A case study of scientific reasoning

Concern is increasingly being expressed about the teaching of higher order thinking skills in schools and the levels of understanding of scientific concepts by students. Metaphors for the improvement of science education have included science as exploration and science as process skills for experimentation. As a result of a series of studies on how children relate evidence to their theories or beliefs, Kuhn (1993a) has suggested that changing the metaphor to science as argument may be a fruitful way to increase the development of higher order thinking skills and understanding in science instruction. This report is of a case study into the coordination of evidence and theories by a grade 7 primary school student. This student was not able to coordinate these elements in a way that would enable her to rationally consider evidence in relation to her theories. It appeared that the thinking skills associated with science as argument were similar for her in different domains of knowledge and context. Specializations: science learning, scientific reasoning, learning environments, science teacher education. Specializations: cognition, reasoning in science and mathermatics.     

Associations of epistemic beliefs in science and scientific reasoning in university students from Taiwan and India

The purpose of this study was to compare the associations of epistemic beliefs in science, performance of scientific reasoning in university students from Taiwan and India, and the relations with their science learning experiences. A total of 126 university students including 67 from Taiwan and 59 from India who had science and mathematics backgrounds were involved in the study. Students’ epistemic beliefs in science were assessed by the SEV questionnaire, while their reasoning performance and learning experiences were prompted by open-ended questions and survey items. Content analysis was performed to analyze their scientific reasoning, and correlation analysis, t tests and ANOVA were applied to reveal the associations between variables. The results showed that students from both countries differed in epistemic beliefs in the dimensions of certainty, development and justification. While few students from either country performed successfully in identifying genuine evidence and giving full rebuttals, Taiwanese participants seemed to demonstrate slightly better scientific reasoning. It was found that the Indian students were more balanced in receiving structured and engaged learning experiences. Varying associations for the students from the different countries were found between epistemic beliefs and scientific reasoning performance, and between epistemic beliefs and science learning experiences.     

Individual differences in the analysis of informal reasoning fallacies

After decades of research into formal or logical fallacies of reasoning, psychologists have only recently begun to examine the informal reasoning fallacies that are routinely present in critical discussions, debates, and other forms of argumentation. The present study considers several possible influences on an ability to identify and analyze these fallacies. College students completed measures of deductive reasoning, personal epistemology, and knowledge of specific argumentation norms and analyzed arguments containing fallacies such as argument from ignorance, begging the question, and slippery slope. Results indicated that effective analysis of informal fallacies was associated with some aspects of deductive reasoning—especially an ability to overcome belief bias—and with higher-order epistemic beliefs, as well as a commitment to argumentation norms for critical discussion. Results are discussed in terms of argumentation research and implications for pedagogical treatments of the fallacies are noted.     

Translation of representations of the structure of matter and its relationship to reasoning,gender, spatial reasoning,and specific prior knowledge

The purpose of this study was to characterize high school chemistry students' ability to make translations between three representations of the structure of matter, and to determine the degree to which the students' ability to make these translations is related to reasoning ability, spatial reasoning ability, gender, and specific knowledge of the representations. Translation between formula, electron configuration, and ball-and-stick model representations of matter were chosen for study because of their promise for adding to knowledge of students' conceptual ecology, and because they may be of practical use for teaching and evaluation in chemistry classrooms. Representations have the characteristic that they embed selected details of the relevant concept or principle, but permit other details to fade. As one example, the chemical formula for water, H₂O, explicitly conveys the identity of the constituent elements and their ratio, but does not explicitly convey the bond angle or whether the bonds are single or double. On the other hand, the ball-and-stick model of water explicitly conveys the bond angle and bond orders, but does not emphasize the ratio of the elements. Translation between representations is an information processing task, requiring understanding of the underlying concept to the extent that the individual can interpret the information provided by the initial representation and infer the details required to construct the target representation. In this study, the use of the translations of representations as an indicator of understanding of chemical concepts is developed in terms of (a) its relationship to four variables associated with achievement in chemistry, (b) specific representation error types, and (c) its utility in revealing details of students' conceptions and concept formation. Translation of representation performance was measured by administering, audio recording, transcribing, and scoring individual, task-based, think-aloud interviews. The associated interview schedule was entitled Translation of Representations—Structure of Matter [TORSOM]. Reasoning ability was measured by the Group Assessment of Logical Thinking—short form (GALT-s), spatial reasoning ability by the spatial reasoning subtest of the Differential Abilities Test (SRDAT), and prior knowledge of the representations by a test developed by the first researcher (Knowledge of Representations—Structure of Matter). When each of the hypothetical correlates were regressed on TORSOM individually, results indicated the KORSOM and GALT-s but not gender or SRDAT were statistically significant (alpha = .05). The two-predictor model accounts for 28% of the variance in the TORSOM scores. Representation error types are described and exemplified.     

