The Effect of Argumentation-Based Inquiry Approach on Students' Academic Achievement and Analytical Thinking Skills
Abstract views: 154
/ 
PDF downloads: 111
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.52380/ijcer.2023.10.2.375Keywords:
ABI, Argumentation, Analytical thinking skill, InquiryAbstract
This study aimed to investigate the effects of the argumentation-based inquiry (ABI) approach on the analytical thinking skills of seventh-grade students using a mixed method. It was conducted in a secondary school in the Black Sea region of Turkey with seventh-grade students from two classes during the fall semester of the 2021–2022 academic year. The findings show that the application of the ABI approach in science classes is effective on the academic achievement of students. According to the analytical thinking test findings, a significant difference was found in favor of the experimental group in the post-test. The evaluation of the quantitative and qualitative findings revealed that the ABI approach used in science lessons had improved the analytical thinking skills of the experimental group students.
References
Authors (2008)
Authors (2016)
Authors (2009)
Authors, (2021a)
Authors, (2021b)
Akkaş Baysal, E. & Ocak, G. (2021). Opinions of the Teachers on the Compensation of Learning Loss Caused by Covid-19 Outbreak . Kastamonu Eğitim Dergisi , Kastamonu Üniversitesinin 15. Yılı: Eğitim Bilimleri Özel Sayısı , 173-184 . DOI: 10.24106/kefdergi.811834
Akkuş, R., Günel, M., & Hand, B. (2007). Comparing an inquiry-based approach known as the Science Writing Heuristic to traditional science teaching practices: Are there differences? International Journal of Science Education,1-21
Akkuş-Çakır, N., & Senemoğlu, N. (2021). Analitik Düşünme Nedir? Ne Değildir? E. Kabataş Memiş & A. Kaçar (Ed.), Eleştirel ve analitik düşünme (1.baskı) içinde (s176-191). Ankara: Pegem Akademi.
Amer, A. (2005). Analytical thinking. Pathways to Higher Education. Center for Advancement of Postgraduate Studies and Research in Engineering Sciences, Faculty of Engineering- Cairo Üniversity (CAPSCU).
Bloom, B. S. (1956). Taxonomy of Education Objectives Handbook I: Cognitive Domain. New York: David Mckay Company.
Bozkurt, C. (2022). 8. Sınıf Öğrencilerinin Dna Ve Genetik Kod Ünitesine ilişkin Analitik Düşünmelerinin Çeşitli Değişkenler Açisindan İncelenmesi, [Yüksek lisans tezi, Kafkas Üniversitesi].
Can, A. (2020). SPSS ile bilimsel araştırma sürecinde nicel veri analizi. Pegem akademi.
Carey, S. S., (2011). A Beginner Guide to Sciencetific Method 4th Edition. United States: Wodsworth.
Christensen, L. B., Burke Johnson, R., & Turner, L. A. (2020). Araştırıma yöntemleri desen ve analiz researcch methods design and analysis. (A. Aypay, Çev.). Anı yayıncılık.
Creswell, J. W., & Plano Clark, V. L. (2020). Karma yöntem araştırmaları tasarımı ve yürütülmesi. (Çev. Edt. Y. Dede, S. B. Demir). Anı yayıncılık. (Orijinal çalışmanın yayın tarihi 2011).
Çakan Akkaş, B. N. (2017). Argümantasyon tabanlı bilim öğrenme (ATBÖ) yaklaşımının temel alındığı öğrenme ortamının 5. Sınıf öğrencilerinin akademik başarılarına ve eleştirel düşünme becerilerine etkisi, [Yüksek lisans tezi, Kastamonu Üniversitesi].
Çakır, N. (2013). Üniversite eğitiminin üst düzey düşünme becerilerinin gelişimine etkisi, [Doktora tezi, Hacettepe üniversitesi].
Duschl, R., Grandy, R. (2007). Reconsidering the Character and Role of Inquiry in School Science: Analysis of a Conference. Science Education. 16 (2), 141-166. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11191-005-2865-z
Duschl, R. A., & Osborne, J. (2002) Supporting and promoting argumentation discourse in science education, Studies in Science Education, 38(1), 39-72. https://doi.org/10.1080/03057260208560187
Elder, L., & Paul, R. (2019). The thinker’s guide to analytical thinking: how to take thinking apart and what to look for when you do. Rowmn & Littlefield.
