Description of Chile primary science teachers’ pedagogical content knowledge of argumentation
Downloads
- PDF (Español (España)) 1320
- EPUB (Español (España)) 30
- VISOR (Español (España))
- MÓVIL (Español (España))
- XML (Español (España)) 123
DOI
https://doi.org/10.25267/Rev_Eureka_ensen_divulg_cienc.2022.v19.i1.1602Info
Authors
- Antonia Larrain (CL) Universidad Alberto Hurtado, Chile.
- Marisol Gómez (CL) Facultad de Psicología, Universidad Alberto Hurtado. Chile. https://orcid.org/0000-0002-6682-4323
- Maribel Calderón (CL) Centro de Investigación Socioeducativa, Facultad de Educación, Universidad Católica Silva Henríquez. Chile. https://orcid.org/0000-0002-8379-1463
- Gabriel Fortes de Macedo (CL) Facultad de Psicología, Universidad Alberto Hurtado. Chile. https://orcid.org/0000-0003-4997-0019
- Francisca Ramírez (CL) Facultad de Psicología, Universidad Alberto Hurtado. Chile. https://orcid.org/0000-0002-4578-3067
- Valentina Guzmán (CL) Facultad de Psicología, Universidad Alberto Hurtado. Chile. https://orcid.org/0000-0001-6164-0843
- Hernán Cofré (CL) Instituto de Biología, Facultad de Ciencias, Pontificia Universidad Católica de Valparaíso. Chile. https://orcid.org/0000-0003-2789-334X
Abstract
La enseñanza de las ciencias ha sido interpelada para formar para la ciudadanía pues esta demanda competencias propias de la ciencia como la capacidad de articular teoría y evidencia, y la argumentación y evaluación crítica de distintos puntos de vista. Promover la argumentación en la enseñanza de las ciencias es clave pero no es sencillo y requiere por parte de docentes lo que se ha llamado conocimiento pedagógico del contenido (CPC) de la argumentación. A nivel internacional se ha reportado bajo CPC de la argumentación en docentes de ciencias. Sin embargo, poco se sabe del CPC de la argumentación en países de habla hispana. El presente artículo reporta un estudio cuyo objetivo fue describir el CPC de argumentación en docentes que enseñan ciencias en educación primaria en Chile. Participaron 10 docentes de establecimientos de Santiago y Coquimbo. Para indagar las diferentes dimensiones del CPC (declarativo y procedimental) se realizaron grabaciones de aulas y entrevistas a docentes. Los resultados muestran que ningún docente despliega un CPC de la argumentación consistentemente alto en todas sus dimensiones. Más aún, el conocimiento procedimental no está relacionado necesariamente con alto conocimiento declarativo. Los resultados sugieren una progresión de aprendizaje de este tipo de conocimiento variable. Se reflexiona acerca del impacto de los resultados para la práctica y teoría educativa.
Palabras clave: Conocimiento pedagógico del contenido de la argumentación; enseñanza de las ciencias; ciencias para la ciudadanía; aprendizaje de las ciencias.
Description of Chile primary science teachers’ pedagogical content knowledge of argumentation
Abstract: Science teaching has been called to contribute to citizenship insofar as it requires scientific competencies such as articulating theory and evidence, and the critical evaluation of different points of view. To promote argumentation in science teaching is key but not simple and requires teachers’ pedagogical content knowledge (PCK) of argumentation. International literature has reported low PCK of argumentation in science teachers, but we scarcely know about this in Spanish speaking countries. This paper reports a study aimed at describing the PCK of argumentation on 10 primary science teachers in [Country]. Lessons were video recorded, and interviews were conducted. Results show low PCK of argumentation overall, and declarative PCK does not necessarily relates with procedimental PCK. Moreover, different configurations of the dimensions of PCK of argumentation were observed, suggesting that there is not one possible learning progression, but different ones. Educational and scientific implications are discussed.
Keywords: Pedagogical content knowledge of argumentation; science teaching; science for citizenship; science learning.
