Educational Research and Reviews

  • Abbreviation: Educ. Res. Rev.
  • Language: English
  • ISSN: 1990-3839
  • DOI: 10.5897/ERR
  • Start Year: 2006
  • Published Articles: 2008

Full Length Research Paper

Promoting reasoned argumentation in science for lower secondary students

Wanida Pharanat1
  • Wanida Pharanat1
  • Faculty of Education, Mahasarakham University, Thailand.
  • Google Scholar
Prasart Nuangchalerm2
  • Prasart Nuangchalerm2
  • Faculty of Education, Mahasarakham University, Thailand.
  • Google Scholar
Kanyarat Sonsupap3
  • Kanyarat Sonsupap3
  • Faculty of Education, Mahasarakham University, Thailand.
  • Google Scholar


  •  Received: 27 December 2014
  •  Accepted: 02 February 2015
  •  Published: 10 February 2015

References

Alberti RE, Emmons ML (2001).Your perfect right : assertiveness and quality in your life and relationships.8th ed. California: Impact.

 

Bodzin AM, Mamlok R (2000). STS simulations engaging students with issues based scenarios. Sci. Teacher. 67(9):36-39.

 

Dawson VM, Venville G (2010) Teaching strategies for developing students' argumentation skills about socioscientific issues in high school genetics. Res. Sci. Educ. 40(2):133-148.
Crossref

 

Driver R, Newton P, Osborne J (2000). Establishing the norms of scientific argumentation in classrooms. Sci. Educ. 84(3):287–312.
Crossref

 

Erduran S, Simon S, Osbourne J (2004) Tapping into argumentation: developments in the application of Toulmin's argument pattern for studying science discourse. Sci. Educ. 88(6):915–933.
Crossref

 

Hanegan NL, Price L, Peterson J (2008) Disconnections between teacher expectations and student confidence in bioethics. Sci. Educ. 17:921-940.
Crossref

 

Jim’enez-Aleixandre MP, Rodr’ıguez AB, Duschl RA (2000). "Doing the lesson" or "doing science": argument in high school genetics. Sci. Educ. 84(6):757–792.
Crossref

 

Kolsto SD (2001). Scientific literacy for citizenship: Tools for dealing with the science dimension on controversial socioscientific issues. Science Education, 85(3), 291-310.
Crossref

 

Kolsto SD (2006). Patterns in students' argumentation confronted with a risk-focused socio-scientific issue. Int. J. Sci. Educ. 28(14):1689-1716.
Crossref

 

Newton P, Driver R, Osborne J (1999).The place of argumentation in the pedagogy of school science. Int. J. Sci. Educ. 21(5):553-576.
Crossref

 

Nuangchalerm P (2009). Development of socioscientific issues-based teaching for preservice science teachers. J. Social Sci. 5(3):239-243.

 

Nuangchalerm P (2010). Engaging students to perceive nature of science through socioscientific issues-based instruction. Eur. J. Soc. Sci. 13(1):34-37.

 

Nuangchalerm P (2012). Enhancing pedagogical content knowledge in preservice science teachers. Higher Educ. Stud. 2(2):66-71.
Crossref

 

Nuangchalerm P, Kwuanthong B (2010). Teaching "Global Warming" through socioscientific issues-based instruction. Asian Social Sci. 6(8):42-47.
Crossref

 

Osborne J, Erduran S, Simon S (2004). Enhancing the quality of argumentation in school science. J. Res. Sci. Teach. 41(10):994–1020.
Crossref

 

Palladino CD (1996). Developing self-esteem: A positive guide for personal success. United Stated of America: Bawden Printing company.

 

Sadler TD (2002). Socioscientific issue research and its relevance for science education. Paper presented to science education graduate students at the university of South Florida.

 

Sadler TD, Fowler SR (2006). A threshold model of content knowledge transfer for socioscientific argumentation. Sci. Educ. 90(6):986-1004.
Crossref

 

Sadler TD, Zeidler DL (2003). Weighing in on genetic engineering and morality: students reveal their ideas expectations, and reservations. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the National Association for Research in Science Teaching, Philadelphia, PA.

 

Sadler TD, Zeidler DL (2005).Patterns of informal reasoning in the context of socioscientific decision-making. J. Res. Sci. Teach. 42(1):112-138.
Crossref

 

Simon S, Erduran S, Osborne J (2006). Learning to teach argumentation: research and development in the science classroom. Int. J. Sci. Educ. 28(2-3):235-260.
Crossref

 

Toulmin, S.E. (2003). The uses of argument. Cambridge University Press.
Crossref

 

Walker KA, Zeidler DL (2007). Promoting discourse about socioscientific issue through scaffolded inquiry. Int. J. Sci. Educ. 29(11):1387-1410.
Crossref

 

Yore LD, Pimm D, Tuan HL (2007).The literacy component of mathematical and scientific literacy. Int. J. Sci. Math. Educ. 5(4):559-589.
Crossref

 

Zeidler DL, Walker KA, Ackett WA, Simmons ML (2002). Tangled up in views: beliefs in the nature of science and responses to socioscientific dilemmas. Sci. Educ. 86(3):343-367.
Crossref

 

Zoller U (1999). Scaling-up of higher-order cognitive skills-oriented college chemistry teaching: An action-oriented research. J. Res. Sci. Teach. 36(5):583-596.
Crossref