Integrating Reading as Evidence to Enhance Argumentation in Scientific Reading-based Inquiry: A Design-based Research in Biology Classroom
Abstract
This study aims to design a Scientific Reading-based Inquiry (SRbI) model that supports argumentation skills development. The assessment of these skills refers to the Toulmin Argument Pattern (TAP), and the participants were Biology Education students in a state university. Furthermore, the Design-based Research (DBR) approach was adopted by combining exploratory studies, trials, and case studies as part of an iterative process. The intervention was formed based on design principles derived from literature review and findings from exploratory studies. Also, observations were made during the trial and intervention process. Data in assessments and observations of written and oral arguments were collected and descriptively analyzed. The study, in three iterations, produced a framework as the basis for the SRbI learning model, with five phases: Reading Orientation, Recapturing, Processing, Communicating, and Reviewing. Therefore, the application of this learning model had a significant impact on the development of students’ argumentation skills.
Keywords
Full Text:
PDFReferences
Anmarkrud, O., Braten, I., & Stromso, H. I. (2014). Multiple-Documents Literacy : Strategic Processing, Source Awareness, and Argumentation when Reading Multiple Conflicting Documents. Learning and Individual Differences, 30, 64–76.
Barzilai, S., & Tzadok, E. (2015). Sourcing while Reading Divergent Expert Accounts: Pathways from Views of Knowing to Written Argumentation. Instructional Science, 43, 737–766.
Belland, B. R., Glazewski, K. D., & Richardson, J. C. (2011). Problem-based Learning and Argumentation: Testing a Scaffolding Framework to Support Middle School Students’ Creation of Evidence-based Arguments. Instructional Science, 39(5), 667–694.
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.
Boone, W. J., Yale, M. S., & Staver, J. R. (2014). Rasch Analysis in the Human Sciences. In Rasch Analysis in the Human Sciences. Springer.
Bråten, I., Ferguson, L. E., Anmarkrud, Ø., & Strømsø, H. I. (2013). Prediction of learning and comprehension when adolescents read multiple texts: The roles of word-level processing, strategic approach, and reading motivation. Reading and Writing, 26(3), 321–348.
Cavagnetto, A., & Hand, B. (2012). The Importance of Embedding Argument Within Science Classrooms. In M. S. Khine (Ed.), Perspectives on Scientific Argumentation: Theory, Practice and ResearchTheory, Practice and Research (pp. 39–53). Springer Netherlands.
Cetin, P. S., & Eymur, G. (2017). Developing Students’ Scientific Writing and Presentation Skills through Argument Driven Inquiry: An Exploratory Study. Journal of Chemical Education, 94(7), 837–843.
Chin, C. C., Yang, W. C., & Tuan, H. L. (2015). Argumentation in a Socioscientific Context and its Influence on Fundamental and Derived Science Literacies. International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 14(4), 603–617.
Choi, A., Klein, V., & Hershberger, S. (2014). 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.
Crowell, A., Crowell, A., & Kuhn, D. (2014). Developing Dialogic Argumentation Skills : A 3-year Intervention Study. Journal of Cognition and Development, 15(2), 363–381.
Davila, Y. C., & Griffiths, N. (2016). Supporting Student Transition : Embedding Reading Practices into the First Year Science Curriculum. Students Transitions Achievement Retention & Success, July, 1–5.
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.
Demircioğlu, T., & Uçar, S. (2012). The Effect of Argument-Driven Inquiry on Pre-Service Science Teachers’ Attitudes and Argumentation Skills. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences, 46, 5035–5039.
Eliyahu, E. Ben, Assaraf, O. B. Z., & Lederman, J. S. (2020). Do Not Just Do Science Inquiry, Understand It! The Views of Scientific Inquiry of Israeli Middle School Students Enrolled in a Scientific Reserve Course. Research in Science Education.
Enfield, M. (2014). Reading Scientifically: Practices Supporting Intertextual Reading Using Science Knowledge. Journal of Science Teacher Education, 25(4), 395–412.
Erduran, S., Ozdem, Y., & Park, J.-Y. (2015). Research Trends on Argumentation in Science Education : a Journal Content Analysis from 1998 – 2014. International Journal of STEM Education, 2(5), 1–12.
Evagorou, M., & Osborne, J. (2013). Exploring Young Students’ Collaborative Argumentation within a Socioscientific Issue. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 50(2).
Eymur, G. (2018). Developing High School Students’ Self-Efficacy and Perceptions about Inquiry and Laboratory Skills through Argument-Driven Inquiry. Journal of Chemical Education, 95(5), 709–715.
