James D. Ellis

Argumentation and Evaluation Intervention in Science Classes: Teaching and Learning with Toulmin

The focus of this chapter is on an Argumentation and Evaluation Intervention (AEI) and the associated graphic organizer, the Argumentation and Evaluation Guide (AEG). The primary goal is to describe the final version of the intervention and graphic organizer developed during a 3-year design study funded by the National Science Foundation for use in middle and secondary science classrooms that contained students of diverse abilities. The framework for the intervention was based on components of argumentation described by Toulmin (The uses of argument. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1958). As such, it incorporated consideration of claims, qualifiers, evidence or grounds, warrants, rebuttals or counterarguments, and conclusions or judgments. This chapter presents detailed descriptions of the major components of the AEG and instructional procedures. After the description of each component, we will present insights from the design study, during which the project staff developed the intervention in collaboration with participating teacher-researchers. In discussions, teacher-researchers provided insights into their views of argumentation, perceptions of their own abilities to teach higher-order thinking associated with argumentation, and their views about students’ abilities to engage in argumentation. Then, via classroom observations and debriefings, they provided information about implementation of the procedures in science classrooms. Finally, observations and discourses with the teacher-researchers and others in the participating schools provided information on the use of additional general supportive instructional strategies and cross-curricular implications of the AEI.

The Effectiveness of Reason Racer, a Game Designed to Engage Middle School Students in Scientific Argumentation.

Abstract Reason Racer is an online, rate-based, multiplayer game that applies specific game features in order to engage middle school students in introductory knowledge of and thinking related to scientific argumentation. Game features include rapid and competitive play, timed performance, immediate feedback, and high rates of response across many game-play sessions and science scenarios. The areas of argumentation addressed in the game include understanding a claim, judging evidence about a claim based on type (fact, opinion) and quality, determining the reasoning applied to the claim (authority, theory, or logic), considering counterarguments and rebuttals, and making judgments. These skills have been identified as important by previous research. Students who played the game at least 10 times improved in every aspect of argumentation skill and judgment. Students who played the game also reported an increase in confidence and motivation to engage in science compared to students who did not play the game. This study has implications for the use of rate-based, multiplayer, competitive games as a component of instruction for difficult-to-teach skills. We also assume that the engaging and fun aspects of Reason Racer contributed to students reporting an increased interest in science.

A Dilemma in Reforming Science Teacher Education: Responding to Students' Concerns or Striving for High Standards

As a science educator returning to a University setting after more than a decade of work with practicing science teachers in teacher enhancement projects supported by the National Science Foundation, I have been confronted with the reality of the preservice teacher education setting. The students enrolled in the methods course for teaching elementary school science lack confidence in their knowledge and ability as teachers of science. Many of them have negative attitudes and experiences as a science learner. Paramount for these students is the practical and basic concerns about whether they have sufficient resources and teaching ideas and whether they can engage students successfully in school science. They seek practical ideas rather than conceptual understanding of research-based descriptions of effective science teaching. These concerns are reflected in the kind of methods course they value and in the way they appraise the quality of the course. At the same time, I am engaged as a professional science educator in the reform effort to set high standards for science teachers. As it should be, these standards for science teachers, even at the entry level, require high levels of knowledge of science and of science teaching, learning, curriculum, and assessment, and demonstrated competence in classroom practice. Teacher educators can use these standards to evaluate the quality of their teacher education programs by interpreting feedback received during the accreditation process (e.g., National Council for Accreditation of Teacher Education — NCATE), by analyzing the success of graduates seeking liscensure (e.g., Interstate New Teacher Assessment and Support Consortium — INTASC), and again by analyzing the success of graduates seeking advanced certification (e.g., National Board for Professional Teaching Standards — NBPTS). Many of us will use these standards to judge the quality of the teacher education programs. I find myself caught on the horns of a dilemma, forced to make a choice between two seemingly unpleasant alternatives. Within the constraints of the teacher education program at the University of Kansas, I feel that a course that addresses the concerns of my students is not the same as one that will best prepare

Teacher development in advanced educational technology

Advanced educational technology promises to improve science teaching and learning. To achieve the posited outcomes, however, teachers must have access to, know how to, have the skills to, and want to use the proposed advanced educational technologies in their teaching. In response, for the past eight years with support from the National Science Foundation, BSCS has conductedENLIST Micros — a teacher development to help science teachers improve their use of microcomputers.ENLIST Micros has three phases — Phase one (1984–1986): BSCS designed, tested, and producedENLIST Micros (Ellis and Kuerbis, 1987, 1989) teacher development materials (text, video, and tutorial software) for helping science teachers improve their use of educational technology. Phase two (1986–1989): BSCS designed, developed, tested, and disseminated a staff development model for helping science teachers integrate educational technology into instruction. Phase three (1989–1992): BSCS established Teacher Development Centers to implement theENLIST Micros teacher development materials and staff development model with science teachers throughout the United States.ENLIST Micros has served more than 1500 science teachers in 15 states. Teachers who have participated in the program have improved their knowledge, attitude, and self-efficacy about computer usage and have improved their use of microcomputers in their science courses. Furthermore, as part of the project, BSCS has described the implementation process and has developed recommendations to support improvements in the use of educational technology in science programs.

Implementing Microcomputers in Science Teaching

ConclusionThe most important finding from this study is that if one adheres to the guidelines from the literature on staff development and educational change, teachers can and will change their teaching behaviors. It is very easy, however, to underestimate the time and resources required to implement change in schools. Even a seemingly simple change such as increasing use of educational computing, which teachers can implement in their individual classrooms without an overhaul of schools, is immensely complex and difficult. Helping teachers and schools change requires a systematic effort, with intensive on-going support over a period of three or more years. Science educators, school leaders, and the public must learn that school improvement is not an event but a continual process of renewal and refinement.This study demonstrates the importance of allocating resources to staff development and implementation along with those for curriculum development. Fortunately, the National Science Foundation has recognized the importance of implementation in school improvement by requiring that implementation be an integral part of all curriculum development projects it funds. As Hall (1986) said, “It is not enough to build pretty boxes; what is important is to get the boxes used.”

