The Dramatic Arc in the Development of Argumentation Skills of Upper Secondary School Students in Geography Education
Abstract
:1. Introduction
2. Theoretical Framework
3. Materials and Methods
3.1. Participants, Context and Data Collection
3.2. The Dramatic Arc as a Basis of a Geography Course
3.3. Data Analysis
4. Results
4.1. Students’ Argumentation Development
4.2. Individual Students’ Argumentation Development
One of my friends in London is a Muslim, and says (W2) there is a really large and close-knit Muslim community in London (C2). However, another thinks (W3) that there are very few Muslims in London (C3). If it is difficult to distinguish such different groups of people, is it right to talk about different cultural groups (rq2, C4)? I don’t think so (C5).
Could a person live only on local food (rq1)? No (C1). Each of us uses products imported from afar (B1). Even if someone would claim to live in a self-sufficient economy so as not to buy anything (C2), where would the seeds of the plants come from (rq2)? Probably (Q1) from the other side of the world (C3).
5. Discussion
6. Conclusions
Author Contributions
Funding
Institutional Review Board Statement
Informed Consent Statement
Data Availability Statement
Acknowledgments
Conflicts of Interest
References
- Capkinoglu, E.; Yilmaz, S.; Leblebicioglu, G. Quality of argumentation by seventh-graders in local socioscientific issues. J. Res. Sci. Teach. 2020, 57, 827–855. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Driver, R.; Newton, P.; Osborne, J. Establishing the norms of scientific argumentation in classrooms. Sci. Educ. 2000, 84, 287–312. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Erduran, S.; Simon, S.; Osborne, J. Tapping into Argumentation: Developments in the Application of Toulmin’s Argument Pattern for Studying Science Discourse. Wiley Intersci. 2004. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Kaya, E.; Erduran, S.; Cetin, P.S. Discourse, argumentation, and science lessons: Match or mismatch in high school students’ perceptions and understanding? Mevlana Int. J. Educ. 2012, 2, 1–32. [Google Scholar]
- Venville, G.J.; Dawson, V. The impact of a classroom intervention on grade 10 students’ argumentation skills, informal reasoning, and conceptual understanding of science. J. Res. Sci. Teach. 2010, 47, 952–977. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Zohar, A.; Nemet, F. Fostering students’ knowledge and argumentation skills through dilemmas in human genetics. J. Res. Sci. Teach. 2002, 39, 35–62. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Toulmin, S. Uses of Argument; Cambridge University Press: Cambridge, UK, 1958. [Google Scholar]
- Van Eemeren, F.; Grootendorst, R. A Systematic Theory of Argumentation: The Pragma-dialectical Approach; Cambridge University Press: Cambridge, UK, 2004. [Google Scholar]
- Kneupper, C.W. Teaching argument: An introduction to the Toulmin model. Coll. Compos. Commun. 1978, 29, 237–241. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Abi-El-Mona, I.; Abd-El-Khalick, F. Perceptions of the Nature and “Goodness” of Argument among College Students, Science Teachers, and Scientists. Int. J. Sci. Educ. 2011, 33, 573–605. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ramage, J.; Callaway, M.; Clary-Lemon, J.; Waggoner, Z. Argument in Composition; Parlor Press LLC: West Lafayette, IN, USA, 2010. [Google Scholar]
- Kakkuri-Knuuttila, M. Argumentti Ja Kritiikki: Lukemisen, Keskustelun Ja Vakuuttamisen Taidot; Gaudeamus: Helsinki, Finland, 2015. [Google Scholar]
- Morgan, A. Argumentation, Geography Education and ICT. Geography 2006, 91, 126–140. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Taylor, C. Towards a geography of education. In Disciplines of Education, Their Role in the Future of Education Research; Furlong, J., Lawn, M., Eds.; Routledge: London, UK, 2010; pp. 132–152. [Google Scholar]
- Finnish National Agency for Education. National Core Curriculum for General Upper Secondary Schools; Finnish National Agency for Education: Helsinki, Finland, 2019; Available online: https://www.oph.fi/en/statistics-and-publications/publications/core-curriculum-general-upper-secondary-schools-nutshell (accessed on 13 April 2021).