Keywords
Downloads
Supporting Agencies
License
Copyright (c) 2021 Antonia Larrain, Marisol Gómez, Maribel Calderón, Gabriel Fortes de Macedo , Francisca Ramírez , Valentina Guzmán , Hernán Cofré
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.
Require authors to agree to Copyright Notice as part of the submission process. This allow the / o authors / is non-commercial use of the work, including the right to place it in an open access archive. In addition, Creative Commons is available on flexible copyright licenses (Creative Commons).
Reconocimiento-NoComercial
CC BY-NC
References
Abell, S. (2007). Research on science teacher knowledge. En: Abell, S., & Lederman, N. (Eds.),
Handbook of research on science education (pp. 1105–1149). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence
Erlbaum.
Acevedo-Díaz, J.A. y García-Carmona, A. (2016). “Algo antiguo, algo nuevo, algo prestado”.
Tendencias sobre la naturaleza de la ciencia en la educación científica. Revista Eureka
sobre Enseñanza y Divulgación de las Ciencias, 13 (1), 3-19.
Baxter, J. A. y Lederman, N. G. (1999). Assessment and measurement of pedagogical content
knowledge. En: J. Gess-Newsome & N. G. Lederman (Eds.), Examining pedagogical
content knowledge: The construct and its implications for science education. (pp. 147–161).
Dordrecht/Boston/London: Kluwer Academic Publishers.
Berry, A., P., Friedrichsen, y J., Loughran, (Eds.) (2015). Re-examining Pedagogical Content
Knowledge in Science Education. Routledge.
Boyd, M. P., & Markarian, W. C. (2015). Dialogic Teaching and Dialogic Stance: Moving beyond Interactional Form. Research in the Teaching of English, 49(3), 272–296. http://www.jstor.org/stable/24398703
Carlson y Daehler (2019). The refined consensus model of pedagogical content knowledge in
science education. En: Hume, A., R., Cooper y A., Borowski (Eds.) Repositioning
Peagogical Content Knowledge in Teachers’ Knowledge for Teaching Science. Springer.
Chan, K., y A., Hume (2019). Towards and consensues Model: Literature Review of How
Scence Teachers’ Pedagogical Content Knowledge is Investigated in Empirical Studies.
En: Hume, A., R., Cooper y A., Borowski (Eds.) Repositioning Pedagogical Content
Knowledge in Teachers’ Knowledge for Teaching Science. Springer.
Alozie, N. M., Moje, E. B., Krajcik, J. S. (2010). An analysis of the supports and constraints for scientific discussion in high school project‐based science. Science Education, 94(3), 395-427. https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.20365
Andriessen, J., Schwarz, B. (2009). Argumentative design. In N. Muller Mirza & A.-N. Perret-Clermont (Eds.), Argumentation and education (pp. 145-174). New York: Springer.
Asterhan, C. S., Schwarz, B. B. (2016). Argumentation for learning: Well-trodden paths and unexplored territories. Educational Psychologist, 51(2), 164-187. https://doi.org/10.1080/00461520.2016.1155458
Bravo, P., Cofré, H. L. (2016). A new approach to capture and develop Biology Teachers’ Pedagogical Content Knowledge through learning study: the case of human evolution. International Journal of Science Education. 38, (16): 2500-2527.
Clarke, D., Hollingsworth, H. (2002). Elaborating a model of teacher professional growth. Teaching and Teacher Education, 18(8), 947-967. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0742-051X(02)00053-7
Cofré, H., Camacho, J., Galaz, A., Jiménez, J., Santibáñez, D., Vergara, C. (2010). La educación científica en Chile: debilidades de la enseñanza y futuros desafíos de la educación de profesores de ciencia. Estudios pedagógicos, 36(2), 279-293. http://dx.doi.org/10.4067/S0718-07052010000200016
Davies, I. (2004). Science and citizenship education. International Journal of Science Education, 26(14), 1751-1763. https://doi.org/10.1080/0950069042000230785
Fortes, G., Larrain, A., Gómez, M. (2020). Design of a teacher training program for the development of pedagogical knowledge on argumentation content. Cogency, 12(2), 169-205.