Fostering conceptual change and critical reasoning about HIV and AIDS

One of the challenges of science education is for students to develop scientific knowledge that is personally meaningful and applicable to real‐life issues. This article describes a middle‐school science intervention fostering adolescents' critical reasoning in the context of HIV by strengthening their conceptual understanding of HIV biology. The intervention included two components: critical reasoning activities that fostered knowledge integration and application to real‐world problem solving, and science writing activities that promoted argument building. Two seventh‐grade classes participated in the study. One class participated in the critical reasoning and writing activities (CR&W); the other class participated in critical reasoning activities only (CR group). Results demonstrate significant pre‐ and posttest improvements on measures of students' HIV knowledge, HIV understanding, and critical reasoning about realistic scenarios in the context of HIV, with the improvements being greater in the CR&W group. The discussion focuses on the role of conceptual knowledge in health reasoning, the role of science writing in fostering knowledge integration, and the benefits of a “thinking curriculum” approach to integrated health and science education. © 2007 Wiley Periodicals, Inc. J Res Sci Teach 44: 844–863, 2007     

Epistemic beliefs about the value of integrating information across multiple documents in history

Individual differences in epistemic dispositions may affect learning from multiple-document inquiry tasks by prompting different students to have different task and activity models. Students with epistemic beliefs that are more appropriate for the required activities may view a multiple-document inquiry task as an exercise in corroboration, seeking coherence, and looking for evidence to support claims, whereas students with less-appropriate epistemic beliefs may see the goal as simply finding the “right” answer verbatim within the documents. This paper describes attempts to develop an assessment for this subset of epistemic beliefs about the value of engaging in integration of evidence when learning from multiple documents in history. Across three experiments, the measure was shown to be reliable and valid. It also uniquely predicted multiple-document comprehension in history above and beyond beliefs about the simplicity and certainty of knowledge, and accounted for differences in prior instruction and experience with document-based questions.     

Disentangling Robust Developmental Constraints From the Instructionally Mutable: Young Children's Epistemic Reasoning About a Study of Their Own Design

This study examines first graders' epistemic reasoning, in tacit “practical epistemologies” reflected in thinking about an investigation of their own design. I analyzed children's epistemic reasoning, following a design experiment scaffolding increasing regulation of scientific inquiry in a domain they studied in depth. Participants consisted of children in two first grade classes (n = 35). The study capitalizes on the final phase of the design experiment, wherein pairs assumed substantial responsibility for design and implementation of an investigation pursuing their own question. I conducted structured interviews with each pair, eliciting their thinking about their investigation. Forty-three percent of the children attributed uncertainty to their findings. Forty-nine percent transcended phenomenon-based reasoning in thinking about how to improve their study, reasoning instead in terms of relation between variables. Forty percent posited additional potentially influential variables, reflecting a tacit understanding of the lack of any straightforward one-to-one correspondence between cause and effect. These findings suggest that epistemic reasoning is plastic, sensitive to instructional opportunities. I argue that the children's relatively deep familiarity with the domain, experience in assuming increasing responsibility for structuring scientific inquiry, and investment they had in their own investigations contributed to the surprisingly robust epistemic reasoning they revealed in this context.     

