Endre søk
Begrens søket
1 - 22 of 22
RefereraExporteraLink til resultatlisten
Permanent link
Referera
Referensformat
  • apa
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association-8th-edition
  • vancouver
  • Annet format
Fler format
Språk
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Annet språk
Fler språk
Utmatningsformat
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf
Treff pr side
  • 5
  • 10
  • 20
  • 50
  • 100
  • 250
Sortering
  • Standard (Relevans)
  • Forfatter A-Ø
  • Forfatter Ø-A
  • Tittel A-Ø
  • Tittel Ø-A
  • Type publikasjon A-Ø
  • Type publikasjon Ø-A
  • Eldste først
  • Nyeste først
  • Skapad (Eldste først)
  • Skapad (Nyeste først)
  • Senast uppdaterad (Eldste først)
  • Senast uppdaterad (Nyeste først)
  • Disputationsdatum (tidligste først)
  • Disputationsdatum (siste først)
  • Standard (Relevans)
  • Forfatter A-Ø
  • Forfatter Ø-A
  • Tittel A-Ø
  • Tittel Ø-A
  • Type publikasjon A-Ø
  • Type publikasjon Ø-A
  • Eldste først
  • Nyeste først
  • Skapad (Eldste først)
  • Skapad (Nyeste først)
  • Senast uppdaterad (Eldste først)
  • Senast uppdaterad (Nyeste først)
  • Disputationsdatum (tidligste først)
  • Disputationsdatum (siste først)
Merk
Maxantalet träffar du kan exportera från sökgränssnittet är 250. Vid större uttag använd dig av utsökningar.
  • 1.
    Christenson, Nina
    Karlstads universitet, Fakulteten för humaniora och samhällsvetenskap (from 2013), Institutionen för geografi, medier och kommunikation (from 2013).
    A Framework for Assessment of Socioscientific Argumentation2016Konferansepaper (Fagfellevurdert)
    Abstract [en]

    A framework for assessment of socio-scientific argumentation

    The ability to produce a convincing argument with evidence to support a claim is important for participants in a democratic society. Research on students’ argumentation and reasoning on socio-scientific issues (SSI) has been extensive over the past decades due to its importance in science education. SSI provide a context where students can engage in reasoning and argumentation that involves the generation and evaluation of positions in response to complex issues which often lack definite solutions and have links to science and implications in society.

    Research includes a great variety among the analytical frameworks that have been developed to study students’ arguments. Most of these frameworks focus on either the structure of the argument or the content and are hard to use due to its complexity and in some cases more suitable to scientific argumentation rather than informal argumentation on SSI. Consequently, there is a need for frameworks that analyze the overarching patterns of socio-scientific arguments related to both the content as well as the structure. Accordingly, this framework should not be too complicated in its organization but possible to be used for assessment purposes for teachers as well as students own practice in order to improve their argumentation.

    Consequently, the aim of this research is to present a new analytical framework with focus on content, structure and the nature of the justifications that can be applied on socio-scientific argumentation. This framework is presented by applying it to authentic grade 12-students’ written arguments on a SSI about genetically modified organisms (GMO).

    There are two main components relating to the structural aspects: claim (decision) and justification (with pros and cons). Justification is defined as a combination of data, warrant and backings. The justification(s) that the arguers state in favor of their own claims are the pros and the justification(s) the arguers state against their own claims are the cons. Moreover, the justification can consist of value-laden statements when the arguers express their values on the issue and/or knowledge based statements when the arguers use conceptual knowledge to support their claims (and the content in the pros and cons are part of the content aspects, se below).

    The content aspect (knowledge) in the justifications (can be both pros or cons) is presented as different subjects that are based on the conceptual knowledge linked to a specific field or discipline such as politics, chemistry, economy etc. that arguers use in their justifications.

    Clearly, it is of great importance that the conceptual knowledge is relevant and scientifically correct, and this is why an explicit category about the conceptual knowledge is added to the framework:

    1. Correct and relevant content knowledge included
    2. Non-specific general knowledge (not directly related to the issue/focus)
    3. Incorrect content knowledge included (misconception or superficial scientific knowledge)

    This framework explicitly includes bot the structural and the content parts of a valid argument and will be fruitful both for future research on informal SSI-argumentation as well as in science education where the framework can be used as a tool assessing arguments considering both structure and content and consequently to assess the arguments as a whole.

     

  • 2.
    Christenson, Nina
    Karlstads universitet, Fakulteten för humaniora och samhällsvetenskap (from 2013), Institutionen för geografi, medier och kommunikation (from 2013).
    Analyzing informal argumentation on socioscientific issues concerning covering content and structure2013Konferansepaper (Fagfellevurdert)
    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.

