Argumentation, critical thinking, nature of science and socioscientific issues: a dialogue between two researchers

References

• Abd-El-Khalick, F. (2012). Nature of science in science education: Towards a coherent framework for synergistic research and development. In B. J. Fraser, K. Tobin, & C. McRobbie (Eds.), Second international handbook of science education (pp. 1041–1060). New York: Springer.
   Google Scholar
• Abd-El-Khalick, F., & Lederman, N. G. (2000). The influence of history of science courses on students’ views of nature of science. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 37, 1057–1095. doi:10.1002/1098-2736(200012)37. 10<1057::AID-TEA3>3.0.CO;2-C. doi: 10.1002/1098-2736(200012)37:10<1057::AID-TEA3>3.0.CO;2-C
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bell, P., & Linn, M. (2000). Scientific arguments as learning artifacts: Designing for learning on the Web in KIE. International Journal of Science Education, 22(8), 797–817. doi: 10.1080/095006900412284
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bell, R. L., & Matkins, J. J. (2003, March). Learning about the nature of science in an elementary science methods course: Content vs. Context. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the National Association for Research in Science Teaching (NARST), Philadelphia, PA.
   Google Scholar
• Bentley, M. L., & Fleury, S. C. (1998). Of starting points and destinations: Teacher education and the nature of science. In W. F. McComas (Ed.), The nature of science and science education: Rationales and strategies (pp. 277–291). Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publishers.
   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. doi: 10.1002/sce.20402
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• BouJaoude, S. (2002). Balance of scientific literacy themes in science curricula: The case of Lebanon. nternational Journal of Science Education, 24(2), 139–156. doi: 10.1080/09500690110066494
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Carey, S., Evans, R., Honda, M., Jay, E., & Unger, C. (1989). 'An experiment is when you try it and see if it works': A study of grade 7 students' understanding of the construction of scientific knowledge. International Journal of Science Education, 11(5), 514–529. doi: 10.1080/0950069890110504
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Chung, Y., Yoo, J., Kim, S.-W., Lee, H., & Zeidler, D. (2016). Enhancing students’ communication skills in the science classroom through socioscientific issues. International Journal of Science & Mathematics Education, 14, 1–27. doi: 10.1007/s10763-014-9557-6
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Dawson, V. M., & Venville, G. (2010). Teaching strategies for developing students’ argumentation skills about socioscientific issues in high school genetics. Research in Science Education, 40, 133–148. doi: 10.1007/s11165-008-9104-y
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Driver, R., Leach, J., Millar, R., & Scott, P. (1996). Young people’s images of science. Philadelphia, PA: Open University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Duschl, R., & Osborne, J. (2002). Argumentation and discourse processes in science education. Studies in Science Education, 38, 39–72. doi: 10.1080/03057260208560187
   Google Scholar
• Duschl, R. A., Schweingruber, H. A., & Shouse, A. W. (2007). Taking science to school: Learning and teaching science in grades K-8. Committee on Science Learning, National Research Council. Washington, DC: National Academies Press.
   Google Scholar
• Eastwood, J. L., Sadler, T. D., Zeidler, D. L., Lewis, A., Amiri, L., & Applebaum, S. (2012). Contextualizing nature of science instruction in socioscientific issues. International Journal of Science Education, 34(15), 2289–2315. doi: 10.1080/09500693.2012.667582
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ennis, R. H. (1989). Critical thinking and subject specificity: Clarification and needed research. Educational Researcher, 18, 4–10. doi: 10.3102/0013189X018003004
   Google Scholar
• Ennis, R. H. (1996a). Critical thinking. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall.
   Google Scholar
• Ennis, R. H. (1996b). Critical thinking dispositions: Their nature and assessability. Informal Logic, 18, 165–182. doi: 10.22329/il.v18i2.2378
   Google Scholar
• Fleming, R. (1986). Adolescent reasoning in socio-scientific issues, part I: Social cognition. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 23, 689–698. doi: 10.1002/tea.3660230804
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Fowler, S. R., & Zeidler, D. L. (2010, March). College students’ use of science content during socioscientific issues negotiation: Evolution as a prevailing concept. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the National Association for Research in Science Teaching, Philadelphia, PA.
