Primary students’ argumentation skills on evaporation: A teaching intervention
Published:
Apr 8, 2022
Keywords:
argumentation argumentation skills evaporation particle theory primary education teaching intervention
Abstract
This paper reports the findings of a study exploring the possibilities of improving students’ argumentation skills concerning evaporation process and factors affecting evaporation by implementing two teaching schemes, with and without the use of particle theory. The participants (ages 10/11, n = 77) were students of four fifth-grade classes of two Greek regular public primary schools. The research data were collected through an open-ended written test (pre- and post-intervention) and a semi-structured interview (post-intervention). Results revealed that the improvement of students’ argumentation skills regarding the evaporation process and the factors affecting evaporation is feasible through an appropriate teaching intervention. This concerns mainly the components of claim and evidence, whereas the use of the particle theory seems to contribute further to this improvement, as well as to the improvement of the reasoning component. Implications for science education are also discussed.
Article Details
- How to Cite
-
Angeloudi, A., & Papageorgiou, G. (2022). Primary students’ argumentation skills on evaporation: A teaching intervention. Preschool and Primary Education, 10(1), 1–24. https://doi.org/10.12681/ppej.27434
- Section
- Articles
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.
Authors who publish with this journal agree to the following terms:
- Authors retain copyright and grant the journal right of first publication with the work simultaneously licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution Non-Commercial License that allows others to share the work with an acknowledgement of the work's authorship and initial publication in this journal.
- Authors are able to enter into separate, additional contractual arrangements for the non-exclusive distribution of the journal's published version of the work (e.g. post it to an institutional repository or publish it in a book), with an acknowledgement of its initial publication in this journal.
- Authors are permitted and encouraged to post their work online (preferably in institutional repositories or on their website) prior to and during the submission process, as it can lead to productive exchanges, as well as earlier and greater citation of published work (See The Effect of Open Access).
Downloads
Download data is not yet available.
References
Ainsworth, S. (1999). The functions of multiple representations. Computers & Education, 33(2-3), 131-152. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0360-1315(99)00029-9
Anthoulas, C., & Skoumios, M. (2018). Improving the written arguments’ content of 8th grade students in Natural Sciences. 3rd National Conference with International Participation for the Educational Material in Mathematics and Natural Sciences.
Baǧ, H., & Çalik, M. (2017). A thematic review of argumentation studies at the K-8 level. Egitim ve Bilim, 42(190), 281–303. https://doi.org/10.15390/EB.2017.6845
Bar, V., & Galili, I. (1994). Stages of children’s views about evaporation. International Journal of Science Education, 16(2), 157–174. https://doi.org/10.1080/0950069940160205
Bar, V., & Travis, A. S. (1991). Children’s views concerning phase changes. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 28(4), 363–382. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.3660280409
Bell, P., & Linn, M. C. (2000). Scientific arguments as learning artifacts: Designing for learning from the web with KIE. International journal of science education, 22(8), 797-817. https://doi.org/10.1080/095006900412284
Berland, L. K., & Reiser, B. J. (2010). Classroom communities' adaptations of the practice of scientific argumentation. Science Education, 95(2), 191-216. doi:10.1002/sce.20420
Berland, L. K., & Lee, V. R. (2012). In Pursuit of Consensus: Disagreement and legitimization during small-group argumentation. International Journal of Science Education, 34(12), 1857–1882. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500693.2011.645086
Bybee, R. W., Taylor, J. A., Gardner, A., Van, P., Powell, J. C., Westbrook, A., & Landes, N. (2006). The BSCS 5E Instructional Model. June.
Bybee, R. W., Taylor, J. A., Gardner, A., Van Scotter, P., Powell, J. C., Westbrook, A., & Landes, N. (2006). The BSCS 5E instructional model: Origins and effectiveness. Colorado Springs, Co: BSCS, 5, 88-98.
