top of page
Asian Institute of Research, Journal Publication, Journal Academics, Education Journal, Asian Institute
Asian Institute of Research, Journal Publication, Journal Academics, Education Journal, Asian Institute

Education Quarterly Reviews

ISSN 2621-5799

asia institute of research, journal of education, education journal, education quarterly reviews, education publication, education call for papers
asia institute of research, journal of education, education journal, education quarterly reviews, education publication, education call for papers
asia institute of research, journal of education, education journal, education quarterly reviews, education publication, education call for papers
asia institute of research, journal of education, education journal, education quarterly reviews, education publication, education call for papers
crossref
doi
open access

Published: 10 May 2022

Argumentation-Based Teaching in Science Education: Meta-Analysis

Nagihan Yıldırım

Recep Tayyip Erdogan University, Turkey

asia institute of research, journal of education, education journal, education quarterly reviews, education publication, education call for papers
pdf download

Download Full-Text Pdf

doi

10.31014/aior.1993.05.02.483

Pages: 226-237

Keywords: Argumentation, Meta-Analysis, Science Education

Abstract

The aim of this study is to conduct a meta-analysis study to examine the effectiveness of the argumentation-based teaching method in terms of sample, subject, years and some variables (academic success, attitude, interest, etc.). Meta-analysis method was used in this study. In order to gather the studies included in meta-analysis, various sources were used in the study. Three type studies were brought together for the meta-analysis: journal articles, doctoral and master thesis. The Social Science Citatio Index (SSCI) journals, Turkish Academic Network and Information Center Social Science Database, national printed journals, Academic Search Complete, Education Research Complete and ERIC databases were searched for journal articles. The Council of Turkish Higher Education Thesis Center was scanned to get the dissertations/theses. While scanning these platforms, the key concepts of "argumentation", "argumentation-based science teaching", "argumentation-based science education", "discussion-oriented teaching method to science" were used. So, 47 studies were used in the meta-analysis. In the study, as a result of the meta-analysis on the argumentation-based teaching process at the national level, it was determined that there was no significant difference in terms of the level of classes in which the studies were conducted and the independent variables examined in the studies, but there was a significant difference between the subject areas in favor of the subject area of chemistry.

References

  1. Aktamış, H., & Hiğde, E. (2015). Assessment of argumentation models used in science education. Mehmet Akif Ersoy University Jounal of Faculty of Education, 35, 136-172.

  2. Arlı, E. E. (2014). The impacts of argumentation based science inquiry approach on seasonal agricultural worker students' academic achievement and thinking skills [Master Thesis]. University of Atatürk.

  3. Aslan, S. (2010). The effect of argumentation-oriented teaching approach on the improvement of their top scientific process and critical thinking among high school 10. class students [Doctoral Thesis]. University of Gazi.

  4. Bayraktar, S. (2000). A meta analysis study on the effectiveness of computer assisted ınstruction in science education [Doctoral Thesis]. Ohio University.

  5. Burke, K. A., & Greenbowe, T. J. (2006). Implementing the science writing heuristic in the chemistry laboratuary. Journal of Chemical Education, 83(7), 1033-1038.

  6. Cavagnetto, A. R., Hand, B., & Norten-Meier, L.(2010). Negotiating the inquiry question: A comparison of whole class and small group strategies in grade five science classrooms. Research in Science Education, 41(2), 193-209.

  7. Cevher, A. H. (2015). The effect of eight grade gifted students' argumentation processes about anomalic cases on scientific creativity levels [Master Thesis]. University of Inönü.

  8. Chin, C., & Osborne, J. (2010). Supporting Argumentation Through Students' Questions: Case Studies in Science Classrooms. The Journal of the Learning Sciences, 19(2), 230-284. https://doi.org/10.1080/10508400903530036

  9. Clark, D. B., & Sampson, V. (2007). Personally-seeded discussions to scaffold online argumentation. International Journal of Science Education, 29(3), 253-277.

  10. Cohen, L., Manion, L., & Morrison, K. R. B. (2000) Research methods in education(5th edition). London: Routledge Falmer.

  11. Çaycı, B. (2019, September 6-8). Öğrenme stillerine göre sınıf öğretmeni adaylarının argümantasyon becerilerinin analizi.International Symposium on Active Learning, Adana, Turkey.

  12. Çelik, K., & Kılıç, Z. (2007, June 20-22). The effect of scientific discussion technique on students' social interaction and communication skills. 1. National Chemistry Education Congress, İstanbul, Turkey..

  13. Çömek, A., Sarıçayır, H., & Erdoğan, Y. (2015). Effectiveness of the argumentation method: A meta-analysis. Journal of Human Sciences, 12(2), 1881–1898.

  14. Deveci, A. (2009). Developing seventh grade middle school students? socioscientific argumentation, level of knowledge and cognitive thinking skills in the structure of matter subject [Master Thesis]. University of Marmara.

