069
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Shulman, L. S. (1986). Those who understand: Knowledge growth in teaching. Educational Researcher, 15, 4–14. doi: 10.3102/0013189X015002004
   Google Scholar
• Shulman, L. S. (1987). Knowledge and teaching: Foundations of the new reform. Harvard Educational Review, 57(1), 1–23. doi: 10.17763/haer.57.1.j463w79r56455411
   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. doi: 10.1080/09500690500336957
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Toulmin, S. (1958). The uses of argument. New York: Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Walker, J. P., & Sampson, V. (2013). Learning to argue and arguing to learn: Argument-driven inquiry as a way to help undergraduate chemistry students learn how to construct arguments and engage in argumentation during a laboratory course. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 50(5), 561–596. doi: 10.1002/tea.21082
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wenzel, J. W. (1990). Three perspectives on argument: Rhetoric, dialectic, logic. In R. Trapp & J. Schuetz (Eds.), Perspectives of argumentation: Essays in honour of Wayne Brockriede (pp. 9–26). New York: Waveland.
   Google Scholar
• Zembal-Saul, C. (2009). Learning to teach elementary school science as argument. Science Education, 93(4), 687–719. doi: 10.1002/sce.20325
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Zohar, A. (2008). Science teacher education and professional development in argumentation. In S. Erduran & M. P. Jiménez-Aleixandre (Eds.), Argumentation in science education – Perspectives from classroom-based research (pp. 245–267). Dordrecht: Springer.
   Google Scholar
• Zohar, A., & Schwartzer, N. (2005). Assessing teachers’ pedagogical knowledge in the context of teaching higher-order thinking. International Journal of Science Education, 27(13), 1595–1620. doi: 10.1080/09500690500186592
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar