Supporting Science Teachers’ Agentic Practice in the Pedagogy of Scientific Argumentation

Examination of existing science curricula and school science practices reveals that scientific argumentation, among other approaches, in teaching science is effective for developing students' scientific enquiry and reasoning. However, much research has shown that science teachers have struggled to integrate it into science learning and teaching. This thesis explores science teachers' pedagogical development of scientific argumentation through sustained collaborative work and reflection. The study adopted an embedded case study approach and involved the generation of qualitative data from three science teachers working in a comprehensive school in London (through lesson planning, lesson observations, reflective interviews, and students' written work). This thesis also utilised the concept of agency to examine teachers’ pedagogical development. The comparative analysis of teachers' practice showed that their initial approach to implementing scientific argumentation evolved, with variations according to teachers’ characteristics, values and emphasis on teaching science, approaches and scaffolding scientific argumentation processes, timing and the organisation of their students for discussions. Reflection on practice and collaborative work with colleagues helped them construct a better understanding of scientific argumentation and its value for learning science. Additionally, the variations in students' written work provided insight into the differences in their teachers' scientific argumentation approach. The results indicate the need for better support for teachers in planning and incorporating scientific argumentation into their practice through more focused professional learning. Additionally, this study examined changes in teachers' pedagogical development through the lens of agency, specifically in the components of sense of purpose, mastery, autonomy to act, and reflexivity, and identified factors that seemed to support or hinder the development of agency. The findings of this thesis contribute to a better understanding of how scientific argumentation is incorporated into teaching science and how the concept of agency may be useful to examine teachers' pedagogical development of new teaching approaches

Explorations in graphical argumentation:The use of external representations of argumentation in collaborative problem solving.

Van Bruggen, J. M. (2003). Explorations in graphical argumentation The use of external representations of argumentation in collaborative problem solving. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Open University of the Netherlands. The Netherlands

Measuring the Effect of Argument-Driven Inquiry on High School Chemistry Students’ Process-Oriented Motivation Utilizing the Newly Developed Process-Oriented Motivation Instrument

This study uncovers how secondary high school chemistry process-oriented motivation is altered after implementation of Argument-Driven Inquiry (ADI). ADI is a laboratory instructional model that utilizes four Science and Engineering Practices (SEPs) in a student-centered lab experience. The SEPs are embedded to the current curriculum to help motivate students to learn chemistry (NRC, 2012). This study utilized eleven total chemistry classes, five on-level chemistry and six honors chemistry, with a total of 243 students participating in some facet of the study. Data sources included were View About Scientific Inquiry (VASI), the newly developed Process-Oriented Motivation Instrument (POMI), and student lab reports (achievement). Two goals were necessary to examine student-process-oriented motivation for the control and experimental group. Based on current science education literature, a valid and reliable POMI does not currently exist. Thus, Goal 1 purpose was to create an instrument, POMI, while generating valid and reliable data. A Confirmatory Factor Analysis along with other forms of validity and reliability were completed to find the most valid and reliable model, the revised POMI model. Thus, Goal 2 utilized this revised POMI model to find the effect ADI had on student-process oriented motivation for both groups. The control group, honors chemistry students, utilized a traditional lab. However, the experimental group, on-level chemistry students, participated in the ADI lab to determine if the type of lab implementation caused a significant difference in process-oriented motivation among the groups. Normalized gain scores were used to compare if there was significant difference between the control and experimental groups. Finally, mediation path analysis discovered if process-oriented motivation factors influence how the experimental group or control performed on their lab report. Two conclusions were drawn as a result of Goal 2: (1) after ADI implementation both groups experienced statistically similar changes in each POMI motivation factor and (2) no POMI factor possessed a significant influence on the lab report scores of either group

Using Argument as a Bridge Between Literacy and Science: An Intervention Study in a Science Methods Course for Elementary Preservice Teachers

The purpose of this study was to investigate the impact of an intervention on teaching science as argument within a science methods course on elementary preservice teachers\u27 (PSTs\u27) (a) understandings of the nature of science (NOS), (b) knowledge about argumentation, (c) complexity of their written explanations, and (d) ability to incorporate components of the framework for teaching science as argument to support students\u27 literacy and science learning. This mixed-methods study utilized an embedded quasi-experimental design with a treatment (n = 20) and control group (n = 25). The treatment group instructor, who completed an eight-week professional development course, implemented the intervention protocol across a 12-week period. Throughout the intervention, emphasis was placed on three key components of teaching science as argument (i.e., argument structure, public reasoning, and the language of science). The control group instructor, who did not partake in any professional learning activities, implemented business-as-usual instruction. Results from a repeated measures MANOVA revealed that, although the intervention did not have a significant impact on PSTs\u27 knowledge of argumentation, PSTs who received the intervention did demonstrate a significant increase in their understanding of the NOS and in the complexity of their written explanations, as compared to PSTs who did not receive the intervention. Furthermore, analysis of PSTs\u27 written lesson plans revealed several themes (i.e., opportunities for students to collect and analyze data, use of scaffolds for helping students construct scientific explanations, emphasis on the use of text to support scientific inquiry, and attention to developing students\u27 science vocabulary) consistent with the framework for teaching science as argument. These findings contribute to a growing body of evidence illustrating the effectiveness of intentionally designed teacher preparation experiences for developing PSTs\u27 knowledge, beliefs, and practices for supporting students\u27 engagement in scientific explanation and argument

Computational Argumentation for the Automatic Analysis of Argumentative Discourse and Human Persuasion

Tesis por compendio[ES] La argumentación computacional es el área de investigación que estudia y analiza el uso de distintas técnicas y algoritmos que aproximan el razonamiento argumentativo humano desde un punto de vista computacional. En esta tesis doctoral se estudia el uso de distintas técnicas propuestas bajo el marco de la argumentación computacional para realizar un análisis automático del discurso argumentativo, y para desarrollar técnicas de persuasión computacional basadas en argumentos. Con estos objetivos, en primer lugar se presenta una completa revisión del estado del arte y se propone una clasificación de los trabajos existentes en el área de la argumentación computacional. Esta revisión nos permite contextualizar y entender la investigación previa de forma más clara desde la perspectiva humana del razonamiento argumentativo, así como identificar las principales limitaciones y futuras tendencias de la investigación realizada en argumentación computacional. En segundo lugar, con el objetivo de solucionar algunas de estas limitaciones, se ha creado y descrito un nuevo conjunto de datos que permite abordar nuevos retos y investigar problemas previamente inabordables (e.g., evaluación automática de debates orales). Conjuntamente con estos datos, se propone un nuevo sistema para la extracción automática de argumentos y se realiza el análisis comparativo de distintas técnicas para esta misma tarea. Además, se propone un nuevo algoritmo para la evaluación automática de debates argumentativos y se prueba con debates humanos reales. Finalmente, en tercer lugar se presentan una serie de estudios y propuestas para mejorar la capacidad persuasiva de sistemas de argumentación computacionales en la interacción con usuarios humanos. De esta forma, en esta tesis se presentan avances en cada una de las partes principales del proceso de argumentación computacional (i.e., extracción automática de argumentos, representación del conocimiento y razonamiento basados en argumentos, e interacción humano-computador basada en argumentos), así como se proponen algunos de los cimientos esenciales para el análisis automático completo de discursos argumentativos en lenguaje natural.[CA] L'argumentació computacional és l'àrea de recerca que estudia i analitza l'ús de distintes tècniques i algoritmes que aproximen el raonament argumentatiu humà des d'un punt de vista computacional. En aquesta tesi doctoral s'estudia l'ús de distintes tècniques proposades sota el marc de l'argumentació computacional per a realitzar una anàlisi automàtic del discurs argumentatiu, i per a desenvolupar tècniques de persuasió computacional basades en arguments. Amb aquestos objectius, en primer lloc es presenta una completa revisió de l'estat de l'art i es proposa una classificació dels treballs existents en l'àrea de l'argumentació computacional. Aquesta revisió permet contextualitzar i entendre la investigació previa de forma més clara des de la perspectiva humana del raonament argumentatiu, així com identificar les principals limitacions i futures tendències de la investigació realitzada en argumentació computacional. En segon lloc, amb l'objectiu de sol$\cdot$lucionar algunes d'aquestes limitacions, hem creat i descrit un nou conjunt de dades que ens permet abordar nous reptes i investigar problemes prèviament inabordables (e.g., avaluació automàtica de debats orals). Conjuntament amb aquestes dades, es proposa un nou sistema per a l'extracció d'arguments i es realitza l'anàlisi comparativa de distintes tècniques per a aquesta mateixa tasca. A més a més, es proposa un nou algoritme per a l'avaluació automàtica de debats argumentatius i es prova amb debats humans reals. Finalment, en tercer lloc es presenten una sèrie d'estudis i propostes per a millorar la capacitat persuasiva de sistemes d'argumentació computacionals en la interacció amb usuaris humans. D'aquesta forma, en aquesta tesi es presenten avanços en cada una de les parts principals del procés d'argumentació computacional (i.e., l'extracció automàtica d'arguments, la representació del coneixement i raonament basats en arguments, i la interacció humà-computador basada en arguments), així com es proposen alguns dels fonaments essencials per a l'anàlisi automàtica completa de discursos argumentatius en llenguatge natural.[EN] Computational argumentation is the area of research that studies and analyses the use of different techniques and algorithms that approximate human argumentative reasoning from a computational viewpoint. In this doctoral thesis we study the use of different techniques proposed under the framework of computational argumentation to perform an automatic analysis of argumentative discourse, and to develop argument-based computational persuasion techniques. With these objectives in mind, we first present a complete review of the state of the art and propose a classification of existing works in the area of computational argumentation. This review allows us to contextualise and understand the previous research more clearly from the human perspective of argumentative reasoning, and to identify the main limitations and future trends of the research done in computational argumentation. Secondly, to overcome some of these limitations, we create and describe a new corpus that allows us to address new challenges and investigate on previously unexplored problems (e.g., automatic evaluation of spoken debates). In conjunction with this data, a new system for argument mining is proposed and a comparative analysis of different techniques for this same task is carried out. In addition, we propose a new algorithm for the automatic evaluation of argumentative debates and we evaluate it with real human debates. Thirdly, a series of studies and proposals are presented to improve the persuasiveness of computational argumentation systems in the interaction with human users. In this way, this thesis presents advances in each of the main parts of the computational argumentation process (i.e., argument mining, argument-based knowledge representation and reasoning, and argument-based human-computer interaction), and proposes some of the essential foundations for the complete automatic analysis of natural language argumentative discourses.This thesis has been partially supported by the Generalitat Valenciana project PROME- TEO/2018/002 and by the Spanish Government projects TIN2017-89156-R and PID2020- 113416RB-I00.Ruiz Dolz, R. (2023). Computational Argumentation for the Automatic Analysis of Argumentative Discourse and Human Persuasion [Tesis doctoral]. Universitat Politècnica de València. https://doi.org/10.4995/Thesis/10251/194806Compendi

Can teachers implement a student-centered dialogical argumentation method across the curriculum?

PTDC/FER-FIL/28278/2017 DL 57/2016/CP1453/CT0066 UIDB/00183/2020 UIDP/00183/2020Does student-centered dialogical argumentation work in authentic classroom settings? Four experienced secondary teachers implemented an argument-based curriculum situated within the contexts of their four respective disciplines - language arts, history, science, and civic education. A mixed-method analysis showed that students who participated in the curriculum performed significantly better on a final argumentative essay, compared to control groups who studied the same content with the same teachers using customary methods. Teachers' interviews suggested additional effects including cognitive, metacognitive and socio-emotional skills. Discussion focuses on teachers' role within a dialogical curriculum and argumentation's applicability and efficiency as a transdisciplinary pedagogical method.publishersversionpublishe

