Effect of Dialogic Argumentation on Grade Eight Students Eepistemic Knowledge of Science: A Mixed Methods Design
No Thumbnail Available
Date
2020-12
Authors
Journal Title
Journal ISSN
Volume Title
Publisher
AAU
Abstract
This dissertation aims to explore the effect of dialogic argumentation on grade
8 students' epistemic knowledge of science in physics learning and to identify the practices
and challenges faced to promote epistemic knowledge through dialogic argumentation. The
study used a mixed methods experimental design research approach where a quasi experimental design was employed to compare experimental, and control groups' epistemic
knowledge of science and a collective case study design was employed to identify teachers'
challenges in promoting students' epistemic knowledge in argumentation lessons. Fourteen
classrooms were randomly selected from twelve schools and assigned to intervention (239
students from seven classrooms) and control (240 students from seven classrooms) groups. A
pre-intervention physics reasoning test was administered to both groups and small group
classroom discussions were video recorded. Then, physics teachers in the intervention group
had trained for three days about dialogic argumentation and its implementation. In addition,
Talking Physics Students Activities manual, that contains fifty-two argumenattives physics
activities were distributed and used in a yearlong dialogic argumentation intervention. Post intervention data were obtained from a physics reasoning test administered to both groups,
video records of small group classroom discussions from both groups and whole-class
teaching and audio records of teacher interviews from intervention group. The test scores and
the quantized qualitative data of small group discussions were analyzed using inferential
statistics. Video data of classroom teaching were quantitized using quantitative ethnography
and analyzed using epistemic network analysis. Teachers interviews were also qualitatively
analyzed using a thematic analysis. Mann-Whitney U test results indicated that the post-test iv
scores of grade 8 students in the argumentaion lessons significantly increased in their level of
epistemic knowledge compared to the non-argumentation groups, z = - 4.509, p = .000, and r
= .21, but not in the pre-test scores, z = - 1.038 and p = .299. However, both pre- and post test scores of both groups were relatively low. The intervention groups showed significant
improvements in the quality of their argumentation on the ASAC scale, z = 2.111, p = .035,
and r = .56, but not the control groups, z = 1.068 and p = .285. The epistemic network
analysis of the wholeclass teaching in the intervention group showed weak and less frequent
connections epistemic aims, epistemic processes of construction, justification, and evaluation
of knowledge. The study found evidence that argumentation-based lessons improved both the
epistemic knowledge and the quality of dialogic argumentations of grade 8 students and that
students' level of epistemic knowledge and the quality of their dialogic argumentations were
strongly correlated. However, teachers had failed to teach argumentation as an epistemic
practice. To make a better use of dialogic argumentation, therefore, well-thought-out and
research-supported training needs to be given to science teachers as part of their continuous
professional development. Future studies are necessary to address the effects of such
trainings and to determine if there are other hidden factors, apart from teachers' inadequacy,
that affect students' epistemic knowledge of science.