  • 3.
    Christenson, Nina
    Karlstads universitet, Fakulteten för samhälls- och livsvetenskaper, Avdelningen för geografi och turism. Karlstads universitet, Fakulteten för humaniora och samhällsvetenskap (from 2013), Institutionen för geografi, medier och kommunikation (from 2013). Karlstads universitet, Fakulteten för hälsa, natur- och teknikvetenskap (from 2013), Institutionen för miljö- och livsvetenskaper (from 2013).
    Geography teacher students’ discussions when playing a spatial planning game with focus on sustainable urban planning.2018Konferansepaper (Fagfellevurdert)
    Abstract [en]

    Previous research has shown that games can facilitate learning of complex processes. This study investigates future geography teachers’ arguments when playing an urban spatial planning game. The game consists of a mat where small models represents residential buildings, institutions such as schools, hospital, police etcetera in a flood-prone area. A play master gives instructions to plan and develop the city. The game has a turning point, the city is exposed to severe flooding and afterwards the students are asked how to rearrange the city to become more resilient. The research questions include; when playing the game – A) what aspects does the students include when planning an urban area? B) what risks does the students identify? C) what preventive actions in order to increase the city’s resilience does the students identify after playing the game? A total of seven students participated in this study, all of whom studying to become upper secondary geography teachers. The game lasted for 40 minutes, was video recorded and transcribed. The inductive analysis focused on what aspects students considered in planning a city, both before and after the flooding for example to build further away from water and increase green areas, as well as what risks the students could identify. The results indicate that this type of game induce the students to, in a social setting, discuss and develop their understanding of sustainable urban planning and that this can be a valuable tool, both in school but also at the university level. 

  • 4.
    Christenson, Nina
    Karlstads universitet, Fakulteten för samhälls- och livsvetenskaper, Avdelningen för geografi och turism.
    Knowledge, Value and Personal experience: Upper secondary students' resources of supporting reasons when arguing socioscientific issues2011Licentiatavhandling, med artikler (Annet vitenskapelig)
    Abstract [en]

    This thesis focuses on upper secondary students’ use of resources in their supporting reasons when arguing socioscientific issues (SSIs). The skills of argumentation have been emphasized in science education during the past decades and SSIs are proven a good context for learners to enhance skills of argumentation and achieve the goal of scientific literacy. Research has shown that supporting reasons from various resources are embedded in students’ argumentation on SSIs, and also that multi-perspective involvement in reasoning is important for the quality of argumentation. To explore the reasons used by students in arguing about SSIs in this thesis, the SEE-SEP model was adopted as an analytical framework. The SEE-SEP model covers the six subject areas of sociology/culture, economy, environment/ecology, science, ethics/morality and policy, which are connected to the three aspects of knowledge, value and personal experience. Two studies covering four SSIs (global warming, GMO, nuclear power and consumption) explore how students construct arguments on one SSI topic chosen by them. In paper I, I investigated students’ use of resources in their informal argumentation and to what extent students made use of knowledge. The results showed that students used value to a larger extent (67%) than knowledge (27%). I also found that the distribution of supporting reasons generated by students varied from the different SSIs. In paper II, I explored students’ use of resources in relation to students’ study background (science majors and social-science majors) and gender. The results showed that social-science majors and females generated more numbers of reasons and also showed a larger amount of multi-disciplinary resources in their supporting reasons. From the findings of this thesis, the SEE-SEP model was established as a suitable model used to analyze students’ resources of supporting reasons while arguing about SSIs. Furthermore, the potential for applying the SEE-SEP model in teachers’ SSI-teaching and students’ SSI-learning is suggested. The implications to research and teaching are also discussed.

  • 5.
    Christenson, Nina
    Karlstads universitet, Fakulteten för humaniora och samhällsvetenskap (from 2013), Institutionen för geografi, medier och kommunikation (from 2013).
    Role-play as a means to practice students’ argumentation skills on socioscientific issues2014Konferansepaper (Fagfellevurdert)
    Abstract [en]

     

    Role-play as a means to practice students’ argumentation skills on SSI

    Introduction

    A democracy is dependent on well-informed citizens capable of understanding and taking part in societal issues. It is important from a societal as well as at the individual perspective, that people understand questions including for example global environmental matters, health concerns and personal ethical dilemmas.  Hence, it has been recognized in research that it is essential for students to develop argumentation skills to be able to participate in debates about controversial SSI (socioscientific issues) (Kolstö, 2000). The language is fundamental in learning science, both in being able to argue as well as being able to understand the science content. A central aspect of learning science is to learn the language of science and therefore it is crucial that science education provides possibilities for students to practice and develop their language skills (Lemke, 1990; Wellington & Osborne, 2001). Thus, language is important both for argumentation and learning science. However, in classrooms, teachers’ talk tends to be dominating (Mortimer & Scott, 2003). A shift must be made in the verbal arena so that the students are the ones doing most of the talk. Thus, a challenge in science education is to construct meaningful and motivating practices to supporting this development. Role-play debate concerning SSI has previously been investigated in research (e.g. Simonneaux, 2001). Jimenez-Aleixandre et. al. (2000) found that students constructing arguments about genetics focused on making detailed claims without being able to justify them. In this study we investigate a role-plays potential to promote students’ abilities to argue about SSI. The study was guided by the questions 1) How are the students arguments constructed concerning content? 2) To what extent do the participating students put forward arguments during the role-play?

    Methodology

    A group of eight students in grade nine, which is the last year of compulsory school in Sweden, participated in a role-play debate. This was the last activity in a series of lessons with the purpose of enhance a high degree of communication in form of dialogues and discussions. The focus of the teaching sequence was on basic genetics usually dealt with in Swedish lower secondary school. The role-play concerned gene technology and whether GMO (genetically modified organisms) should be allowed or not. The students were given different characters representing a variety of views on the GMO issue to play. The roles were handed out in advance and the participants were encouraged to find arguments based on scientific knowledge to be able to argue from facts. The role-play debate was moderated by one of the authors. The moderator made sure that all students initially got to present themselves (their given characters) and to briefly present their standpoint. The role-play debate was video- and audio recorded and transcribed verbatim. The analyses focus on the content that the student use in their justifications when supporting their standpoints. We also analyzed how the time of talk was distributed between the participants.

    Findings

    The recording of the role-play debate was 48 minutes of length in total. After a short introduction, the students started to discuss the issue. Our analysis show that 82% of the time was devoted to students’ argumentation. The moderator hade a rather passive role, only making sure that the debate carried on in an orderly manner. The students’ arguments were focused on the GMO issue during the whole sequence. Concerning the content of the arguments, our analysis revealed three main themes that the students were referring to. These were 1) values (principles, ethics, beliefs etc.), 2) effects (examples and scenarios of consequences of GMO) and 3) solutions (suggestions and opinions about actions needed). Of these three themes, the effect theme was dominating the discussions. Within the themes, we found different categories of the content on which the arguments were based. For example, arguments about possible effects of GMO included a great variety of content concerning ecosystems, biodiversity, dispersion of GMO, effects on humans and animals, taste and quality of GMO-products etc. Since the discussion was mostly focused on the effects, most arguments were concerned with science. However, other aspects were included as well, for example small farmers struggle against large multinational companies, the growing gap between poor and rich and consequences for the world economy. The length of time as well as number of utterances made by the students differed to a great extent. Four of the students’ contributed to 85% of the talk. The number of utterances varied from 2-70. 

     Conclusions and implications

    It has been argued in science education research that students should learn how to argue with a scientific content, which includes that students must have the opportunity to train the language of science. This study shows that a role-play where students are given different characters and time to prepare arguments in advance, do have the potential to make students argue with commitment and focus, using a variety of scientifically based arguments. Our findings shows that students to a great extent can, on the contrary to the findings of Jiménez-Aleixandre et al. (2000), support their standpoints using scientific data in their justifications. We also found that students refer to different themes including numerous different aspects, indicating a high quality of students’ arguments (Christenson & Chang Rundgren, accepted). However, the speech time was unequal distributed among the students due to that some of the participants took a passive role during the role-play. The problem of some students being quiet has also been recognized by Albe (2008). Hence, Some students might need more practice to be able to fully participate in debates. In addition, group construction and the role of the teacher are other important aspects that need to be considered in future research.

    References

    Albe, V. (2008). When scientific knowledge, daily life experience, epistemological and social considerations intersect: Students’ argumentation in group discussions on a socio-scientific issue. Research in Science Education, 38, 67-90.

    Christenson, N. & Chang Rundgren, S-N. (accepted). A framework for teachers’ assessment of socioscientific argumentation: An example of the GMO issue. Journal of Biological Education.

    Jiménez-Aleixandre, M. P., Rodriguez, A. B., & Duschl, R. A. (2000). “Doing the lesson” or “doing science”: argument in high school science. Science Education, 84, 757-792.

    Kolstø, S. D. (2000). Consensus projects: teaching science for citizenship. International Journal of Science Education, 22(6), 645-664.

    Lemke, J. L. (1990). Talking science: Language, learning, and values. Norwood, NJ: Ablex Publishing Cooperation.

    Mortimer E. F., & Scott, P. (2003). Meaning making in secondary science classrooms. Buckingham: Open University Press.

    Simonneaux, L. (2001). Role-play or debate to promote students’ argumentation and justification on an issue in animal transgenesis. International Journal of Science Education, 23(9), 903-927.

    Wellington, J., & Osborne, J. (2001). Language and Literacy in science education. Buckingham: Open University Press. 

  • 6.
    Christenson, Nina
    Karlstads universitet, Fakulteten för hälsa, natur- och teknikvetenskap (from 2013), Institutionen för miljö- och livsvetenskaper.
    Socioscientific argumentation: Aspects of content and structure2015Doktoravhandling, med artikler (Annet vitenskapelig)
    Abstract [en]

    Socioscientific argumentation has shown to be a feasible educational framework for promoting citizenship and for cultivating scientific literacy. However, there are several aspects of this educational framework that have been shown to be problematic. Consequently, in this thesis I investigated various aspects of quality of socioscientific argumentation from both an upper secondary student and a teacher perspective. By using students’ written argumentation on socioscientific issues (SSI) I studied how they justified their claims. The results showed that different SSI led students to use different subject areas in their justifications. I also compared science majors with social science majors and found that the number of justifications provided by the students is related to their discipline background. In these two studies, a new content focused analytical framework for analyzing content aspects of socioscientific argumentation, the SEE-SEP model, was used and shown to be suitable for this purpose. However, to ensure that students are able to produce high-quality arguments I suggest that both content and structural aspects need to be considered. As a result of this, I have presented a framework based on research literature and the Swedish curriculum, for analyzing and assessing both these aspects of socioscientific argumentation. Moreover, I investigated how science and language teachers assess students’ socioscientific argumentation and found that the science teachers focused on students’ ability to reproduce content knowledge, whereas language teachers focused on students’ ability to use content knowledge from references, and the structural and linguistic aspects of argumentation.

     

    The complexity of teaching socioscientific argumentation makes it difficult to teach and assess comprehensively. In order to promote quality and include both content and structural aspects, I suggest that a co-operation among teachers of different disciplines is beneficial.

  • 7.
    Christenson, Nina
    Karlstads universitet, Fakulteten för hälsa, natur- och teknikvetenskap (from 2013), Institutionen för miljö- och livsvetenskaper (from 2013).
    Teacher Education and Anthropocene2019Konferansepaper (Fagfellevurdert)
    Abstract [en]

    Education in general and teacher education in particular is believed to play a key role for a sustainable world. In recent years, there has been discussion on the need to reorient teacher education towards sustainable development. These discussions elucidated that teacher education is no longer about just a mastery of content knowledge and skill in a particular discipline that one is trained for, and necessitates the need for the development of key competences and skills. Yet it is not well documented how teacher education programmes in different nations have successfully transformed and integrated sustainable development into the core of teacher education programmes. What can teacher education contribute in terms of providing directions to rethink humans’ relationship with the planet in today’s Anthropocene era? What kind of (fresh) approach to teacher education is required in the Anthropocene/in 21stcentury? How can teacher education responds/is responding to the challenges posed by the Anthropocene? The discussion is anchored around two particular teacher training programmes, i.e. primary school teacher training at the University of Gothenburg and Karlstad University, and presented as a comparison format. Both of these programmes includes one single objective related to sustainable development in thestudy plan for teacher education for primary school respectively. During the fourth semester students can choose one specialization and in two of these, technology and natural sciences and the specialization for social sciences includes one course objective dealing with sustainability perspectives respectively. We conclude that sustainability perspectives are very limited during all of the courses for future primary teachers at both Karlstad University and the University of Gothenburg.

  • 8.
    Christenson, Nina
    Karlstads universitet, Fakulteten för humaniora och samhällsvetenskap (from 2013), Institutionen för geografi, medier och kommunikation (from 2013). Karlstads universitet, Fakulteten för hälsa, natur- och teknikvetenskap (from 2013), Institutionen för miljö- och livsvetenskaper (from 2013).
    Teaching climate change: Teachers views, methods and good examples2019Konferansepaper (Fagfellevurdert)
    Abstract [en]

    Teaching climate change, teachers views, methods and good examples

    Climate change (CC) is one of the greatest challenges facing humanity and it is of great importance that education enables students with the knowledge and skills needed for making informed and evidence-based decisions. In this pilot study we examine teachers methods and views of teaching CC. A survey included questions about the teachers’ experience of teaching the topic of climate change and their views on teaching this specific content was distributed to 84 secondary teachers. 28% of the teachers consider geography to be the subject most responsible for teaching CC, 77% report that the aim is to teach the pupils an environmentally friendly behavior. The most used teaching methods are teachers lecturing (used by 89% of the teachers), group discussions (87%) and teacher moderated whole class debates (55%). 44% reported that they have sufficient knowledge for teaching CC, 26% feel that they have enough knowledge about howto teach CC but only 12% believe they have enough time for their teaching. Although CC is perceived as an interdisciplinary issue, relatively few of the teachers reportedly use interdisciplinary work. Both the high level of lecturing and lack of interdisciplinary work can be an consequence of a (over) loaded curriculum. To cooperate with other subjects can be difficult, often the subjects are not only separated by time (different schedules) but also in space (different classrooms). We conclude by giving examples of innovative ways of facing the challenge of teaching CC using innovative pedagogical tools.

  • 9.
    Christenson, Nina
    Karlstads universitet, Fakulteten för humaniora och samhällsvetenskap (from 2013), Institutionen för geografi, medier och kommunikation (from 2013).
    The relationship of discipline background to argumentation on socio-scientific issues2012Konferansepaper (Fagfellevurdert)
    Abstract [en]

    In order to prepare learners to engage in discussion and be able to make informed decisions on socio-scientific issues (SSIs), SSI-research has become an important field in biology- and science education. Research has revealed that justifications from various resources are involved in students’ informal reasoning and argumentation on SSIs. The importance of multi-disciplinary involvement of reasoning is shown in connection to the quality of argumentation as well as the number of reasons presented in the argumentation. In this study, to investigate the resources of reasons in students’ argumentation on SSIs in relation to study backgrounds, a model termed SEE-SEP covering three aspects (of knowledge, value and personal experience) and six subject areas (of Sociology/culture, Economy, Environment/ecology, Science, Ethics/morality and Policy), was adopted to analyze students’ reasons in different SSIs. A total of 208 upper secondary students (105 social-science majors and 103 science majors) from Sweden were invited to justify and expound their arguments on four SSIs including global warming, genetically modified organism (GMO), nuclear power and consumption. The results showed that (1) the group of social-science majors generated more numbers of reasons than the science majors; (2) the aspect of value was found to be used most in students’ argumentation without differences between students’ study backgrounds; (3) reasons from the subject area of science were presented most in the topics of nuclear power and GMO, with no difference between students’ study backgrounds; (4) personal experience was referred less often in students’ argumentation by both groups of students than the aspects of value and knowledge, especially in the topics of global warming, GMO and nuclear power, in which, the subject area of economy was also discussed less; (5) the social science major students used more resources from the subject area of environment/ecology than the science majors, regardless of SSI. In addition, we found that the social-science majors could provide more solutions of the SSIs and also use reasons from different subject areas in discussing the consumption issue, in contrast to science majors. The implications to SSI-research and teaching are discussed.