The BSCS perspective on preparing science teachers in educational computing

Jame5 D° E1115 7he 8101091ca1 5c1ence5 Curr1cu1um 5tudy Jntr0duct10n 5t udYt 10na1 n 1982, t he(85C5)t echn0109y m19ht 1mpr 0ve 81°1°91ca16e9an 1nve5t 19at 1n95c1ence5 Cur f 1cu1um5c1enceh° w educa-educat10n. 85C56e9an the 1nve5t19at10n 6y eva1uat1n9 re5earch 0n educat10na1 c0mput1n9 and rev1ew1n9 the ava11a61e 50ftware f0r 5c1ence educat10n. After 5evera1 m0nth50f 5tudy, the 85C5 dec1ded t0 f0cu51n1t1a11y 0n deve10p1n9 tra1n1n9 mater1a15 and m0de15 f0r prepar1n95c1ence teacher5 t0 u5e m1cr0c0mputer5, 6ecau5e we were uncerta1n a60ut the k1nd50f 50ftware t0 deve10p, and few teacher5 were p0tent1a1 u5er50f the 50ftware we m19ht deve10p. Wh11e deve10p1n9 the5e tra1n1n9 mater1a15, h0wever, 85C55taff w0u1d w0rk w1th 5c1ence educat0r5, c0mputer educat0r5, and 5c1ence teacher5 thr0u9h0ut the nat10n t0 determ1ne effec-t1ve u5e50f c0mputer51n 5c1ence educat10n, wh1ch 85C5 c0u1d 1nc1ude a5 c0mp0nent50f extant and future 85C5 pr09ram5. a techn0109y-0r1ented e1ementary 5ch0015c1ence and hea1th pr09ram. 85C5 and 18M are extend1n9 the 5tudy t0 deve10p a de519n f0r a techn0109y-0r1ented curr1cu1um f0r m1dd1e 5ch0015c1ence. Furtherm0re, 1n 1988, the 85C51n c011a60rat10n w1th the A550c1at10n f0r the Educat10n 0f 7eacher5 1n 5c1ence (AE75) and the ER1C C1ear1n9h0u5e f0r 5c1ence, Mathemat1c5, and Env1r0nmenta1 Educa-t10n and the 5MEAC 1nf0rmat10n Reference Center ed1ted the 1988 AE75 Year600k: 1nf0rmat10n 7echn0109y and 5c1ence Educat10n. 7h15 mater1a1156a5ed up0n w0rk 5upp0rted 6y the Nat10na15c1ence F0undat10n under 6rant N0. MDR-8470061. Any 0p1n10n5, f1nd1n95, and c0nc1u510n50r rec0mmendat10n5 expre55ed 1n th15 art1c1e are th05e 0f the auth0r and d0 n0t nece55ar11y ref1ect the v1ew50f the Nat10na15c1ence F0unda-t10n. 7h15 paper pre5ent5 the re5u1t50f 5even year5 0f 5tudy 6y the 85C51nt0 educat10na1 techn0109y 1n 5c1ence educat10n and der1ve5 fr0m that 5tudy rec0mmendat10n5 f0r pre5erv1ce educat10n. 7he f1r5t 5ect10n 5ummar12e5 fr0m the 1988 AE75 Year600k and the 85C5/18M De519n 5tudy de5cr1pt10n50f app11cat10n50f educat10na1 techn01-09y t0 enhance the teach1n9 and 1earn1n90f 5c1ence and pr0v1de5 a de519n f0r a techn0109y-0r1ented curr1cu1um f0r e1ementary 5ch0015c1ence and hea1th. 7he 5ec0nd 5ect10n 115t5 the e55ent1a1 c0mpetenc1e5 that a 5c1ence teacher need5 t0 u5e educat10na1 c0mputer51n 1n5truct10n. 7he th1rd 5ect10n de5cr16e5 the ENL157 M1cr05 curr1cu1um and 1mp1ementat10n m0de1. 7he f1na15ect10n 5ummar12e5 rec0mmendat10n5 f0r pre5erv1ce teacher educat10n. Educat10na1 7echn0109Y and 5c1ence Educat10n Educat10na1 techn0109y can enhance 5c1ence educat10n 6y he1p1n91) 5tudent51eam and d0 5c1ence and 2) teacher55hare 1dea5 and mana9e 1n5truct10n. 1n the near future, techn0109y-0r1ented curr1cu1a that make effect1ve u5e 0f educat10na1 techn0109y may dramat1ca11y 1mpr0ve the teach1n9 and 1earn1n90f 5c1ence. 7h155ect10n w111 de5cr16e rec0mmendat10n5 fr0m the 1988 AE75 Year600k and 85C5/18M De519n 5tudy f0r 1) app11cat10n50f educat10na1 techn0109y f0r 5c1ence 5tudent5, 2)

Social media: How the next generation can practice argumentation

Abstract In this article the authors share how social media, paired with gaming and in-class supports, can facilitate the practice of scientific argumentation and report data that show how students can learn and practice argumentation through these highly interactive and engaging mediums. Social media will continue to evolve and fluctuate in popularity, but no matter the service or software, there will continue to be online spaces for communication, collaboration, learning, and future career growth. Since the role of education is to prepare students to be college and career ready, the use of social media as a component of schooling should be explored. This work has parsed out specific strategies and methods to support higher order thinking through gaming and social media.