FRINK Linked Data Fragments server

Matches in SemOpenAlex for { <https://semopenalex.org/work/W2597985106> ?p ?o ?g. }

• W2597985106 startingPage "23" @default.
• W2597985106 abstract "Argumentation has long been promoted as a core scientific practice in which students should engage, yet science classrooms still often omit it. One remedy is to incorporate socioscientific issues (SSIs) in the curricula. Sadler (2004) defines them as dilemmas with both social and scientific factors. SSIs are open-ended and complex, typically subject to multiple perspectives and solutions (see Figure 1 for examples). These issues, influenced by science and society, are relevant to students' lives and promote classroom argumentation. Engaging in argumentation on SSIs requires students to discuss science content with their peers and teachers without setting out to defeat an opponent. Collaboration becomes important as students establish criteria to distinguish among multiple distinct ideas (Linn, Clark, and Slotta 2003) and work together to build a sound argument. We recommend using critical friend pairs, in which two students discuss and critique each other's arguments, to promote collaboration and critical-thinking skills. This article presents a lesson plan using critical friend pairs that promotes argumentation and evaluating evidence. Choosing an SSI SSIs can be global or local, political or ethical, and as timely as the day's news. SSIs have no correct or incorrect outcomes but multiple possible solutions (Sadler 2011). Figure 2 lists five SSIs that cover multiple science content areas that connect to the Next Generation Science Standards (NGSS Lead States 2013). Choose an SSI that's relevant to your students, and perhaps controversial, such as a new power plant being planned for the town, so that your class is likely to have students who oppose and others who support the issue. The SSI should also align with your particular content goals, for example, studying genetically modified organisms, for which several SSIs could be considered. In our case, we surveyed students about their thoughts on mass production of genetically modified organisms and on animal testing to see which topic was more controversial and thus likely to result in a richer discussion. [ILLUSTRATION OMITTED] FIGURE 1 Sample socioscientific issues. * Are pesticides harmful or beneficial? Hydraulic fracturing? Nuclear energy? * Are renewable energy devices cost effective? * Is raising zoo animals in captivity cruel or helpful to the species? * Is stem cell research justified? * Should human cloning be allowed? * How can global climate change be mitigated? Ideally, an SSI should: * Have more than one plausible and defensible outcome * Be socially debatable and controversial * Be linked to science content and course objectives * Be supported by available data (on both sides) * Be important to students personally Lastly, the issue should be socially, not scientifically, controversial. Avoid issues such as whether global climate change is occurring, as there are not two defensible sides to the issue. A better related topic might be how to solve the issue of global climate change (e.g., what types of alternative methods of energy to use, how best to decrease greenhouse gas emissions, etc.). Creating critical friend pairs Critical friend pairings can be defined in many ways (e.g., Costa and Kallick 1993), but in this lesson each in the pair of learners critically views the other's evidence and written argument on a given SSI. Critical friend pairings help students understand that SSIs are subject to multiple perspectives with multiple solutions, offering an opportunity to discuss an issue with someone who has an opposing view. The pair setting encourages students to weigh the credibility of the evidence proposed by a critical friend, while making one's own argument as sound as possible. To help you form critical pairs, give students a brief survey, with questions such as these on genetically modified organisms (GMOs): 1. …" @default.
• W2597985106 created "2017-04-07" @default.
• W2597985106 creator A5008029719 @default.
• W2597985106 creator A5054431731 @default.
• W2597985106 creator A5089050689 @default.
• W2597985106 date "2016-02-01" @default.
• W2597985106 modified "2023-09-23" @default.
• W2597985106 title "Making Critical Friends: Using Socioscientific Issues to Teach Argumentation and Evidence-Based Reasoning" @default.
• W2597985106 hasPublicationYear "2016" @default.
• W2597985106 type Work @default.
• W2597985106 sameAs 2597985106 @default.
• W2597985106 citedByCount "1" @default.
• W2597985106 countsByYear W25979851062017 @default.