- Jasanoff, S. Science and citizenship: A new synergy. Sci. Public Policy 2004, 31, 90–94. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- UNESCO (United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization). Leading SDG 4—Education 2030. Available online: https://en.unesco.org/themes/education2030-sdg4 (accessed on 13 April 2021).
- Balgopal, M.; Wallace, A.; Dahlberg, S. Writing from different cultural contexts: How college students frame an environmental SSI through written arguments: Framing SSI Arguments. J. Res. Sci. Teach. 2017, 54, 195–218. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Karpudewan, M. The role of green chemistry activities in fostering secondary school students’ understanding of acidbase concepts and argumentation skills. Chem. Educ. Res. Pract. 2016, 17, 893–901. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Alanko-Kahiluoto, O.; Käkelä-Puumala, T. Kirjallisuudentutkimuksen Peruskäsitteitä; Suomalaisen Kirjallisuuden Seura: Helsinki, Finland, 2008. [Google Scholar]
- ElShafie, S.J. Making science meaningful for broad audiences through stories. Integr. Comp. Biol. 2018, 58, 1213–1223. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Korhonen, P.; Ostern, A. (Eds.) Katarsis: Draama, Teatteri Ja Kasvatus; Atena Kustannus: Jyväskylä, Finland, 2001. [Google Scholar]
- Andriessen, J.E.; Schwarz, B.B. Argumentative Design. In Argumentation and Education; Muller, M.N., Perret-Clermont, A.N., Eds.; Springer: Boston, MA, USA, 2009; pp. 45–174. [Google Scholar]
- Weinberger, A.; Stegmann, K.; Fischer, F.; Mandl, H. Scripting Argumentative Knowledge Construction in Computer-Supported Learning Environments. In Scripting Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning; Fischer, F., Kollar, I., Mandl, H., Haake, J.M., Eds.; Springer: Boston, MA, USA, 2007; Volume 6, pp. 191–211. [Google Scholar]
- Schwarz, C.V.; Reiser, B.J.; Davis, E.A.; Kenyon, L.; Acher, A.; Fortus, D.; Schwartz, Y.; Hug, B.; Krajcik, J. Developing a Learning Progression for Scientific Modeling: Making Scientific Modeling Accessible and Meaningful for Learners. J. Res. Sci. Teach. 2009, 46, 632–654. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef][Green Version]
- Chinn, C.A. Learning to Argue. In The Rutgers Invitation Symposium on Education Series: Collaborative Learning, Reasoning, and Technology; O’Donnell, A.M., Hmelo-Silver, C.E., Erkens, G., Eds.; Lawrence Erlbaum: Mahwah, NJ, USA, 2006; pp. 355–383. [Google Scholar]
- Salminen, T.; Marttunen, M.; Laurinen, L. Argumentation in secondary school students’ structured and unstructured chat discussions. J. Educ. Comput. Res. 2012, 47, 175–208. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Fang, S.-C.; Hsu, Y.-S.; Lin, S.-S. Conceptualizing Socioscientific Decision Making from a Review of Research in Science Education. Int. J. Sci. Math. Educ. 2019, 17, 427–448. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Hahn, U.; Oaksford, M. Rational argument. In The Oxford Handbook of Thinking and Reasoning; Holyoak, K.J., Morrison, R.G., Eds.; Oxford University Press: Oxford, UK, 2012. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Kuhn, D.; Hemberger, L.; Khait, V. Argue with Me: Argument as a Path to Developing Students’ Thinking and Writing; Wessex Inc.: New York, NY, USA, 2013. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Barzilai, S.; Zohar, A. Epistemic Thinking in Action: Evaluating and Integrating Online Sources. Cogn. Instr. 2012, 30, 39–85. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Bråten, I.; Strømsø, H.; Britt, M.A. Trust Matters: Examining the Role of Source Evaluation in Students’ Construction of Meaning within and across Multiple Texts. Read. Res. Q. 2009, 44, 6–28. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- McGrew, S.; Ortega, T.; Breakstone, J.; Wineburg, S. The Challenge That’s Bigger Than Fake News: Civic Reasoning in a Social Media Environment. Am. Educ. 2009, 41, 4–39. [Google Scholar]
- Walraven, A.; Brand-Gruwel, S.; Boshuizen, H.P. How students evaluate information and sources when searching the World Wide Web for information. Comput. Educ. 2009, 52, 234–246. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef][Green Version]
- Valentine, K. Plagiarism as literacy practice: Recognizing and rethinking ethical binaries. Coll. Compos. Commun. 2006, 58, 89–109. [Google Scholar]
- Kaposi, D.; Dell, P. Discourses of plagiarism: Moralist, proceduralist, developmental and inter-textual approaches. Br. J. Sociol. Educ. 2012, 33, 813–830. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Grooms, J.; Sampson, V.; Golden, B. Comparing the effectiveness of verification and inquiry laboratories in supporting undergraduate science students in constructing arguments around socioscientific issues. Int. J. Sci. Educ. 2014, 36, 1412–1433. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Zeidler, D.L. The central role of fallacious thinking in science education. Sci. Educ. 1997, 81, 483–496. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Breen, L.; Maassen, M. Reducing the incidence of plagiarism in an undergraduate course: The role of education. Issues Educ. Res. 2005, 15, 1–16. [Google Scholar]
- Gilmore, J.; Strickland, D.; Timmerman, B.; Maher, M.; Feldon, D. Weeds in the flower garden: An exploration of plagiarism in graduate students’ research proposals and its connection to enculturation, ESL and contextual factors. Int. J. Educ. Integr. 2010, 6, 13–28. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Abasi, A.R.; Graves, B. Academic literacy and plagiarism: Conversations with international graduate students and disciplinary professors. J. Engl. Acad. Purp. 2008, 7, 221–233. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Duschl, R.A.; Osborne, J. Supporting and promoting argumentation discourse in science education. Stud. Sci. Educ. 2002, 38, 39–72. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Sadler, T. Socio-scientific issues-based education: What we know about science education in the context of SSI. In Socio-Scientific Issues in Classroom: Teaching, Learning and Research; Sadsler, T., Ed.; Springer: New York, NY, USA, 2011; pp. 355–369. [Google Scholar]
- Jin, Q.; Kim, M. Emergence of Argumentation in Elementary Students’ Science Learning. Can. J. New Sch. Educ. 2020, 11, 9–17. [Google Scholar]
- Abrami, P.; Bernard, R.M.; Borokhovski, E.; Wade, A.; Surkes, M.A.; Tamim, R.; Zhang, D. Instructional interventions affecting critical thinking skills and dispositions. Rev. Educ. Res. 2008, 78, 1102–1134. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef][Green Version]
- Bangert-Drowns, R.; Hurley, M.M.; Wilkinson, B. The effects of school-based writing to learn interventions on academic achievement. Rev. Educ. Res. 2004, 61, 213–238. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Mitchell, S.; Prior, P.; Bilbro, R.; Peake, K.; See, B.H.; Andrews, R. A reflexive approach to interview data in an investigation of argument. Int. J. Res. Method Educ. 2008, 31, 229–241. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Wells, G.; Mejia Arauz, R. Dialogue in the classroom. J. Learn. Sci. 2006, 15, 379–428. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Coffin, C.; O’Halloran, K. Researching argumentation in educational contexts. Int. J. Res. Method Educ. 2008, 31, 219–227. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ravenscroft, A.; McAlister, S. Investigating and promoting educational argumentation. Int. J. Res. Method Educ. 2008, 31, 317–335. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Eggert, S.; Nitsch, A.; Boone, W.J.; Nückles, M.; Bögeholz, S. Supporting Students’ Learning and Socioscientific Reasoning about Climate Change—The Effect of Computer-Based Concept Mapping Scaffolds. Res. Sci. Educ. 2017, 47, 137–159. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Keinonen, T.; Kärkkainen, S. University students’ argumentation in science and environmental education. Probl. Educ. 21st Century 2010, 22, 54–63. [Google Scholar]
- Van der Schee, J.; Lidstone, J. 2016 International Charter on Geographical Education. IGU Commision on Geographical Education. 2019. Available online: https://www.igu-cge.org/wp-content/uploads/2019/03/IGU_2016_eng_ver25Feb2019.pdf (accessed on 16 April 2021).
