Tracking Student Argumentation Skills across General Chemistry through Argument-Driven Inquiry Using the Assessment of Scientific Argumentation in the Classroom Observation Protocol

Abstract

Current research suggests that students often fail to focus equally on the three aspects of scientific argumentation (cognitive, epistemic, and social) when they are given an opportunity to engage in argumentation. This study examined student argumentation within a two-semester general chemistry laboratory sequence at East Carolina University to explore how the three aspects of argumentation change over time with repeated exposure through the Argument-Driven Inquiry (ADI) instructional model for laboratory instruction. Video recordings of group argumentation across five investigations were transcribed and coded using the Assessment of Scientific Argumentation in the Classroom (ASAC) observation protocol. A positive increase was seen in the total ASAC scores for each of the experiments. A significant increase was seen within each of the three subcategories of the ASAC observation protocol, cognitive, epistemic, and social, over the two-semester sequence. These results support the idea that increased opportunities to engage in argumentation improves an essential scientific practice.