Exploring the effectiveness of an arguing-to-learn based strategy on learning science

Abstract

Argumentation is being seen as increasingly important in science lessons to develop students’ argumentation skills, reinforce their learning of science, and develop scientific literacy (Driver, Newton & Osborne, 2000). This study aims to investigate whether, and to what extent, students are able to use argumentation effectively in science class and what relation there is between argumentation and interest and achievement in science and epistemic beliefs. An intervention was carried out on 45 students in their first year of secondary school in an international school in Hong Kong. Students in the intervention class (n=22) were taught using an argumentation-based learning strategy; they were compared to a control class (n=23) who were taught using a standard textbook higher-order-thinking learning strategy. Three quantitative measures were used to compare cross group difference after a two-month intervention period. Results indicated that the training group did not show any significant change in their scores of the Epistemic Belief Inventory (EBI) or science term grades. However, they showed significant gains (p<.05) in their enjoyment of and confidence in science learning as measured by the Science Questionnaire (SQ). Two qualitative measures, namely one-to-one interview and online forum discussions were also used to gain understanding of students’ use of argumentation. Results of the current study suggest that these students were not able to use or trained to use argumentation in science to achieve significant improvement in science scores. However, the teaching of an argumentation-based strategy may at least improve their enjoyment and confidence towards science learning, which may in turn lead to long-term improved learning. Limitations of the current study will be discussed and further research will be suggested.