Exploring the influence of a science content course incorporating explicit nature of science and argumentation instruction on preservice primary teachers' views of nature of science

There exists a general consensus in the science education literature around the goal of enhancing students. and teachers. views of nature of science (NOS). An emerging area of research in science education explores NOS and argumentation, and the aim of this study was to explore the effectiveness of a science content course incorporating explicit NOS and argumentation instruction on preservice primary teachers. views of NOS. A constructivist perspective guided the study, and the research strategy employed was case study research. Five preservice primary teachers were selected for intensive investigation in the study, which incorporated explicit NOS and argumentation instruction, and utilised scientific and socioscientific contexts for argumentation to provide opportunities for participants to apply their NOS understandings to their arguments. Four primary sources of data were used to provide evidence for the interpretations, recommendations, and implications that emerged from the study. These data sources included questionnaires and surveys, interviews, audio- and video-taped class sessions, and written artefacts. Data analysis involved the formation of various assertions that informed the major findings of the study, and a variety of validity and ethical protocols were considered during the analysis to ensure the findings and interpretations emerging from the data were valid. Results indicated that the science content course was effective in enabling four of the five participants. views of NOS to be changed. All of the participants expressed predominantly limited views of the majority of the examined NOS aspects at the commencement of the study. Many positive changes were evident at the end of the study with four of the five participants expressing partially informed and/or informed views of the majority of the examined NOS aspects. A critical analysis of the effectiveness of the various course components designed to facilitate the development of participants‟ views of NOS in the study, led to the identification of three factors that mediated the development of participants‟ NOS views: (a) contextual factors (including context of argumentation, and mode of argumentation), (b) task-specific factors (including argumentation scaffolds, epistemological probes, and consideration of alternative data and explanations), and (c) personal factors (including perceived previous knowledge about NOS, appreciation of the importance and utility value of NOS, and durability and persistence of pre-existing beliefs). A consideration of the above factors informs recommendations for future studies that seek to incorporate explicit NOS and argumentation instruction as a context for learning about NOS.

Utilizing argumentation to teach nature of science

The quest for the achievement of informed nature of science (NOS) views for all learners continues to inspire science educators to seek out effective instructional interventions to aid in the development of learners’ NOS views. Despite the extensive amount of research conducted in the field, the development of informed NOS views has been difficult to achieve, with many studies reporting difficulties in changing learners’ NOS views. Can engaging learners in argumentation lead to improvements in their NOS views? This review answers this question by examining studies which have explored NOS and argumentation in science education. The review also outlines a rationale for incorporating argumentation in science education, together with a brief overview of important recent studies in the field. Implications drawn from this review suggest that the incorporation of explicit NOS and argumentation instruction, together with consideration of various contextual, task-specific and personal factors which could mediate learners’ NOS views and engagement in argumentation, could lead to improvements in learners’ views of NOS.

Adapting an argumentation framework for online discourse analysis : a knowledge building approach

The use of online tools to support teaching and learning is now commonplace within educational institutions, with many of these institutions mandating or strongly encouraging the use of a blended learning approach to teaching and learning. Consequently, these institutions generally adopt a learning management system (LMS), with a fixed set of collaborative tools, in the belief that effective teaching and learning approaches will be used, to allow students to build knowledge. While some studies into the use of an LMS’s still identify continued didactic approaches to teaching and learning, the focus of this paper is on the ability of collaborative tools such as discussion forums, to build knowledge. In the context of science education, argumentation is touted as playing an important role in this process of knowledge building. However, there is limited research into argumentation in other domains using online discussion and a blended learning approach. This paper describes a study, using design research, which adapts a framework for argumentation that can be applied to other domains. In particular it will focus on an adapted social argumentation schema to identify argument in a discussion forum of N=16 participants in a secondary High School.

A Monte-Carlo tree search in argumentation

Monte-Carlo Tree Search (MCTS) is a heuristic to search in large trees. We apply it to argumentative puzzles where MCTS pursues the best argumentation with respect to a set of arguments to be argued. To make our ideas as widely applicable as possible, we integrate MCTS to an abstract setting for argumentation where the content of arguments is left unspecified. Experimental results show the pertinence of this integration for learning argumentations by comparing it with a basic reinforcement learning.

Argumentation of the River Derwent using Thirlmere

This is the Argumentation of the River Derwent using Thirlmere produced by the Cumberland River Authority in 1972. This report focuses on the augmentation of the River Derwent by a limited discharge from the Thirlmere Reservoir in short terms. A Working Party of officers from both the Authority and the Corporation was established and experimental releases of water from Thirlmere were made in dry periods in order to assess more clearly their effect upon river flows, and on the level of Bassenthwaite Lake. This report contains the Working Party's evaluations, conclusions and recommendations.

