Abstract

Within the last years a consensus about the importance of argumentation in school science has developed. Students should not only be able to follow and judge scientific debates in public, it is also assumed that argumentation contributes directly to science learning. However, detailed studies on the interrelationship between argumentation and the development of science knowledge are rare in research on students’ learning. In the study reported in this paper, Junior High School students’ processes of argumentation and their cognitive development occurring in science lessons based on argument were investigated. Using video and audio documents of small group and classroom discussions, students’ performance of argumentation was analysed using a schema based on the work of Toulmin (1958). In parallel, students’ development and usage of scientific knowledge was investigated drawing on a schema for determining the content and area of abstraction of students’ meaning making. Results show that when engaging in argumentation students draw on their prior experiences and knowledge. Activities based on argumentation enabled students to consolidate and elaborate their existing knowledge but did mainly not result in new (conceptual) understanding. However, students were able to develop high level arguments with relatively little knowledge and vice verca.

Full Text
Published version (Free)

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call