Addressing Challenges to Public Understanding of Science: Epistemic Cognition,Motivated Reasoning,and Conceptual Change

Science is of critical importance to daily life in a knowledge society and has a significant influence on many everyday decisions. As scientific problems increase in their number and complexity, so do the challenges facing the public in understanding these issues. Our objective is to focus on 3 of those challenges: the challenge of reasoning about knowledge and the processes of knowing, the challenge of overcoming biases in that reasoning, and the challenge of overcoming misconceptions. We propose that research in epistemic cognition, motivated reasoning, and conceptual change can help to identify, understand, and address these obstacles for public understanding of science. We explain the contributions of each of these areas in providing insights into the public's understandings and misunderstandings about knowledge, the nature of science, and the content of science. We close with educational recommendations for promoting scientific literacy.     

Scientific reasoning during adolescence: The influence of instruction in science knowledge and reasoning strategies

The mechanism linking instruction in scientific topics and instruction in logical reasoning strategies is not well understood. This study assesses the role of science topic instruction combined with logical reasoning strategy instruction in teaching adolescent students about blood pressure problems. Logical reasoning instruction for this study emphasizes the controlling-variables strategy. Science topic instruction emphasizes variables affecting blood pressure. Subjects receiving logical reasoning instruction link their knowledge of blood pressure variables to their knowledge of controlling variables more effectively than those receiving science topic instruction alone—their specific responses show how they attempt to integrate their understanding.     

Motivated scientific reasoning biases, epistemological beliefs, and theory polarization: a two-process approach to adolescent cognition

Theory-motivated reasoning biases arise when different reasoning skills are invoked to evaluate evidence that is congruent or incongruent with individuals' belief systems. To explore this phenomenon, 66 early and 73 middle adolescents evaluated evidence relevant to their theories of social class or religion. In both conditions, reasoning biases were found, but in-group biases were evident only in the religion condition. In both conditions, higher order scientific reasoning was used to reject theory-incongruent evidence and judgmental heuristics (i.e., cognitive rules of thumb) were used to evaluate theory-congruent evidence. In both conditions, subsequent to the evidence presentation, adolescents' theories became more extreme (i.e., polarized) than at the outset of the experiment. Beliefs regarding the origin, acquisition, and certainty of knowledge, however, appeared to moderate reasoning biases and theory polarization. Age differences emerged on only one index of bias: In the religion condition, middle adolescents were more likely to treat theory-incongruent evidence as implausible. These findings are pertinent to theories of cognitive development, decision making, rationality, and in-group favoritism.     

Using representational tools to support historical reasoning in computer-supported collaborative learning

Abstract

In this article the authors focus on how features of a computersupported collaborative learning (CSCL) environment can elicit and support domain-specific reasoning and more specifically historical reasoning. The CSCL environment enables students to collaborate on a historical inquiry task and in writing an argumentative essay. In order to support historical reasoning the authors compared two representational tools: a graphical representation (argumentative diagram) and a linear representation (argument list). As it is assumed that an argumentative diagram can support both cognitive and interaction processes, it was expected that using this tool would result in more qualitative historical reasoning, in the chat as well as in the essay. However, the results of this study did not show a significant difference in the amount of historical reasoning between the two conditions. A possible explanation can be found in the way the students make use of the representational tool while executing the task. The tool does not only function as a cognitive tool that can elicit elaborate activities, but also as a tool through which students communicate.     

Juror and expert knowledge of child sexual abuse.

