学生在社会科学论证中辩护的运用

Anders Jönsson, Louise Rietz, M. Lundström
{"title":"学生在社会科学论证中辩护的运用","authors":"Anders Jönsson, Louise Rietz, M. Lundström","doi":"10.5617/nordina.8203","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Research focusing on students’ argumentation in socioscientific issues (SSI) shows that students tend to base their arguments on values rather than knowledge. This study explores Swedish upper secondary chemistry students’ written argumentation. The data consists of student texts written at the end of an intervention designed to develop skills related to high quality argumentation. The results show that after being taught about argumentation and the context of SSI, students mainly base their arguments on content knowledge. Value justifications are present in students’ texts, but constitute a smaller proportion. Beside content knowledge- and value justifications, we found a third category – “reasoning” – in which students draw conclusions, or make predictions of future events, to support or refute a claim. The justifications in the argumentative texts include a breadth of subject areas in which chemistry knowledge plays an important role. This study suggests that content knowledge constitutes an important part in student argumentation.","PeriodicalId":37114,"journal":{"name":"Nordic Studies in Science Education","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2021-09-14","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Students’ use of Justifications in Socioscientific Argumentation\",\"authors\":\"Anders Jönsson, Louise Rietz, M. Lundström\",\"doi\":\"10.5617/nordina.8203\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Research focusing on students’ argumentation in socioscientific issues (SSI) shows that students tend to base their arguments on values rather than knowledge. This study explores Swedish upper secondary chemistry students’ written argumentation. The data consists of student texts written at the end of an intervention designed to develop skills related to high quality argumentation. The results show that after being taught about argumentation and the context of SSI, students mainly base their arguments on content knowledge. Value justifications are present in students’ texts, but constitute a smaller proportion. Beside content knowledge- and value justifications, we found a third category – “reasoning” – in which students draw conclusions, or make predictions of future events, to support or refute a claim. The justifications in the argumentative texts include a breadth of subject areas in which chemistry knowledge plays an important role. This study suggests that content knowledge constitutes an important part in student argumentation.\",\"PeriodicalId\":37114,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Nordic Studies in Science Education\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2021-09-14\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"1\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Nordic Studies in Science Education\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.5617/nordina.8203\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Nordic Studies in Science Education","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.5617/nordina.8203","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

摘要

关注学生在社会科学问题上的论证的研究表明,学生倾向于基于价值观而非知识进行论证。本研究探讨瑞典高中化学学生的书面论证。数据由干预结束时写的学生文本组成,旨在培养与高质量论证相关的技能。研究结果表明,在教授论证和SSI上下文后,学生的论证主要基于内容知识。价值论证存在于学生的文本中,但所占比例较小。除了内容知识和价值论证之外,我们还发现了第三类——“推理”,即学生得出结论,或对未来事件做出预测,以支持或反驳一种说法。议论文中的理据包括化学知识在其中发挥重要作用的广泛学科领域。本研究表明,内容知识是学生论证的重要组成部分。
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
Students’ use of Justifications in Socioscientific Argumentation
Research focusing on students’ argumentation in socioscientific issues (SSI) shows that students tend to base their arguments on values rather than knowledge. This study explores Swedish upper secondary chemistry students’ written argumentation. The data consists of student texts written at the end of an intervention designed to develop skills related to high quality argumentation. The results show that after being taught about argumentation and the context of SSI, students mainly base their arguments on content knowledge. Value justifications are present in students’ texts, but constitute a smaller proportion. Beside content knowledge- and value justifications, we found a third category – “reasoning” – in which students draw conclusions, or make predictions of future events, to support or refute a claim. The justifications in the argumentative texts include a breadth of subject areas in which chemistry knowledge plays an important role. This study suggests that content knowledge constitutes an important part in student argumentation.
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
Nordic Studies in Science Education
Nordic Studies in Science Education Social Sciences-Education
CiteScore
0.70
自引率
0.00%
发文量
20
期刊最新文献
Sammenhengen mellom utforskende undervisning i naturfag og elevers prestasjoner og interesse for og trivsel med naturvitenskap. Norske resultater fra PISA 2015. Quantum physical insights of agential realism within new materialism in science education: Lower secondary school students’ conversations when constructing representations of plate boundaries in Minecraft Matriser, krafter och fysik: Elevers levda erfarenheter av bedömningsmatriser i grundskolans fysikundervisning En kritisk diskusjon av ‘tematisk analyse etter Braun og Clarke (2006)’ i naturfagdidaktiske studier
×
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