Argumentation enables students to engage in real world scientific practices by rationalizing claims grounded in supporting evidence. Student engagement in scientific argumentation activates the negotiation process by which students develop and defend evidence-based claims. Little is known, however, on the intricate process and potential patterns of negotiation between students during scientific argumentation. The present study seeks to fill this gap by exploring how a group of university science education students negotiated when evaluating the relationship between lines of evidence and alternative explanatory models of a phenomena (i.e., climate change). This research, theoretically grounded in social constructionism, used Halliday's model of Systemic Functional Linguistics (SFL) within a discourse analysis framework. The authors analyzed transcripts of student conversations during a model-evidence link activity to gain insights into patterns of negotiation. An interpersonal analysis centering on mood and moves revealed students' ability to engage in the negotiation component of scientific argumentation to make assertions about relations between evidence and models. Effective collaboration resulting in group consensus of the relationship (categorized as supports, strongly supports, or contradicts) was facilitated by the use of interrogatives, modulation, and a balanced contribution between group members. Conversely, negotiation which did not reach consensus featured less balanced discussion among group members, contained more interruptions, more conflict moves, and double polarity clauses.

中文翻译：

---

科学论证中的谈判：人际分析

论证使学生能够通过合理化基于支持证据的主张来参与现实世界的科学实践。学生参与科学论证会激活谈判过程，学生通过该过程发展和捍卫基于证据的主张。然而，人们对科学论证期间学生之间的复杂过程和潜在的谈判模式知之甚少。本研究试图通过探索一组大学科学教育学生在评估证据线与现象（即气候变化）的替代解释模型之间的关系时如何进行谈判来填补这一空白。这项研究在理论上以社会建构主义为基础，在话语分析框架内使用了韩礼德的系统功能语言学 (SFL) 模型。作者在模型证据链接活动中分析了学生对话的记录，以深入了解谈判模式。以情绪和动作为中心的人际关系分析揭示了学生参与科学论证的谈判部分以对证据和模型之间的关系做出断言的能力。通过使用疑问、调制和小组成员之间的平衡贡献，促进了有效协作，从而促成了群体对关系的共识（分类为支持、强烈支持或反对）。相反，未达成共识的谈判特点是小组成员之间的讨论不那么平衡，包含更多的中断、更多的冲突动作和双重极性条款。