- Roberts, M. Geography through Enquiry: Approaches to Teaching and Learning in the Secondary School; Geographical Association: Sheffield, UK, 2013. [Google Scholar]
- Murphy, A.B. Geography: Why It Matters; Polity Press: Cambridge, UK, 2018. [Google Scholar]
- Leicht, A.; Heiss, J.; Byun, W.J. (Eds.) Issues and Trends in Education for Sustainable Development: Education on the Move; United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization: Paris, France, 2018; Available online: https://unesdoc.unesco.org/ark:/48223/pf0000261954?posInSet=1&queryId=c2a619f8-d20a-4b88-8ac4-1d52388e7e12 (accessed on 16 April 2021).
- Ewijk, C.; Fabriz, S.; Büttner, G. Fostering Self-Regulated Learning Among Students by Means of an Electronic Learning Diary: A Training Experiment. J. Cogn. Educ. Psychol. 2015, 14, 77–97. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Murtonen, M. Ohjattu oppimispäiväkirja reflektion välineenä yliopistopedagogiikan opinnoissa. Yliopistopedagogiikka 2013, 20, 19–23. [Google Scholar]
- Tarán, L.; Gutas, D. Aristotle Poetics: Editio Maior of the Greek Text with Historical Introductions and Philological Commentaries; BRILL: Laiden, The Netherlands, 2012. [Google Scholar]
- Moore, R.W. The Technique of the Drama: Gustav Freytag, E.J. MacEwan. Sch. Rev. 1895, 3, 238–239. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Flick, U. Managing Quality in Qualitative Research, 2nd ed.; SAGE Publications Ltd.: Los Angeles, CA, USA, 2018. [Google Scholar]
- Onwuegbuzie, A.; Leech, N. Generalization practices in qualitative research: A mixed methods case study. Qual. Quant. 2010, 44, 881–892. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Åhlberg, M. HConcept maps, Vee diagrams and rhetorical argumentation (RAA) analysis: Three educational theory-based tools to facilitate meaningful learning. In Proceedings of the Third International Seminar on Misconceptions in Science and Mathematics, Ithaca, NY, USA, 1–3 August 1993; Cornell University: Ithaca, NY, USA, 1993; pp. 1–5. [Google Scholar]
- Åhlberg, M.; Kaivola, T. Käsitekartat, Vee-heuristiikka ja argumentaatioanalyysi kestävää kehitystä edistävän tutkivan opiskeluprosessin apuvälineinä. In Korkeakouluopetus Kestäväksi: Opas Yk:N Kestävää Kehitystä Edistävän Koulutuksen Vuosikymmentä Varten; Kaivola, T., Rohweder, L., Eds.; Opetusministeriö, koulutus- ja tiedepolitiikan osasto: Helsinki, Finland, 2006; pp. 74–83. ISBN 952-485-091-5. [Google Scholar]
- Salmio, K. Esimerkkejä Peruskoulun Valtakunnallisista Arviointihankkeista Kestävän Kehityksen Didaktiikan Näkökulmasta: Vuosien 1993–1995 Valtakunnalliset Kokeet Ja Vuoden 1998 Luonnontieteiden Oppimistulosten Arviointi; Joensuun yliopisto: Joensuu, Finland, 2004. [Google Scholar]
- Åhlberg, M.; Chapman, J.; Reiss, M. How can we teach about global warming in an intellectually honest way as part of education for sustainable development? In Proceedings of the Third World Environmental Education Congress (3WEEC), Torino, Italy, 2–6 October 2005. [Google Scholar]
- Biggs, J.; Collis, K. Towards a model of school-based curriculum development and assessment using the SOLO taxonomy. Aust. J. Educ. 1989, 33, 151–163. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Chan, C.C.; Tsui, M.; Chan, M.Y.; Hong, J.H. Applying the structure of the observed learning outcomes (SOLO) taxonomy on student’s learning outcomes: An empirical study. Assess. Eval. High. Educ. 2002, 27, 511–527. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Karaksha, A.; Grant, G.; Nirthanan, S.N.; Davey, A.K.; Anoopkumar-Dukie, S.A. Comparative Study to Evaluate the Educational Impact of E-Learning Tools on Griffith University Pharmacy Students’ Level of Understanding Using Bloom’s and SOLO Taxonomies. Educ. Res. Int. 2014, 2014, 934854. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef][Green Version]
- Kim, M.; Roth, W.-M. Argumentation as/in/for dialogical relation: A case study from elementary school science. Pedagog. Int. J. 2014, 9, 300–321. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef][Green Version]