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.
Felton, M., & Herko, S. (2004). From Dialogue to Two-Sided Argument: Scaffolding Adolescents’ Persuasive Writing. Journal of Adolescent & Adult Literacy, 47(8), 672–683.
Felton, M., & Kuhn, D. (2001). The Development of Argumentive Discourse Skill. Discourse Processes, 32(2), 135–153.
Fielding-Wells, J., Dole, S., & Makar, K. (2014). Inquiry Pedagogy to Promote Emerging Proportional Reasoning in Primary Students. Mathematics Education Research Journal, 26(1), 47–77.
Haggard, M. R. (2014). Developing Critical Thinking with the Directed Reading-Thinking Activity. The Reading Teacher, 41(6), 526–533.
Jairam, D., Kiewra, K. A., & Marxhausen, M. P. K. (2014). SOAR versus SQ3R : a Test of Two Study Systems. Instructional Science, 42, 409–420.
Jin, L., & Jeong, A. (2013). Learning Achieved in Structured Online Debates: Levels of Learning and Types of Postings. Instructional Science, 41(6), 1141–1152.
Joyce, B., & Calhoun, E. (2009). Three Sides of Teaching: Styles, Models, and Diversity. International Handbook of Research on Teachers and Teaching, 645–652.
Knight-Bardsley, A., & McNeill, K. L. (2016). Teachers’s Pedagogical Design Capacity for Scientific Argumentation. Science Education, 100(4).
Koeneman, M., Goedhart, M., & Ossevoort, M. (2013). Introducing Pre-university Students to Primary Scientific Literature Through Argumentation Analysis. Research in Science Education, 43(5), 2009–2034.
Kuhn, D., Hemberger, L., & Khait, V. (2016). Dialogic argumentation as a bridge to argumentative thinking and writing. Infancia y Aprendizaje, 39(1), 25–48.
Kulgemeyer, C., & Schecker, H. (2013). Students Explaining Science-Assessment of Science Communication Competence. Research in Science Education, 43(6), 2235–2256.
Larrain, A., Howe, C., & Cerda, J. (2014). Argumentation in Whole-Class Teaching and Science Learning. Psykhe (Santiago), 23(2), 1–15.
Ma, B., Katsh-singer, R., Pimentel, D., Gonzalez-howard, M., & Mcneill, K. L. (2014). Supporting All Students in Writing Scientific Arguments.
McDonald, C. V. (2017). Exploring Nature of Science and Argumentation in Science Education. In Science Education: A Global Perspective (pp. 7–43). Springer International Publishing.
Mckenney, S., & Mor, Y. (2015). Supporting Teachers in Data-Informed Educational Design. British Journal of Educational Technology, 46(2), 265–280.
McNeill, K. L., González-Howard, M., Katsh-Singer, R., & Loper, S. (2016). Pedagogical Content Knowledge of Argumentation: Using Classroom Contexts to Assess High-Quality PCK rather than pseudoargumentation. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 53(2), 261–290.
Mesci, G., Schwartz, R. S., & Pleasants, B. A. S. (2020). Enabling Factors of Preservice Science Teachers’ Pedagogical Content Knowledge for Nature of Science and Nature of Scientific Inquiry. Science and Education, 29(2), 263–297.
Nichols, K., Gillies, R., & Hedberg, J. (2016). Argumentation-Based Collaborative Inquiry in Science Through Representational Work: Impact on Primary Students’ Representational Fluency. Research in Science Education, 46, 343–364.
Norris, S. P. (2012). Reading for evidence and interpreting visualizations in mathematics and science education. Reading for Evidence and Interpreting Visualizations in Mathematics and Science Education, 9789460919, 1–208.
Parmin, P., & Fibriana, F. (2020). The Reconstruction of Indigenous Knowledge about Golobe (Hornstedtia alliacea) as a Natural Resource Conservation Study for Prospective Teachers’ Scientific Literacy. Al-Ta lim Journal, 27(2), 115-126.
Phillips, L. M., Norris, S. P., & Macnab, J. S. (2012). Model And Modelling in Science Education: Visualization in Mathematics, Reading and Science Education (Vol. 5, Issue 2). Springer.
Plomp, T., & Nieveen, N. (2013). Educational Design Research, Part A : An Introduction (T. Plomp & N. Nieveen (eds.)). SLO.
Pritasari, C., Dwiastuti, S., & Probosari, R. M. (2015). The Argumentation Capacity Improvement Through The Problem Based Learning Implementation in Class X MIA 1 SMA Batik
Surakarta. Jurnal Pendidikan IPA Indonesia, 4(2), 158–163.
