Improvements to elementary children's epistemic understanding from sustained argumentation

By Suna Ryu, William A. Sandoval. 2012

309 citations recorded by the source corpus.

Subfields: Developmental and Educational Psychology, Education

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/a29ed498abcac440ef222a1814332f816fe7c4d5

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

In Developmental and Educational Psychology

In Education

Citations in the corpus

Handbook of Epistemic Cognition (2016, background): “Besides cognitive skills, argumentative reasoning also involves meta-strategic understanding and understanding of the epistemic norms of argumentation (Iordanou & Constantinou, 2014, 2015; Kuhn, Goh et al., 2008; Ryu & Sandoval, 2012).”
Coding Classroom Interactions for Collective and Individual Engagement (2015, methodology): “For science classroom communities, meaningful changes in practice can be framed in such a way as to participate in the negotiation and appropriation of the disciplinary epistemic and social norms and values consistent with scientific practices (Ryu, 2014; Ryu & Sandoval, 2012).”
Identifying Essential Epistemic Heuristics for Guiding Mechanistic Reasoning in Science Learning (2018, background): “However, unless these guidelines are made explicit as they emerge from student activity and are articulated by students themselves (e.g., Manz, 2016; Ryu & Sandoval, 2012), they could easily become dogmatic and rote.”
Understanding and Promoting Thinking About Knowledge (2016, background): “…of epistemic cognition interventions would have to be evaluated quite broadly by attending to changes in disciplinary practices at the interpersonal level, in addition to individual belief change and potential interactions between those loci of intervention (e.g., Ryu & Sandoval, 2012).”
Explicit Nature of Science and Argumentation Instruction in the Context of Socioscientific Issues: An effect on student learning and transfer (2014, background): “The other point of view considers the issue from a socio-cultural perspective (Ryu & Sandoval, 2012), where the focus is on the social context in which students do engage in argumentation.”
Conjecture Mapping: An Approach to Systematic Educational Design Research (2014, background): “A detailed report of how changes in those outcomes can be traced to children’s appropriation of the epistemic and social norms referenced in Figure 3 can be found in Ryu and Sandoval (2012).”
Epistemic beliefs and prior knowledge as predictors of the construction of different types of arguments on socioscientific issues (2020, unknown): “…(Baytelman, Iordanou & Constantinou, 2016; ; Barzilai & Eshet-Alkalai, 2015; Berland et al., 2016; Jiménez-Aleixandre, 2014; McNeill et al., 2017; Ryu & Sandoval, 2012), particularly the ability to construct counterarguments (Iordanou, 2016b; Wu & Tsai, 2011; Zavala & Kuhn, 2017), the…”
Developing Norms of Argumentation: Metacognitive, Epistemological, and Social Dimensions of Developing Argumentive Competence (2013, background): “…who participate in a community identified by joint activities come to share a set of standards and values that shape the behaviors central to the activity (Driver, Newton, & Osborne, 2000; Ford, 2012; Ford & Forman, 2006; Kuhn, Wang, & Li, 2010; Resnick & Nelson-LeGall, 1997; Ryu & Sandoval, 2012).”
Disciplinary Literacies and Learning to Read for Understanding: A Conceptual Framework for Disciplinary Literacy (2016, background): “Studies of science argumentation show that students as early as elementary grades can productively engage in making claims about scientific phenomena and finding evidence to support those claims (Chin & Osborne, 2012; Ryu & Sandoval, 2012; Sampson & Clark, 2008).”
On the Goals of Epistemic Education: Promoting Apt Epistemic Performance (2018, background): “A further social aspect of apt epistemic performance is the joint development, negotiation, and application of epistemic norms and criteria (e.g., Cobb, Stephan, McClain, & Gravemeijer, 2001; Kelly, 2008; Longino, 2002; Ryu & Sandoval, 2012).”
Resistance and the Development of Scientific Practice: Designing the Mangle Into Science Instruction (2015, background): “In response, researchers increasingly seek to design contexts that establish “a need” for practices and to study their development in extended activity (Berland & Hammer, 2012; Ryu & Sandoval, 2012).”
Supporting Use of Evidence in Argumentation through Practice in Argumentation and Reflection in the Context of SOCRATES Learning Environment (2015, methodology): “In addition, gains in students‘ epistemological understanding have also been reported as a result of participating in argumentation (Iordanou, 2010; Ryu & Sandoval, 2012).”
Examining the Use of Talk and Writing for Students' Development of Scientific Conceptual Knowledge Through Constructing and Critiquing Arguments (2016, background): “Scholars such as Kuhn et al. (2013) Mercer (2008), and Ryu and Sandoval (2012) have suggested that more studies of sustained engagement in argumentation are needed to understand the relationship between time, talk, writing, and knowledge development.”
The Role of Epistemic Emotions in Personal Epistemology and Self-Regulated Learning (2018, background): “Although research has been carried out with younger populations to examine epistemic understanding (Ryu & Sandoval, 2012), judgments of the epistemic status of sources of justification (Sandoval & Çam, 2011), and use of evidence (Sandoval, 2005), much research is still needed to understand how…”
Quality Talk: Developing Students’ Discourse to Promote High-level Comprehension (2018, background): “For example, as mentioned previously, Ryu and Sandoval (2012) found with elementary school students that explicit instruction in argumentation and epistemic criteria for evaluating and making knowledge claims (e.g., citing evidence) led to better argumentation performance.”