  • 10.
    Christenson, Nina
    Karlstads universitet, Fakulteten för samhälls- och livsvetenskaper, Avdelningen för geografi och turism. Karlstads universitet, Fakulteten för samhälls- och livsvetenskaper, Avdelningen för geografi och turism.
    Upper Secondary Students' Argumentation on Socio-scientific Issues2009Konferansepaper (Fagfellevurdert)
    Abstract

    The aim of this research is to explore students´ capability of dealing with socio-scientific issues and to examine how students use their existing science content knowledge when making arguments about different topics, all related to sustainable development. The purpose is also to examine any differences in students´ argumentation, and use of science content knowledge, among students focusing their studies towards science contra students with social science as major focus in their education. Approximately 100 students of grade 12 (50 science major, 50 non-science major) will fill in questionnaires where they express their opinions on the socio-scientific issues, and formulate arguments to support their standpoint. A number of interviews will be preformed to allow deeper penetration of students´ thoughts. To have the ability to argue well in issues with implication both in society and science, socio-scientific issues, the students need to practice this skill. Students need to develop understandings in science and have meaningful experiences that encourage science knowledge, and a context that is issue-based is an effective way to do this, and to teach and learn argumentation. In most of previous research of argumentation using socio-scientific issues, students have prior to expressing their argumentation, been given extended information about the socio-scientific issues that was the focus of argumentation (Sadler, 2004a), but in this study interest lies in students performances without gaining prior information, imitating real life situation. This is a first step of designing a teaching instruction based on socio-scientific issues with good argumentation skills as a goal, and this research is meant to be a piece of that objective

  • 11.
    Christenson, Nina
    et al.
    Karlstads universitet, Fakulteten för samhälls- och livsvetenskaper, Avdelningen för biologi.
    Chang Rundgren, Shu-Nu
    Linköpings universitet, Lärande, Estetik, Naturvetenskap (LEN).
    Investigating students’ use of knowledge, value and personal experiences (KVP) in relation to the different attributes of socioscientific issues2010Konferansepaper (Fagfellevurdert)
  • 12.
    Christenson, Nina
    et al.
    Karlstads universitet, Fakulteten för samhälls- och livsvetenskaper, Avdelningen för biologi.
    Chang Rundgren, Shu-Nu
    Linköpings universitet, Lärande, Estetik, Naturvetenskap (LEN).
    Höglund, Hans-Olof
    Karlstads universitet, Fakulteten för samhälls- och livsvetenskaper, Avdelningen för biologi.
    Upper secondary students’ use of scientific knowledge in arguing socioscientific issues2010Konferansepaper (Fagfellevurdert)
  • 13.
    Christenson, Nina
    et al.
    Karlstads universitet, Fakulteten för samhälls- och livsvetenskaper, Avdelningen för biologi.
    Chang Rundgren, Shu-Nu
    Swedish National Graduate School in Science, Technology and Mathematics Education Research, Linköping Univeristy .
    Höglund, Hans-Olof
    Karlstads universitet, Fakulteten för samhälls- och livsvetenskaper, Avdelningen för biologi.
    Using the SEE-SEP model to analyse upper secondary students' use of supporting reasons in arguing socioscientific issues2012Inngår i: Journal of Science Education and Technology, ISSN 1059-0145, E-ISSN 1573-1839, Vol. 21, nr 3, s. 342-352Artikkel i tidsskrift (Fagfellevurdert)
    Abstract [en]

    To achieve the goal of scientific literacy, the skills of argumentation have been emphasized in science education during the past decades. But the extent to which students can apply scientific knowledge to their argumentation is still unclear. The purpose of this study was to analyse 80 Swedish upper secondary students' informal argumentation on four socioscientific issues (SSIs) to explore students' use of supporting reasons and to what extent students used scientific knowledge in their arguments. Eighty upper secondary students were asked to express their opinions on one SSI topic they chose through written reports. The four SSIs in this study include global warming, genetically modified organisms (GMO), nuclear power, and consumption. To analyse students' supporting reasons from a holistic view, we used the SEE-SEP model, which links the six subject areas of sociology/culture (So), environment (En), economy (Ec), science (Sc), ethics/morality (Et) and policy (Po) connecting with three aspects, and (KVP). The results showed that students used value to a greater extent (67%) than they did scientific knowledge (27%) for all four SSI topics. According to the SEE-SEP model, the distribution of supporting reasons generated by students differed among the SSI topics. Also, some alternative concepts were disclosed in students' arguments. The implications for research and education are discussed.

  • 14.
    Christenson, Nina
    et al.
    Karlstads universitet, Fakulteten för humaniora och samhällsvetenskap (from 2013), Institutionen för geografi, medier och kommunikation.
    Chang Rundgren, Shu-Nu
    Karlstads universitet, Fakulteten för hälsa, natur- och teknikvetenskap (from 2013), Institutionen för ingenjörs- och kemivetenskaper.
    Zeidler, Dana
    University of South Florida, USA.
    The Relationship of Discipline Background to Upper Secondary Students´ Argumentation on Socioscientific Issues2014Inngår i: Research in science education, ISSN 0157-244X, E-ISSN 1573-1898, Vol. 44, nr 4, s. 581-601Artikkel i tidsskrift (Fagfellevurdert)
    Abstract [en]

    In the present STEM (Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics)-driven society, socioscientific issues (SSI) have become a focus globally and SSI research has grown into an important area of study in science education. Since students attending the social and science programs have a different focus in their studies and research has shown that students attending a science program are less familiar with argumentation practice, we make a comparison of the supporting reasons social science and science majors use in arguing different SSI with the goal to provide important information for pedagogical decisions about curriculum and instruction. As an analytical framework, a model termed SEE-SEP covering three aspects (of knowledge, value, and experiences) and six subject areas (of sociology/culture, economy, environment/ecology, science, ethics/morality, and policy) was adopted to analyze students’ justifications. A total of 208 upper secondary students (105 social science majors and 103 science majors) from Sweden were invited to justify and expound their arguments on four SSI including global warming, genetically modified organisms (GMO), nuclear power, and consumer consumption. The results showed that the social science majors generated more justifications than the science majors, the aspect of value was used most in students’ argumentation regardless of students’ discipline background, and justifications from the subject area of science were most often presented in nuclear power and GMO issues. We conclude by arguing that engaging teachers from different subjects to cooperate when teaching argumentation on SSI could be of great value and provide students from both social science and science programs the best possible conditions in which to develop argumentation skills.

  • 15.
    Christenson, Nina
    et al.
    Karlstads universitet, Fakulteten för hälsa, natur- och teknikvetenskap (from 2013), Institutionen för miljö- och livsvetenskaper (from 2013).
    Gericke, Niklas
    Karlstads universitet, Fakulteten för hälsa, natur- och teknikvetenskap (from 2013), Institutionen för miljö- och livsvetenskaper (from 2013).
    Teaching sustainability using a spatial planning game – Risk Ville2018Konferansepaper (Annet vitenskapelig)
    Abstract [en]

    Climate change is one of the greatest contemporary challenges facing humanity and consequently weneed to equip science teacher students with knowledge and understanding of the causes andconsequences of a changing climate. Societies resilience depends on its citizens’ capability to respondto risks. It is through education that learners can be subject to the responsibility of reacting to challengingsocial issues in connection to risks, e.g. associated with a changing climate, which is linked to responsible citizenship. Hence, education is a key component in the important work of transfer of risk knowledge andrisk reduction.At the Center for Climate and Safety at Karlstad University, Sweden, we use a game, Risk Ville, forlearning about issues related to building societies resilient to risks related to climate change. We use thisgame in teacher education to illustrate the complexity and promote discussions on how to handle theconsequences of a changing climate. In an ongoing research project, we investigate the potential forlearning about risks and sustainable community planning in relation to climate related hazards (e.g.flooding) when teacher students are playing Risk Ville by analyzing the students discourse. Preliminaryfindings show that the teacher students are using a wide range of different resources of knowledge butalso that values paly a large role their decision making when playing the game.

  • 16.
    Christenson, Nina
    et al.
    Karlstads universitet, Fakulteten för humaniora och samhällsvetenskap (from 2013), Institutionen för geografi, medier och kommunikation (from 2013).
    Gericke, Niklas
    Karlstads universitet, Fakulteten för hälsa, natur- och teknikvetenskap (from 2013), Institutionen för miljö- och livsvetenskaper (from 2013).
    Rundgren, Shu-Nu Chang
    Karlstads universitet, Fakulteten för hälsa, natur- och teknikvetenskap (from 2013), Institutionen för miljö- och livsvetenskaper (from 2013).
    A cross-disciplinary approach to teaching socioscientific issues: A study of the co-operation between language and science teachers teaching about global warming2014Konferansepaper (Fagfellevurdert)
    Abstract [en]

    To combine the teaching of scientific concepts with the challenging problems of socioscientific issues (SSI) has been shown to be effective on engaging students in discussions and in developing students’ skills in decision-making and critical thinking. Research has revealed that teaching SSI in science education is a challenging task for science teachers alone suggesting a co-operation with teachers of the humanities, proposing that these teachers might be better at managing debates and other pedagogical methods related to a SSI driven instruction. However, to our knowledge no one has yet investigated the outcomes of a co-operation between language teachers, who regularly in their courses teach topics like argumentation, debate and how to write an argumentative text, and science teachers. Hence, the aim of our study is to investigate how the co-operation of teachers from different disciplines (language and science teachers) can contribute to upper secondary school students’ argumentation skills about global warming. A total of ten teachers from the subjects of Swedish (mother tongue), English, biology, physics and chemistry will participate in this study together with two classes of science major students in their first year of upper secondary school, which they teach. Data will be collected from both the teachers by interviews at the end of the teaching sequence and from students making a pre- and post-test of written argumentation about global warming, as well as interviews. Since this study is an ongoing project, we are still collecting data. We foresee that we will find that the teachers as well as the students can provide us with insights on how they perceive a cross-disciplinary teaching with focus on SSI, and also that we will be able to follow some progression in students argumentation through the pre- and post-test. Our findings on the learning outcome and how teachers and students perceive a cross-disciplinary teachers’ cooperation on SSI will be presented at the ERIDOB-conference. We believe that the results from our study will provide valuable insights on how to develop future SSI-teaching by using a cross-disciplinary approach and how the involvement of language teachers may be of help to the science teachers in doing this.