Garcia, L. R. (2017). Concepciones sobre argumentación de futuros docentes de Biología. Enseñanza de las ciencias: revista de investigación y experiencias didácticas, (Extra), 2335-2342.
Gess-Newsome, J. (2015). A model of teacher professional knowledge and skill including
PCK: Results of the thinking from the PCK summit. En: A. Berry, P. Friedrichsen, y J.
Loughran (Eds.), Re-examining Pedagogical Content Knowledge in Science Education. (págs. 29-45). Routledge.
González-Weil, C., Cortéz, M., Bravo, P., Ibaceta, Y., Cuevas, K., Quiñones, P., Abarca, A. (2012). La indagación científica como enfoque pedagógico: estudio sobre las prácticas innovadoras de docentes de ciencia en EM. Estudios Pedagógicos, 38(2), 85-102. http://dx.doi.org/10.4067/S0718-07052012000200006
Hemberger, L., Kuhn, D., Matos, F., Shi, Y. (2017). A dialogic path to evidence-based argumentive writing. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 26(4), 575-607. https://doi.org/10.1080/10508406.2017.1336714
Jimenez-Aleixandre, P., Erudran, S. (2008). Argumentation in science education: An overview. In S. Erduran & M. P. Jimenez-Aleixandre (Eds.), Argumentation in science education: Perspectives from classroom-based research (pp. 47-70). Springer.
Knight‐Bardsley, A., McNeill, K. L. (2016). Teachers’ pedagogical design capacity for scientific argumentation. Science Education, 100(4), 645-672. https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.21222
Kolstø, S. D. (2000). Consensus projects: Teaching science for citizenship. International Journal of Science Education, 22(6), 645-664. https://doi.org/10.1080/095006900289714
Larrain, A., Freire, P., Howe, C. (2014). Science teaching and argumentation: One-sided versus dialectical argumentation in Chilean middle school science lessons. International Journal of Science Education, 26, 1017-1036. Hhttps://doi.org/10.1080/09500693.2013.832005
Leitão, S. (2000). The potential of argument in knowledge building. Human Development, 43, 332–360. https:/doi.org/10.1159/000022697
Loughran, J.J., Mulhall, P., Berry, A. (2004). In search of pedagogical content knowledge in science: Developing ways of articulating and documenting professional practice. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 41 (5), 370–391.
Loughran, Mulhall, P., Berry, A. (2008). Exploring pedagogical content knowledge in science teacher education. International Journal of Science Education, 30 (3), 1301–1320.
Magnusson, S., Krajcik, J., Borko, H. (1999). Nature, sources, and development of pedagogical content knowledge for science teaching. In J. Gess-Newsome & N. Lederman (Eds.), Examining Pedagogical Content Knowledge (pp. 95-132). The Netherlands: Science & Technology Education Library, Kluwer Academic Publishers.
McNeill, K. L., González‐Howard, M., Katsh‐Singer, R., Loper, S. (2016). Pedagogical content knowledge of argumentation: Using classroom contexts to assess high‐quality PCK rather than pseudoargumentation. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 53(2), 261-290. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.21252
McNeill, K., Knight, A. (2013). Teachers’ pedagogical content knowledge of scientific argumentation: The impact of professional development on K-12 teachers. Science Education, 96(6), 936-972. http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/sce.21081
McNeill, K., Krajcik, J. (2008). Inquiry and scientific explanations: Helping students use evidence and reasoning. In J. Luft, R. Bell, & J. Gess-Newsome (eds.). Science as inquiry in the secondary
setting (pp. 121–134). National Science Teachers Association Press.
