Developing an inquiry-based laboratory curriculum to engage students in planning investigations and argumentation

References

• Asterhan, C. S. C., & Schwarz, B. B. (2009). Argumentation and explanation in conceptual change: Indications from protocol analyses of peer-to-peer dialog. Cognitive Science, 33(3), 374–400. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1551-6709.2009.01017.x
   PubMed Web of Science ®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. https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.20402
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bretz, S. L. (2019). Evidence for the importance of laboratory courses. Journal of Chemical Education, 96(2), 193–195. https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.jchemed.8b00874
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Brownell, S., Kloser, M., Fukami, T., & Shavelson, R. (2012). Undergraduate biology Lab courses: Comparing the impact of traditionally based “cookbook” and authentic research-based courses on student Lab experiences. The Journal of College Science Teaching, 41(4), 36–45.
   Google Scholar
• Bruckermann, T., Aschermann, E., Bresges, A., & Schlüter, K. (2017). Metacognitive and multimedia support of experiments in inquiry learning for science teacher preparation. International Journal of Science Education, 39(6), 701–722. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500693.2017.1301691
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Chang, P.-S., Lai, C.-Y., & Wen, M. L. (2017). The development, implementation and assessment of a scientific inquiry and practice curriculum: The scientific argumentation in the laboratory. Chinese Journal of Science Education, 25(4), 355–389. https://doi.org/10.6173/CJSE.2017.2504.03
   Google Scholar
• Chen, Y.-C. (2019). Using the science talk–writing heuristic to build a new era of scientific literacy. The Reading Teacher, 73(1), 51–64. https://doi.org/10.1002/trtr.1808
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Chen, Y.-C. (2020). Dialogic pathways to manage uncertainty for productive engagement in scientific argumentation. Science & Education, 29(2), 331–375. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11191-020-00111-z
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Chen, Y.-C., Aguirre-Mendez, C., & Terada, T. (2020). Argumentative writing as a tool to develop conceptual and epistemic knowledge in a college chemistry course designed for non-science majors. International Journal of Science Education, 42(17), 2842–2875. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500693.2020.1837990
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Chen, Y.-C., Hand, B., & Park, S. (2016). Examining elementary students’ development of oral and written argumentation practices through argument-based inquiry. Science & Education, 25(3), 277–320. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11191-016-9811-0
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Choi, A. (2012). Using the writing template provided by the science writing heuristic (SWH) approach for quality arguments. Journal of The Korean Association For Science Education, 32(9), 1470–1488. https://doi.org/10.14697/JKASE.2012.32.9.1470
   Google Scholar
• Choi, A., Hand, B., & Greenbowe, T. (2013). Students’ written arguments in general chemistry laboratory investigations. Research in Science Education, 43(5), 1763–1783. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11165-012-9330-1
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Choi, A., Klein, V., & Hershberger, S. (2015). Success, difficulty, and instructional strategy to enact an argument-based inquiry approach: experiences of elementary teachers. International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 13(5), 991–1011. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10763-014-9525-1
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Choi, A., Notebaert, A., Diaz, J., & Hand, B. (2010). Examining arguments generated by year 5, 7, and 10 students in science classrooms. Research in Science Education, 40(2), 149–169. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11165-008-9105-x
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Crujeiras-Pérez, B., & Brocos, P. (2021). Pre-service teachers’ use of epistemic criteria in the assessment of scientific procedures for identifying microplastics in beach sand. Chemistry Education Research and Practice, 22(2), 237–246. https://doi.org/10.1039/D0RP00176G
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Crujeiras-Pérez, B., & Jiménez-Aleixandre, M. P. (2017). High school students’ engagement in planning investigations: Findings from a longitudinal study in Spain. Chemistry Education Research and Practice, 18(1), 99–112. https://doi.org/10.1039/C6RP00185H
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Duschl, R. A., & Bybee, R. W. (2014). Planning and carrying out investigations: An entry to learning and to teacher professional development around NGSS science and engineering practices. International Journal of STEM Education, 1(12). https://doi.org/10.1186/s40594-014-0012-6
   Google Scholar
• Duschl, R. A., & Grandy, R. (2013). Two views about explicitly teaching nature of science [article]. Science and Education, 22(9), 2109–2139. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11191-012-9539-4
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Duschl, R. A., Schweingruber, H. A., & Shouse, A. W. (2007). Taking science to school: Learning and teaching science in grades K-8. The National Academies Press. https://nap.nationalacademies.org/catalog/11625/taking-science-to-school-learning-and-teaching-science-in-grades
   Google Scholar
• Etkina, E., Karelina, A., Ruibal-Villasenor, M., Rosengrant, D., Jordan, R., & Hmelo-Silver, C. E. (2010). Design and reflection help students develop scientific abilities: Learning in introductory physics laboratories. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 19(1), 54–98. https://doi.org/10.1080/10508400903452876
