Moving beyond Pseudoargumentation: Teachers' Enactments of an Educative Science Curriculum Focused on Argumentation

Autor/inn/en	McNeill, Katherine L.; González-Howard, María; Katsh-Singer, Rebecca; Loper, Suzanna
Titel	Moving beyond Pseudoargumentation: Teachers' Enactments of an Educative Science Curriculum Focused on Argumentation
Quelle	In: Science Education, 101 (2017) 3, S.426-457 (32 Seiten)Infoseite zur Zeitschrift PDF als Volltext Verfügbarkeit
Sprache	englisch
Dokumenttyp	gedruckt; online; Zeitschriftenaufsatz
ISSN	0036-8326
DOI	10.1002/sce.21274
Schlagwörter	Science Teachers; Science Curriculum; Persuasive Discourse; Epistemology; Middle School Teachers; Teacher Education; Decision Making; Science Instruction + Suchen Sie Ihr Suchwort? Science; Teacher; Teachers; Science teacher; Wissenschaft; Lehrer; Lehrerin; Lehrende; Persuasion; Persuasive Kommunikation; Erkenntnistheorie; Middle school; Middle schools; Mittelschule; Mittelstufenschule; Lehrerausbildung; Lehrerbildung; Decision-making; Entscheidungsfindung; Teaching of science; Science education; Natural sciences Lessons; Naturwissenschaftlicher Unterricht
Abstract	Argumentation, a key epistemic practice in science, engages students in socially constructing knowledge claims using evidence. However, teachers need support in integrating argumentation into classroom instruction. We examined teachers' enactments of an educative science curriculum and their curricular decision making for argumentation. Ten middle school teachers enacted lessons that focused on both the structure of an argument and argumentation as a dialogic process. For each teacher, we analyzed videotapes of two lessons and follow-up interviews. Across the teachers, we observed a wide range in teachers' enactments. In some instances, teachers' instructional practices aligned with the underlying epistemic goals, while in other cases the structural aspects were oversimplified and discourse norms followed more traditional teacher-led patterns. To support classroom instruction to move beyond pseudoargumentation, we found three main influences on teachers' curricular decision making in classes with higher quality argumentation: (1) teachers' understanding of argumentation as an epistemic practice (rather than surface level features); (2) teachers as critically reflective curriculum users; and (3) teachers problematizing their prior teaching experiences. As a field, we need to think critically about how to design teacher education experiences to discourage the relabeling of teaching with reform-oriented terms, such as argumentation, and instead support instructional transformation. (As Provided).
Anmerkungen	Wiley-Blackwell. 350 Main Street, Malden, MA 02148. Tel: 800-835-6770; Tel: 781-388-8598; Fax: 781-388-8232; e-mail: cs-journals@wiley.com; Web site: http://www.wiley.com/WileyCDA
Erfasst von	ERIC (Education Resources Information Center), Washington, DC
Update	2020/1/01