Argumentation in a Socioscientific Context and its Influence on Fundamental and Derived Science Literacies

Chi Chin Chin, Wei Cheng Yang, Hsiao-Lin Tuan

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

8 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

This study explored the effects of arguing to learn in a socioscientific context on the fundamental and derived components of reading, writing, and science understanding as integral parts of science literacy. We adopted mixed-methods in which the 1-group pretest–posttest design with supplemental interviews and questionnaires. The pretest evaluated the dependent variables (reading and writing scores), the treatment was arguing to learn about the global climate change issue, the posttest evaluated the dependent variables, and follow-up questionnaires and interviews informed the quantitative results. An intact grade six class (N = 28) at an urban elementary school located in central Taiwan was the participants. Analyses of the pretest–posttest gain scores and correlations between these outcomes revealed significant (p < 0.05) improvements in writing and associations among reading, writing, and arguing to learn. Interpretation of the qualitative data (interview and questionnaire responses) supported that argumentation as an instructional treatment focused on fundamental literacy could play a positive role in facilitating students’ enhanced science understanding (derived literacy).

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)603-617
Number of pages15
JournalInternational Journal of Science and Mathematics Education
Volume14
Issue number4
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 2016 May 1

Fingerprint

Argumentation
argumentation
Questionnaire
literacy
science
questionnaire
Pre-test
interview
Dependent
Mixed Methods
Climate Change
Taiwan
elementary school
climate change
school grade
interpretation
Context
Influence
Group
student

All Science Journal Classification (ASJC) codes

  • Education
  • Mathematics(all)

Cite this

@article{6f1a605bb3354354b1b188af3c408edf,
title = "Argumentation in a Socioscientific Context and its Influence on Fundamental and Derived Science Literacies",
abstract = "This study explored the effects of arguing to learn in a socioscientific context on the fundamental and derived components of reading, writing, and science understanding as integral parts of science literacy. We adopted mixed-methods in which the 1-group pretest–posttest design with supplemental interviews and questionnaires. The pretest evaluated the dependent variables (reading and writing scores), the treatment was arguing to learn about the global climate change issue, the posttest evaluated the dependent variables, and follow-up questionnaires and interviews informed the quantitative results. An intact grade six class (N = 28) at an urban elementary school located in central Taiwan was the participants. Analyses of the pretest–posttest gain scores and correlations between these outcomes revealed significant (p < 0.05) improvements in writing and associations among reading, writing, and arguing to learn. Interpretation of the qualitative data (interview and questionnaire responses) supported that argumentation as an instructional treatment focused on fundamental literacy could play a positive role in facilitating students’ enhanced science understanding (derived literacy).",
author = "Chin, {Chi Chin} and Yang, {Wei Cheng} and Hsiao-Lin Tuan",
year = "2016",
month = "5",
day = "1",
doi = "10.1007/s10763-014-9606-1",
language = "English",
volume = "14",
pages = "603--617",
journal = "International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education",
issn = "1571-0068",
publisher = "Springer Netherlands",
number = "4",

}

Argumentation in a Socioscientific Context and its Influence on Fundamental and Derived Science Literacies. / Chin, Chi Chin; Yang, Wei Cheng; Tuan, Hsiao-Lin.

In: International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, Vol. 14, No. 4, 01.05.2016, p. 603-617.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

TY - JOUR

T1 - Argumentation in a Socioscientific Context and its Influence on Fundamental and Derived Science Literacies

AU - Chin, Chi Chin

AU - Yang, Wei Cheng

AU - Tuan, Hsiao-Lin

PY - 2016/5/1

Y1 - 2016/5/1

N2 - This study explored the effects of arguing to learn in a socioscientific context on the fundamental and derived components of reading, writing, and science understanding as integral parts of science literacy. We adopted mixed-methods in which the 1-group pretest–posttest design with supplemental interviews and questionnaires. The pretest evaluated the dependent variables (reading and writing scores), the treatment was arguing to learn about the global climate change issue, the posttest evaluated the dependent variables, and follow-up questionnaires and interviews informed the quantitative results. An intact grade six class (N = 28) at an urban elementary school located in central Taiwan was the participants. Analyses of the pretest–posttest gain scores and correlations between these outcomes revealed significant (p < 0.05) improvements in writing and associations among reading, writing, and arguing to learn. Interpretation of the qualitative data (interview and questionnaire responses) supported that argumentation as an instructional treatment focused on fundamental literacy could play a positive role in facilitating students’ enhanced science understanding (derived literacy).

AB - This study explored the effects of arguing to learn in a socioscientific context on the fundamental and derived components of reading, writing, and science understanding as integral parts of science literacy. We adopted mixed-methods in which the 1-group pretest–posttest design with supplemental interviews and questionnaires. The pretest evaluated the dependent variables (reading and writing scores), the treatment was arguing to learn about the global climate change issue, the posttest evaluated the dependent variables, and follow-up questionnaires and interviews informed the quantitative results. An intact grade six class (N = 28) at an urban elementary school located in central Taiwan was the participants. Analyses of the pretest–posttest gain scores and correlations between these outcomes revealed significant (p < 0.05) improvements in writing and associations among reading, writing, and arguing to learn. Interpretation of the qualitative data (interview and questionnaire responses) supported that argumentation as an instructional treatment focused on fundamental literacy could play a positive role in facilitating students’ enhanced science understanding (derived literacy).

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84962892106&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=84962892106&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1007/s10763-014-9606-1

DO - 10.1007/s10763-014-9606-1

M3 - Article

AN - SCOPUS:84962892106

VL - 14

SP - 603

EP - 617

JO - International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education

JF - International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education

SN - 1571-0068

IS - 4

ER -