Change search
CiteExportLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • harvard1
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association-8th-edition
  • vancouver
  • Other style
More styles
Language
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Other locale
More languages
Output format
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf
Analyzing informal argumentation on socioscientific issues concerning covering content and structure
Karlstad University, Faculty of Arts and Social Sciences (starting 2013), Department of Geography, Media and Communication. (SMEER)ORCID iD: 0000-0003-4306-8278
2013 (English)Conference paper, Oral presentation only (Refereed)
Abstract [en]

The ability to generate a convincing and persuasive argument with evidence to support a claim is important for participants in a democratic society. Research has revealed a great variety among the analytical frameworks that have been developed to study students’ arguments. Many of these frameworks have limitations such as focusing on either the structure of the argument or the content and/or are hard to use due to its complexity and in some cases more suitable to scientific argumentation rather than informal argumentation on SSI. Accordingly, there is need for a framework that can be used for assessment purposes and that can be used as support for teachers assessment as well as students own practice in order to improve their informal argumentation. The aim of this research is to present a new analytical framework with focus on content and structure as well as the nature of the justifications that can be applied on informal argumentation on SSI. We present this framework by applying it to authentic grade 12-students’ written arguments on a SSI about genetically modified organisms (GMO). The framework consists of several elements and focus on claims and justifications in arguments. The justifications are categorized with regard to three aspects; subjects, pros/cons and knowledge/attitudes. Our hope is that this framework will be fruitful both for future research on informal SSI-argumentation and in school education. The framework can be used as a tool assessing arguments, their complexity regarding both structure and content and consequently to assess the arguments as a whole. The low complexity of the framework also makes it possible for students to use directly as a tool for practicing argumentation on SSI.

Place, publisher, year, edition, pages
2013.
National Category
Didactics
Identifiers
URN: urn:nbn:se:kau:diva-64368OAI: oai:DiVA.org:kau-64368DiVA: diva2:1145518
Conference
ESERA 2013 (European Science Education Research Association)
Available from: 2017-09-29 Created: 2017-09-29 Last updated: 2017-10-06Bibliographically approved

Open Access in DiVA

No full text

Other links

Konferens

Search in DiVA

By author/editor
Christenson, Nina
By organisation
Department of Geography, Media and Communication
Didactics

Search outside of DiVA

GoogleGoogle Scholar

Total: 3 hits
CiteExportLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • harvard1
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association-8th-edition
  • vancouver
  • Other style
More styles
Language
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Other locale
More languages
Output format
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf