Interactional patterns in argumentation discussions

Abstract

Recent science education reform documents and standards, such as the Next Generation Science Standards (NGSS), call for school science to better reflect authentic scientific endeavors by highlighting the centrality of students engaging in science practices. This dissertation study focuses specifically on argumentation (through the modality of talk), one of the eight science practices emphasized in the NGSS. Although extensively studied, argumentation rarely occurs in classrooms. The absence of this science practice in classrooms is partly due to the student-driven exchanges required by argumentation differing greatly from the interactions that occur during traditional instruction, where students primarily speak to and through the teacher. To transform the type of talk that occurs in science classrooms it is necessary to examine discourse patterns, as well as the roles classroom members take on, in order to identify and develop strategies that can facilitate the shift in discourse norms. This dissertation employs a mixed-methods approach, using social network analysis (SNA), multiple case study methodology, and discourse analysis (DA), to deeply examine video recordings of three middle school classrooms engaged in argumentation through a science seminar (a type of whole class debate). Findings from the SNA highlight the importance of argumentation research integrating a focus on argument structure with dialogic interactions, and point to the benefits of using multiple types of representations to capture engagement in this science practice. Furthermore, examining the manner by which teachers articulated student expectations and goals for the argumentation activity suggest the need to continue supporting teachers in developing and using rich instructional strategies to help students with the dialogic component of argumentation. Additionally, this work sheds light on the importance of how teachers frame the goals for student engagement in this science practice, specifically as being either individual goals or communal goals. Lastly, findings from the DA stress the relationship between discourse patterns and interactional norms, and also suggest the need to expand our perspectives of who can prompt for critique during an argumentation activity.