Observing Primary School Pre-service Teachers’ Oral Argumentation in Science Writing Heuristic Implementation

This study provides information on primary school pre-service teachers’ (PST) oral argumentation in science writing heuristic (SWH) implementation. The study lasted six weeks and 34 PST participated in the study. Data were collected using the Assessment of Scientific Argumentation in Class (ASAC) observation protocol. Accordingly, PSTs were observed throughout the implementation and the ASAC protocol was filled each week. Content and constant comparative analysis yielded results about students’ oral argumentation. Results showed that participants’ oral argumentation improved with time. Next, ASAC aspects’ observation scores diverged and the scores for cognitive and epistemic aspects were higher than those for social aspects. The findings are discussed and implications are presented considering PST’s oral argumentation and the use of ASAC.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
e-Kafkas Eğitim Araştırmaları Dergisi
Published
2024-11-20
DOI
https://doi.org/10.30900/kafkasegt.1536299
Primary Topic
Science Education and Pedagogy
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Observing Primary School Pre-service Teachers’ Oral Argumentation in Science Writing Heuristic Implementation

Mehmet Şen, Berk Gümüş
e-Kafkas Eğitim Araştırmaları Dergisi
Science Education and Pedagogy
article

Observing Primary School Pre-service Teachers’ Oral Argumentation in Science Writing Heuristic Implementation

Mehmet Şen, Berk Gümüş
article en

Abstract

This study provides information on primary school pre-service teachers’ (PST) oral argumentation in science writing heuristic (SWH) implementation. The study lasted six weeks and 34 PST participated in the study. Data were collected using the Assessment of Scientific Argumentation in Class (ASAC) observation protocol. Accordingly, PSTs were observed throughout the implementation and the ASAC protocol was filled each week. Content and constant comparative analysis yielded results about students’ oral argumentation. Results showed that participants’ oral argumentation improved with time. Next, ASAC aspects’ observation scores diverged and the scores for cognitive and epistemic aspects were higher than those for social aspects. The findings are discussed and implications are presented considering PST’s oral argumentation and the use of ASAC.

e-Kafkas Eğitim Araştırmaları Dergisi
TED University (TR)
Quality Education
Openalex Percentile: Top 71%
Science Education and Pedagogy
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.