- Sampson, V.; Clark, D.B. Assessment of the ways students generate arguments in science education: Current perspectives and recommendations for future directions. Sci. Educ. 2008, 92, 447–472. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Telenius, M.; Yli-Panula, E.; Vesterinen, V.-M.; Vauras, M. Argumentation within Upper Secondary School Student Groups during Virtual Science Learning: Quality and Quantity of Spoken Argumentation. Educ. Sci. 2020, 10, 393. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Rapanta, C. Argumentation as Critically Oriented Pedagogical Dialogue. Informal Log. 2019, 39, 1–31. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef][Green Version]
- Finnish National Agency for Education. National Core Curriculum for General Upper Secondary Schools; Finnish National Agency for Education: Helsinki, Finland, 2015. [Google Scholar]
- Knight, A.M.; McNeill, K.L. Comparing Students’ Individual Written and Collaborative Oral Socioscientific Arguments. Int. J. Environ. Sci. Educ. 2015, 10, 623–647. [Google Scholar]
- Duschl, R.A. Science education in three-part harmony: Balancing conceptual, epistemic, and social learning goals. Rev. Res. Educ. 2008, 32, 268–291. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef][Green Version]
- MacQuarrie, S. Everyday teaching and outdoor learning: Developing an integrated approach to support school-based provision. Education 2018, 46, 345–361. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Park, C. Engaging Students in the Learning Process:the learning journal. J. Geogr. High. Educ. 2003, 27, 183–199. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Juntunen, M.; Aksela, M. Improving students’ argumentation skills through a product life-cycle analysis project in chemistry education. Chem. Educ. Res. Pr. 2014, 15, 639–649. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Elo, S.; Kääriäinen, M.; Kanste, O.; Pölkki, T.; Utriainen, K.; Kyngäs, H. Qualitative Content Analysis: A Focus on Trustworthiness. SAGE Open 2014, 4, 1–10. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Krippendorff, K. Content Analysis: An Introduction to Its Methodology, 2nd ed.; Sage: Thousand Oaks, CA, USA, 2004. [Google Scholar]
- Vaismoradi, M.; Jones, J.; Turunen, H.; Snelgrove, S. Theme development in qualitative content analysis and thematic analysis. J. Nurs. Educ. Pract. 2016, 6, 100. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef][Green Version]
- Yli-Panula, E.; Jeronen, E.; Telenius, M. Argumentaatiotaitojen harjoittaminen ekosysteemiopetuksessa: Aiheena yhteiskunnallis-luonnontieteelliset ilmiöt (Phenomena-based socio-scientifc issues in practicing argumentation skills in teaching ecosystems). In Opetuksen Ja Oppimisen Ytimessä. Suomen Ainedidaktisen Tutkimusseuran Julkaisuja; Luukka, E., Palomäki, A., Pihkala-Posti, L., Hanska, J., Eds.; Tampereen Yliopisto: Tampere, Finland, 2021; Volume 19, pp. 222–247. [Google Scholar]
Publisher’s Note: MDPI stays neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations. |
© 2021 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
Share and Cite
Härmä, K.; Kärkkäinen, S.; Jeronen, E. The Dramatic Arc in the Development of Argumentation Skills of Upper Secondary School Students in Geography Education. Educ. Sci. 2021, 11, 734. https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci11110734
Härmä K, Kärkkäinen S, Jeronen E. The Dramatic Arc in the Development of Argumentation Skills of Upper Secondary School Students in Geography Education. Education Sciences. 2021; 11(11):734. https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci11110734
Chicago/Turabian StyleHärmä, Kimmo, Sirpa Kärkkäinen, and Eila Jeronen. 2021. "The Dramatic Arc in the Development of Argumentation Skills of Upper Secondary School Students in Geography Education" Education Sciences 11, no. 11: 734. https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci11110734