Abstract
This chapter considers argumentation in science education in the larger context of discourse in science classrooms. While there has been a great deal of discussion and emphasis in science education research in the past decade on argumentation, this has come somewhat at the expense of a broader view of science discourse. While argumentation is clearly a critical component to the development of new knowledge in any field, there is much discipline specific discourse that falls outside of the area of argumentation. This broader use of discourse processes that we describe as sense making, is also critical to students’ development of a rich understanding of the cultural practices of science.
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
References
Bazerman, C. (1988). Shaping written knowledge: The genre and activity of the experimental article in science. Madison, WI: University of Wisconsin Press.
Brown, B. A. (2004), Discursive identity: Assimilation into the culture of science and its implications for minority students. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 41, 810–834.
Carlone, H. B. (2004), The cultural production of science in reform-based physics: Girls’ access, participation, and resistance. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 41, 392–414.
Cazden, C. B. (2001). Classroom discourse: The language of teaching and learning (2nd ed.). Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann.
Chin, C., & Osborne, J. (2010). Supporting argumentation through students’ questions: Case studies in science classrooms. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 19(2), 230–284. doi:10.1080/10508400903530036
Collins, H. M. (1985). Changing order: Replication and induction in scientific practice. London: Sage.
Duschl, R. A. (1990). Restructuring science education: The importance of theories and their development. New York: Teacher’s College Press.
Duschl, R. A. (2008). Science education in three-part harmony: Balancing conceptual, epistemic, and social learning goals. Review of Research in Education, 32, 268–291.
Erduran, S., & Jiménez-Aleixandre, M. P. (Eds.). (2008). Argumentation in science education: Recent developments and future directions. New York: Springer.
Gee, J. P. (2010). An introduction to discourse analysis: Theory and method. Routledge, New York, NY: Psychology Press.
Goodwin. (1994). Professional vision. American Anthropologist, 96(3), 606–663.
Gumperz, J. J., Cook-Gumperz, J., & Szymanski, M. H. (1999). Collaborative practices in bilingual cooperative learning classrooms. Santa Cruz, CA: Center for Research on Education, Diversity, and Excellence.
Jiménez-Aleixandre, M. P., & Reigosa, C. (2006). Contextualizing practices across epistemic levels in the chemistry laboratory. Science Education, 90, 707–733.
Kelly, G. J. (2008). Inquiry, activity, and epistemic practice. In R. Duschl & R. Grandy (Eds.), Teaching scientific inquiry: Recommendations for research and implementation (pp. 99–117; 288–291). Rotterdam: Sense Publishers.
Kelly, G. J. (2010). Scientific literacy, discourse, and epistemic practices. In C. Linder, L. Östman, D. A. Roberts, P. Wickman, G. Erikson, & A. McKinnon (Eds.), Exploring the landscape of scientific literacy (pp. 61–73). New York: Routledge.
Kelly, G. J., & Brown, C. M. (2003). Communicative demands of learning science through technological design: Third grade students’ construction of solar energy devices. Linguistics & Education, 13(4), 483–532.Â
Kelly, G. J., & Chen, C. (1999). The sound of music: Constructing science as sociocultural practices through oral and written discourse. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 36, 883–915.
Kelly, G. J., & Crawford, T. (1997). An ethnographic investigation of the discourse processes of school science. Science Education, 81(5), 533–559.
Kelly, G. J., Druker, S., & Chen, C. (1998). Students’ reasoning about electricity: Combining performance assessments with argumentation analysis. International Journal of Science Education, 20(7), 849–871.
Kelly, G. J., & Green, J. (1998). The social nature of knowing: Toward a sociocultural perspective on conceptual change and knowledge construction. In B. Guzzetti & C. Hynd (Eds.), Perspectives on conceptual change: Multiple ways to understand knowing and learning in a complex world (pp. 145–181). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Knorr-Cetina, K. (1999). Epistemic cultures: how the sciences make knowledge. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Latour, B. (1987). Science in action: How to follow scientists and engineers through society. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Lemke, J. L. (1990). Talking science: Language, learning, and values. Norwood, NJ: Ablex.
McDonald, S., & Songer, N. (2008). Enacting classroom inquiry: Theorizing teachers’ conceptions of science teaching. Science Education, 92, 973–993.
Mortimer, E. F., & Scott, P. (2003). Meaning making in secondary science classrooms. Berkshire, England: Open University Press.
National Research Council. (2000). Inquiry and the national science education standards. Washington, DC: National Research Council.
Roth, W. M. (2005). Talking science. Language and learning in science classrooms. Oxford, UK: Rowman & Littlefield.
Ryu, S. R., & Sandoval, W. S. (2008). Interpersonal influences on collaborative argument during scientific inquiry. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association in New York.
Sampson, V., & Clark, D. B. (2011). A comparison of the collaborative scientific argumentation practices of two high and two low performing groups. Research in Science Education, 41(1), 63–97.
Sandoval, W. A., & Millwood, K. A. (2005). The quality of students’ use of evidence in written scientific explanations. Cognition and Instruction, 23(1), 23–55.
Strike, K. A., & Posner, G. J. (1992). A revisionist theory of conceptual change. In R. Duschl & R. Hamilton (Eds.), Philosophy of science, cognitive psychology, and educational theory and practice (pp. 147–176). Albany, NY: SUNY.
Toulmin, S. (1958). The uses of argumentation. London: Cambridge University Press.
Traweek, S. (1988). Beamtimes and lifetimes: The world of high energy physicists. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
von Aufschnaiter, C., Erduran, S., Osborne, J., & Simon, S. (2008). Arguing to learn and learning to argue: Case studies of how students’ argumentation relates to their scientific knowledge. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 45(1), 101–131. doi:10.1002/tea.20213
Wittgenstein, L. W. (1969). On certainty. New York: Harper Torchbooks.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2012 Springer Science+Business Media B.V.
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
McDonald, S.P., Kelly, G.J. (2012). Beyond Argumentation: Sense-Making Discourse in the Science Classroom. In: Khine, M. (eds) Perspectives on Scientific Argumentation. Springer, Dordrecht. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-007-2470-9_13
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-007-2470-9_13
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Dordrecht
Print ISBN: 978-94-007-2469-3
Online ISBN: 978-94-007-2470-9
eBook Packages: Humanities, Social Sciences and LawEducation (R0)