From recognition to critical evaluation: Effects of a professional development strategy on scientific argumentation in higher education
Main Article Content
Keywords
Scientific argumentation, Toulmin, Formative assessment, Higher education, Teacher professional development
Abstract
This study reports the results of a professional development strategy aimed at strengthening university instructors’ ability to evaluate and provide feedback on scientific argumentation. Five science faculty members participated in a three-module process involving reflective essays, the design of argumentative activities, and the administration of the PCK-A instrument. The analysis combined qualitative category coding with descriptive statistics. Findings reveal a gradual progression: the importance of classroom argumentation is first acknowledged, everyday situations are then reframed as scientific problems, and finally Toulmin’s argument structure is incorporated to deepen analysis and discussion, ultimately guiding decisions that integrate theory and practice. Improvements are evident in the use of evidence and in dialogic interactions, although challenges remain in articulating warrants and offering refutations when clear criteria are lacking. Making Toulmin’s structure explicit and applying component-based rubrics emerge as key steps to consolidating argumentative practice and turning identified weaknesses into opportunities for improvement.
References
Briceño-Martínez, J. J. (2013). La argumentación y la reflexión en los procesos de mejora de los profesores universitarios colombianos de ciencia en activo: aplicación de estrategias formativas sobre ciencia, aprendizaje y enseñanza [Tesis doctoral]. Universidad de Granada.
Briceño-Martínez, J. J., & Benarroch, A. (2012). Concepciones y creencias sobre ciencia, aprendizaje y enseñanza de profesores universitarios de ciencias. REIEC, 8(1), 24– 41. https://doi.org/10.54343/reiec.v8i1.122
Bricker, L. A., & Bell, P. (2008). Conceptualizations of argumentation from science studies and the learning sciences and their implications for the practices of science education. Science Education, 92(3), 473–498. https:// doi.org/10.1002/sce.20278
Cabrera Lanzo, N., Guàrdia Ortiz, L., & Sangrà, A. (2022). Desarrollo profesional de docentes universitarios en línea: un análisis desde las ecologías de aprendizaje. Educar, 58(2), 321–336. https://doi.org/10.5565/rev/ educar.1528
Chai, C. S., Koh, J. H. L., & Tsai, C.-C. (2013). A review of technological pedagogical content knowledge. Educational Technology & Society, 16(2), 31–51. https://www.jstor.org/ stable/jeductechsoci.16.2.31
Chen, Y.-C., Benus, M. J., & Hernandez, J. (2019). Managing uncertainty in scientific argumentation. Science Education, 103(5), 1235–1276. https://doi.org/10.1002/ sce.21527
Corbin, J. & Strauss, A. (2008). Fundamentos de la investigación cualitativa: Técnicas y procedimientos para el desarrollo de la teoría fundamentada (3.ª ed.). Sage Publications, Inc. https://doi. org/10.4135/9781452230153
Darling-Hammond, L., Hyler, M. E., & Gardner, M. (2017). Effective teacher professional development. Learning Policy Institute. https://learningpolicyinstitute.org/ product/effective-teacher-professionaldevelopment-report
Driver, R., Newton, P., & Osborne, J. (2000). Establishing the norms of scientific argumentation in classrooms. Science Education, 84(3), 287–312. https://doi.org/10.1002/(SICI)1098- 237X(200005)84:33.0.CO;2-A
Erduran, S., & Jiménez-Aleixandre, M. P. (Eds.). (2007). Argumentation in science education: Perspectives from classroombased research. Springer. https://doi. org/10.1007/978-1-4020-6670-2
Erduran, S., Ozdem, Y., & Park, J. Y. (2015). Research trends on argumentation in science education: A journal content analysis from 1998–2014. International Journal of STEM Education, 2(1). https:// doi.org/10.1186/s40594-015-0020-1
Erduran, S., Simon, S., & Osborne, J. (2004). TAPping into argumentation: Developments in the use of Toulmin’s Argument Pattern in studying science discourse. Science Education, 88(6), 915–933. https://doi. org/10.1002/sce.20012
Felton, M., Levin, D. M., De La Paz, S., & Butler, C. (2022). Scientific argumentation and responsive teaching: Using dialog to teach science in three middle-school classrooms. Science Education, 106(6), 1354–1374. https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.21740
Fishman, E. J., Borko, H., Osborne, J., Gomez, F., Rafanelli, S., Reigh, E., Tseng, A., Million, S., & Berson, E. (2017). A practice based professional development program to support scientific argumentation from evidence in the elementary classroom. Journal of Science Teacher Education, 28(3), 222–249. https://doi.org/10.1080/10 46560X.2017.1302727
Gibbs, G., & Coffey, M. (2004). The impact of training of university teachers on their teaching skills, their approach to teaching and the approach to learning of their students. Active Learning in Higher Education, 5(1), 87–100. https://doi. org/10.1177/1469787404040463
González-Howard, M., & McNeill, K. L. (2019). Teachers’ framing of argumentation goals: Working together to develop individual versus communal understanding. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 56(6), 821–844. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.21530
Gray, R., & Kang, N. H. (2014). The structure of scientific arguments by secondary science teachers: Comparison of experimental and historical science topics. International Journal of Science Education, 36(1), 46– 65. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500693.2012 .715779
Hattie, J., & Timperley, H. (2007). The power of feedback. Review of Educational Research, 77(1), 81–112. https://doi. org/10.3102/003465430298487
Jiménez-Aleixandre, M. P., & Díaz, J. (2003). Discurso de aula y argumentación en la clase de ciencias: cuestiones teóricas y metodológicas. Investigación Didáctica, 21(3), 359–370. http://hdl.handle. net/10347/20698
Jiménez-Aleixandre, M. P., & Erduran, S. (2007). Argumentation in science education: An overview. En S. Erduran & M. P. JiménezAleixandre (Eds.), Argumentation in Science Education: Perspectives from Classroom-Based Research (pp. 3–27). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1- 4020-6670-2_1
Kelly, G. J., & Takao, A. (2002). Epistemic levels in argument: An analysis of university oceanography students’ use of evidence in writing. Science Education, 86(3), 314–342. https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.10024
Kim, S., & Hand, B. (2015). An analysis of argumentation discourse patterns in elementary teachers’ science classroom discussions. Journal of Science Teacher Education, 26(3), 221–236. https://doi. org/10.1007/s10972-014-9416-x
Knight, P. (2002). Being a Teacher in Higher Education. McGraw-Hill Education.
Article Sidebar
Article Details
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.
Authors will keep their copyright and guarantee the journal the right of first publication of their work, which will be simultaneously subject to the Creative Commons Recognition License that allows third parties to share the work whenever its author is indicated and his first publication this magazine.
Revista Boletín Redipe by Red Iberoamericana de Pedagogía is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
Alejandra Martinez-Morales, Antonio Nariño University, Bogotá, Colombia
PhD candidate in Education, Antonio Nariño University. Professor of Natural Sciences-Physics, Government of Cundinamarca.
Milany Gómez Betancur, Antonio Nariño University, Bogotá, Colombia
PhD in Political Marketing, Actors and Institutions in Contemporary Societies. Professor at the Faculty of Education, Antonio Nariño University.