   Google Scholar
• Geng, F. (2014). An content analysis of the definition of critical thinking. Asian Social Science, 10(19), 124–128. doi: 10.5539/ass.v10n19p124
   Google Scholar
• Jimenez-Aleixandre, M. P., & Erduran, S. (2008). Argumentation in science education: An overview. In S. Erduran, & M. P. Jimenez-Aleixandre (Eds.), Argumentation in science education: Perspectives from classroom-based research (pp. 3–27). Dordrecht: Springer.
   Google Scholar
• Keating, D. P. (1988). Adolescents’ ability to engage in critical thinking. [S.l.]: Distributed by ERIC Clearinghouse.
   Google Scholar
• Khishfe, R. (2008). The development of seventh graders’ views of nature of science. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 45(4), 470–496. doi: 10.1002/tea.20230
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Khishfe, R. (2012a). Nature of science and decision making. International Journal of Science Education, 34(1), 67–100. doi: 10.1080/09500693.2011.559490
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Khishfe, R. (2012b). Relationship between nature of science understandings and argumentation skills: A role for counterargument and contextual factors. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 49(4), 489–514. doi: 10.1002/tea.21012
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Khishfe, R. (2014). Explicit nature of science and argumentation instruction in the context of socioscientific issues: An effect on student learning and transfer. International Journal of Science Education, 36(5–6), 974–1016. doi: 10.1080/09500693.2013.832004
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kim, M., Anthony, R., & Blades, D. (2014). Decision making through dialogue: A case study of analyzing preservice teachers’ argumentation on socioscientific issues. Research in Science Education, 44, 903–926. doi: 10.1007/s11165-014-9407-0
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• King, P. M., & Kitchener, K. S. (1994). Developing reflective judgment: Understanding and promoting intellectual growth and critical thinking in adolescents and adults. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
   Google Scholar
• Kolstø, S. D. (2001). Science literacy for citizenship: Tools for dealing with the science dimension of controversial socioscientific issues. Science Education, 85, 291–310. doi: 10.1002/sce.1011
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kuhn, D. (1991). The skills of argument. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Kuhn, D. (1993). Science as argument: Implications for teaching and learning scientific thinking. Science Education, 77, 319–337. doi: 10.1002/sce.3730770306
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kuhn, D. (1999). A developmental model of critical thinking. Educational Researcher, 28, 16–25 +46. doi: 10.3102/0013189X028002016
   Google Scholar
• Lederman, N. G. (2004). Syntax of nature of science within inquiry and science instruction. In L. B. Flick, & N. G. Lederman (Eds.), Scientific inquiry and nature of science (pp. 301–317). Dordrecht: Kluwer.
   Google Scholar
• Lederman, N. G. (2007). Nature of science: Past, present, and future. In S. K. Abell, & N. G. Lederman (Eds.), Handbook of research in science education (pp. 831–880). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
   Google Scholar
• Lederman, N. G., & Lederman, J. S. (2014). Research on teaching and learning of nature of science. In N. G. Lederman, & S. K. Abell (Eds.), Handbook of research on science education, volume II (pp. 600–620). New York, NY: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Lipman, M. (2003). Thinking in education (2nd Ed.). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Means, M. L., & Voss, J. F. (1996). Who reasons well? Two studies of informal reasoning among children of different grade, ability, and knowledge levels. Cognition and Instruction, 14(2), 139–178. doi: 10.1207/s1532690xci1402_1
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Nussbaum, E. M., Sinatra, G. M., & Poliquin, A. (2008). Role of epistemic beliefs and scientific argumentation in science learning. International Journal of Science Education, 30(15), 1977–1999. doi: 10.1080/09500690701545919
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ogunniyi, M. B. (2006, April). Using an argumentation-instrumental reasoning discourse to facilitate teachers’ understanding of the nature of science. Paper Presented at the Annual Meeting of the National Association for Research in Science Teaching (NARST), San Francisco, CA.
   Google Scholar
• Patronis, T., Potari, D., & Spiliotopoulou, V. (1999). Students’ argumentation in decision making on a socio-scientific issue: Implications for teaching. International Journal of Science Education, 21, 745–754. doi: 10.1080/095006999290408
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Pelch, M. A., & McConnell, D. A. (2017). How does adding an emphasis on socioscientific issues influence student attitudes about science, its relevance, and their interpretations of sustainability? Journal of Geoscience Education, 65, 203–214. doi: 10.5408/16-173.1
   Google Scholar
• Sadler, T. D. (Ed.). (2011). Socio-scientific issues in the classroom: Teaching, learning and research. Dordrecht: Springer.
