This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Preview
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
References
Anderson, C. W., Kurth, L., & Palinscar, A. S. (1996). Design principles for collaborative problem solving in science. Paper presented at the meeting of the American Educational Research Association, New York, NY.
Carlsen, W. (1997). Never ask a question if you don’t know the answer: The tension in teaching between modeling scientific argument and maintaining law and order. Journal of Classroom Interaction, 32, 14–23.
Carey, S. (1985). Conceptual change in childhood. Cambridge, MA: Bradford Books/MIT Press.
Connelly, F. M., Finegold, M., Clipsham, J., & Wahlstrom, M. W. (1977). Scientific enquiry and the teaching of science: Pattern of enquiry project. Toronto, Ontario: OISE Press.
Duschl, R. A. (1994). ‘Research on the history and philosophy of science’, in D.L. Gabel, (Ed.), Handbook of research on science teaching and learning, Macmillan Publishing Company, New York, 443–465.
Duschl, R., Deak, G., Ellenbogen, K. & Holton, D. (1999). Developmental and educational perspectives on theory change: To have and hold, or to have and hone? Science & Education, 8, 525–541.
Duschl, R., Ellenbogen, K. & Erduran, S. (1999). Understanding dialogic argumentation among middle school science students. Paper presented at the meeting of the American Educational Research Association, Montreal.
Duschl, R. A., & Gitomer, D. H. (1997). Strategies and challenges to changing the focus of assessment and instruction in science classrooms. Educational Assessment, 4(1), 37–73.
Duschl, R. A., & Hamilton, R. J. (1999). Conceptual change in science and the learning of science, in B. Fraser & K. Tobin, (Eds.), International Handbook of Science Education. Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publishers, 1047–1065.
Duschl, R. & Osborne, J. (in press). Supporting argumentation discourse processes in science education. Studies in Science Education.
Eichinger, D. C., Anderson, C. W., Palinscar, A., & David, Y. M. (1991). An illustration of the roles of content knowledge, scientific argument, and social norms in collaborative problem solving. Paper presented at the meeting of the American Educational Research Association, Chicago: IL.
Erduran, S. (1999). Merging curriculum design with chemical epistemology: A case of teaching and learning chemistry through modeling. Unpublished Ph.D. dissertation Vanderbilt University, Nashville, TN, USA.
Fensham, P. (1988). Developments and dilemmas in science education. London: Falmer Press.
Gopnik, A. (1996). The scientist as child. Philosophy of Science, 63(4), 485–514.
Hammer, D. (1997). Discovery learning and discovery teaching. Cognition and Instruction, 15(4) 485–529.
Hull, D. (1988). Science as a process, University of Chicago Press, Chicago.
Jimenez-Aleixandre, M.P., Bugallo-Rodríguez, A., & Duschl R.A. (1997). Argument in high school genetics. Paper presented at the meeting of the National Association for Research in Science Teaching, Chicago: IL.
Kelly, G. & Duschl, R. (2002). Toward a research agenda for epistemological studies in science education. Paper presented at the meeting of the National Association for Research in Science Teaching, New Orleans.
Kitcher, P. (1993). The advancement of science. New York: Oxford University Press.
Laudan, L. (1977). Progress and its problems. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press.
Lemke, J. (1990). Talking science. Norwood, NJ: Ablex Publishing Co.
Longino, H. (1990). Science as social knowledge. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
Longino, H. (1994). The fate of knowledge in social theories of science. In F.F. Schmitt (Ed.), Socializing epistemology: The social dimensions of knowledge. Lanham, MD: Rowan and Littlefield (135–158).
Pontecorvo, C., & Girardet, H. (1993). Arguing and reasoning in understanding historical topics. Cognition and Instruction, 11(3&4), 365–395.
Rosebery, A. S., Warren, B., Conant, F. R. (1992). Appropriating scientific discourse: Findings from language minority classrooms. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 2(1) 61–94.
Roth, W-M. (1995). Inventors, copycats, and everyone else-The emergence of shared resources and practices as deining aspects of clasroom communities. Science Education, 79(5) 475–502.
Russell, T. (1981). What history of science, how much, and why? Science Education, 65(1), 51–64.
Schwitzgebel, E. (1999). Children’s theories and the drive to explain. Science and Education, 8(5) 457–488.
Smith, M. (1995). Pedagogical challenges of instructional assessment in middle school earth science: Two case studies. Unpublished Ph.D. dissertation, University of Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh, PA, USA.
van Eemeren, F. H., Grootendorst, R., Henkemans, F. S. (1996). Fundamentals of argumentation theory; A handbook of historical backgrounds and contemporary developments. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Walton, D. N. (1996). Argumentation schemes for presumptive reasoning. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Woody, A. (1997). Personal Communication, November, 1997.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2003 Kluwer Academic Publishers
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Duschl, R. (2003). The Assessment of Argumentation and Explanation. In: Zeidler, D.L. (eds) The Role of Moral Reasoning on Socioscientific Issues and Discourse in Science Education. Science & Technology Education Library, vol 19. Springer, Dordrecht. https://doi.org/10.1007/1-4020-4996-X_8
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/1-4020-4996-X_8
Publisher Name: Springer, Dordrecht
Print ISBN: 978-1-4020-3855-6
Online ISBN: 978-1-4020-4996-5
eBook Packages: Springer Book Archive