Opinions Of Teacher Candidate On Small Group Discussions In Argumentation Applications
Öz
The study was performed with 3rd year university students receiving the science teaching
laboratory applications I and II courses given by the same instructor during 2014-2015
academic year. The participants were included in the study on a voluntary basis. Semi-structured
interviews were held with 24 students who had participated in argumentation applications in
both semesters. The students were asked questions regarding benefits and harms of working in
small groups, duties of the teacher and students in this process, reasons behind their willingness
or unwillingness to use this method in future. The data were encoded and themes were created
after transcribing the interviews. As a result of the assessment, the students expressed that
small group discussions had more advantages than disadvantages. They also stated that
these applications positively affected their improvement. Considering that changes which the
students observed in themselves were learning more easily, being able to cooperate, having
improved communication skill, a critical perspective and awareness, it can be said that small
group discussions contribute to the goal of raising science literate individuals.
Anahtar Kelimeler
Kaynakça
- Bell, P., & Linn, M. C. (2000). Scientific arguments as learning artifacts: Designing for learning from the web with KIE. International Journal of Science Education, 22(8), 797-817.
- Berland, L. K. & Reiser, B. J. (2009). Making sense of argumentation and explanation. Science Education, 93(1), 26-55
- Cavagnetto A. R., (2010), Argument to foster scientific literacy: A review of argument interventions in K-12 science contexts, Rev. Educ. Res., 80(3), 336–371.
- Demirbağ M. & Günel, M. (2014). Integrating Argument Based Science Inquiry with Modal Representations: Impact on Science Achievement, Argumantation and Writing Skills. Educational Sciences: Theorry & Practice (ESTP), 14(1), 1-20.
- Driver, R., Newton, P., & Osborne, J. (2000).Establishing the norms of scientific argumentation in classrooms. Science Education, 84, 287-312.
- Duschl, R. A. (2008). Quality argumentation and epistemic criteria. S. Erduran & M.P. Jimenez-Aleixandre (Eds.), Argumentation in science education: Perspectives from classroom-based research (pp. 159–175). Dordrecht: Springer
- Duschl, R. A. & Osborne, J. (2002). Supporting and promoting argumentation discourse in science education. Studies in Science Education, 38, 39-72
- Erduran, S. (2008). Methodological foundations in the study of argumentation in science classrooms. Chapter 3 in S. Erduran & M.P. Jimenez-Aleixandre (Eds.), Argumentation in Science Education: Perspectives from Classroom-Based Research. Dordrecht: Springer.
- Erduran, S., & Jimenez-Aleixandre, M. P. (Eds.) (2008). Argumentation in Science Education: Perspectives from Classroom-Based Research. Dordrecht: Springer.
- Ford, M. (2008). Disciplinary authority and accountability in scientific practice and learning. Science Education, 92(3), 404-423.