   Google Scholar
• Sadler, T. D., Barab, S. A., & Scott, B. (2007). What do students gain by engaging in socioscientific inquiry? Research in Science Education, 37, 371–391. doi: 10.1007/s11165-006-9030-9
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sadler, T. D., Chambers, W. F., & Zeidler, D. (2002, April). Investigating the crossroads of socioscientific issues, the nature of science, and critical thinking. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the National Association for Research in Science Teaching, New Orleans, LA. Retrieved from ERIC database (ED 466401).
   Google Scholar
• Sadler, T. D., & Fowler, S. R. (2006). A threshold model of content knowledge transfer for socioscientific argumentation. Science Education, 90(6), 986–1004. doi: 10.1002/sce.20165
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sadler, T. D., & Zeidler, D. L. (2005). The significance of content knowledge for informal reasoning regarding socioscientific issues: Applying genetics knowledge to genetic engineering issues. Science Education, 85, 71–93. doi: 10.1002/sce.20023
   Google Scholar
• Sadler, T. D., Zeidler, D. L., & Chambers, F. W. (2004). Student conceptualisations of the nature of science in response to a socioscientific issue. International Journal of Science Education, 26, 387–409. doi: 10.1080/0950069032000119456
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sandoval, W. A., & Millwood, K. A. (2008). What can argumentation tell us about epistemology? In S. Erduran, & M. P. Jimenez-Aleixandre (Eds.), Argumentation in Science Education: Perspectives from Classroom-based Research (pp. 68–85). Springer: Dordrecht.
   Google Scholar
• Siegel, H. (1988). Educating reason: Rationality, critical thinking, and education. New York, NY: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Simonneaux, L. (2008). Argumentation in socio-scientific contexts. In S. Erduran, & M. P. Jimenez-Aleixandre (Eds.), Argumentation in science education: Perspectives from classroom-based research (pp. 179–199). Dordrecht: Springer.
   Google Scholar
• Smith, C. L., & Wenk, L. (2006). Relations among three aspects of first-year college students’ epistemologies of science. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 43(8), 747–785. doi: 10.1002/tea.20113
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Spector, B., Strong, P., & La Porta, T. (1998). Teaching the nature of science as an element of science, technology and society. In W. F. McComas (Ed.), The nature of science and science education: Rationales and strategies (pp. 267–276). Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publishers.
   Google Scholar
• Yacoubian, H. A. (2012). Towards a philosophically and a pedagogically reasonable nature of science curriculum (Doctoral dissertation). University of Alberta, AB, Canada.
   Google Scholar
• Yacoubian, H. A. (2015). A framework for guiding future citizens to think critically about nature of science and socioscientific issues. Canadian Journal of Science, Mathematics and Technology Education, 15(3), 248–260. doi: 10.1080/14926156.2015.1051671
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Yacoubian, H. A., & BouJaoude, S. (2010). The effect of reflective discussions following inquiry-based laboratory activities on students’ views of nature of science. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 47, 1229–1252. doi: 10.1002/tea.20380
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Zeidler, D. (2014). Socioscientific issues as a curriculum emphasis: Theory, research and practice. In S. K. Abell, & N. G. Lederman (Eds.), Handbook of research on science education (pp. 697–726). New York, NY: Routledge, Taylor and Francis.
   Google Scholar
• Zeidler, D. L. (Ed.). (2003). The role of moral reasoning and discourse on socioscientific issues in science education. Dordrecht: Kluwer.
   Google Scholar
• Zeidler, D. L., & Nichols, B. H. (2009). Socioscientific issues: Theory and practice. Journal of Elementary Science Education, 21(2), 49–58. doi: 10.1007/BF03173684
   Google Scholar
• Zeidler, D. L., & Sadler, T. D. (2008). The role of moral reasoning in argumentation: Conscience, character and care. In S. Erduran, & M. Pilar Jimenez-Aleixandre (Eds.), Argumentation in science education: Perspectives from classroom-based research (pp. 201–216). New York, NY: Springer.
   Google Scholar
• Zeidler, D. L., Walker, K. A., Ackett, W. A., & Simmons, M. L. (2002). Tangled up in views: Beliefs in the nature of science and responses to socioscientific dilemmas. Science Education, 86, 343–367. doi: 10.1002/sce.10025
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Zohar, A., & Nemet, F. (2002). Fostering students’ knowledge and argumentation skills through dilemmas in human genetics. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 39, 35–62. doi: 10.1002/tea.10008
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar