Effect of Argumentation on Metacognition and Logical Thinking Abilities in
Science – Technology Teacher Candidate Education and Opinions about
Argumentation
Journal Name:
- Eğitim Bilimleri Araştırmaları Dergisi (EBAD)
Keywords (Original Language):
| Author Name | University of Author | Faculty of Author |
|---|---|---|
Abstract (2. Language):
Introduction
In recent years, many studies have focused on the importance of argumentation in
science education (Driver, Newton & Osborne, 2000; Jiménez-Aleixandre, Rodriguez &
Dusch, 2000; Kelly & Takao, 2002; Kaya, 2005; Yeşiloğlu, 2007; Gültepe, 2011). These studies
emphasize the importance of students having discussions with the teacher and with each
other in order to learn scientific information (Schwarz, Neuman, Gil & Ilya, 2003) and to use
argumentation.
We learn most of what we know from teachers or experts of one kind or another,
which is not surprising in our highly-specialized modern society. However, it is possible to
rely too heavily on experts, and this approach to learning and knowledge tends to encourage
passivity and receptiveness rather than inventiveness and imagination. We tend to think that
because teachers and experts know more about the subject than the rest of us, we must seek
and rely on their judgment. One can gain understanding in any subject by thinking it
through for oneself, by being imaginative and inventive rather than simply accepting an
expert’s opinion. For this reason, this paper concentrates on the arguments of experts for a
wide range of ideas and shows how only a relatively slight knowledge of the subject is
required to evaluate these arguments oneself (Fisher, 2004).
Works on argumentation draw from two related frameworks. One framework is
related to science studies and highlights the importance of discourse in the construction of
scientific knowledge. A second framework is about the sociocultural perspective and points
to the role of social interaction in learning and thinking processes, purporting that higher
thinking processes originate from socially mediated activities, and particularly through the
mediation of language. From these approaches, a view can be derived about science learning
in terms of the appropriation of community practices that promote the modes of
communication required to sustain scientific discourse. Such a view stands in contrast to the
traditional views of science learning that focus only on outcomes such as problem solving,
learning concepts or developing science-process skills (Jiménez-Aleixandre & Erduran, 2007).
In the literature, the definition of argumentation is evaluated in terms of concepts
such as product or process, dialogical or monological, individual or social, verbal or written.
In definitions discussed by various authors, argumentation is defined as a process of
persuasion that uses evidence in the construction of scientific knowledge by an individual or
group.
Driver, Newton and Osborne (2000) state that argumentation has three major effects
in science teaching: developing conceptual understanding, developing investigational
capability, and developing an understanding of scientific epistemology. We do not wish to
project the implication that argumentation is a solution to most science education problems. Rather, we conceive of argumentation as, on the one hand, a solution to some learning
problems, to the extent that it helps students learn things that are hard to learn except
through argumentation (e.g., evaluating evidence), and on the other hand as the key to the
potential to help us better understand and support the learning processes in the science
classroom (Jiménez-Aleixandre & Erduran, 2007). Therefore, science and technology courses
should be complemented with various argumentation activities.
Science and technology courses aim for the acquisition of skills that support
knowledge and understanding of scientific information, research and discovery, design and
creation, affectivity and value, use and application (Kaptan, 1999). When we consider these
skills, argumentation becomes associated with science and technology courses.
Argumentation provides meaningful and active learning. Argumentation activities are quite
important for both students and teachers in science and technology education. In order to
provide students with basic skills, prospective teachers must be trained in this perspective.
The studies show that argumentation instruction in primary school sciencetechnology
courses has a very important place. For this reason, emphasis should be placed
on training science-technology teacher candidates in various skills related to argumentation.
The purpose of this research, for training science-technology teacher candidates in
argumentation skills, is to determine the optimum processing model to incorporate
argumentation into the course.
Method
In science education, teaching methods based on argumentation have significant
value. The aim of this research is to determine the effects of different methods of teaching
argumentation on metacognition and the logical thinking abilities of science-technology
teacher candidates. The opinions of science-technology teacher candidates about
argumentation were also searched out.
The research method was a pretest-posttest control group from experimental designs,
and qualitative and quantitative data were used together in data collection. In experimental
procedures, a Special Methods Course is a processed lesson presenting argumentation and
processes based on argumentation.
The research sample included two groups of students from Hacettepe University,
Department of Science Education, during the academic years of 2010-2011 and 2011-2012. In
this study, the lesson presenting argumentation was taught to groups consisted of 61 teacher
candidates, and the lesson teaching processes based on argumentation was taught to groups
consisting of 74 teacher candidates. Working groups were determined according to the
principle of accessibility. In-depth interviews were also conducted with 10 selected students.
In this research, a t-test was used to examine the effects of the implementations on
metacognition and logical thinking. To collect the quantitative data, “Metacognitive
Orientation of Learning Environment Scale-Science” and “Logical Thinking Group Test”
scales were applied to the groups as pretest and posttest. For the quantitative part of the
research, descriptive and content analyses were conducted on interviews with the teacher
candidates.
