ABSTRACT

Students’ difficulties in scientific argumentation have been widely reported in the literature. Researchers argue that these difficulties result mainly from students’ lack of understanding of the goals and norms of argumentation. Therefore, designing and implementing appropriate instructional scaffolds to facilitate such essential knowledge of argumentation holds pedagogical significance. In this qualitative case study, two kinds of argument-focused metacognitive scaffolds (AMS) – questioning and prompting, and modelling of thinking – were designed and integrated into an elementary science classroom. One science teacher and her 19 students participated in this case study. To explore the pedagogical contributions of AMS, data were collected from multiple sources including classroom observation, interviews with students, and students’ works. AMS in this study supported students to engage in argumentation reflectively, as these scaffolds facilitated the development of students’ understanding of the goals and evidence-related norms of argumentation and abilities of metacognitive monitoring during argumentation. These influences were also recognised and appreciated by students. When AMS gradually reduced, students’ knowledge of argumentation and abilities of metacognitive monitoring were retained and affected how they performed argumentation in new contexts. Pedagogical implications of these findings are discussed.

摘要

学生在科学论证方面的困难已在文献中广泛报道。研究人员认为，这些困难主要是由于学生缺乏对论证目标和规范的理解。因此，设计和实施适当的教学支架以促进这种基本的论证知识具有教学意义。在这个定性案例研究中，设计了两种以论证为中心的元认知支架 (AMS) - 提问和提示，以及思维建模 - 并被整合到基础科学课堂中。一位科学老师和她的 19 名学生参加了这个案例研究。为了探索 AMS 的教学贡献，我们从多个来源收集了数据，包括课堂观察、学生访谈和学生作品。本研究中的 AMS 支持学生反思性地进行辩论，因为这些支架促进了学生对辩论目标和证据相关规范的理解以及在辩论过程中元认知监控能力的发展。这些影响也得到了学生的认可和赞赏。当AMS逐渐减少时，学生的议论文知识和元认知监控能力得以保留，并影响他们在新语境下进行议论文的方式。讨论了这些发现的教学意义。这些影响也得到了学生的认可和赞赏。当AMS逐渐减少时，学生的议论文知识和元认知监控能力得以保留，并影响他们在新语境下进行议论文的方式。讨论了这些发现的教学意义。这些影响也得到了学生的认可和赞赏。当AMS逐渐减少时，学生的议论文知识和元认知监控能力得以保留，并影响他们在新语境下进行议论文的方式。讨论了这些发现的教学意义。