Opinions of Teacher Candidate on Small Group Discussions in Argumentation Applications

Esra KABATAŞ MEMİŞ

Abstract


The study was performed with 3rd year university students receiving the science teaching laboratory applications I and II courses given by the same instructor during 2014-2015 academic year. The participants were included in the study on a voluntary basis. Semi-structured interviews were held with 24 students who had participated in argumentation applications in both semesters. The students were asked questions regarding benefits and harms of working in small groups, duties of the teacher and students in this process, reasons behind their willingness or unwillingness to use this method in future. The data were encoded and themes were created after transcribing the interviews.As a result of the assessment, the students expressed that small group discussions had more advantages than disadvantages. They also stated that these applications positively affected their improvement. Considering that changes which the students observed in themselves were learning more easily, being able to cooperate, having improved communication skill, a critical perspective and awareness, it can be said that small group discussions contribute to the goal of raising science literate individuals.


Keywords


Argumentation, Small goup discussion, Science Education

Full Text:

PDF (Türkçe)

References


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.

Berland, L. K. & Reiser, B. J. (2009). Making sense of argumentation and explanation. Science Education, 93(1), 26-55

Cavagnetto A. R., (2010), Argument to foster scientific literacy: A review of argument interventions in K-12 science contexts, Rev. Educ. Res., 80(3), 336–371.

Demirbağ & Günel, 2014

Driver, R., Newton, P., & Osborne, J. (2000).Establishing the norms of scientific argumentation in classrooms. Science Education, 84, 287-312.

Duschl, R. A. (2008). Quality argumentation and epistemic criteria. S. Erduran & M.P. Jimenez-Aleixandre (Eds.), Argumentation in science education: Perspectives from classroom-based research (pp. 159–175). Dordrecht: Springer

Duschl, R. A. & Osborne, J. (2002). Supporting and promoting argumentation discourse in science education. Studies in Science Education, 38, 39-72

Erduran, S. (2008). Methodological foundations in the study of argumentation in science classrooms. Chapter 3 in S. Erduran & M.P. Jimenez-Aleixandre (Eds.), Argumentation in Science Education: Perspectives from Classroom-Based Research. Dordrecht: Springer.

Erduran, S., & Jimenez-Aleixandre, M. P. (Eds.) (2008). Argumentation in Science Education: Perspectives from Classroom-Based Research. Dordrecht: Springer.

Ford, M. (2008). Disciplinary authority and accountability in scientific practice and learning. Science Education, 92(3), 404-423.

Garcia-Mila, G. & Andersen, C. (2008). Cognitive Foundations of Learning Argumentation. Chapter 2 in S. Erduran & M.P. Jimenez-Aleixandre (Eds.), Argumentation in Science Education: Perspectives from Classroom-Based Research. Dordrecht: Springer.

Jimenez-Aleixandre, M. P. & Erduran, S. (2008). Argumentation in science Education: an Overview. Chapter 3 in S. Erduran & M.P. Jimenez-Aleixandre (Eds.), Argumentation in Science Education: Perspectives from Classroom-Based Research. Dordrecht: Springer.

Kabataş Memiş, E. & Seven, S. (2015). Effects of an SWH Approach and Self-Evaluation on Sixth Grade Students’ Learning and Retention of an Electricity Unit. International Journal of Progressive Education, 11(3), 32-49.

Kuhn, D. (1993). Science as argument: Implications for teaching and learning scientific thinking. Science Education, 77(3), 319–337.

Kuhn, D. (2010). Teaching and learning science as argument. Science Education, 94(5), 810-824.

Köseoğlu, F., Tümay, H.& Budak. E., (2008). Bilimin doğası hakkında Paradigma Değişimleri ve Öğretimi ile ilgili Yeni anlayışlar. G.Ü.Gazi Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi, 28 (2), 221-237.

MEB (2006). Milli eğitim bakanlığı talim terbiye kurulu başkanlığı, ilköğretim fen ve teknloji dersi (6, 7 ve 8. Sınıflar) Öğretim Programı. Ankara.

MEB (2013). İlköğretim kurumları (ilkokullar ve ortaokullar) Fen Bilimleri dersi öğretim programı. Ankara, Talim Terbiye Kurulu Başkanlığı.

Newton, P., Driver, R., & Osborne, J. (1999). The place of argumentation in the pedagogy of school science. International Journal of Science Education, 21, 553–576.

National Research Council (1996). National Science Education Standarts. Washington, DC: National Academy Press

NRC (1999) How people learn: Brain, mind,experience, and school. Washington, DC: National Academies Press.

Sampson, V., & Clark, D. (2009). The effect of collaboration on the outcomes of argumentation. Science Education, 93(3), 448-484.

Siegel, H. (1995). Why Should educators care about argumentation? Informal Logic, 17 (2), 159-176.

Simonneaux, L. (2008). Argumentation in socioscientific contexts. S. Erduran & M. P. Jiménez-Aleixandre (Eds.), Argumentation in science education: Perspectives from classroom-based research (pp. 179–199). Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Springer.

Toulmin, S. (1958). The uses of argument. Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press.

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.



Creative Commons License  
 Kastamonu Eğitim'de yayınlanan tüm içerik ve makaleler "Creative Commons Alıntı 4.0 Uluslararası Lisansı" ile lisanslanmıştır.