Pamela S. Lottero-Perdue, Heidi L. Masters, Jamie N. Mikeska, Meredith Thompson, Meredith Park Rogers, Dionne Cross Francis
{"title":"Elementary preservice teachers' responsiveness while eliciting students' initial arguments and encouraging critique in online simulated argumentation discussions","authors":"Pamela S. Lottero-Perdue, Heidi L. Masters, Jamie N. Mikeska, Meredith Thompson, Meredith Park Rogers, Dionne Cross Francis","doi":"10.1002/sce.21847","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>Engaging children in argumentation-focused discussions is essential to helping them collaboratively make sense of scientific phenomena. To support this effort, teachers must listen and be responsive to students' ideas to move the discussion forward with the goal of reaching consensus. Given the complexity of this ambitious science teaching practice, in lieu of traditional field experiences, online simulated teaching experiences provide opportunities for preservice teachers to practice implementing these strategies in a low-risk, high-support environment. Limited research has explored elementary preservice teachers' responsiveness while navigating an argumentation-focused discussion, particularly in an online simulated teaching experience. The purpose of this study was to examine preservice teachers' responsiveness to students' ideas while eliciting students' initial constructed arguments and encouraging argument critique in two online simulated teaching experiences. Findings showed that preservice teachers' responsiveness to students' ideas was high in both online simulated teaching experiences when asking students to share evidence as well as engage in critique. However, their responsiveness varied when prompting for reasoning and was often low when eliciting students' claims. These findings provide empirical evidence that such online simulated teaching experiences can be used as productive spaces for PSTs to practice being responsive to students' ideas during argumentation-focused discussions.</p>","PeriodicalId":771,"journal":{"name":"Science & Education","volume":"108 2","pages":"546-580"},"PeriodicalIF":3.1000,"publicationDate":"2023-11-29","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Science & Education","FirstCategoryId":"95","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/sce.21847","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"教育学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Engaging children in argumentation-focused discussions is essential to helping them collaboratively make sense of scientific phenomena. To support this effort, teachers must listen and be responsive to students' ideas to move the discussion forward with the goal of reaching consensus. Given the complexity of this ambitious science teaching practice, in lieu of traditional field experiences, online simulated teaching experiences provide opportunities for preservice teachers to practice implementing these strategies in a low-risk, high-support environment. Limited research has explored elementary preservice teachers' responsiveness while navigating an argumentation-focused discussion, particularly in an online simulated teaching experience. The purpose of this study was to examine preservice teachers' responsiveness to students' ideas while eliciting students' initial constructed arguments and encouraging argument critique in two online simulated teaching experiences. Findings showed that preservice teachers' responsiveness to students' ideas was high in both online simulated teaching experiences when asking students to share evidence as well as engage in critique. However, their responsiveness varied when prompting for reasoning and was often low when eliciting students' claims. These findings provide empirical evidence that such online simulated teaching experiences can be used as productive spaces for PSTs to practice being responsive to students' ideas during argumentation-focused discussions.
期刊介绍：
Science Education publishes original articles on the latest issues and trends occurring internationally in science curriculum, instruction, learning, policy and preparation of science teachers with the aim to advance our knowledge of science education theory and practice. In addition to original articles, the journal features the following special sections: -Learning : consisting of theoretical and empirical research studies on learning of science. We invite manuscripts that investigate learning and its change and growth from various lenses, including psychological, social, cognitive, sociohistorical, and affective. Studies examining the relationship of learning to teaching, the science knowledge and practices, the learners themselves, and the contexts (social, political, physical, ideological, institutional, epistemological, and cultural) are similarly welcome. -Issues and Trends : consisting primarily of analytical, interpretive, or persuasive essays on current educational, social, or philosophical issues and trends relevant to the teaching of science. This special section particularly seeks to promote informed dialogues about current issues in science education, and carefully reasoned papers representing disparate viewpoints are welcomed. Manuscripts submitted for this section may be in the form of a position paper, a polemical piece, or a creative commentary. -Science Learning in Everyday Life : consisting of analytical, interpretative, or philosophical papers regarding learning science outside of the formal classroom. Papers should investigate experiences in settings such as community, home, the Internet, after school settings, museums, and other opportunities that develop science interest, knowledge or practices across the life span. Attention to issues and factors relating to equity in science learning are especially encouraged.. -Science Teacher Education [...]
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：
京公网安备 11010802042870号
