دورية أكاديمية
Motivating and Shaping Scientific Argumentation in Lab Reports.
| العنوان: | Motivating and Shaping Scientific Argumentation in Lab Reports. |
|---|---|
| المؤلفون: | Gouvea J; Department of Education, Tufts University, Medford, MA 02155.; Department of Biology, Tufts University, Medford, MA 02155., Appleby L; Department of Education, Tufts University, Medford, MA 02155.; Department of Physics and Astronomy, Tufts University, Medford, MA 02155., Fu L; Ministry of Education, Singapore 138675., Wagh A; Comparative Media Studies and Writing, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge, MA 02142. |
| المصدر: | CBE life sciences education [CBE Life Sci Educ] 2022 Dec; Vol. 21 (4), pp. ar71. |
| نوع المنشور: | Journal Article; Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't |
| اللغة: | English |
| بيانات الدورية: | Publisher: American Society for Cell Biology Country of Publication: United States NLM ID: 101269039 Publication Model: Print Cited Medium: Internet ISSN: 1931-7913 (Electronic) Linking ISSN: 19317913 NLM ISO Abbreviation: CBE Life Sci Educ Subsets: MEDLINE |
| أسماء مطبوعة: | Original Publication: Bethesda, MD : American Society for Cell Biology, c2006- |
| مواضيع طبية MeSH: | Students* , Writing*, Humans ; Knowledge ; Laboratories ; Learning |
| مستخلص: | Writing a lab report can be an opportunity for students to engage in scientific thinking. Yet students' lab reports often do not exhibit evidence of such engagement. Students' writing can appear focused on "filling in" required components and reporting on predetermined conclusions. We conducted a design experiment in an introductory biology laboratory course and examined the impact on students' engagement in argumentation in lab reports. Over two design iterations, students' arguments more often considered and integrated multiple claims, included a broader range of evidence and ideas, and gave appropriate attention to uncertainty in conclusions. We argue that two interrelated changes to the design of the lab course made these shifts possible. First, we restructured the role of instructors to position them as an audience interested in students' thinking. Second, we introduced more uncertainty into the lab activities to provoke consideration of multiple interpretations. We propose that these changes created a different rhetorical context that helped motivate and shape students' engagement in argumentation. More broadly, we suggest that an important alternative to explicitly scaffolding knowledge and skills is to design learning environments that can inspire students to engage in a range of scientific practices more authentically. |
| References: | Science. 2011 May 20;332(6032):919-20. (PMID: 21596978) Child Dev. 2003 Sep-Oct;74(5):1245-60. (PMID: 14552396) Psychol Bull. 1968 Oct;70(4):213-20. (PMID: 19673146) CBE Life Sci Educ. 2007 Summer;6(2):140-54. (PMID: 17548876) CBE Life Sci Educ. 2016 Summer;15(2):. (PMID: 27193288) CBE Life Sci Educ. 2012 Spring;11(1):39-46. (PMID: 22383616) Trends Genet. 2010 Aug;26(8):345-52. (PMID: 20594608) CBE Life Sci Educ. 2018 Dec;17(4):ar63. (PMID: 30496030) |
| تواريخ الأحداث: | Date Created: 20220926 Date Completed: 20220928 Latest Revision: 20221208 |
| رمز التحديث: | 20231215 |
| مُعرف محوري في PubMed: | PMC9727606 |
| DOI: | 10.1187/cbe.21-11-0316 |
| PMID: | 36154118 |
| قاعدة البيانات: | MEDLINE |
| تدمد: | 1931-7913 |
|---|---|
| DOI: | 10.1187/cbe.21-11-0316 |