INTERDISCIPLINARY JOURNAL OF ENVIRONMENTAL AND SCIENCE EDUCATION

Keyword: scientific argument

2 results found.

Research Article
Developing the Structure of Junior High School Students’ Arguments about Ohm's Law
Interdisciplinary Journal of Environmental and Science Education, 2021, 17(4), e2256, https://doi.org/10.21601/ijese/11137
ABSTRACT: While students’ difficulties in constructing scientific arguments have been studied, research on developing the quality of students’ scientific arguments through the implementation of instructional interventions is limited. The present study aims to examine the effects of an instructional intervention for Ohm’s Law, which was designed on a teaching science as practices approach, on the development of the structure of students’ written scientific arguments. Instructional material was constructed for teaching Ohm’s Law and was implemented to 14-year-old students. The research data included students’ written answers (arguments) put down on worksheets during the instructional intervention, as well as students’ answers (arguments) to a questionnaire they were provided with before and after the instructional intervention. Data analysis showed that the instructional intervention contributed to developing the structure of students’ written scientific arguments. The study concludes with a discussion on the results and proposals for further research.
Research Article
Do Emotions, Nature Relatedness, and Conservation Concern Influence Students’ Evaluations of Arguments about Biodiversity Conservation?
Interdisciplinary Journal of Environmental and Science Education, 2021, 17(1), e2230, https://doi.org/10.29333/ijese/9157
ABSTRACT: Understanding human treatment towards nature provides insight into mitigating human induced environmental issues. This study determines whether individuals’ relationships with nature (NR), emotions experienced during evidence evaluation, and conservation concern drive evaluation of scientific arguments made about biodiversity conservation. Although we predicted that participants with strong NR would exhibit motivated reasoning, resulting in strong argument-evaluation skills as they evaluate an anti-conservation argument, we found that participants’ emotions during evidence evaluation were more predictive of their argument-evaluation skills. Further, participants with either low or high conservation concern demonstrated better argumentation skills. These findings suggest that while fostering strong relationships with nature may be important, of greater importance is to address emotions experienced when evaluating evidence. Furthermore, this study indicates a possibility that one’s reasoning about arguments made about biodiversity conservation may be motivated by how important one deems conservation to be.