  15. Driver, R., Newton, P.,& Osborne, J. (2000). Establishing the norms of scientific argumentation in classrooms. Science Education, 84, 287-312.

  16. Erduran, S., Simon, S., & Osborne, J. (2004). TAP ping into argumentation: developments in the use of Toulmin‟s argument pattern for studying science discourse. Science Education, 88(6), 915–933. http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/sce.20012

  17. Glass, G. V., McGaw, B., & Smith, M. L. (1981). Meta-analysis in social research.Beverly Hills, CA: Sage Publications.

  18. Gümrah, A. (2013). The effects of scientific argumentation on secondary students' conceptual understanding of chemical changes, nature of science views, science process, communication and argument skills [Doctora Thesis]. University of Marmara.

  19. Günel, M., Kabataş Memiş, E., Yeşildağ, F., Biber, B, Okçu, B., & Şahin, A. (2010, September, 23-25). The effect of using the argumentation-based science learning (ATBO) approach in university level physics laboratories on academic success. IX. National Science and Mathematics Education Congress, İzmir, Turkey.

  20. Günel, M., Kıngır, S., & Geban, Ö. (2012). Analysis of argumentation and questioning patterns in argumentbased ınquiry classrooms. Science and Education, 37(164), 316-330.

  21. Hand, B., & Keys, C. (1999). Inquiry investigation: A new approach to laboratory reports. The Science Teacher, 66, 27-29.

  22. Hand, B., & Norton-Meier, L. (Eds.). (2011). Voices from the classroom. Springer Science & Business Media.

  23. Hand, B., Wallace, C., & Yang, E. (2004). Using the science writing heuristic to enhance learning outcomes from laboratory activities in seventh grade science: Quantitative and qualitative aspects. International Journal of Science Education, 26(2), 131-149. https://doi.org/10.1080/0950069032000070252

  24. Hasançebi, F. (2014). The impacts of argument-based inquiry (ABI) approach on students' science achievements, argument skill and personal development [Doctoral Thesis]. University of Atatürk.

  25. Hunter, J. E., & Schmidt, F. L. (1990). Statistical methods for meta-analysis. San Diego, CA: Academic Press Inc.

  26. Karakuş, M., & Yalçın, O. (2016). The effect of the argümantation-based learning in science education to the academic achievement and scientific process skills: a meta analysis study. Anadolu University Journal of Social Sciences, 16 (4), 1-20. https://doi.org/10.18037/ausbd.415534

  27. Kıngır, S. (2011). Using the science writing heuristic approach to promote student understanding in chemical changes and mixtures [Doctoral Thesis]. Middle East Technical University.

  28. Kulik, J., Kulik, C.-L., & Bangert-Drowns, R. L. (1985). Effectiveness of computer-based education in elementary pupils. Computers in Human Behavior, 1, 59–74.

  29. Martin, A. M., & Hand, B. (2007). Factors affecting the implementation of argument in the elementary science classroom. A longitudinal case study. Research in Science Education, 39, 17-38. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11165-007-9072-7

  30. Ministry of National Education (2013). Science Curriculum (Primary and Secondary School 3, 4, 5, 6, 7 and 8th grades). Ministry of National Education Publications, Ankara.

  31. Ministry of National Education (2018). Science Curriculum (Primary and Secondary School 3, 4, 5, 6, 7 and 8th grades). Ministry of National Education Publications, Ankara.

  32. Nam, J., Choi, A., & Hand B. (2011). Implementation of the science writing heuristic (SWH) approach in 8th grade science classrooms. International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 9, 1111-1133. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10763-010-9250-3

  33. Niaz, M., Aguilera, D., Maza, A., & Liendo, G. (2002). Arguments, contradictions, resistances and conceptual change in students‟ understanding of atomic structure. Science Education, 86, 505-525.

  34. Okumuş, S. (2012). The effects of argumentation model on students achievement and understanding level on the unit of states of matter and heat [Master Thesis]. Karadeniz Technical University.

  35. Özer, G. (2009). Investigating the effect of scientific argumentation based instruction approach on students' conceptual change and success concerning the concept of mole [Master Thesis]. University of Gazi.

  36. Özkara, D. (2011). Teaching pressure subject to eighth class students with activities based on scientific argumentation [Master Thesis]. University of Adıyaman.

  37. Şahin-Kalyon, D., & Taşar, M. F. (2020). Fourth and fıfth grade students’ argument structure. International Journal of Euroasian Research, 8(22), 39-71. https://dx.doi.org/10.33692/avrasyad.643598

  38. Ulu, C. (2019). The ımpact of argumentation based ınquiry approach on metacognitive knowledge and skills. International Journal of Science and Education, 2(1), 11-23.

bottom of page