Argumentation and Writing in the Science Classroom: A Review of Selected Literature
Writing in science classrooms has three main positive purposes: 1) integrating curriculum between language arts and science, 2) motivating students to explore science through creative writing and 3) building arguments through scientific explanations. Writing adds value to assessment as well as student motivation. A teacher can gauge a student’s learning as well as track his/her progress throughout the lesson, unit or school year. Writing helps the student articulate concepts and big ideas in his/her own voice as well as demonstrate reasoning. These are all positive outcomes for teachers and students.
Modern progressive education theory, the values of the new Common Core curriculum and student motivational studies all point to writing in subject areas – other than a strict language arts classroom – as necessary towards the intellectual development of not only early adolescents but of all students. While inquiry-based lessons focusing on hands-on activities and student-centered discussion are positive attributes of a science classroom, scientific argumentation and explanation quantitatively and qualitatively enhance learning and achievement (Nam, et al., 2011).
In the study, “Implementation of the Science Writing Heuristic (SWH) Approach in 8th Grade Science Classrooms”, the authors studied three Korean middle school classrooms testing the use of discussion and writing focused on building arguments against a controlled setting. Each teacher taught the SWH method and a control class which did not implement argumentation. SWH follows a strict protocol of brainstorming ideas, identifying variables to test, testing the variables, making a claim upon what is learned, identifying evidence supporting the claim, arguing for the claim through reasoning, comparing ideas with others’ and reflecting on the big idea tested by the class.
What the study found is the classrooms using the SWH protocol achieved higher in a summary writing assessment than the control. The tool for testing the summary focused on the students articulating: the big idea, specific science concepts taught during the lesson, the components of the argument and evidence, and how well the summary was written.
“These results indicated that students….who successfully experienced public negotiation opportunities in class were able to self negotiate in their summary writing activity in the way which enables them to elaborate their thinking and understanding from the negotiation in class. Our data analyses suggest that students who were actively engaged in an argument-based inquiry approach were able to develop arguments in their summary writing.” (Nam, et al. 2011).
Thus, by combining hands-on activities, classroom or group discussion and writing to build a scientific argument or explanation utilizing claims, evidence and reasoning, students demonstrated higher levels of achievement than the control group. What was also interesting was the results were true for all but one of the teachers. The study concluded teacher preparation and quality affect student performance. The classroom teacher with students not demonstrating a difference between the achievement also scored low in the teacher assessment categories. That teacher scored lowest in building the “big idea”, “science concepts” and “argumentation.” Engaging students in those areas would help develop a better post-lesson summary. In conclusion, the study found it to be equally important to use argumentation in discussion and writing as well as it is for the educator to effectively implement such a system.
In the book, “Supporting Grade 5-8 Students in Constructing Explanations in Science” (McNeill & Krajcik, 2012), the framework for discussion and writing via argumentation is presented. The book defines scientific explanations in three parts.
The Claim: a conclusion to a question or problem.
Evidence: scientific data that supports the claim.
Reasoning: a justification that links the evidence to the claim (use scientific principles to make that claim.)
McNeill & Krajcik contend the use of scientific explanations produce help students understand science concepts, develop 21st century skills, use evidence to support claims, reason logically, consider and critique alternative explanations and understand the nature of science (7). The claim is the easiest item for students to include in their writing. It is a broad contention stating what occurred during the experiment. The claim is “a statement that expresses the answer or conclusion to a question or problem” (22). Next, the evidence is the data supporting the claim. Finally, the reasoning, the most difficult for students to comprehend, justifies the links between the evidence and the claim.
“The reasoning explains why the evidence supports the claim, providing a logical connection between the evidence and the claim.” (24).
Implementing science explanations are increasingly recommended by literature and curriculum standards. Successful implementation is equally as important (Nam, et al. 2010). McNeill & Krajcik present a framework for such a process. They outline the difficulties educators should expect along the way, specifically what challenges students will encounter when developing higher-order thinking skills. The book also provides case studies and video evidence demonstrating teachers both presenting the initial discussion as to the foundations of scientific explanations and further advancement of the concept. It provides student examples showing advancement throughout the year.
First, the teacher should discuss the framework of claim, evidence and reasoning using everyday examples. One teacher featured claimed she could be an NFL quarterback. Her evidence was she had watched several games, thrown a football and understands the rules. She reasoned her evidence by saying prominent quarterbacks had also done the same thing. Next, the class should critique the strengths and weaknesses of the evidence and provide feedback through confirmation or rebuttal. Finally, after a class debate, the each student should contribute to a consensus final big idea explaining the phenomena and answering the overarching scientific question.
This book can act as professional development with actual, in-class teaching examples implementing scientific explanations and arguments in the classroom. At the least it encourages teachers and teachers-in-training to use these methods. But most effectively, it synthesizes research, in relation with the above journal article, promoting the process of argumentation (claim, evidence and reasoning) in science classrooms for the cognitive benefit of mid-level students.
Works Cited
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.
McNeil, K. L., Krajcik, J. S. (2012). Supporting Grade 5-8 Students in Constructing Explanations in Science. Boston: Pearson.