Explicit argumentation as a supervisory tool for decision making in child protection cases involving human rights issues

This paper addresses the problems often faced by social workers and their supervisors in decision making where human rights considerations and child protection concerns collide. High profile court cases in the United Kingdom and Europe have consistently called for social workers to convey more clarity when justifying their reasons for interfering with human rights in child protection cases. The themes emerging from these case law decisions imply that social workers need to be better at giving reasons and evidence in more explicit ways to support any actions they propose which cause interference with Convention Rights. Toulmin (1958, 1985) offers a structured approach to argumentation which may have relevance to the supervision of child protection cases when social workers and managers are required to balance these human rights considerations. One of the key challenges in this balancing act is the need for decision makers to feel confident that any interventions resulting in the interference of human rights are both justified and proportionate. Toulmin’s work has already been shown to have relevance for assisting social workers navigate pathways through cases involving competing ethical and moral demands (Osmo and Landau, 2001) and more recently to human rights and decision making in child protection (Duffy et al, 2006). Toulmin’s model takes the practitioner through a series of stages where any argument or proposed recommendation (claim) is subjected to intense critical analysis involving exposition of its strengths and weaknesses. The author therefore proposes that explicit argumentation (Osmo and Landau, 2001) may help supervisors and practitioners towards safer and more confident decision making in child protection cases involving the interference of the human rights of children and parents. In addition to highlighting the broader context of human rights currently permeating child protection decision making, the paper will include case material to practically demonstrate the application of Toulmin’s model of argumentation to the supervision context. In this way the paper adopts a strong practice approach in helping to assist practitioners with the problems and dilemmas they may come up against in decision making in complex cases.

Modelling group decision simulation through argumentation

Group decision making plays an important role in today’s organisations. The impact of decision making is so high and complex, that rarely the decision making process is made individually. In Group Decision Argumentation, there is a set of participants, with different profiles and expertise levels, that exchange ideas or engage in a process of argumentation and counter-argumentation, negotiate, cooperate, collaborate or even discuss techniques and/or methodologies for problem solving. In this paper, it is proposed a Multi-Agent simulator for the behaviour representation of group members in a decision making process. Agents behave depending on rational and emotional intelligence and use persuasive argumentation to convince and make alternative choices.

Débattre : pratique de l'argumentation et inscription de l'identité dans une perspective textuelle et interactionnelle

L'objectif de la thèse est de rendre compte d'une pratique langagière particulière, le débat, et d'opérer ce travail à la fois à un niveau théorique - en tant qu'analyser la pratique du débat pose certaines questions aux sciences du langage - et à un niveau pratique - dans la mesure où la spécificité du débat repose sur certains observables qu'il s'agit d'identifier et de décrire et qui permettent à chacun de distinguer le débat d'autres formes de comportement, telles que l'anecdote, la dispute ou encore la réunion de travail.¦La thèse part du constat que la pratique du débat constitue un fait social attesté et reconnaissable comme tel, et ce aussi bien par les agents qui s'engagent dans son accomplissement que par un observateur externe. Le fait qu'aucune règle ne vienne pour autant décrire «ce qui fait débat» plaide pour l'adoption d'une perspective ethnométhodologique, sensible à la manière dont les agents pourvoient eux-mêmes, en agissant de façon méthodique et routinière, à la reconnaissabilité (accountability) des pratiques dans lesquelles ils s'engagent.¦La thèse questionne le caractère reconnaissable de la pratique du débat à partir de données originales. Le corpus est constitué de huit événements publics s'étant déroulés à l'Université de Lausanne et ayant été vidéo-enregistrés pour l'occasion. Ces rencontres ne relèvent donc pas d'événements télédiffusés, par exemple des débats de sociétés organisés par des chaînes de télévision. Il s'agit de confrontations verbales (de types « débats publics » ou « conférence-discussion ») où tous les participants, public compris, sont réunis en un même lieu et dans une même tranche temporelle.¦La thèse organise la réflexion en trois parties. Intitulée la parole en interaction médiatisée, la première partie est consacrée à la présentation et à la problématisation, grâce à divers extraits du corpus, des différentes dimensions analytiques mobilisées. Par l'articulation d'acquis en linguistique textuelle et énonciative et en analyse conversationnelle, il s'agit d'étudier la matérialité signifiante des actions verbales en lien avec les dynamiques discursives et interactionnelles dans lesquelles cette matérialité s'inscrit et prend sens. En d'autres termes, on considère la manière dont les unités linguistiques participent à l'accomplissement d'activités pratiques et les pressions que ces activités pratiques sont susceptibles d'exercer sur l'usage de ces unités. L'analyse du débat est en outre inscrite dans une approche multimodale des pratiques, qui entend dépasser l'analyse de la seule verbalité pour donner une place aux ressources corporelles, qu'il s'agisse de gestes, de mimiques ou de la répartition des participants dans l'espace.¦Une fois les différentes dimensions analytiques posées, les deux autres parties examinent chacune une composante - autrement dit un observable - qui spécifie le débat en tant que pratique langagière particulière. Mobilisant une approche dialogale de la pratique de l 'argumentation, la deuxième partie entend montrer que le débat gagne à être abordé comme un mode particulier de gestion du désaccord, fondé sur l'usage de ressources argumentatives. La troisième partie s'intéresse finalement à la problématique de l'inscription de l'identité dans le langage et dans l'interaction et considère la manière dont les traits identitaires que les agents s'attribuent, respectivement ou réciproquement, lorsqu'ils s'engagent dans un débat, participent à assurer le caractère reconnaissable de cette pratique.

Argumentation and education. Theoretical foundations and practices

During the last decade, argumentation has attracted growing attention as a means to elicit processes (linguistic, logical, dialogical, psychological, etc.) that can sustain or provoke reasoning and learning. Constituting an important dimension of daily life and of professional activities, argumentation plays a special role in democracies and is at the heart of philosophical reasoning and scientific inquiry. Argumentation, as such, requires specific intellectual and social skills. Hence, argumentation will have an increasing importance in education, both because it is a critical competence that has to be learned, and because argumentation can be used to foster learning in philosophy, history, sciences and in many other domains. Argumentation and Education answers these and other questions by providing both theoretical backgrounds, in psychology, education and theory of argumentation, and concrete examples of experiments and results in school contexts in a range of domains. It reports on existing innovative practices in education settings at various levels.