References
- Abd-El-Khalick, F., & Akerson, V. L. (2004). Learning as conceptual change: Factors mediating the development of preservice elementary teachers’ views of nature of science. Science Education, 88(5), 785–810. https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.10143
- Abd-El-Khalick, F., Bell, R. L., & Lederman, N. G. (1998). The nature of science and instructional practice: Making the unnatural natural. Science Education, 82(4), 417–436. https://doi.org/10.1002/(SICI)1098-237X(199807)82:4<417::AID-SCE1>3.0.CO;2-E
- Acar, O., Turkmen, L., & Roychoudhury, A. (2010). Student difficulties in socio-scientific argumentation and decision-making research findings: Crossing the borders of two research lines. International Journal of Science Education, 32(9), 1191–1206. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500690902991805
- Akerson, V. L., & Abd-El-Khalick, F. (2005). “How should I know what scientists do? I am just a kid”: Fourth-grade students’ conceptions of nature of science. Journal of Elementary Science Education, 17(1), 1–11. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF03174669
- Akerson, V. L., & Donnelly, L. A. (2010). Teaching nature of science to K-2 students: What understandings can they attain? International Journal of Science Education, 32(1), 97–124. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500690902717283
- Bell, P., & Linn, M. C. (2000). Scientific arguments as learning artifacts: Designing for learning from the web with KIE. International Journal of Science Education, 22(8), 797–817. https://doi.org/10.1080/095006900412284
- Bell, R. L., Lederman, N. G., & Abd-El-Khalick, F. (2000). Developing and acting upon one’s conception of the nature of science: A follow-up study. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 37(6), 563–581. https://doi.org/10.1002/1098-2736(200008)37:6<563::AID-TEA4>3.0.CO;2-N
- Chinn, C. A., & Brewer, W. F. (1998). An empirical test of a taxonomy of responses to anomalous data in science. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 35(6), 623–654. https://doi.org/10.1002/(SICI)1098-2736(199808)35:6<623::AID-TEA3>3.0.CO;2-O
- Christenson, N., Gericke, N., & Chang, S. (2017). Science and language teachers’ assessment of upper secondary students’ socioscientific argumentation. International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 15(8), 1403–1422. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10763-016-9746-6
- Dawson, V., & Carson, K. (2017). Using climate change scenarios to assess high school students’ argumentation skills. Research in Science and Technological Education, 35(1), 1–16. https://doi.org/10.1080/02635143.2016.1174932
- Dawson, V., & Venville, G. J. (2009). High-school students’ informal reasoning and argumentation about biotechnology: An indicator of scientific literacy? International Journal of Science Education, 31(11), 1421–1445. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500690801992870
- 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(2), 133–148. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11165-008-9104-y
- Driver, R., Leach, J., Millar, R., & Scott, P. (1996). Young people’s images of science. Open University Press.
- Driver, R., Newton, P., & Osborne, J. (2000). Establishing the norms of scientific argumentation in classrooms. Science Education, 84(3), 287–312. https://doi.org/10.1002/(SICI)1098-237X(200005)84:3<287::AID-SCE1>3.0.CO;2-A
- Duschl, R. (2008). Science education in three-part harmony: Balancing conceptual, epistemic, and social learning goals. Review of Research in Education, 32(1), 268–291. https://doi.org/10.3102/0091732X07309371
- 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. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500693.2012.667582
- Eymur, G. (2019). The influence of the explicit nature of science instruction embedded in the argument-driven inquiry method in chemistry laboratories on high school students’ conceptions about the nature of science. Chemistry Education Research and Practice, 20(1), 17–29. https://doi.org/10.1039/C8RP00135A
- Khishfe, R. (2008). The development of seventh graders’ views of nature of science. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 45(4), 470–496. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.20230
- Khishfe, R. (2012). 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. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.21012
- 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. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500693.2013.832004
- Khishfe, R. (2015). A look into students’ retention of acquired nature of science understandings. International Journal of Science Education, 37(10), 1639–1667. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500693.2015.1049241
- Khishfe, R. (2017). Consistency of nature of science views across scientific and socioscientific contexts. International Journal of Science Education, 39(4), 403–432. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500693.2017.1287976
- Khishfe, R. (2019). The transfer of nature of science understandings: a question of similarity and familiarity of contexts. International Journal of Science Education, 41(9), 1159–1180. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500693.2019.1596329
- Khishfe, R., & Abd-El-Khalick, F. (2002). The influence of explicit and reflective versus implicit inquiry-oriented instruction on sixth graders’ views of nature of science. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 39(7), 551–578. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.10036
- Khishfe, R., & Lederman, N. (2006). Teaching nature of science within a controversial topic: Integrated versus nonintegrated. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 43(4), 377–394. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.20137
- Kuhn, D. (1991). The skills of argument. Cambridge University Press.