On Cognitive Preferences and the Plausibility of Rule-based Models

It is conventional wisdom in machine learning and data mining that logical models such as rule sets are more interpretable than other models, and that among such rule-based models, simpler models are more interpretable than more complex ones. In this position paper, we question this latter assumption by focusing on one particular aspect of interpretability, namely the plausibility of models. Roughly speaking, we equate the plausibility of a model with the likeliness that a user accepts it as an explanation for a prediction. In particular, we argue that, all other things being equal, longer explanations may be more convincing than shorter ones, and that the predominant bias for shorter models, which is typically necessary for learning powerful discriminative models, may not be suitable when it comes to user acceptance of the learned models. To that end, we first recapitulate evidence for and against this postulate, and then report the results of an evaluation in a crowd-sourcing study based on about 3.000 judgments. The results do not reveal a strong preference for simple rules, whereas we can observe a weak preference for longer rules in some domains. We then relate these results to well-known cognitive biases such as the conjunction fallacy, the representative heuristic, or the recogition heuristic, and investigate their relation to rule length and plausibility.Comment: V4: Another rewrite of section on interpretability to clarify focus on plausibility and relation to interpretability, comprehensibility, and justifiabilit

How exemplary teachers promote scientific reasoning and higher order thinking in primary science

There is an emerging interest in the development of STEM capabilities to drive Australia’s future economy and workforce. As a consequence, the focus on the teaching of higher order thinking and scientific reasoning has intensified. Despite these efforts, Australia’s level of achievement on international benchmarking tests has not improved. The aim of this PhD research was to investigate how exemplary teachers develop higher order thinking and scientific reasoning in primary science. The study drew on video data from the EQUALPRIME international research project, which explored quality primary science education in different cultures (ARC Discovery Project DP110101500). This qualitative research examined how Year 4 teachers in two contextually different schools scaffolded, supported and created opportunities for higher order thinking and scientific reasoning during the teaching of a physical science topic. Teacher beliefs, pedagogical strategies and contextual factors were viewed through the multiple theoretical lenses of social constructivism, sociocultural theory and social semiotic theory. The central data source was video which was subjected to micro-ethnographic analysis. These data were supplemented with interviews and classroom artefacts, and from these, case studies were compiled. Using a cross-case analysis and an interpretivist approach, assertions were drawn from which the research questions were answered. The study identified that the teaching of these skills was a complex multifaceted process influenced by the combination of teacher beliefs and contextual factors. Based on safe and supportive learning cultures, the teachers employed inquiry-based approaches and a combination of language- and body-based pedagogies that built students’ thinking and reasoning in parallel with conceptual development, across the unit. Outcomes of the research will contribute to new and deeper understanding of effective scaffolding, support and promotion of higher order thinking and reasoning in primary science which can inform enhancements to pre‐service and in‐service teacher professional learning

Science Teachers’ Professional Growth and the Communication in Science Inquiry Project

The Communication in Science Inquiry Project (CISIP) a National Science Foundation-funded, standards-based model of a scientific classroom discourse community (SCDC) was designed to meet the need for highly-qualified teachers and science education reform. The model included: (a) inquiry; (b) oral discourse; (c) written discourse; (d) academic language development, and (e) learning principles. Research and evaluation feedback were mechanisms by which CISIP become self-regulating, promoting instructional change and incorporating more aspects of inquiry-based learning with academic language development strategies. The program underwent a philosophical shift from teachers-as-consumers to teachers-as-producers based on classroom observations using a professional development-aligned classroom observation instrument that showed teachers were not implementing the CISIP model. Research indicated that CISIP was effective in changing how teachers taught science by providing sustained, long-term professional development. Teachers who participated for greater than one year showed the most change in their teaching practices, becoming more aligned with science education standards documents. Current and future directions in science teacher professional development (PD) include: (a) studying how teacher PD affects student learning; (b) building validity arguments for research instruments to be used for generalizing findings from multiple PD contexts, and (c) the need for improving PD providers’ understanding of how to conduct effective PD and engage in research that contributes to our understanding of 21st century science education reform