Canpolat, N. (2006). Turkish undergraduates’ misconceptions of evaporation, evaporation rate, and vapour pressure. International Journal of Science Education, 28(15), 1757–1770. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500690600779957
Cetin, P. S. (2014). Explicit argumentation instruction to facilitate conceptual understanding and argumentation skills. Research in Science and Technological Education, 32(1), 1–20. https://doi.org/10.1080/02635143.2013.850071
Christenson, N., & Chang Rundgren, S. N. (2015). A framework for teachers’ assessment of socio-scientific argumentation: An example using the GMO issue. Journal of Biological Education, 49(2), 204–212. https://doi.org/10.1080/00219266.2014.923486
Cohen, L., Manion, L., & Morrison, K. (2007). Research methods in education. doi:10.4324/9780203029053
Coştu, B., & Ayas, A. (2005). Evaporation in different liquids: Secondary students’ conceptions. Research in Science and Technological Education, 23(1), 75–97. https://doi.org/10.1080/02635140500068476
Coştu, B., Ayas, A., & Niaz, M. (2010). Promoting conceptual change in first year students’ understanding of evaporation. Chemistry Education Research and Practice, 11(1), 5–16. https://doi.org/10.1039/c001041n
Chen, H. T., Wang, H. H., Lu, Y. Y., Lin, H. S., & Hong, Z. R. (2016). Using a modified argument-driven inquiry to promote elementary school students’ engagement in learning science and argumentation. International Journal of Science Education, 38(2), 170–191. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500693.2015.1134849
Cross, D., Taasoobshirazi, G., Hendricks, S., Hickey, D. T., Cross, D., Taasoobshirazi, G., Hendricks, S., Hickey, D. T., Cross, D., Taasoobshirazi, G., & Hendricks, S. (2008). Argumentation: A strategy for improving achievement and revealing scientific identities. International Journal of Science Education, 30(6), 837–861. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500690701411567
Deng, Y., & Wang, H. (2017). Research on evaluation of Chinese students’ competence in written scientific argumentation in the context of chemistry. Chemistry Education Research and Practice, 18(1), 127–150. https://doi.org/10.1039/c6rp00076b
Erduran, S., Simon, S., & Osborne, J. (2004). TAPing into argumentation: Developments in the application of Toulmin’s Argument Pattern for studying science discourse. Science Education, 88(6), 915–933. https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.20012
Erduran, S., & Jimenez-Aleixandre, M. P. (Eds.), (2008). Argumentation in science education: Perspectives from classroom-based research (pp. 3–28). Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Springer.
Evagorou, M., Papanastasiou, E., & Osborne, J. (2011). The case of designing and validating a tool to assess 11–14 year old students written argumentation. European Science Education Research Association (ESERA), Lyon, France.
Faize, F. A., Husain, W., & Nisar, F. (2018). A critical review of scientific argumentation in science education. Eurasia Journal of Mathematics, Science and Technology Education, 14(1), 475–483. https://doi.org/10.12973/ejmste/80353
Faize, F. A., & Dahar, M. A. (2017). Developing Argumentation Skills among Undergraduate Students Using Inquiry Led Argument Framework. Pakistan Journal of Education, 34(2), 37–54.
Felton, M., & Kuhn, D. (2001). The Development of Argumentative Discourse Skill. Discourse Processes, 32, 135–153. doi:10.1080/0163853x.2001.9651595.
Foong, C. C., & Daniel, E. G. S. (2013). Students’ Argumentation Skills across Two Socio-Scientific Issues in a Confucian Classroom: Is transfer possible? International Journal of Science Education, 35(14), 2331–2355. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500693.2012.697209
Garcia-Mila, M., Gilabert, S., Erduran, S., & Felton, M. (2013). The Effect of Argumentative Task Goal on the Quality of Argumentative Discourse. Science Education, 97(4), 497–523. https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.21057
Gopal, H., Kleinsmidt, J., Case, J., & Musonge, P. (2004). An investigation of tertiary students’ understanding of evaporation, condensation and vapour pressure. International Journal of Science Education, 26(13), 1597–1620. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500690410001673829
Heng, L. L., Surif, J., & Seng, C. H. (2015). Malaysian Students’ Scientific Argumentation: Do groups perform better than individuals? International Journal of Science Education, 37(3), 505–528. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500693.2014.995147
Hong, Z. R., Lin, H. S., Wang, H. H., Chen, H. T., & Yang, K. K. (2013). Promoting and scaffolding elementary school students' attitudes toward science and argumentation through a science and society intervention. International Journal of Science Education, 35(10), 1625-1648. 1625-1648. doi:10.1080/09500693.2012.734935
Jiménez-Aleixandre, M. P., Bugallo Rodríguez, A., & Duschl, R. A. (2000). “Doing the lesson” or “doing science”: Argument in high school genetics. Science Education, 84(6), 757–792. https://doi.org/10.1002/1098-237X(200011)84:6<757::AID-SCE5>3.0.CO;2-F
Jiménez-Aleixandre, M. P. (2007). Designing argumentation learning environments. In Argumentation in science education, 91–115. doi:10.1007/978-1-4020-6670-2_5.
