Investigating Elementary Students' Scientific and Historical Argumentation
Investigating Elementary Students' Scientific and Historical Argumentation
复制标题
调查小学生的科学和历史论证
DOI：
10.1080/10508406.2013.799475
复制
发表时间：
2013
影响因子：
3.8
通讯作者：
Lindsay L. Cornelius
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
L. Herrenkohl;Lindsay L. Cornelius
本文探讨了认识性认知与基础科学和历史课堂辩论实践之间的关系。文献强调论证作为科学和历史学习的批判性认识实践（Duschl & J. Osborne，2002;国家研究理事会，2007，2012）。虽然在历史和科学教学中有充分的支持论证，但学生通过这种实践解决的具体认识问题并不总是有经验证明的。我们借鉴了Chinn，巴克兰和Samarapungavan（2011）的工作，在2个五年级和2个六年级的城市教室中检查科学和历史的论证实践。学生和教师的紧急论证实践进行编码和分析，并使用Chinn等人的5个组成部分的认知推理进行检查。研究结果强调，学生从事复杂的论证实践，是一致的跨课堂。课堂案例表明，学生通过他们的论证实践解决了Chinn等人模型中的所有5个认知成分。进一步的研究，以更好地了解教师的认知承诺，教学实践和学生的认知承诺和学习之间的关系，建议。
This article examines the relationship between epistemic cognition and classroom argumentation practices in elementary science and history. Literature highlights argumentation as a critical epistemic practice for science and history learning (Duschl & J. Osborne, 2002; National Research Council, 2007, 2012). Although there is ample support for argumentation in the teaching of history and science, the specific epistemic issues that students address through this practice are not always empirically documented. We draw on the work of Chinn, Buckland, and Samarapungavan (2011) to examine argumentation practices in science and history in 2 fifth-grade and 2 sixth-grade urban classrooms. Students' and teachers' emergent argumentation practices were coded and analyzed and epistemic reasoning was examined using the 5 components of the Chinn et al. model. Findings highlight that students engaged in complex argumentation practices that were consistent across classrooms. The classroom case examples demonstrate that students addressed all 5 epistemic components in the Chinn et al. model through their argumentation practice. Further research to better understand the relationship between teacher epistemic commitments, pedagogical practices, and student epistemic commitments and learning is suggested.