INTERDISCIPLINARY JOURNAL OF ENVIRONMENTAL AND SCIENCE EDUCATION
Research Article

The Effect of Argumentation-Based Science Teaching Approach on 8th Graders’ Learning in the Subject of Acids-Bases, their Attitudes towards Science Class and Scientific Process Skills

Interdisciplinary Journal of Environmental and Science Education, 2020, 16(1), e02207, https://doi.org/10.29333/ijese/6369
Full Text (PDF)

ABSTRACT

Studies show that there are difficulties in learning the subject of acids and bases. For this reason, in the scope of the study, case studies which use daily life context are used to help students to establish the relation between acid-bases and daily life. In the content of the study, it was aimed to provide hands-on learning opportunities with performing experiments in the laboratory. It was thought that argument based science learning supported with authentic case studies would facilitate the students to learn the concepts of acid and base and support the development of their scientific process skills. The study aimed to investigate the effect of argumentation-based science teaching approach on 8th graders’ learning of the subject of acids and bases, their attitudes towards science class and their scientific process skills. The sample of the study consisted of 69 8th grade students from two different classes attending Science and Technology Course at a government school. The quasi-experimental research design which is one of the quantitative research designs was used in the content of the study. The experimental group was taught through Argumentation Based Science Learning Approach and the control group was taught through didactic teaching approach. The academic achievement test for the subject of acids and bases, Science Class Attitude Scale and Science Process Skills test were administered as pre-test prior to the application and post test following to the application. The results revealed that the argumentation based science teaching approach was more effective than the didactic teaching approach while learning the subject of acids and bases. The findings displayed that the academic achievement of the students taught with argumentation based approach was higher than the ones taught with didactic teaching approach. The findings of the study displayed that the Argumentation Based Science Learning Effect had no significant effect on students’ attitudes towards science class. But the approach had a significant effect on students’ science process skills.

KEYWORDS

learning acid-bases argumentation based science learning science process skills science class attitude

CITATION (APA)

Ural, E., & Gençoğlan, D. M. (2020). The Effect of Argumentation-Based Science Teaching Approach on 8th Graders’ Learning in the Subject of Acids-Bases, their Attitudes towards Science Class and Scientific Process Skills. Interdisciplinary Journal of Environmental and Science Education, 16(1), e02207. https://doi.org/10.29333/ijese/6369
Harvard
Ural, E., and Gençoğlan, D. M. (2020). The Effect of Argumentation-Based Science Teaching Approach on 8th Graders’ Learning in the Subject of Acids-Bases, their Attitudes towards Science Class and Scientific Process Skills. Interdisciplinary Journal of Environmental and Science Education, 16(1), e02207. https://doi.org/10.29333/ijese/6369
Vancouver
Ural E, Gençoğlan DM. The Effect of Argumentation-Based Science Teaching Approach on 8th Graders’ Learning in the Subject of Acids-Bases, their Attitudes towards Science Class and Scientific Process Skills. INTERDISCIP J ENV SCI ED. 2020;16(1):e02207. https://doi.org/10.29333/ijese/6369
AMA
Ural E, Gençoğlan DM. The Effect of Argumentation-Based Science Teaching Approach on 8th Graders’ Learning in the Subject of Acids-Bases, their Attitudes towards Science Class and Scientific Process Skills. INTERDISCIP J ENV SCI ED. 2020;16(1), e02207. https://doi.org/10.29333/ijese/6369
Chicago
Ural, Evrim, and Durdu Mehmet Gençoğlan. "The Effect of Argumentation-Based Science Teaching Approach on 8th Graders’ Learning in the Subject of Acids-Bases, their Attitudes towards Science Class and Scientific Process Skills". Interdisciplinary Journal of Environmental and Science Education 2020 16 no. 1 (2020): e02207. https://doi.org/10.29333/ijese/6369
MLA
Ural, Evrim et al. "The Effect of Argumentation-Based Science Teaching Approach on 8th Graders’ Learning in the Subject of Acids-Bases, their Attitudes towards Science Class and Scientific Process Skills". Interdisciplinary Journal of Environmental and Science Education, vol. 16, no. 1, 2020, e02207. https://doi.org/10.29333/ijese/6369