Jiménez-Aleixandre, M. P., & Erduran, S. (2007). Argumentation in science education: An overview. Argumentation in science education, 3-27. doi:10.1007/978-1-4020-6670-2_1
Johnson, P., & Papageorgiou, G. (2010). Rethinking the introduction of particle theory: A substance‐based framework. Journal of Research in Science Teaching: The Official Journal of the National Association for Research in Science Teaching, 47(2), 130-150. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.20296
Johnson, P. (1998). Children’s understanding of changes of state involving the gas state, Part 2: Evaporation and condensation below boiling point. International Journal of Science Education, 20(6), 695–709. https://doi.org/10.1080/0950069980200607
Kaya, E. (2013). Argumentation Practices in Classroom: Pre-service teachers' conceptual understanding of chemical equilibrium. International Journal of Science Education, 35(7), 1139-1158. doi:10.1080/09500693.2013.770935
Kaya, E. (2018). Argumentation in elementary science education: addressing methodological issues and conceptual understanding. Cultural Studies of Science Education, 13(4), 1087–1090. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11422-017-9848-7
Keith, W., & Beard, D. (2008). Toulmin’ s Rhetorical Logic: What’ s the Warrant for Warrants? Philosophy & Rhetoric, 41(1), 22–50. doi:10.1353/par.2008.0003
Kirbulut, Z. D., & Beeth, M. E. (2013). Consistency of Students’ Ideas across Evaporation, Condensation, and Boiling. Research in Science Education, 43(1), 209–232. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11165-011-9264-z
Kirikkaya, E. B., & Gulu, D. (2008). Fifth Grade Students’ Misconceptions about Heat - Temperature and Evaporation – Boiling. Elementary Education Online, 7(1), 15–27.
Krajcik, J., & McNeill, K. (2008). Assessing Middle School Students’ Content Knowledge and Scientific Reasoning Through Written Explanations. Assessing Science Learning: Perspectives from Research and Practice, 101–116.
Kuhn, D., & Udell, W. (2007). Coordinating own and other perspectives in argument. Thinking & Reasoning, 13(2), 90-104. doi:10.1080/13546780600625447
Kulatunga, U., Moog, R. S., & Lewis, J. E. (2013). Argumentation and Participation Patterns in General Chemistry. 50(10), 1207–1231. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.21107
McDonald, C. V., & McRobbie, C. J. (2012). Utilising argumentation to teach nature of science. Second International Handbook of Science Education, 969-986. doi:10.1007/978-1-4020-9041-7_64
McNeill, K. L. (2011). Elementary Students’ Views of Explanation, Argumentation, and Evidence, and Their Abilities to Construct Arguments Over the School Year. 48(7), 793–823. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.20430
McNeill, K. L., & Krajcik, J. (2006). Supporting students’ construction of scientific explanation through generic versus context-specific written scaffolds. In annual meeting of the American educational research association, San Francisco.
Mcneill, K. L., Lizotte, D. J., Krajcik, J., & Marx, R. W. (2006). Supporting Students’ Construction of Scientific Explanations by Fading Scaffolds in Instructional Materials. 15(2), 153–191. doi:10.1207/s15327809jls1502_1
McNeill, K. L., & Krajcik, J. (2007). Middle school students’ use of appropriate and inappropriate evidence in writing scientific explanations. In Thinking with Data. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203810057
Mendonca, P., & Justi, R. (2014). An Instrument for Analyzing Arguments Produced in Modeling-Based Chemistry Lessons. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 51(2), 192–218. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.21133
Ogan-Bekiroglu, F., & Eskin, H. (2012). Examination of the relationship between engagement in scientific argumentation and conceptual knowledge. International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 10, 1415–1443. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10763-012-9346-z
Naylor, S., Keogh, B., & Downing, B. (2007). Argumentation and primary science. Research in Science Education, 37(1), 17–39. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11165-005-9002-5
Osborne, J. (2010). Arguing to Learn in Science: The Role of Collaborative, Critical Discourse. Science, 328, 463–466. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1183944
Osborne, R. J., & Cosgrove, M. M. (1983). Children’s conceptions of the changes of state of water. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 20(9), 825–838. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.3660200905
Papageorgiou, G., Grammaticopoulou, M., & Johnson, P. M. (2010). Should we teach primary pupils about chemical change? International Journal of Science Education, 32(12), 1647–1664. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500690903173650
Papageorgiou, G., Johnson, P., & Fotiades, F. (2008). Explaining melting and evaporation below boiling point. Can software help with particle ideas? Research in Science and Technological Education, 26(2), 165–183. https://doi.org/10.1080/02635140802037336
Papageorgiou, G., & Johnson, P. (2005). Do particle ideas help or hinder pupils’ understanding of phenomena? International Journal of Science Education, 27(11), 1299–1317. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500690500102698
Plakitsi, K., Perraki, V., & Klonari, K. (2014). New Curriculum for Science Education: Elementary School. Institute of Educational Policy, Ministry of Education. [in greek]
Prain, V., Tytler, R., & Peterson, S. (2009). Multiple representation in learning about evaporation. International Journal of Science Education, 31(6), 787–808. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500690701824249
Russell, T., Harlen, W., & Watt, D. (1989). Children’s ideas about evaporation. International Journal of Science Education, 11(5), 566–576. https://doi.org/10.1080/0950069890110508
Ryu, S., & Sandoval, W. A. (2012). Improvements to elementary children’s epistemic understanding from sustained argumentation. Science Education, 96(3), 488–526. https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.21006
Sadler, T. D. (2004). Informal reasoning regarding socioscientific issues: A critical review of research. Journal of Research in Science Teaching: The Official Journal of the National Association for Research in Science Teaching, 41(5), 513-536. doi:10.1002/tea.20009
Sampson, V. D., & Clark, D. B. (2006). Assessment of Argument in Science Education: A Critical Review of the Literature. In S. A. Barab, K. E. Hay, & D. T. Hickey (Eds.), Proceedings of the 7th International Conference of the Learning Sciences (Issue 1958, pp. 655–661). International Society of the Learning Sciences.
Sampson, V., & Clark, D. (2009). The impact of collaboration on the outcomes of scientific argumentation. Science education, 93(3), 448-484. doi:10.1002/sce.20306
Sampson, V., & Blanchard, M. R. (2012). Science teachers and scientific argumentation: Trends in views and practice. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 49(9), 1122-1148. doi:10.1002/tea.21037
Sandoval, W. A. (2003). Conceptual and epistemic aspects of students’ scientific explanations. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 12(1), 5–51. https://doi.org/10.1207/S15327809JLS1201_2
Sandoval, W. A., & Millwood, K. A. (2007). What Can Argumentation Tell Us About Epistemology? Argumentation in science education, 71–88. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4020-6670-2_4
Sandoval, W. A., Enyedy, N., Redman, E. H., & Xiao, S. (2019). Organising a culture of argumentation in elementary science. International Journal of Science Education, 41(13), 1848–1869. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500693.2019.1641856
Skoumios, M., & Balia, C. (2020). Studying the Structure of Primary School Students’ Written Arguments on Electric Circuits. Science Education International, 31(3), 304–312. https://doi.org/10.33828/sei.v31.i3.9
Skoumios, M., & Hatzinikita, V. (2014). Assessing students’ science written explanations. Natural Sciences in Education, 3, 9–19. [in greek]
Subramaniam, K., & Harrell, P. E. (2013). Framing Prospective Elementary Teachers’ Conceptions of Dissolving as a Ladder of Explanations. Journal of Science Teacher Education, 24(7), 1177–1199. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10972-013-9356-x
Toulmin, S. E. (1958). The uses of argument. Cambridge University Press.
Toulmin, S. E. (2003). The uses of argument (Updated ed.). Cambridge University Press.
Tsikalas, T., Stamovlasis, D., & Papageorgiou, G. (2014). Mental representations of 12 year-old children about boiling and evaporation: A probabilistic association with convergent and divergent thinking. Preschool and Primary Education, 2, 17–26. https://doi.org/http://dx.doi.org/10.12681/ppej.87
Tytler, R., Prain, V., & Peterson, S. (2007). Representational issues in students learning about evaporation. Research in Science Education, 37(3), 313–331. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11165-006-9028-3
Venville, G. J., & Dawson, V. M. (2010). The impact of a classroom intervention on grade 10 students' argumentation skills, informal reasoning, and conceptual understanding of science. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 47(8), 952-977. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.20358
Von Aufschnaiter, C., Erduran, S., Osborne, J., & Simon, S. (2008). Arguing to learn and learning to argue: Case studies of how students' argumentation relates to their scientific knowledge. Journal of Research in Science Teaching: The Official Journal of the National Association for Research in Science Teaching, 45(1), 101-131.
Wang, T. L., & Tseng, Y. K. (2018). The comparative effectiveness of physical, virtual, and virtual-physical manipulatives on third-grade students’ science achievement and conceptual understanding of evaporation and condensation. International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 16(2), 203-219. doi:10.1007/s10763-016-9774-2
Zohar, A., & Nemet, F. (2002). Fostering students’ knowledge and argumentation skills through dilemmas in human genetics. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 39(1), 35–62. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.10008
