| Popis: |
Argument plays a central role in science. One side of scientific argumentation is descriptive and explanatory, debating competing theories about reality. A second side is prescriptive, involving socio-scientific debates about how humans should adapt to or change the world around them. In this chapter, we argue that it is important to engage science students in both types of discourse. Socio-scientific discussions are often more meaningful and engaging to students; however, such discussions need to be informed by basic science. In this chapter, we first describe an analytic framework, Walton’s dialogue theory, involving both (a) argument schemes (which specify various types of argument) and (b) critical questions for evaluating the schemes. We then explore the two faces of scientific argumentation through an analysis of a seventh-grade discussion on global climate change and how critical questions were used to stimulate the discussion. Finally, we explain how various argument schemes guided our development of an educational computer game (“Losing the Lake”) to promote awareness of environmental sustainability. The importance of taking a broad (multisided) view of scientific argumentation is described. |