Mental health professionals with expertise in child sexual abuse (CSA) often testify as expert witnesses in court. There is significant controversy over the admissibility of this type of evidence. To be admissible, the testimony of an expert must be beyond the common knowledge of the jury and based on information generally considered to be reliable within the professional community in which it is used. To date, no empirical data have existed to allow courts to make an informed judgement as to the extent of either juror knowledge or professional acceptance of CSA data. The present study addresses this issue. Jurors and experts completed a questionnaire designed to reveal their understanding of CSA. Results indicate that experts demonstrated strong consensus on 29 of 40 items included in the questionnaire, and that relative to experts, jurors have limited knowledge of these issues. These results suggest that many of the scientific findings concerning CSA are reliable and that the information is often beyond the common knowledge of the jury. These findings argue for the use of expert testimony in select cases of child sexual abuse.     

Elementary students' views of explanation,argumentation, and evidence,and their abilities to construct arguments over the school year

Science includes more than just concepts and facts, but also encompasses scientific ways of thinking and reasoning. Students' cultural and linguistic backgrounds influence the knowledge they bring to the classroom, which impacts their degree of comfort with scientific practices. Consequently, the goal of this study was to investigate 5th grade students' views of explanation, argument, and evidence across three contexts—what scientists do, what happens in science classrooms, and what happens in everyday life. The study also focused on how students' abilities to engage in one practice, argumentation, changed over the school year. Multiple data sources were analyzed: pre‐ and post‐student interviews, videotapes of classroom instruction, and student writing. The results from the beginning of the school year suggest that students' views of explanation, argument, and evidence, varied across the three contexts with students most likely to respond “I don't know” when talking about their science classroom. Students had resources to draw from both in their everyday knowledge and knowledge of scientists, but were unclear how to use those resources in their science classroom. Students' understandings of explanation, argument, and evidence for scientists and for science class changed over the course of the school year, while their everyday meanings remained more constant. This suggests that instruction can support students in developing stronger understanding of these scientific practices, while still maintaining distinct understandings for their everyday lives. Finally, the students wrote stronger scientific arguments by the end of the school year in terms of the structure of an argument, though the accuracy, appropriateness, and sufficiency of the arguments varied depending on the specific learning or assessment task. This indicates that elementary students are able to write scientific arguments, yet they need support to apply this practice to new and more complex contexts and content areas. © 2011 Wiley Periodicals, Inc. J Res Sci Teach 48: 793–823, 2011     

Epistemic beliefs in action: Spontaneous reflections about knowledge and knowing during online information searching and their influence on learning

In the present study it was investigated whether high school students are spontaneously able to reflect epistemologically during online searching for information about a controversial topic. In addition, we examined whether activating epistemic beliefs is related to individual characteristics, such as prior knowledge of the topic and argumentative reasoning skill; also whether learning from the Web is influenced by epistemic beliefs in action and the ability to detect fallacies in arguments. The participants (N = 64) were students of Grade 13, who were asked to think aloud during navigation. Qualitative and quantitative analyses were performed. Findings reveal that most participants spontaneously activated beliefs about all four dimensions identified in the literature, that is, about the simplicity/complexity, certainty/uncertainty, justification, and source of knowledge, at different levels of sophistication. Most epistemic reflections were about the source of knowledge. Two patterns of contextualized epistemic beliefs emerged and significantly influenced learning from the Web, which was also affected by participants' ability to identify argumentative fallacies.     

Inquiry as a Members’ Phenomenon: Young Children as Competent Inquirers

Understanding children’s inquiry often draws on exogenous understanding (i.e., scientists’ inquiry, classroom expectations) without first understanding inquiry in children’s everyday lives. In contrast, we examine young children’s inquiry in their families to better understand their competent engagement in inquiry. Specifically, we develop an endogenous representation of inquiry as a members’ phenomenon (IMP)—a representation formulated by participants in the course of their own activity. IMP highlights key moments in inquiry—beginning by orienting to inquiry, making progress by drawing on sensemaking resources, and orienting to ending inquiry. This representation also allows us to recognize evidence of young children’s competence in managing interactional, affective, and epistemic challenges inherent in these key moments of inquiry; the diverse array of sensemaking resources through which children address those challenges; and a range of children’s interests and concerns addressed within their inquiry. Furthermore, IMP provides a prism for reconceptualizing learning from learners’ perspective: attending to how participants orient to a moment of inquiry, inquire together, and come to what counts to them as a satisfactory end to their inquiry. This representation of inquiry is an important step in basic learning sciences research and informative for the design of science and other domain learning environments.     