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Greenbowe, T. J., Poock, J. R., Burke, K. A., & Hand, B. M. (2007). Using the science writing heuristic in the general chemistry laboratory To improve students’ academic performance. Journal of Chemical Education, 84(8), 1371. https://doi.org/10.1021/ed084p1371
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gudyanga, R., & Jita, L. C. (2019). Teachers’ implementation of laboratory practicals in the South African physical sciences curriculum. Issues in Educational Research, 29(3), 715–731.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hand, B., Shelley, M. C., Laugerman, M., Fostvedt, L., & Therrien, W. (2018). Improving critical thinking growth for disadvantaged groups within elementary school science: A randomized controlled trial using the science writing heuristic approach. Science Education, 102(4), 693–710. https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.21341
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hand, B., Wallace, C. W., & Yang, E. M. (2004). Using a science writing heuristic to enhance learning outcomes from laboratory activities in seventh-grade science: Quantitative and qualitative aspects. International Journal of Science Education, 26(2), 131–149. https://doi.org/10.1080/0950069032000070252
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hofstein, A. (2017). The role of laboratory in science teaching and learning (pp. 355–368). Brill. https://brill.com/view/book/edcoll/9789463007498/BP000027.xml
   Google Scholar
• Hofstein, A., Katchevitch, D., & Mamlok-Naaman, R. (2019). Chapter 8 The development of argumentation skills in the chemistry laboratory (Argumentation in chemistry education: research, policy and practice) (pp. 173–196). The Royal Society of Chemistry. https://doi.org/10.1039/9781788012645-00173
   Google Scholar
• Hofstein, A., Shore, R., & Kipnis, M. (2004). RESEARCH REPORT providing high school chemistry students with opportunities to develop learning skills in an inquiry-type laboratory: A case study. International Journal of Science Education, 26(1), 47–62. https://doi.org/10.1080/0950069032000070342
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Jiménez-Aleixandre, M. P. (2007). Designing argumentation learning environments. In S. Erduran & M. P. Jiménez-Aleixandre (Eds.), Argumentation in science education: Perspectives from classroom-based research (pp. 91–115). Springer Netherlands. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4020-6670-2_5
   Google Scholar
• Katchevich, D., Hofstein, A., & Mamlok-Naaman, R. (2013). Argumentation in the chemistry laboratory: Inquiry and confirmatory experiments. Research in Science Education, 43(1), 317–345. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11165-011-9267-9
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kelly, G. J., Regev, J., & Prothero, W. (2007). Analysis of lines of reasoning in written argumentation. In S. Erduran, & M. P. Jiménez-Aleixandre (Eds.), Argumentation in science education: Perspectives from classroom-based research (pp. 137–158). Springer Netherlands. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4020-6670-2_7
   Google Scholar
• Ketpichainarong, W., Panijpan, B., & Ruenwongsa, P. (2010). Enhanced learning of biotechnology students by an inquiry-based cellulase laboratory. International Journal of Environmental and Science Education, 5(2), 169–187.
   Google Scholar
• Keys, C. W., Hand, B., Prain, V., & Collins, S. (1999). Using the science writing heuristic as a tool for learning from laboratory investigations in secondary science. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 36(10), 1065–1084. https://doi.org/10.1002/(SICI)1098-2736(199912)36:10%3C1065::AID-TEA2%3E3.0.CO;2-I
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kind, P. M., Kind, V., Hofstein, A., & Wilson, J. (2011). Peer argumentation in the school science laboratory—exploring effects of task features. International Journal of Science Education, 33(18), 2527–2558. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500693.2010.550952
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kingir, S., Geban, Ö, & Gunel, M. (2012). How does the science writing heuristic approach affect students’ performances of different academic achievement levels? A case for high school chemistry. Chemistry Education Research and Practice, 13(4), 428–436. https://doi.org/10.1039/C2RP20013A
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kuo, C.-Y., Wu, H.-K., Jen, T.-H., & Hsu, Y.-S. (2015). Development and validation of a multimedia-based assessment of scientific inquiry abilities. International Journal of Science Education, 37(14), 2326–2357. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500693.2015.1078521
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lee, H.-S., Liu, O. L., Pallant, A., Roohr, K. C., Pryputniewicz, S., & Buck, Z. E. (2014). Assessment of uncertainty-infused scientific argumentation. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 51(5), 581–605. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.21147
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lord, T., & Terri, O. (2006). Moving from didactic to inquiry-based instruction in a science laboratory. The American Biology Teacher, 68(6), 342–345. https://doi.org/10.2307/4452009
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Manz, E., Lehrer, R., & Schauble, L. (2020). Rethinking the classroom science investigation. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 57(7), 1148–1174. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.21625
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• McMahon, S. I., Raphael, T. E., McMahon, S. I., Raphael, T. E., Goatley, V., & Pardo, L. (1997). The book club connection (The book club program: Theoretical and research foundations) (pp. 3–25). Teachers College Press.