McNeill, K., González-Howard, M. Katsh-Singer, Loper, S. (2017). Moving Beyond Pseudoargumentation: Teachers’ Enactments of an Educative Science Curriculum Focused on Argumentation. Science Education. 101(3) 426-457. https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.21274
Osborne, J. (2010). Arguing to learn in science: The role of collaborative, critical discourse. Science, 328(5977), 463-466. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1183944
Padilla, K., Ponce de León, A., Rembado, F.M., & Garritz, A. (2008). Undergraduate
professors’ pedagogical content knowledge: the case of ‘amount of substance’.
International Journal of Science Education, 30,10, 1389-1404.
Park, S. y Oliver, J. S. (2008). Revisiting the conceptualisation of Pedagogical Content Knowledge (PCK): PCK as a conceptual tool to understand teachers as professionals. Research in Science Education, 38(3), 261-284.
Ravanal, E., y F., López (2016). Mapa del conocimiento didáctico y modelo didáctico en profesionales del área biológica sobre el contenido de célula. Revista Eureka sobre Enseñanza y Divulgación de las Ciencias 13 (3), 725-742.
Rollnick, M. (2017). Learning about semi-conductors for teaching—the role played by content knowledge in pedagogical content knowledge (PCK) Development. Research in Science Education 47, 833–868.
Sadler, T. D. (2006). Promoting discourse and argumentation in science teacher education. Journal of Science Teacher Education, 17(4), 323-346. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10972-006-9025-4
Sampson, V., Blanchard, M. R. (2012), Science teachers and scientific argumentation: Trends in views and practice. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 49, 1122–1148. http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/tea.21037
Sengul, O., Enderle, P. J., Schwartz, R. S. (2020). Science teachers’ use of argumentation instructional model: linking PCK of argumentation, epistemological beliefs, and practice. International Journal of Science Education, 42(7), 1068-1086. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500693.2020.1748250
Shulman, L. S. (1986). Those who understand: Knowledge growth in teaching. Educational Researcher, 15(2), 4-14. https://doi.org/10.3102/0013189X015002004
Schmelzing, S., Van Driel, J. H., Jüttner, M., Brandenbusch, S., Sandmann, A. y Neuhaus, B.
(2013). Development, evaluation, and validation of a paper-and-pencil test for
measuring two components of biology teachers’ pedagogical content knowledge
concerning the “cardiovascular system”. International Journal of Science and Mathematics
Education, 11, 1369–1390.
Tippett, C. (2009). Argumentation: The language of science. Journal of Elementary Science Education, 21(1), 17-25.
van Driel, J. H., Berry, A., y Meirink, J. (2014). Research on science teacher knowledge. En: N. Lederman y S. Abell (Eds.), Handbook of research on science education, Volume II (págs. 848-870). New York: Routledge.
Van Es, E. A., Sherin, M. G. (2008). Mathematics teachers’ “learning to notice” in the context of a video club. Teaching and Teacher Education, 24(2), 244-276. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2006.11.005
Vergara, C., Cofré, H. (2014). Conocimiento pedagógico del contenido: ¿El paradigma perdido en la formación inicial y continua de profesores en Chile? Estudios Pedagógicos, 40, 323-338. http://dx.doi.org/10.4067/S0718-07052014000200019
Vergara, C., H., Cofré y D., Santibáñez (2021). Enseñanza de la Biología y conocimiento
pedagógico del contenido: una introducción. En: Cofré, H., Vergara, C., y Spotorno,
A. Enseñar evolución y genética para la alfabetización Científica. Ediciones Universitarias de
Valparaíso.
Walan, S., Nilsson, P., & Ewen, B.M. (2017). Why inquiry? Primary teachers’ objectives in
choosing inquiry- and context-based instructional strategies to stimulate students’
science learning. Research in Science Education, 1–20.
Wang, J., Buck, G. A. (2016). Understanding a high school physics teacher’s pedagogical content knowledge of argumentation. Journal of Science Teacher Education, 27(5), 577-604.https://doi.org/10.1007/s10972-016-9476-1