Promoting social inclusion in the early years of elementary school: a focus on children’s epistemic beliefs for moral reasoning

As classrooms continue to diversify, there is an increasing need to understand children’s inclusive behaviours and moral reasoning. Research shows that epistemic beliefs (beliefs about knowing and knowledge) can influence reasoning for adults, but we know little about this relationship in younger children or how classroom contexts relate to epistemic beliefs for moral reasoning. Thirty-one elementary school children (mean age 6.5 years) participated in epistemic beliefs and moral reasoning tasks in the first year of a three-year longitudinal study. Findings showed that while children described objectivist epistemic beliefs (right/wrong answers) about social inclusion, their justifications revealed an unexpected, more complex set of epistemic beliefs. Implications for moral pedagogies are discussed.     

Adolescents' and parents' reasoning about actual family conflict

This study employed a distinct domain perspective on social-cognitive development to assess reasoning about issues of family conflict. Subjects were 102 fifth through twelfth graders from 2-parent families and their parents. Individually interviewed family members described actual family conflicts and, for each, justified their position on the dispute and reasoned about them from the other's perspective. Parents generated fewer conflicts than did children. Preadolescent to late adolescent families generally agreed that conflicts occurred over the mundane, everyday details of family life, but they did not agree on their interpretation. Adolescents understood but rejected their parents' conventional interpretations of conflicts, reasoning instead in terms of personal choice. Boys' understanding of their parents' conventional perspectives increased significantly with age, whereas girls' understanding was significantly lower in early adolescence, as compared to pre- or late adolescence. The results are discussed in terms of adolescent individuation and parent-child conflict during adolescence.     

Dialogical PISA: correct answers are all alike,every incorrect answer is incorrect in its own way

Why do students give incorrect answers in PISA? What are the reasons for giving incorrect answers? Do all incorrect answers reflect only the lack of competence or might even a competent child make a mistake? The aim of this article is to contribute to a better understanding of these issues. In the current investigation, we selected six students who responded incorrectly to one PISA question in mathematics or science when they solved it individually. Then, we analyzed their understanding of the PISA task and their reasoning about it through a dialogical problem solving in triads to identify why they made an incorrect answer. Moreover, we tried to determine how the shared peer interaction might change the understanding and reasoning of the child and enable her/him to solve the task. The results of this study illustrate the differences between incorrect answers reflecting lack of competence and those incorrect answers, which appear for some other reasons. Based on the dialogical problem solving approach, we analyzed these two types of incorrect answers and the reasoning trajectories behind them.     

How some college students represent their understandings of the nature of scientific theories

This study explores college students' representations about the nature of theories during their enrollment in a large astronomy course with instruction designed to address a number of nature of science issues. We focus our investigation on how nine students represent their understanding of theory, how they distinguish between scientific theories and non‐scientific theories, and how they reason about specific theories. Students' notions of theory were classified under four main categories: (1) hypothesis, (2) idea with evidence, (3) explanation, and (4) explanation based on evidence. Students' condition for deciding whether a given idea is a scientific theory or not were classified under six criteria: content domain, convention, evidence, mathematical content, methodology, and tentativeness. Students expressed slight levels of variation between their reasoning about scientific theories in general and specific theories they learned in the course. Despite increased sophistication in some students' representations, this study affirms the complex dimensions involved in teaching and assessing student understanding about theories. The implications of this study underscore the need to explicitly address the nature of proof in science and issues of tentativeness and certainty students associate with scientific theories, and provide students with more opportunities to utilize the language of science.