   Google Scholar
• Ministry of Education Republic of China (Taiwan). (2018). Curriculum guidelines of 12-year basic education: Natural sciences.
   Google Scholar
• Najami, N., Hugerat, M., Kabya, F., & Hofstein, A. (2020). The laboratory as a vehicle for enhancing argumentation Among Pre-service science teachers. Science & Education, 29(2), 377–393. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11191-020-00107-9
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• National Research Council. (2012). A framework for K-12 science education: Practices, crosscutting concepts, and core ideas. The National Academies Press. https://doi.org/10.17226/13165
   Google Scholar
• Neuman, W. L. (2011). Social research methods: Qualitative and quantitative approaches (7th ed.). Allyn & Bacon.
   Google Scholar
• NGSS Lead States. (2013). Next Generation Science Standards: For States, By States. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press.
   Google Scholar
• OECD. (2016). PISA 2015 assessment and analytical framework. https://doi.org/10.1787/9789264255425-en
   Google Scholar
• Osborne, J. (2010). Arguing to learn in science: The role of collaborative, critical discourse. Science, 328(5977), 463. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1183944
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Osborne, J. (2014). Teaching scientific practices: Meeting the challenge of change. Journal of Science Teacher Education, 25(2), 177–196. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10972-014-9384-1
   Google Scholar
• Sampson, V., Enderle, P., Grooms, J., & Witte, S. (2013). Writing to learn by learning to write during the school science laboratory: Helping middle and high school students develop argumentative writing skills as they learn core ideas. Science Education, 97(5), 643–670. https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.21069
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sanchez-Amat, A., & Solano, F. (1997). A pluripotent polyphenol oxidase from the melanogenic MarineAlteromonas spShares catalytic capabilities of tyrosinases and laccases. Biochemical and Biophysical Research Communications, 240(3), 787–792. https://doi.org/10.1006/bbrc.1997.7748
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sansom, R., & Walker, J. P. (2020). Investing in laboratory courses. Journal of Chemical Education, 97(1), 308–309. https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.jchemed.9b00714
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• She, H.-C., Lin, H.-s., & Huang, L.-Y. (2019). Reflections on and implications of the programme for international student assessment 2015 (PISA 2015) performance of students in Taiwan: The role of epistemic beliefs about science in scientific literacy. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 56(10), 1309–1340. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.21553
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Szalay, L., Tóth, Z., & Kiss, E. (2020). Introducing students to experimental design skills [10.1039/C9RP00234K]. Chemistry Education Research and Practice, 21(1), 331–356.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Telenius, M., Yli-Panula, E., Vesterinen, V.-M., & Vauras, M. (2020). Argumentation within upper secondary school student groups during virtual science learning: Quality and quantity of spoken argumentation. Education Sciences, 10(12), 393. https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci10120393
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Tseng, Y.-J., Hong, Z.-R., & Lin, H.-s. (2022). Advancing students’ scientific inquiry performance in chemistry through Reading and evaluative reflection. Chemistry Education Research and Practice, 23(3), 616–627. https://doi.org/10.1039/D1RP00246E
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Uzuntiryaki-Kondakci, E., Tuysuz, M., Sarici, E., Soysal, C., & Kilinc, S. (2021). The role of the argumentation-based laboratory on the development of pre-service chemistry teachers’ argumentation skills. International Journal of Science Education, 43(1), 30–55. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500693.2020.1846226
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Walker, J. P., Sampson, V., Southerland, S., & Enderle, P. J. (2016). Using the laboratory to engage all students in science practices. Chemistry Education Research and Practice, 17(4), 1098–1113. https://doi.org/10.1039/C6RP00093B
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Walker, J. P., Van Duzor, A. G., & Lower, M. A. (2019). Facilitating argumentation in the laboratory: The challenges of claim change and justification by theory. Journal of Chemical Education, 96(3), 435–444. https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.jchemed.8b00745
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wu, P.-H., & Wu, H.-K. (2020). Constructing a model of engagement in scientific inquiry: Investigating relationships between inquiry-related curiosity, dimensions of engagement, and inquiry abilities. Instructional Science, 48(1), 79–113. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11251-020-09503-8
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Yang, H.-g., & Park, J. (2017). Identifying and applying factors considered important In students’ experimental design In scientific open inquiry. Journal of Baltic Science Education, 16(6), 932–945. https://doi.org/10.33225/jbse/17.16.932
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar