Examination of the Argumentation Processes of Classroom Teachers Participating in On-the-job Training Activities
Abstract
In
recent years, attention has been given to learning of the science language.
This has brought together a transformation in science education programs and
the implementation of argumentation applications that is a part of this
transformation. However adequate training has not been given to teacher son
revised 2013 science program in Turkey and on argumentation practices. This
situation has constituted the rationale for this case study. In line with the
needs analysis a revised science curriculum and on-the-job (OJT) training
activity on argumentation has been prepared for classroom teachers. First a
pilot application prepared and then the main application have been conducted.
At the end of these applications the argumentation skills, opinions on OJT
activities and activity preparation based on argumentation skills of teachers
have been examined. The findings of this study have revealed that classroom
teachers are not adequate in creating the opposite argument of the
argumentation components that they have been restrictive, and that they have
used the supportive evidence rationale in a limited way in an argumentation
activity they have practiced in their classroom. They have been unable to reach
the confuting stage. Nevertheless the classroom teachers who have participated
in OJT activities think that these activities are useful in professional and
personal point of view and that they should be repeated at regular intervals.
Keywords
Supporting Institution
Amasya University
Project Number
SEB BAP 14-032
References
- Akkuş, R., Günel, M., & Hand, B.(2007). Comparing on inquiry-based approach known as the science writing heuristic to traditional science teaching practices: Are there differences? International Journal of Science Education, 29(14), 1745-1765.http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/09500690601075629
- Alkış-Küçükaydın, M., &Uluçınar-Sağır, Ş.(2015). In-service training argumentation application for elementary school teachers: Pilot study. ERPA International Congress on Education 2015 in Athena, Greece.
- Arıbaş, S.,&Göktaş Ö. (2014). Secondary school math teachers’ views on necessities of in-service trainings for alternative measurement and evaluation.Journal of Adıyaman University Social Science Institute ,7(16), 17-42.
- Berland, L.K., &Reiser, B.(2009). Making sense of argumentation and explanation. Science Education, 93(1), 26-55.http://dx.doi.org/10.10027sce.20286
- Bilgin, K.U, Akay, A.,Koyuncu, H.E., & Haşar, E.Ç.(2007). In-service training in local government. Türkiye Ekonomi Politikaları Araştırma Vakfı Yayınları (Economic Policy Research Foundation of Turkey Publications) , Ankara, Turkey.
- Böttcher, F.,&Meisert, A.(2011). Argumentation in science education: A model-based framework. Science and Education, 20,103-140 http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11191-010-9304-5
- Braund, M., Scholtz, Z., Sadeck, M., &Koopman, R.(2013). First steps in teaching argumentation: A South African study. International Journal of Educational Development, 33,175-184.http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/09500690601075629 10.1016/j.ijedudev.2012.03.007
- Ceylan, Ç. (2010). Implementing the science writing heuristic (SWH) approach in science laboratory activities. Unpublished Master Thesis, Gazi University, Institute of Educational Science, Ankara, Turkey.
- Ceylan, K.E. (2012). Teaching 5th grades elementary students with scientific argument based method in the area of world and universe learning. Unpublished Master Thesis, Gazi University, Institute of Educational Science, Ankara, Turkey.
- Chen, J.J, Lin, H.S, Hsu, Y.S., & Lee, H.(2011). Data and claim: The refinement of science fair work through argumentation. International Journal of Science Education Part B: Communication and Public Engagement, 1(2), 147-164.
