Christine D. Tippett

Argumentation: The Language of Science

In the past two decades, the role of language in the science curriculum has become prominent in science education literature (e.g., Dawes, 2004; Gee, 1989; Lemke, 1990; Yore, Bisanz, & Hand, 2003). From a constructivist perspective, language mediates social interaction and meaning is constructed as learners interpret and reinterpret events through the lens of prior knowledge (Barnes, 1992; Berk & Winsler, 1995). This perspective applied to the science classroom results in the view that scientific knowledge is socially constructed, negotiated, validated, and communicated in the context of the specific discourse practices of science (Driver, Asoko, Leach, Mortimer, & Scott, 1994). The rhetorical goal of scientific discourse is consensus based on evidence rather than compromise or conciliation achieved through democratic processes. As scientists attempt to reach consensus, they engage in a process known as argumentation whereby they attempt to persuade others of the validity of their claims. In fact, argumentation has been called the language of science (Duschl, Ellenbogan, & Erduran, 1999). Argumentation has also been identified as a possible mechanism for conceptual growth and change (e.g., Driver et al., 1994; Mercer, Dawes, Wegerif, & Sams, 2004; Nussbaum & Sinatra, 2003). In this article, I begin by briefly discussing forms of argument and describing two frameworks that may be used to analyze arguments. Next, I review the science argumentation literature, highlight themes, and examine research trends. Finally, I pose questions that could be addressed by future research and reflect upon two pedagogical implications that arise in the science argumentation literature.

Science Teacher Preparation in a North American Context

This article provides a description of science teacher education policy in Canada and the USA. We focus on qualifications and procedures to obtain an initial teaching license, requirements for license renewal, and trends in our respective countries. In both countries, science teacher education is the responsibility of the province or state, rather than the federal government. Because these countries are composed of many provinces/states, each with its own unique characteristics, we focus on general trends, recognizing that exceptions to these trends exist. Our review indicates that science teacher education in Canada and the USA consists of a highly diverse array of licenses, requirements, and programs. While this variability provides flexibility for programs to meet local needs and to create innovative programs, it also creates the potential for teachers to enter classrooms with insufficient preparation. In both countries, multiple pathways lead to certification, many of which have very few science content or science pedagogy requirements. The science content knowledge required of elementary teachers is of concern in both countries. Secondary science teachers have multiple ways to teach with insufficient preparation in science content and pedagogy. The nature of science is notably absent from most science teacher education state and provincial requirements. Innovative program structures with high requirements for science content and pedagogy exist in both countries. Research is needed that compares program structures and requirements to determine their relative impact on teachers’ practices. Additionally, much remains to be done to improve the extent to which existing research influences policy.

Preservice Teachers' Images of Scientists: Do Prior Science Experiences Make a Difference?

This article presents the results of a mixed methods study that used the Draw-a-Scientist Test as a visual tool for exploring preservice teachers’ beliefs about scientists. A questionnaire was also administered to 165 students who were enrolled in elementary (K–8) and secondary (8–12) science methods courses. Taken as a whole, the images drawn by preservice teachers reflected the stereotype of a scientist as a man with a wild hairdo who wears a lab coat and glasses while working in a laboratory setting. However, results indicated statistically significant differences in stereotypical components of representations of scientists depending on preservice teachers’ program and previous science experiences. Post degree students in secondary science methods courses created images of scientists with fewer stereotypical elements than drawings created by students in the regular elementary program.

What recent research on diagrams suggests about learning with rather than learning from visual representations in science

ABSTRACT The move from learning science from representations to learning science with representations has many potential and undocumented complexities. This thematic analysis partially explores the trends of representational uses in science instruction, examining 80 research studies on diagram use in science. These studies, published during 2000–2014, were located through searches of journal databases and books. Open coding of the studies identified 13 themes, 6 of which were identified in at least 10% of the studies: eliciting mental models, classroom-based research, multimedia principles, teaching and learning strategies, representational competence, and student agency. A shift in emphasis on learning with rather than learning from representations was evident across the three 5-year intervals considered, mirroring a pedagogical shift from science instruction as transmission of information to constructivist approaches in which learners actively negotiate understanding and construct knowledge. The themes and topics in recent research highlight areas of active interest and reveal gaps that may prove fruitful for further research, including classroom-based studies, the role of prior knowledge, and the use of eye-tracking. The results of the research included in this thematic review of the 2000–2014 literature suggest that both interpreting and constructing representations can lead to better understanding of science concepts.

Teaching Engineering Design in Elementary Science Methods Classes

One of the challenges currently facing elementary science teacher educators is how best to prepare preservice teachers for the demands of a science curriculum that includes engineering. Teachers are expected to follow the curriculum mandated by their state department of education (US) or provincial ministry of education (Canada), and in the near future, science curriculum in the United States is likely to be tied to the Next Generation Science Standards (NGSS, Achieve, Inc. 2013a, b), which delineates crosscutting concepts, disciplinary core ideas, and scientific and engineering practices. Because science and engineering are highly interconnected, learning about science inquiry can enhance learning about engineering design and technology, and vice versa (National Research Council. A framework for K-12 science education: Practices, crosscutting concepts, and core ideas. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press, 2012. Retrieved from http://www.nap.edu/catalog.php?record_id=13165). Many engineering activities lead naturally to science inquiry as questions arise during the design process, so engaging in engineering activities during science methods courses offers preservice teachers the opportunity to develop an understanding of both science and engineering practices. Preservice teachers’ beliefs about science, technology, and engineering will influence how they teach their future students. Including technology and engineering design in elementary science methods courses creates opportunities for preservice teachers to discover that technology is not simply computers and cell phones and to learn about scientific phenomena in the context of an engineering problem. Incorporating engineering activities in science methods courses allows teacher educators to emphasize engineering, technology, and science applications. Preservice teachers can learn how to apply design skills in contexts that mirror how engineers and scientists solve problems and answer questions, while they think critically, construct explanations, communicate information, and engage in reasoned argument DiBiase (Science Activities, 38(1), 11–16, 2001).

Explicit Literacy Instruction Embedded in Middle School Science Classrooms

The Explicit Literacy Instruction Embedded in Middle School Science Classrooms project was initiated in the spring of 2005 at the request of a small group of teachers from two middle schools in a Victoria, British Columbia (BC), school district that had French immersion and English programs of instruction in Grades 6, 7, and 8. A third middle school joined the project later. Part of the motivation was that the school district was implementing the new K–7 and Grade 8 provincial science curricula (BC Ministry of Education [MoE], 2005, 2006) and the schools’ had recently selected and purchased textbooks.