• W2597985106 crossrefType "journal-article" @default.
• W2597985106 hasAuthorship W2597985106A5008029719 @default.
• W2597985106 hasAuthorship W2597985106A5054431731 @default.
• W2597985106 hasAuthorship W2597985106A5089050689 @default.
• W2597985106 hasConcept C111472728 @default.
• W2597985106 hasConcept C138885662 @default.
• W2597985106 hasConcept C144024400 @default.
• W2597985106 hasConcept C145420912 @default.
• W2597985106 hasConcept C15744967 @default.
• W2597985106 hasConcept C185592680 @default.
• W2597985106 hasConcept C19417346 @default.
• W2597985106 hasConcept C2776185021 @default.
• W2597985106 hasConcept C2777212361 @default.
• W2597985106 hasConcept C2778658864 @default.
• W2597985106 hasConcept C44877443 @default.
• W2597985106 hasConcept C47177190 @default.
• W2597985106 hasConcept C533356498 @default.
• W2597985106 hasConcept C55493867 @default.
• W2597985106 hasConcept C65059942 @default.
• W2597985106 hasConcept C98184364 @default.
• W2597985106 hasConceptScore W2597985106C111472728 @default.
• W2597985106 hasConceptScore W2597985106C138885662 @default.
• W2597985106 hasConceptScore W2597985106C144024400 @default.
• W2597985106 hasConceptScore W2597985106C145420912 @default.
• W2597985106 hasConceptScore W2597985106C15744967 @default.
• W2597985106 hasConceptScore W2597985106C185592680 @default.
• W2597985106 hasConceptScore W2597985106C19417346 @default.
• W2597985106 hasConceptScore W2597985106C2776185021 @default.
• W2597985106 hasConceptScore W2597985106C2777212361 @default.
• W2597985106 hasConceptScore W2597985106C2778658864 @default.
• W2597985106 hasConceptScore W2597985106C44877443 @default.
• W2597985106 hasConceptScore W2597985106C47177190 @default.
• W2597985106 hasConceptScore W2597985106C533356498 @default.
• W2597985106 hasConceptScore W2597985106C55493867 @default.
• W2597985106 hasConceptScore W2597985106C65059942 @default.
• W2597985106 hasConceptScore W2597985106C98184364 @default.
• W2597985106 hasIssue "2" @default.
• W2597985106 hasLocation W25979851061 @default.
• W2597985106 hasOpenAccess W2597985106 @default.
• W2597985106 hasPrimaryLocation W25979851061 @default.
• W2597985106 hasRelatedWork W1507216624 @default.
• W2597985106 hasRelatedWork W151873223 @default.
• W2597985106 hasRelatedWork W1532816638 @default.
• W2597985106 hasRelatedWork W1608034627 @default.
• W2597985106 hasRelatedWork W1877008300 @default.
• W2597985106 hasRelatedWork W1901974036 @default.
• W2597985106 hasRelatedWork W1973275595 @default.
• W2597985106 hasRelatedWork W2026522891 @default.
• W2597985106 hasRelatedWork W2047253177 @default.
• W2597985106 hasRelatedWork W2104210354 @default.
• W2597985106 hasRelatedWork W2341204195 @default.
• W2597985106 hasRelatedWork W2358874616 @default.
• W2597985106 hasRelatedWork W240128288 @default.
• W2597985106 hasRelatedWork W2524404058 @default.
• W2597985106 hasRelatedWork W2559318189 @default.
• W2597985106 hasRelatedWork W2751445807 @default.
• W2597985106 hasRelatedWork W292720504 @default.
• W2597985106 hasRelatedWork W3093876711 @default.
• W2597985106 hasRelatedWork W2510377410 @default.
• W2597985106 hasRelatedWork W2624649517 @default.
• W2597985106 hasVolume "83" @default.
• W2597985106 isParatext "false" @default.
• W2597985106 isRetracted "false" @default.
• W2597985106 magId "2597985106" @default.
• W2597985106 workType "article" @default.