- Kutluca, A. Y., & Aydın, A. (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. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11191-017-9919-x
- Leach, J., Hind, A., & Ryder, J. (2003). Designing and evaluating short teaching interventions about the epistemology of science in high school classrooms. Science Education, 87(6), 831–848. https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.10072
- Lederman, N., & Flick, L. (2005). Beware of the unit of analysis: It may be you!! School Science and Mathematics, 105(8), 381–383. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1949-8594.2005.tb18058.x
- Lederman, N. G. (1992). Students’ and teachers’ conceptions of the nature of science: A review of the research. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 29(4), 331–359. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.3660290404
- Lederman, N. G., & Abd-El- Khalick, F. (1998). Avoiding de-natured science: Activities that promote understandings of the nature of science. In W. F. McComas (Ed.), The nature of science and science education: Rationales and strategies (pp. 83–126). Kluwer.
- 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). Lawrence Erlbaum.
- Lederman, N. G., Abd-El-Khalick, F., Bell, R. L., & Schwartz, R. S. (2002). Views of nature of science questionnaire: Toward valid and meaningful assessment of learners’ conceptions of nature of science. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 39(6), 497–521. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.10034
- Lin, S., & Mintzes, J. J. (2010). Learning argumentation skills through instruction in socioscientific issues: The effect of ability level. International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 8(6), 993–1017. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10763-010-9215-6
- Matthews, M. R. (1994). Science teaching: The role of history and philosophy of science. Routledge.
- 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. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.20377
- McDonald, C. V. (2011, September). The impact of context of argumentation on inservice science teachers’ views of nature of science [Paper presentation]. Biannual conference of the European Science Education Research Association (ESERA), Lyon, France.
- McNeill, K. L., Lizotte, D. J., Krajcik, J., & Marx, R. W. (2006). Supporting students’ construction of scientific explanations by fading scaffolds in instructional materials. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 15(2), 153–191. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15327809jls1502_1
- Norris, S., Philips, L., & Osborne, J. (2007). Scientific inquiry: The place of interpretation and argumentation. In J. Luft, R. Bell, & J. Gess- Newsome (Eds.), Science as inquiry in the secondary setting (pp. 87–98). NSTA Press.
- Nussbaum, E. M., Sinatra, G. M., & Owens, M. C. (2012). The two faces of scientific argumentation: Applications to global climate change. In M. Khine (Ed.), Perspectives on scientific argumentation (pp. 17–37). Springer.
- 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. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500690701545919
- Ogunniyi, M. B. (2006). Using an argumentation-instrumental reasoning discourse to facilitate teachers’ understanding of the nature of science [Paper Presentation]. The Annual Meeting of the National Association for Research in Science Teaching (NARST), San Francisco, CA.
- Osborne, J., Erduran, S., & Simon, S. (2004). Enhancing the quality of argumentation in school science. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 41(10), 994–1020. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.20035
- Owens, D. C., Sadler, T., & Zeidler, D. (2018). Controversial issues in the science classroom. Phi Delta Kappan, 99(4), 45–49. https://doi.org/10.1177/0031721717745544
- 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(7), 745–754. https://doi.org/10.1080/095006999290408
- Rundgren, C., Eriksson, M., & Rundgren, S. C. (2016). Investigating the intertwinement of knowledge, value, and experience of upper secondary students’ argumentation concerning socioscientific issues. Science and Education, 25(9–10), 1049–1071. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11191-016-9859-x
- Sadler, T. D. (2004). Informal reasoning regarding socioscientific issues: A critical review of research. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 41(5), 513–536. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.20009
- Sadler, T. D., Chambers, F. W., & Zeidler, D. L. (2004). Student conceptualisations of the nature of science in response to a socioscientific issue. International Journal of Science Education, 26(4), 387–409. https://doi.org/10.1080/0950069032000119456
- Sampson, V., Grooms, J., & Walker, J. P. (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. https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.20421
- 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. 71–88). Springer.
- 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). Springer.
- Venville, G. J., & Dawson, V. M. (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. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.20358
- Walker, K., & Zeidler, D. L. (2007). Promoting discourse about socioscientific issues through scaffolded inquiry. International Journal of Science Education, 29(11), 1387–1410. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500690601068095
- Yerrick, R. K. (2000). Lower track science students’ argumentation and open inquiry instruction. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 37(8), 807–838. https://doi.org/10.1002/1098-2736
- Zeidler, D. L. (Ed.). (2003). The role of moral reasoning and discourse on socioscientific issues in science education. Kluwer.
- 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(3), 343–367. https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.10025