Probosari, R. M. (2015). Improvement of Students’s Scientific Writing of Biology Education of Sebelas Maret University Through Reading Project Based Reading. Jurnal Pendidikan IPA Indonesia, 4(1), 31–35.
Probosari, R. M., Rami, M., Harlita, Indrowati, M., & Sajidan. (2016). Profil Keterampilan Argumentasi Ilmiah Mahasiswa Pendidikan Biologi FKIP UNS pada Mata Kuliah Anatomi Tumbuhan. Bioedukasi, 9(2007), 29–33.
Probosari, R. M., Sajidan, Suranto, Prayitno, B. A., & Widyastuti, F. (2017). Modelling Scientific Argumentation in the Classroom : Teachers Perception and Practice. Journal of Physics: Conference Series, 365(`), 011001.
Probosari, R. M., Widyastuti, F., Sajidan, S., Suranto, S., & Prayitno, B. A. (2018). Reading for Tracing Evidence: Developing Scientific Knowledge through Science Text. Journal of Physics: Conference Series, 1022(1), 1–5.
Probosari, R. M., Widyastuti, F., Sajidan, S., Suranto, S., & Prayitno, B. A. (2019). Improving Scientific Argumentation: Opportunities and Barriers Analysis in Inquiry-based Scientific Reading. Journal of Physics: Conference Series, 1280, 1–7.
Probosari, R. M., Widyastuti, F., Sajidan, Suranto, & Prayitno, B. A. (2019). Students’ Argument Style Through Scientific Reading-based Inquiry: Improving Argumentation Skill in Higher Education. AIP Conference Proceedings, 2194(020088), 1–7.
Renken, M. D., & Nunez, N. (2010). Evidence for Improved Conclusion Accuracy after Reading about Rather than Conducting a Belief-inconsistent Simple Physics Experiment. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 24(6), 792–811.
Sampson, V., & Clark, D. (2009). The Impact of Collaboration on the Outcomes of Scientific Argumentation. Science Education, 93(3), 448–484.
Sari, I., & El Islami, R. (2020). The Effectiveness of Scientific Argumentation Strategy towards the Various Learning Outcomes and Educational Levels Five Over the Years in Science Education. Journal of Innovation in Educational and Cultural Research, 1(2), 52-57.
Scherz, Z., Spektor-Levy, O., & Eylon, B. A. T. S. (2005). Scientific Communication: An Instructional Program for High-Order Learning Skills and Its Impact on Students’ Performance. In K. Boersma, M. Goedhart, O. de Jong, & H. Eijkelhof (Eds.), Research and the Quality of Science Education (pp. 231–243). Springer.
Taylor, J. C., Tseng, C., Murillo, A., Therrien, W., & Hand, B. (2018). Using Argument-based Science Inquiry to Improve Science Achievement for Students with Disabilities in Inclusive Classrooms. Journal of Science Education for Students with Disabilities, 21(1), 1–14.
Toulmin, S. E. (2003). The Uses of Argument, Updated Edition. Cambridge University Press.
Tsai, C. (2015). Improving Students’ PISA Scientific Competencies Through Online Argumentation Improving Students’ PISA Scientific Competencies Through Online Argumentation. November, 1–2.
Wang, P., Chen, Z., Kasimu, R., Chen, Y., Zhang, X., & Gai, J. (2016). Inquiry Into the Independent Reading Development of First-Generation College Graduates With Advanced Degrees. Journal of Literacy Research, 48(1), 105.
Yarden, A., Norris, S. P., & Phillips, L. M. (2015). Adapted Primary Literature The Use of Authentic Scientific Texts in Secondary Schools. In Innovations in Science Education and Technology (Vol. 22). Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht.
Yu, R. L., & Jeng, F. H. (2016). The Analysis and Reconciliation of Students’ Rebuttals in Argumentation Activities. International Journal of Science Education, 38(1), 130–155.
Zion, M., Schwartz, R. S., Rimerman-Shmueli, E., & Adler, I. (2020). Supporting Teachers’ Understanding of Nature of Science and Inquiry Through Personal Experience and Perception of Inquiry as a Dynamic Process. Research in Science Education, 50(4), 1281–1304.
Zohar, A., & Nemet, F. (2002). Fostering Students’ Knowledge and Argumentation Skills Through Dilemmas in Human Genetics. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 39(1), 35–62.
Refbacks
- There are currently no refbacks.