REFERENCES

  1. Aikenhead, G. (2001). Integrating western and aboriginal sciences: Cross-cultural science teaching. Research in Science Teaching, 31, 337-355. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1013151709605
  2. Akkus, R., Gunel, M., & Hand, B. (2007). Comparing an inquiry-based approach known as the science writing heuristic to traditional science teaching practices: Are there differences? International Journal of Science Education, 1, 1-21.
  3. Artdej, R., Ratanaroutai, T., Coll, R. K., & Thongpanchang, T. (2010). Thai grade 11 students’ alternative conceptions for acid–base chemistry. Research in Science & Technological Education, 28(2), 167-183. https://doi.org/10.1080/02635141003748382
  4. Aydeniz, M., Pabuççu, A., Çetin, P. S., & Kaya, E. (2012). Argumentation and Students’ conceptual understanding of properties and behaviors of gases. International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 10, 1303-1324. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10763-012-9336-1
  5. Aydoğdu, B., Yıldız, E., Akpınar, E., & Ergin, Ö. (2006). İlköğretim Öğrencilerinin Bilimsel Süreç Becerilerini Etkileyen Değişkenler. Eğitimde Çağdaş Yönelimler III Yapılandırmacılık Ve Eğitime Yansımaları Sempozyumu, 182-185.
  6. Berland, L., & McNeill, K. L. (2010). A learning progression for scientific argumentation: Understanding student work and designing supportive instructional contexts. Science Education, 94(5), 765-793. https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.20402
  7. Bradley. J. D., & Mosimege, M. D. (1998). Misconceptions in acids & bases: A comparative study of student teachers with different chemistry backgrounds. South African Journal of Chemistry, 51, 137-155.
  8. Burke, K. A., Greenbowe, T. J., & Hand, B. M. (2005). Excerpts from the process of using inquiry and the science writing heuristic (Doctoral Dissertation). Prepared for the Middle Atlantic Discovery Chemistry Program, MoravianCollege, Bethlehem.
  9. Çetin, P. S. (2014). Explicit argumentation instruction to facilitate conceptual understanding and argumentation skills. Research in Science & Technological Education, 32(1), 1-20. https://doi.org/10.1080/02635143.2013.850071
  10. Çetingül, P. İ., & Geban, Ö. (2005). Understanding of acid-Base concept by using conceptual change approach. Hacettepe University Journal of Education, 29, 69-74.
  11. Chang, C., & Weng, Y. (2000). Exploring interrelationship between problem-solving ability and science process skills of tenth-grade earth science students in Taiwan. Chinese Journal of Science Education, 8(1), 35-56.
  12. Cross, D., Taasoobshirazi, G., Hendricks, S., & Hickey, D., T. (2008). Argumentation: A strategy for improving achievement and revealing scientific identities. International Journal of Science Education, 30(6), 837-861. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500690701411567
  13. Demirbağ, M., & Günel, M. (2014). Integrating argument-based science inquiry with modal representations: Impact on science achievement, argumentation, and writing skills. Educational Sciences: Theory & Practice, 14(1), 386-391. https://doi.org/10.12738/estp.2014.1.1632
  14. Demircioğlu, G., Ayas, A., & Demicioğlu, H. (2005). Conceptual change achieved through a new teaching program on acids and bases. Chemistry Education Research and Practice, 6(1), 36-51. https://doi.org/10.1039/B4RP90003K
  15. Demircioğlu, G., Özmen, H., & Ayas, A. (2004). Some misconceptions encountered in chemistry: A research on acid and base. Educational Sciences: Theory & Practice, 4(1), 73-80.
  16. Driver, R. H., Asoko, J., Leach, E., Mortimer, P., & Scott, P. (1994). Constructing scientific knowledge in the classroom. Educational Researcher, 23, 5-12. https://doi.org/10.3102/0013189X023007005
  17. Driver, R., Newton, P., & Osborne, J. (2000). Establishing the norms of scientific argumentation in classrooms. Science Education, 84, 287-312. https://doi.org/10.1002/(SICI)1098-237X(200005)84:3<287::AID-SCE1>3.0.CO;2-A
  18. Duschl, R., & Osborne, J. (2002). Supporting and promoting argumentation discourse. Studies in Science Education, 38, 39-72. https://doi.org/10.1080/03057260208560187
  19. Erduran, S., Simon, S., & Osborne, J. (2004). TAPping into Argumentation: Developments in the application of Toulmin’s argument pattern for studying science discourse. Science Education, 88(6), 915-933. https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.20012
  20. Flores, G. S. (2000). Teaching and assessing science process skills in physics: The “Bubbles” task. Science Activities, 37(1), 31-37. https://doi.org/10.1080/00368120009603556
  21. Gultepe, N., & Kılıç, Z. (2015). Effect of scientific argumentation on the development of scientific process skills in the context of teaching chemistry. International Journal of Environmental & Science Education, 10(1), 111-132. https://doi.org/10.1037/t51058-000
  22. Jime´nez-Aleixandre, M.P., & Pereiro-Munhoz, C. (2002). Knowledge producers or knowledge consumers? Argumentation and decision making about environmental management. International Journal of Science Education, 24, 1171-1190. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500690210134857
  23. Jimenez-Aleixandre, M. P., Rodriguez, A. B., & Duschl, R. A. (2000). “Doing the lesson” or “Doing science”: Argument in high school genetics. Science Education, 84(6), 757-792. https://doi.org/10.1002/1098-237X(200011)84:6<757::AID-SCE5>3.0.CO;2-F
  24. Kala, N., Yaman, F., & Ayas, A. (2013). The effectiveness of predict-observe-explain technique in probing students’ understanding about acid-base chemistry: A case forthe concepts of pH, pOH, and strenght. International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 11, 555-574. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10763-012-9354-z
  25. Karadeniz Bayrak, B. (2013). Using two-tier test to identify primary students’ conceptual understanding and alternative conceptions in acid base. Mevlana International Journal of Education (MIJE), 3(2), 19-26. https://doi.org/10.13054/mije.13.21.3.2
  26. Karpudewan, M., Roth, W., M., & Sinniah, D. (2016). The role of green chemistry activities in fostering secondary school students’ understanding of acid-base concepts and argumentation skills. Chemistry Education Research and Practice, 17, 893-901. https://doi.org/10.1039/C6RP00079G
  27. Kaya, E. (2013) Argumentation practices in classroom: Pre-service teachers’ conceptual understanding of chemical equilibrium. International Journal of Science Education, 35(7), 1139-1158. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500693.2013.770935
  28. Kelly, G. J., Drucker, S., & Chen, C. (1998). Students’ reasoning about electricity: Combining performance assessments with argumentation analysis. International Journal of Science Education, 20, 849-871. https://doi.org/10.1080/0950069980200707
  29. Keys, C. W. (2000). Investigating the thinking processes of eighth grade writers during the composition of a scientific laboratory report. Journal of Research in ScienceTeaching, 37(7), 676-690. https://doi.org/10.1002/1098-2736(200009)37:7<676::AID-TEA4>3.0.CO;2-6
  30. Keys, C. W., Hand, B., Prain, V., Collins, S. 1999. Using the science writing heuristic as a tool for learning from laboratory investigations in secondary science. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 36(10),1065-1084. https://doi.org/10.1002/(SICI)1098-2736(199912)36:10<1065::AID-TEA2>3.0.CO;2-I
  31. Kılınç, A. (2014). İşbirlikli Öğrenme Yönteminin (Jigsaw Tekniği) Asitler ve Bazlar Konusunda Öğrenci Başarısına Etkisi ve Öğrenci Görüşleri (Masters Thesis). Gazi Üniversitesi Eğitim Bilimleri Enstitüsü. Ankara.
  32. Kousathana, M., Demerouti, M., & Tsaparlis, G. (2005). Instructional misconceptions in ccid-base equilibria: An analysis from a history and philosophy of science perspective. Science & Education, 14, 173-193. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11191-005-5719-9
  33. Lawson, A. E. (2003). The nature and development of hypothetico-predictive argumentation with implications for science teaching. International Journal of Science Education, 25, 1387-1408. https://doi.org/10.1080/0950069032000052117
  34. Leach, J. (1999). Students’ understanding of the co-ordination of theory and evidence in science. International Journal of Science Education, 21, 789-806. https://doi.org/10.1080/095006999290291
  35. Mason, L. (1996). An analysis of children’s construction of new knowledge through their use of reasoning and arguing in classroom discussions. Qualitative Studies in Education, 9, 411-433. https://doi.org/10.1080/0951839960090404
  36. MEB (2018). Fen Bilimleri Dersi Öğretim Programı. Retrieved on 27 November 2018 from http://mufredat.meb.gov.tr/Dosyalar/201812312311937-FEN%20BİLİMLERİ%20ÖĞRETİM%20PROGRAMI2018.pdf
  37. Meriç G. (2014). Fen ve Teknoloji Dersinde Kavram Karikatürlerinin Öğrencilerin Kavramsal Anlama, Motivasyon ve Tutum Düzeyleri Üzerine Etkisi (Masters Thesis). Celal Bayar Üniversitesi Fen Bilimleri Enstitüsü. Manisa.
  38. Newton, P., Driver, R., & Osborne, J. (1999). The place of argumentation in the pedagogy of school science. International Journal of Science Education, 21, 553-576. https://doi.org/10.1080/095006999290570
  39. Nussbaum, M., & Sinatra, G. (2003). Argument and conceptual engagement. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 28, 384-395. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0361-476X(02)00038-3
  40. Osborne, J., Erduran, S., & Simon, S. (2004). Enhancing the quality of argumentation in school science. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 41(10), 994-1020. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.20035
  41. Patronis, T., Potari, D., & Spiliotopoulou, V. (1999). Students’ argumentation in decision-making on a socio-scientific issue: Implications for teaching. International Journal of Science Education, 21(7), 745-754. https://doi.org/10.1080/095006999290408
  42. Ross. B. & Munby. H. (1991). Concept mapping and misconceptions: A study of high school students’ understanding of acids & bases. International Journal of Science Education, 13, 11-24. https://doi.org/10.1080/0950069910130102
  43. Sampson, V., & Walker, J., P. (2012). Argument-driven inquiry as a way to help undergraduate students write to learn by learning to write in chemistry. International Journal of Science Education, 34(10), 1443-1485. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500693.2012.667581
  44. Şaşmaz-Ören F., Tezcan R., 2009. İlköğretim 7. Sınıf Fen Bilgisi Dersinde Öğrenme Halkası Yaklaşımının Öğrencilerin Tutumları Üzerine Etkisi. Elementary Education Online, 8(1), 103-118.
  45. Schafersman, S. D. (1991). An introduction to critical thinking. Retrieved from http://smartcollegeplanning.org/wp-content/uploads/2010/03/Critical-Thinking.pdf
  46. Schmidt, H. J. (1995). Applying the concept of conjugation to the Bronsted theory of acid–base reactions by senior high school students from Germany. International Journal of Science Education, 17, 733-742. https://doi.org/10.1080/0950069950170605
  47. Schwarz, B., Neumann, Y., Gil, J., & Ilya, M. (2003). Construction of collective and individual knowledge in argumentative activity. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 12, 219-256. https://doi.org/10.1207/S15327809JLS1202_3
  48. Sheppard, K. (2006). High school students’ understanding of titrations and related acid–base phenomena. Chemistry Education: Research and Practice, 7, 32-45. https://doi.org/10.1039/B5RP90014J
  49. Suppe, F. (1998). The structure of a scientific paper. Philosophy of Science, 65, 381-405. https://doi.org/10.1086/392651
  50. Tarhan, L., & Acar Sesen, B. (2012). Jigsaw cooperative learning: Acid–base theories. Chemistry Education Research and Practice, 13, 307-313. https://doi.org/10.1039/C2RP90004A
  51. Turpin, T., & Cage, B. N. (2004). The effects of an integrated activity-based science curriculum on student achievement, science process skills and science attitudes. Electronic Journal of Literacy Through Science, 3, 1-15.
  52. Tuysuz, C., Demirel, O., E., & Yildirim, B. (2013). Investigating the effects of argumentation, problem, and laboratory-based instruction approach on pre-service teachers’ achievement concerning the concept of “acid and base”. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences, 93, 1376-1381. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2013.10.047
  53. Von Aufschnaiter, C., Erduran, S., Osborne, J., & Simon, S. (2008). Arguing to Learn and Learning to Argue: Case Studies of How Students’ Argumentation Relates to Their Scientific Knowledge Claudia von Aufschnaiter. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 45(1), 101-131. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.20213
  54. Yore, D. L. (2000). Enhancing science literacy for all students with embed reading instruction and writing to learn activities. Journal of Deaf Studies and Deaf Education, 5(1), 105-122. https://doi.org/10.1093/deafed/5.1.105
  55. Zohar, A., & Nemet, F. (2002). Fostering students’ knowledge and argumentation skills through dilemmas in human genetics. Journal of research in science teaching, 39(1), 35-62. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.10008

LICENSE

Creative Commons License
This is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.