Ennis, R. H. (1985). A logical basis for maesuring critical thinking skills. Educational leadership, 43(2), 44-48.
Ezberci Çevik, E. (2021). Analitik düşünme becerisi. E. Kabataş Memiş (Ed.), 21. Yüzyıl becerileri için fen eğitimi öğrenmeyi derinleştirme (1. Baskı) içinde (s136-150). Ankara: Pegem Akademi.
Hand, B. (2008). Science Inquiry, Argument and Language, İçinde Hand, B., Introducing the Science Writing Heuristic Approach (ss.1-11), Sense Publishers.
Hand, B., Wallace, C. & Yang, E. (2004). Using a Science Writing Heuristic to enhance learning outcomes from labarotory activities in seventh-grade Science: Quantitative and qualitative aspects. International Journal of Science Education, 26(2),131-149. Doi:10.1080/0950069032000070252.
Hand, B. & Keys, C. W. (1999). Inquiry investigation. The Science Teacher, 66 (4), 27-29.
Hohenshell, M. LO. & Hand, B., (2006). Writing-to-learn strategies in secondary school cell biology: A mixed method study. Internatiınal Journal of Sceience Education. 28(2), 261-289.
Jill, L. (2007). Inquiry-based learning. Schreyer Institute for Teaching Excellence. University Park, Penn State.
Keys, C. W., Hand, B., Prain, V., & Collins, S. (1999). Using the science writing heuristic as a tool for learning from laboratory ınvestigations in secondary science, Journal Of Research In Scıence Teachıng, 36(10), 1065–1084.
MNE (2018a). Fen bilimleri dersi öğretim programı (İlkokul ve ortaokul 3,4,5,6,7 ve 8. sınıflar. Ankara: Millî Eğitim Bakanlığı.
MNE (2013). İlköğretim Kurumları (İlkokullar ve Ortaokullar) Fen Bilimleri Dersi (3,4,5,6,7 ve 7. Sınıflar) Öğretim Programı. Milli Eğitim Bakanlığı Talim ve Terbiye Kurulu Başkanlığı, Ankara.
Newton, P., Driver, R., & Osborne, J. (2000). Establishing the norms of scientific argumentation in classrooms, Science Education, 84(3), 287-312.
Newton, P., Driver, R., & Osborne, J. (1999). The place of argumentation in the pedagogy of school science. İnternational Journal of Science Education, 21(5), 553-576.
National Research Council. (2000). Nutrient requirements ofbeef cattle. 7th rev. ed. Update 2000. National Academy Press,Washington, DC.
Osborne, J. F., Henderson, J. B., MacPherson, A., Szu, E., Wild, A., & Yao, S.‐Y. (2016). The development and validation of a learning progression for argumentation in science. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 53(6), 821–846. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.21316
Öz, M. (2020). Fen Eğitiminde Argümantasyon Tabanlı Bilim Öğrenme Yaklaşımı ve Çoklu Modsal Betimleme Kullanımının Öğrencilerin Akademik Başarılarına ve Eleştirel Düşünme Becerilerine Etkisi. (Yayınlanmış Doktora Tezi). Kastamonu Üniversitesi/ Fen Bilimleri Enstitüsü, Kastamonu.
Ramdiah, S., Mayasari, R. & Fauzi, A. (2018). The effect of TPS and PBL learning models to the analytical ability of students in biology classroom. In Asia-Pacific Forum on Science Learning & Teaching. 19(2), 1-16.
Resnick, L. (1987). Education and learning to think. Washington, DC: National Academy.
Sartika, S. B. (2018). Teaching models to increase students’ analytical thinking skills. 1st International Conference on Intellectuals’ Global Responsibility (ICIGR 2017). Atlantis Press.
Schwab, K., Samans, R. (2016). The Future of Jobs: Employment, Skills and Workforce Strategy for the Fourth Industrial Revolution.
Geneva, Switzerland: World Economic Forum, 6,157.
Tsaii C. C., &Hwang, G. J. (2012). Developing a survey for assessing preferences in constructivist context-aware ubiquitous learning environments, Journal of computer assisted learning, 28(3), 250-264.
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2023 Esra Kabatas Memıs, Zeynep Ergun
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.
