Lower track science students' argumentation and open inquiry instruction
By Randy Yerrick. 2000
167 citations recorded by the source corpus.
Subfields: Developmental and Educational Psychology, Education
View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/e53959b598b42688db3720a5c19008f0047739f6
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
- Explicit Nature of Science and Argumentation Instruction in the Context of Socioscientific Issues: An effect on student learning and transfer (2014, background): “At the same time, some emerging research in the field of argumentation has provided some evidence to suggest that engaging learners in argumentation may aid in the development of more informed understandings of NOS (Bell & Linn, 2000; Ogunniyi, 2006; Yerrick, 2000).”
- LEARNING ARGUMENTATION SKILLS THROUGH INSTRUCTION IN SOCIOSCIENTIFIC ISSUES: THE EFFECT OF ABILITY LEVEL (2010, background): “Yerrick (2000) examined the effects of inquiry instruction on five low-achieving students' argumentation; he found that these students were able to actively make argumentsanduseevidencetosupport their arguments aftertheinstruction.”
- The effect of argumentative task goal on the quality of argumentative discourse (2013, unknown): “The first, a classic hypothesis in the field of cognitive psychology, points to the effect of students’ prior knowledge on the quality and complexity of the arguments they construct (Bell & Linn, 2000; Kuhn, 1991; Means & Voss, 1996; Sadler & Zeidler, 2004; von Aufschnaiter, Erduran, Osborne, & Simo”
- Scaffolding Preservice Science Teachers' Evidence-Based Arguments During an Investigation of Natural Selection (2002, background): “Nevertheless, there is a great deal of evidence from the literature suggesting that students rarely provide genuine evidence to support their explanations in science (Kelly, Druker, & Chen, 1998; Kuhn, 1991, 1993; Yerrick, 2000 ).”
- Peer Argumentation in the School Science Laboratory—Exploring effects of task features (2011, background): “Katchevich et al. (2010), Richmond and Striley (1996), Watson et al. (2004), and Yerrick (2000) all attempt to improve argumentation in the science laboratory by using strategies strengthening these aspects.”
- Argument to Foster Scientific Literacy (2010, background): “The activities reported by Engle and Conant (2002) and Yerrick (2000) included students developing ways to address questions, construction of explanations for the research questions, and defense of their ideas.”
- Comparing an Inquiry‐based Approach known as the Science Writing Heuristic to Traditional Science Teaching Practices: Are there differences? (2007, background): “Yerrick (2000) argues that low-achieving students are challenged in an inquiry setting since they cannot easily adapt into scientific discourse that teacher and high achievers share.”
- The Development of Dynamic Inquiry Performances within an Open Inquiry Setting: A Comparison to Guided Inquiry Setting (2009, background): “of open inquiry learning practices (Berg et al., 2003; Chin & Chia, 2006; Crawford, 2000; Roth, 1999; Yerrick, 2000).”
- The Influence of Explicit Nature of Science and Argumentation Instruction on Preservice Primary Teachers' Views of Nature of Science. (2010, background): “Yerrick (2000) assessed changes in high school students’ abilities to construct arguments within”
- Teaching biotechnology through case studies - can we improve higher order thinking skills of nonscience majors? (2003, background): “These findings are in accord with previous research results (Dori, 2003; Dori & Herscovitz, 1999; Tal, Dori, & Lazarowitz, 2000; Yerrick, 2000; Zohar & Namet, 2002).”