  • 17.
    Christenson, Nina
    et al.
    Karlstads universitet, Fakulteten för humaniora och samhällsvetenskap (from 2013), Institutionen för geografi, medier och kommunikation (from 2013).
    Gericke, Niklas
    Karlstads universitet, Fakulteten för hälsa, natur- och teknikvetenskap (from 2013), Institutionen för miljö- och livsvetenskaper (from 2013).
    Rundgren, Shu-Nu Chang
    Stockholm Univ, Dept Educ, S-10691 Stockholm, Sweden.
    Science and language teachers' assessment of upper secondary students' socioscientific argumentation2017Inngår i: International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, ISSN 1571-0068, E-ISSN 1573-1774, Vol. 15, nr 8, s. 1403-1422Artikkel i tidsskrift (Fagfellevurdert)
    Abstract [en]

    Researchers and policy-makers have recognized the importance of including and promoting socioscientific argumentation in science education worldwide. The Swedish curriculum focuses more than ever on socioscientific issues (SSI) as well. However, teaching socioscientific argumentation is not an easy task for science teachers and one of the more distinguished difficulties is the assessment of students’ performance. In this study, we investigate and compare how science and Swedish language teachers, participating in an SSI-driven project, assessed students’ written argumentation about global warming. Swedish language teachers have a long history of teaching and assessing argumentation and therefore it was of interest to identify possible gaps between the two groups of teachers’ assessment practices. The results showed that the science teachers focused on students’ content knowledge within their subjects, whereas the Swedish language teachers included students’ abilities to select and use content knowledge from reliable reference resources, the structure of the argumentation and the form of language used. Since the Swedish language teachers’ assessment correlated more with previous research about quality in socioscientific argumentation, we suggest that a closer co-operation between the two groups could be beneficial in terms of enhancing the quality of assessment. Moreover, SSI teaching and learning as well as assessment of socioscientific argumentation ought to be included in teacher training programs for both pre- and in-service science teachers.

  • 18.
    Christenson, Nina
    et al.
    Karlstads universitet, Fakulteten för humaniora och samhällsvetenskap (from 2013), Institutionen för geografi, medier och kommunikation (from 2013).
    Gericke, Niklas
    Karlstads universitet, Fakulteten för hälsa, natur- och teknikvetenskap (from 2013), Institutionen för miljö- och livsvetenskaper (from 2013).
    Rundgren, Shu-Nu Chang
    Stockholm University, Sweden.
    Science and Swedish language teachers’ assessment of upper secondary students’ socioscientific argumentation2015Konferansepaper (Fagfellevurdert)
    Abstract [en]

    The Swedish curricula, as well as researchers and policy makers worldwide, have recognized the importance of promoting and including sociscientific argumentation in science education to promote scientific literacy. However, to teach socioscientific argumentation in not an easy task for science teachers and among the difficulties is the assessment practice. In this small-scale qualitative study, we have, investigated and compared how science and Swedish language teachers, participating in a SSI-driven project, assess students’ written argumentation about Global warming. The Swedish language teachers have a long tradition of teaching and assessing argumentation and therefore it is of interest to identify possible gaps between these two groups. The results indicate that the science teachers focus on students’ ability to reproduce content knowledge within their respective subject that they have been teaching. The Swedish language teachers include students’ abilities to select and use content knowledge from trustable reference resources, in addition to the structure of the argumentation and the form of the language used. In fact, the Swedish language teachers’ assessment correlates more to previous research about quality in socioscientific argumentation and we suggest that a closer co-operation between these two groups can be beneficial to enhance the quality of assessing students’ socioscientific argumentation.

  • 19.
    Christenson, Nina
    et al.
    Karlstads universitet, Fakulteten för humaniora och samhällsvetenskap (from 2013), Institutionen för geografi, medier och kommunikation (from 2013). Karlstads universitet, Fakulteten för hälsa, natur- och teknikvetenskap (from 2013), Institutionen för miljö- och livsvetenskaper (from 2013).
    Hindersson, Emelie
    Karlstads universitet, Fakulteten för hälsa, natur- och teknikvetenskap (from 2013), Centrum för klimat och säkerhet (from 2013).
    Teaching climate change, teachers views, methods and good examples2019Konferansepaper (Fagfellevurdert)
    Abstract [en]

