ABSTRACT

The paper examines how science teachers’ instructional adaptations to Toulmin’s Argumentation Pattern (TAP), made during the first time the framework is introduced to students as a learning heuristic for structuring their arguments, could contribute to the way the quality of students’ arguments is evaluated. We first depict these adaptations, that mainly refer to the way each component of TAP was defined to students; the sequence one may choose to follow in order to express these components; and the specific argumentative indicators that may be used. We then analyze a number of students’ written arguments in two ways. First we use Toulmin’s own definitions of the components, with the help of argumentative indicators, which is an analytical method often utilized in research studies in science education. Second, we compare and contrast this analysis with a supplementary analysis that mainly uses, as coding categories, the teachers’ adapted definitions of the TAP’s components. The findings of the study suggest that, an awareness of the adaptations that science teachers make to TAP during the first time it is introduced to students seems to improve the trustworthiness of the analysis of students’ work and of their learning outcomes.

摘要

本文研究了理科教师如何针对Toulmin的论证模式（TAP）进行适应性调整，该框架是在框架首次引入学生时作为一种学习启发式方法来构建他们的论证，从而有助于评估学生论证的质量。我们首先描述这些改编，这些改编主要是指为学生定义TAP的每个组成部分的方式。为了表达这些成分，可以选择遵循的顺序；以及可以使用的特定论证指标。然后，我们以两种方式分析许多学生的书面论证。首先，在论证指标的帮助下，我们使用图尔明自己对成分的定义，这是科学教育研究中经常使用的一种分析方法。第二，我们将此分析与补充分析进行比较和对比，该补充分析主要使用教师对TAP组件的适应性定义作为编码类别。该研究结果表明，对理科老师在首次将TAP引入学生时对TAP进行的适应的认识，似乎可以提高对学生的工作和学习成果进行分析的可信度。