学生论证能力与化学表征能力的关系分析——以环境化学课程混合式学习为例

IF 2.2 Q2 EDUCATION, SCIENTIFIC DISCIPLINES Chemistry Teacher International : best practices in chemistry education Pub Date : 2023-11-14 DOI:10.1515/cti-2023-0047
Dimas Gilang Ramadhani, Sri Yamtinah, Sulistyo Saputro, Sri Widoretno
{"title":"学生论证能力与化学表征能力的关系分析——以环境化学课程混合式学习为例","authors":"Dimas Gilang Ramadhani, Sri Yamtinah, Sulistyo Saputro, Sri Widoretno","doi":"10.1515/cti-2023-0047","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Abstract Engaging students in collaborative learning fosters the expression of ideas, deepens understanding, and hones argumentation skills. Argumentation is pivotal, and instructors should facilitate opportunities for its practice. In the study on an environmental chemistry course, class conversations were recorded to analyze students’ contributions to online learning. Participants shared opinions, raised objections, and built on others’ answers. The instructor played a crucial role in harmonizing collaboration and guiding comprehensive argumentation. The study found claims and data as the most basic and common elements of argumentation. However, more complex components like rebuttal and backing warrants often need instructor intervention. While claims and data typically relied on one form of representation, such as macroscopic or symbolic, warrants demanded multiple dimensions, predominantly symbolic and submicroscopic. Toulmin’s arguments and Mahaffy’s tetrahedral ability of chemical representation were used for analysis. The findings highlighted that argumentation skills and chemical representation are intertwined, with certain argumentative components calling for specific representational dimensions. Collaborative online learning, thus, can enhance student participation and multifaceted skill development.","PeriodicalId":93272,"journal":{"name":"Chemistry Teacher International : best practices in chemistry education","volume":"7 24","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":2.2000,"publicationDate":"2023-11-14","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Analysis of the relationship between students’ argumentation and chemical representational ability: a case study of hybrid learning oriented in the environmental chemistry course\",\"authors\":\"Dimas Gilang Ramadhani, Sri Yamtinah, Sulistyo Saputro, Sri Widoretno\",\"doi\":\"10.1515/cti-2023-0047\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Abstract Engaging students in collaborative learning fosters the expression of ideas, deepens understanding, and hones argumentation skills. Argumentation is pivotal, and instructors should facilitate opportunities for its practice. In the study on an environmental chemistry course, class conversations were recorded to analyze students’ contributions to online learning. Participants shared opinions, raised objections, and built on others’ answers. The instructor played a crucial role in harmonizing collaboration and guiding comprehensive argumentation. The study found claims and data as the most basic and common elements of argumentation. However, more complex components like rebuttal and backing warrants often need instructor intervention. While claims and data typically relied on one form of representation, such as macroscopic or symbolic, warrants demanded multiple dimensions, predominantly symbolic and submicroscopic. Toulmin’s arguments and Mahaffy’s tetrahedral ability of chemical representation were used for analysis. The findings highlighted that argumentation skills and chemical representation are intertwined, with certain argumentative components calling for specific representational dimensions. Collaborative online learning, thus, can enhance student participation and multifaceted skill development.\",\"PeriodicalId\":93272,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Chemistry Teacher International : best practices in chemistry education\",\"volume\":\"7 24\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.2000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-11-14\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Chemistry Teacher International : best practices in chemistry education\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1515/cti-2023-0047\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"EDUCATION, SCIENTIFIC DISCIPLINES\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Chemistry Teacher International : best practices in chemistry education","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1515/cti-2023-0047","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"EDUCATION, SCIENTIFIC DISCIPLINES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

让学生参与合作学习可以促进思想的表达,加深理解,磨练辩论技巧。论证是关键,教师应该提供实践论证的机会。在对一门环境化学课程的研究中,我们记录了课堂对话,以分析学生对在线学习的贡献。参与者分享意见,提出反对意见,并以他人的答案为基础。导师在协调合作和指导全面论证方面发挥了至关重要的作用。研究发现,主张和数据是论证中最基本、最常见的元素。然而,更复杂的部分,如反驳和支持权证往往需要教师的干预。虽然权利要求和数据通常依赖于一种表现形式,如宏观或符号,但权证需要多个维度,主要是符号和亚微观。图尔敏论证和马哈菲化学表征的四面体能力被用于分析。研究结果强调,论证技巧和化学表征是交织在一起的,某些论证成分需要特定的表征维度。因此,协作式在线学习可以提高学生的参与度和多方面的技能发展。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Analysis of the relationship between students’ argumentation and chemical representational ability: a case study of hybrid learning oriented in the environmental chemistry course
Abstract Engaging students in collaborative learning fosters the expression of ideas, deepens understanding, and hones argumentation skills. Argumentation is pivotal, and instructors should facilitate opportunities for its practice. In the study on an environmental chemistry course, class conversations were recorded to analyze students’ contributions to online learning. Participants shared opinions, raised objections, and built on others’ answers. The instructor played a crucial role in harmonizing collaboration and guiding comprehensive argumentation. The study found claims and data as the most basic and common elements of argumentation. However, more complex components like rebuttal and backing warrants often need instructor intervention. While claims and data typically relied on one form of representation, such as macroscopic or symbolic, warrants demanded multiple dimensions, predominantly symbolic and submicroscopic. Toulmin’s arguments and Mahaffy’s tetrahedral ability of chemical representation were used for analysis. The findings highlighted that argumentation skills and chemical representation are intertwined, with certain argumentative components calling for specific representational dimensions. Collaborative online learning, thus, can enhance student participation and multifaceted skill development.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
3.10
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Analysis of the relationship between students’ argumentation and chemical representational ability: a case study of hybrid learning oriented in the environmental chemistry course University and local recyclable material cooperative – building bridges around e-waste Designing a learning environment based on the spiral of skills to overcome the didactic obstacles associated with teaching the Daniell cell Does it occur or not? – A structured approach to support students in determining the spontaneity of chemical reactions Relativistic effects on the chemistry of heavier elements: why not given proper importance in chemistry education at the undergraduate and postgraduate level?
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1