Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
- Publication
- Publication Type
Articles 1 - 5 of 5
Full-Text Articles in Education
Examining The Role Of Epistemic Cognition In Teacher Learning And Facilitation Of Inquiry Dialogue, Sirine Mabrouk-Hattab
Examining The Role Of Epistemic Cognition In Teacher Learning And Facilitation Of Inquiry Dialogue, Sirine Mabrouk-Hattab
Theses, Dissertations and Culminating Projects
In this study, I investigated how a fifth -grade teacher engaged in epistemic cognition when he learned and facilitated inquiry dialogue. Inquiry dialogue is a type of talk in which participants use argumentation to search for the most reasonable answer to a contestable question. It has been suggested to represent the normative dialogue type to enhance students’ reasoning, as it is most aligned with the standards and practice of rigorous argumentation. Despite its importance, researchers have shown that it has not been widely implemented in classrooms and this is partly due to teachers’ epistemic cognition. Given the significance of inquiry …
Examining Transfer Effects From Dialogic Discussions To New Tasks And Contexts, Alina Reznitskaya, Monica Glina, Brian Carolan, Olivier Michaud, Jon Rogers, Lavina Sequeira
Examining Transfer Effects From Dialogic Discussions To New Tasks And Contexts, Alina Reznitskaya, Monica Glina, Brian Carolan, Olivier Michaud, Jon Rogers, Lavina Sequeira
Department of Educational Foundations Scholarship and Creative Works
This study investigated whether students who engage in inquiry dialogue with others improve their performance on various tasks measuring argumentation development. The study used an educational environment called Philosophy for Children (P4C) to examine specific theoretical assumptions regarding the role dialogic interaction plays in the development of individual argumentation. Using quasi-experimental research design, we randomly assigned 12 fifth-grade classrooms to two treatment conditions: P4C and Regular Instruction (REG). To document treatment fidelity, we analyzed 36 systematically selected discussion transcripts focusing on various features of classroom discourse. To evaluate transfer performance, we administered 3 post-intervention measures, including an interview, a persuasive …
Arguing Towards Truth: The Case Of The Periodic Table, Mark Weinstein
Arguing Towards Truth: The Case Of The Periodic Table, Mark Weinstein
Department of Educational Foundations Scholarship and Creative Works
Recently Erik Scerri has published an influential philosophical history of the development of the Periodic Table. Following Scerri's account, I will explore the main thread of the arguments responsible for the remarkable advancement of scientific understanding that the Periodic Table represents. I will argue that the history of disputation at crucial junctures in the debate shows sensitivity to the aspects of truth that are captured by my model of truth in inquiry. The availability of a clear and explicit model of truth in inquiry is of crucial importance as a response to post-modernist and other relativistic accounts of inquiry. It …
Measuring Argumentative Reasoning: What's Behind The Numbers?, Alina Reznitskaya, Li Jen Kuo, Monica Glina, Richard C. Anderson
Measuring Argumentative Reasoning: What's Behind The Numbers?, Alina Reznitskaya, Li Jen Kuo, Monica Glina, Richard C. Anderson
Department of Educational Foundations Scholarship and Creative Works
The aim of this paper is to develop a more thorough, empirically-based understanding of the differences in measurement of written argumentation when alternative scoring frameworks are employed. Reflective compositions of 127 elementary school children were analyzed using analytic and holistic scales. The scales were derived from Argument Schema Theory, an explicit model of argumentation development. We investigated the relationships among the different scales, as well as their relative reliability and efficiency. The scores derived using analytic and holistic methods have adequate reliability. Although less efficient, analytic scoring allows for gathering more sensitive and detailed information about the differences in student …
Towards An Account Of Argumentation In Science, Mark Weinstein
Towards An Account Of Argumentation In Science, Mark Weinstein
Department of Educational Foundations Scholarship and Creative Works
In this article it is argued that a complex model that includes Toulmin's functional account of argument, the pragma-dialectical stage analysis of argumentation offered by the Amsterdam School, and criteria developed in critical thinking theory, can be used to account for the normativity and field-dependence of argumentation in science. A pragma-dialectical interpretation of the four main elements of Toulmin's model, and a revised account of the double role of warrants, illuminates the domain specificity of scientific argumentation and the restrictions to which the confrontation and opening stages of scientific critical discussions are subjected. In regard to the argumentation stage, examples …