    Climate change (CC) is one of the greatest challenges facing humanity and it is of great importance that education enables students with the knowledge and skills needed for making informed and evidence-based decisions. In this pilot study we examine teachers methods and views of teaching CC. A survey included questions about the teachers’ experience of teaching the topic of climate change and their views on teaching this specific content was distributed to 84 secondary teachers. 28% of the teachers consider geography to be the subject most responsible for teaching CC, 77% report that the aim is to teach the pupils an environmentally friendly behavior. The most used teaching methods are teachers lecturing (used by 89% of the teachers), group discussions (87%) and teacher moderated whole class debates (55%). 44% reported that they have sufficient knowledge for teaching CC, 26% feel that they have enough knowledge about howto teach CC but only 12% believe they have enough time for their teaching. Although CC is perceived as an interdisciplinary issue, relatively few of the teachers reportedly use interdisciplinary work. Both the high level of lecturing and lack of interdisciplinary work can be an consequence of a (over) loaded curriculum. To cooperate with other subjects can be difficult, often the subjects are not only separated by time (different schedules) but also in space (different classrooms). We conclude by giving examples of innovative ways of facing the challenge of teaching CC using innovative pedagogical tools.

  • 20.
    Christenson, Nina
    et al.
    Karlstads universitet, Fakulteten för humaniora och samhällsvetenskap (from 2013), Institutionen för geografi, medier och kommunikation (from 2013).
    Koivisto, Jenni
    Karlstads universitet, Fakulteten för hälsa, natur- och teknikvetenskap (from 2013), Centrum för klimat och säkerhet (from 2013).
    Persson, Erik
    Karlstads universitet, Fakulteten för hälsa, natur- och teknikvetenskap (from 2013), Centrum för klimat och säkerhet (from 2013).
    Hindersson, Emelie
    Karlstads universitet, Fakulteten för hälsa, natur- och teknikvetenskap (from 2013), Centrum för klimat och säkerhet (from 2013).
    Gustafsson, Kristin
    Karlstads universitet, Fakulteten för hälsa, natur- och teknikvetenskap (from 2013), Centrum för klimat och säkerhet (from 2013).
    Pettersson, Andreas
    Karlstads universitet, Fakulteten för hälsa, natur- och teknikvetenskap (from 2013), Centrum för klimat och säkerhet (from 2013).
    Riskville – A game for learning about disaster risks and urban planning2018Inngår i: International Journal of Mass Emergencies and Disasters, ISSN 0280-7270, Vol. 36, nr 3, s. 238-246Artikkel i tidsskrift (Fagfellevurdert)
    Abstract [en]

    Education plays a key role in disaster risk reduction (DRR) and in creating resilient societies worldwide by disseminating information about risks and in improving people’s risk awareness. This, in turn, helps them to prepare, cope with and recover from possible disaster events, hence making the societies more resilient. This paper shortly presents the theoretical background and the rules of the game Riskville where the participants get to experience in a hands-on manner the connections and conflicts between urban planning, different interests and climate related risks. We conclude that Riskville promotes discussions on different perspectives on disaster risk and resilience and approaches in including them into urban planning.

  • 21.
    Christenson, Nina
    et al.
    Karlstads universitet, Fakulteten för hälsa, natur- och teknikvetenskap (from 2013), Institutionen för miljö- och livsvetenskaper. Karlstads universitet, Fakulteten för humaniora och samhällsvetenskap (from 2013), Institutionen för geografi, medier och kommunikation.
    Rundgren, Shu-Nu Chang
    Karlstads universitet, Fakulteten för hälsa, natur- och teknikvetenskap (from 2013), Institutionen för ingenjörs- och kemivetenskaper.
    A Framework for Teachers’ Assessment of Socio-scientific Argumentation: An example using the GMO issue2014Inngår i: Journal of Biological Education, ISSN 0021-9266, E-ISSN 2157-6009, nr 2, s. 204-212Artikkel i tidsskrift (Fagfellevurdert)
    Abstract [en]

    Socio-scientific issues (SSI) have proven to be suitable contexts for students to actively reflect on and argue about complex social issues related to science. Research has indicated that explicitly teaching SSI argumentation is a good way to help students develop their argumentation skills and make them aware of the complexity of SSI. However, assessing the quality of students’ arguments on SSI is evidently difficult for many teachers. This article aims to facilitate teachers’ assessment of the quality of students’ arguments on SSI by introducing a new assessment framework that represents a low degree of complexity and exemplifying it by applying it to students’ written SSI argumentation concerning genetically modified organisms (GMO). The new assessment framework considers both the quality indicators presented in the research literature and curricular guidelines for the science courses in Swedish secondary and upper secondary school. The framework focuses on both the content and the structure that can be revealed in students’ SSI argumentation and is meant to function as a tool for identifying quality indicators that could serve as the basis for grading.

  • 22. Lundström, Mats
    et al.
    Stolpe, Karin
    Christenson, Nina
    Karlstads universitet, Fakulteten för humaniora och samhällsvetenskap (from 2013), Institutionen för geografi, medier och kommunikation (from 2013).
    Once again? - How an upcoming vaccination debate is portrayed in (Swedish) media2016Konferansepaper (Fagfellevurdert)
1 - 22 of 22
RefereraExporteraLink til resultatlisten
Permanent link
Referera
Referensformat
  • apa
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association-8th-edition
  • vancouver
  • Annet format
Fler format
Språk
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Annet språk
Fler språk
Utmatningsformat
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf