Exploration of middle school students’ scientific epistemological beliefs and their engagement in argumentation

IF 2 4区 教育学 Q2 EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH
Mehmet Şen, Semra Sungur, Ceren Öztekin
{"title":"Exploration of middle school students’ scientific epistemological beliefs and their engagement in argumentation","authors":"Mehmet Şen, Semra Sungur, Ceren Öztekin","doi":"10.1080/00220671.2023.2265880","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Abstract Epistemological beliefs and argumentation are two important themes in science education, but research on the relationship between them is scarce. We treated epistemological beliefs in our study considering the cognitivist view of personal epistemology and included the justification, source, certainty, and development dimensions. We examined students’ engagement in argumentation by considering expositional comments, oppositional comments, information seeking, and co-construction of knowledge. Sixth-grade students participated in this study. We measured the students’ epistemological beliefs quantitatively before and after the argumentation activity to reveal any changes in their epistemological beliefs. We then used qualitative data to reveal how the students engaged in argumentation during whole-class discussions. Finally, we proposed possible connections between students’ epistemological beliefs and their engagement in argumentation. MANOVA results showed no significant change in students’ epistemological beliefs. Qualitative analyses revealed that students mainly used expositional comments during argumentation. Our findings suggested that the use of expositional comments can support the justification dimension of epistemological beliefs, but overuse of exposition can hinder other epistemological beliefs. Oppositional comments can feed the certainty and development dimensions of epistemological beliefs. Information-seeking can promote both the justification and source dimensions of epistemological beliefs. Finally, the use of co-construction of knowledge can improve both the justification and development dimensions of epistemological beliefs. The discussion and implication part addresses students’ epistemological beliefs, engagement in argumentation, and the connection between epistemological beliefs and argumentation.","PeriodicalId":48163,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Educational Research","volume":"35 8","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":2.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-10-27","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Educational Research","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/00220671.2023.2265880","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"教育学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Abstract Epistemological beliefs and argumentation are two important themes in science education, but research on the relationship between them is scarce. We treated epistemological beliefs in our study considering the cognitivist view of personal epistemology and included the justification, source, certainty, and development dimensions. We examined students’ engagement in argumentation by considering expositional comments, oppositional comments, information seeking, and co-construction of knowledge. Sixth-grade students participated in this study. We measured the students’ epistemological beliefs quantitatively before and after the argumentation activity to reveal any changes in their epistemological beliefs. We then used qualitative data to reveal how the students engaged in argumentation during whole-class discussions. Finally, we proposed possible connections between students’ epistemological beliefs and their engagement in argumentation. MANOVA results showed no significant change in students’ epistemological beliefs. Qualitative analyses revealed that students mainly used expositional comments during argumentation. Our findings suggested that the use of expositional comments can support the justification dimension of epistemological beliefs, but overuse of exposition can hinder other epistemological beliefs. Oppositional comments can feed the certainty and development dimensions of epistemological beliefs. Information-seeking can promote both the justification and source dimensions of epistemological beliefs. Finally, the use of co-construction of knowledge can improve both the justification and development dimensions of epistemological beliefs. The discussion and implication part addresses students’ epistemological beliefs, engagement in argumentation, and the connection between epistemological beliefs and argumentation.
中学生科学认识论信念及其参与论证的探究
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Journal of Educational Research
Journal of Educational Research EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH-
CiteScore
3.50
自引率
0.00%
发文量
26
期刊介绍: The Journal of Educational Research is a well-known and respected periodical that reaches an international audience of educators and others concerned with cutting-edge theories and proposals. For more than 100 years, the journal has contributed to the advancement of educational practice in elementary and secondary schools by judicious study of the latest trends, examination of new procedures, evaluation of traditional practices, and replication of previous research for validation. The journal is an invaluable resource for teachers, counselors, supervisors, administrators, curriculum planners, and educational researchers as they consider the structure of tomorrow''s curricula. Special issues examine major education issues in depth. Topics of recent themes include methodology, motivation, and literacy. The Journal of Educational Research publishes manuscripts that describe or synthesize research of direct relevance to educational practice in elementary and secondary schools, pre-K–12. Special consideration is given to articles that focus on variables that can be manipulated in educational settings. Although the JER does not publish validation studies, the Editors welcome many varieties of research--experiments, evaluations, ethnographies, narrative research, replications, and so forth.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信