Results, Discussion and Suggestions
The quantitative data revealed that with the lesson presenting argumentation,
metacognition and logical thinking of teacher candidates were not affected meaningfully,
while with the lesson teaching processes based on argumentation, the metacognition and logical thinking of the teacher candidates were affected meaningfully. When the difference
between these groups is examined, it is clear that the group learning processes based on
argumentation was affected positively.
Scheid (2010) has emphasized that the metacognition skill levels of teacher candidates
is important in argumentation education, like research conducted about the investigation of
knowledge elements related to the metacognition and metacognitive level of teacher
candidates. Also, in parallel with the findings of Mercier (2011), this research determined
that logical thinking has helped to find lines of argumentation and develop evaluation of
arguments. No matter the age level, there is an important link between argumentation and
logical thinking.
When the quantitative data of the research were examined, teacher candidates
considered their opinions on teaching the lesson, on associations between science-technology
education and argumentation, on the effects of argumentation on the skills gained in sciencetechnology
education, on using argumentation in the lesson, on the usability of
argumentation in science-technology education, on the association and comparison of
argumentation with other techniques and methods, and on the advantages and
disadvantages of argumentation and the teacher’s role in argumentation practices.
Based on the findings of the interviews conducted with the teacher candidates, it can
be noted that the participants evaluated argumentation from different perspectives and
generally indicates positive views about argumentation. This result shows that the
participant opinions are parallel with a variety of research findings based on argumentation.
Ceylan (2010) conducted interviews with teacher candidates and stated that they have a
positive attitude towards teaching science based on argumentation. Özer-Keskin, Şengül and
Keskin-Samancı (2010) examined the teacher candidates’ ideas about science education
activities based on argumentation, and noted that these candidates had a generally positive
attitude towards this approach. Also, Kıngır (2011) interviewed 9th-grade students about
argumentation, and found a positive development in the conceptual understanding of the
group that participated in education based on argumentation.
As a result of the research, we suggest that activities based on argumentation should
be applied in different lessons and interdisciplinary dimensions. The activities and
reflections applied during the research process can be conducted at the same time by the
Science Teacher Candidates and Science-Technology Teachers in the area.
Bookmark/Search this post with
Abstract (Original Language):
Bu araştırmada, hizmet öncesi öğretmen eğitiminde argümantasyonun farklı şekillerde işleniş modelinin fen-teknoloji öğretmen adaylarının biliş üstü ve mantıksal düşünme becerilerine etkisini inceleyerek, argümantasyonla ilgili görüşlerin belirlenmesi amaçlanmıştır. Araştırmanın çalışma grubunu 2010-2011 ve 2011-2012 öğretim yılı Hacettepe Üniversitesi Fen Bilgisi Öğretmenliğinde öğrenim gören 135 kişilik grup oluşturmaktadır. Araştırma yöntemi olarak deneysel desenlerden ön test-son test kontrol gruplu desen, veri toplama yöntemlerinden ise nitel ve nicel verilerin bir arada kullanıldığı yöntem tercih edilmiştir. Çalışmanın nicel boyutunda, verilerin toplanmasında “Üst Bilişe Yönelimli Sınıf Çevresi Ölçeği-Fen” ve “Mantıksal Düşünme Becerileri Ölçeği” gruplara uygulanmış ve bu becerilerin etkisinin incelenmesinde t-testi kullanılmıştır. Nitel boyutta ise argümantasyona dayalı uygulamaların öğretmen adayları üzerindeki yansımalarını belirlemek üzere, öğretmen adaylarıyla yapılan görüşmelerden elde edilen veriler içerik analizi ile analiz edilmiştir. Nicel veriler incelendiğinde, gruplar arasında bu becerilere ilişkin dersin argümantasyona dayandırılarak işlendiği grubun olumlu yönde etkilendiği görülmektedir. Nitel veriler incelendiğinde ise, öğretmen adaylarının dersin işlenişi, fen-teknoloji eğitimiyle argümantasyonun ilişkilendirilmesi, argümantasyonun fen-teknoloji eğitiminde kazandırılan becerilere etkisi, öğretmenlik süresince argümantasyonu derslerde kullanma, fen-teknoloji eğitiminde argümantasyonun kullanılabilirliği, argümantasyonun diğer yöntem-tekniklerle ilişkilendirilmesi ve kıyaslanması, argümantasyonun avantajları ve sınırlılıkları, argümantasyon uygulamalarında öğretmenin rolü temalarına ilişkin görüşler belirttikleri görülmektedir. Çalışmanın sonucunda argümantasyona dayalı etkinliklerin farklı derslerde ve her branştaki öğretmen adaylarına disiplinler arası boyutlarda uygulanması önerilmiştir.
- 2