Na'ama Y. Av-Shalom, Randi M. Zimmerman, C. Chinn, R. Duncan
{"title":"辩论赛中认知语篇与元认知语篇的不同范畴分析","authors":"Na'ama Y. Av-Shalom, Randi M. Zimmerman, C. Chinn, R. Duncan","doi":"10.5817/sp2019-4-5","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Argumentative practices have been shown to deepen understanding and improve academic performance. After 10 years of work with science curricula designed to develop reasoning, we present a framework grounded in data from our projects for identifying different forms of metacognitive engagement in science inquiry classes. We focus on four categories of discourse from our data: object of thought or discourse; expressions of what someone is thinking; degree of specificity; and discourse applying and tailoring understanding of epistemic cognition to particular topics. We present multiple examples in each of these categories. Our goal is to provide analytic tools along with examples to better identify and code argumentative discourse that advances students' apt epistemic performance.","PeriodicalId":37607,"journal":{"name":"Studia Paedagogica","volume":"50 12","pages":"101-118"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2019-12-31","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Analysis of Different Categories of Epistemic and Metacognitive Discourse in Argumentation\",\"authors\":\"Na'ama Y. Av-Shalom, Randi M. Zimmerman, C. Chinn, R. Duncan\",\"doi\":\"10.5817/sp2019-4-5\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Argumentative practices have been shown to deepen understanding and improve academic performance. After 10 years of work with science curricula designed to develop reasoning, we present a framework grounded in data from our projects for identifying different forms of metacognitive engagement in science inquiry classes. We focus on four categories of discourse from our data: object of thought or discourse; expressions of what someone is thinking; degree of specificity; and discourse applying and tailoring understanding of epistemic cognition to particular topics. We present multiple examples in each of these categories. Our goal is to provide analytic tools along with examples to better identify and code argumentative discourse that advances students' apt epistemic performance.\",\"PeriodicalId\":37607,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Studia Paedagogica\",\"volume\":\"50 12\",\"pages\":\"101-118\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2019-12-31\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"1\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Studia Paedagogica\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.5817/sp2019-4-5\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"Social Sciences\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Studia Paedagogica","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.5817/sp2019-4-5","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"Social Sciences","Score":null,"Total":0}
Analysis of Different Categories of Epistemic and Metacognitive Discourse in Argumentation
Argumentative practices have been shown to deepen understanding and improve academic performance. After 10 years of work with science curricula designed to develop reasoning, we present a framework grounded in data from our projects for identifying different forms of metacognitive engagement in science inquiry classes. We focus on four categories of discourse from our data: object of thought or discourse; expressions of what someone is thinking; degree of specificity; and discourse applying and tailoring understanding of epistemic cognition to particular topics. We present multiple examples in each of these categories. Our goal is to provide analytic tools along with examples to better identify and code argumentative discourse that advances students' apt epistemic performance.
期刊介绍：
Studia Paedagogica publishes original papers on education, upbringing and learning from all spheres of social life. The papers are theoretical, but mainly empirical as the journal publishes research undertaken in the Czech Republic and abroad. The journal publishes only original research papers and is open to both experienced and early researchers. Early researchers can publish their papers in the section Emerging Researchers of the journal and are offered intensive editorial support. The journal is interdisciplinary - it covers current topics in educational research while at the same time providing scope for studies grounded in other social sciences. The journal publishes four issues per year, two issues are dedicated to general interest articles and are in Czech, two issues are on a single topic and are in English. Studia Paedagogica is a peer reviewed journal published by the Masaryk University. The executive editors are members of the staff of the Department of Educational Sciences and the editorial board comprises of international experts. The name of the journal is derived from the name of its predecessor, Studia minora facultatis philosophicae universitatis brunensis (Sborník prací filozofické fakulty brněnské univerzity), which was issued from 1996 to 2008. However, the tradition of the journal dates much further back as the pedagogical-psychological series of the journal was published even between 1966 to 1995.
京公网安备 11010802042870号
京ICP备2023020795号-1
分享
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：
扫码关注我们
