The DOI matches its Crossref record; 51 of the 51 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Science teachers and scientific argumentation: Trends in views and practice
Abstract
Current research indicates that student engagement in scientific argumentation can foster a better understanding of the concepts and the processes of science. Yet opportunities for students to participate in authentic argumentation inside the science classroom are rare. There also is little known about science teachers' understandings of argumentation, their ability to participate in this complex practice, or their views about using argumentation as part of the teaching and learning of science. In this study, the researchers used a cognitive appraisal interview to examine how 30 secondary science teachers evaluate alternative explanations, generate an argument to support a specific explanation, and investigate their views about engaging students in argumentation. The analysis of the teachers' comments and actions during the interview indicates that these teachers relied primarily on their prior content knowledge to evaluate the validity of an explanation rather than using available data. Although some of the teachers included data and reasoning in their arguments, most of the teachers crafted an argument that simply expanded on a chosen explanation but provided no real support for it. The teachers also mentioned multiple barriers to the integration of argumentation into the teaching and learning of science, primarily related to their perceptions of students' ability levels, even though all of these teachers viewed argumentation as a way to help students understand science. © 2012 Wiley Periodicals, Inc. J Res Sci Teach 49: 1122–1148, 2012
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Lincoln, Y. S., Guba, E. G., & Pilotta, J. J. (1985) · International Journal of Intercultural Relations · doi:10.1016/0147-1767(85)90062-8 · Cited by 45,787
(1999) · Cited by 12,812
Taking science to school: learning and teaching science in grades K-8
(2008) · Choice Reviews Online · doi:10.5860/choice.45-3327 · Cited by 2,480
Establishing the norms of scientific argumentation in classrooms
Driver, R., Newton, P., & Osborne, J. (2000) · Science Education · doi:10.1002/(sici)1098-237x(200005)84:3<287::aid-sce1>3.0.co;2-a · Cited by 2,323
Willis, G. (2005) · doi:10.4135/9781412983655 · Cited by 1,778
Personal epistemology the psychology of beliefs about knowledge and knowing
Hofer, B. K. (2009) · Cited by 1,642
Enhancing the quality of argumentation in school science
Osborne, J., Erduran, S., & Simon, S. (2004) · Journal of Research in Science Teaching · doi:10.1002/tea.20035 · Cited by 1,596
Fostering students' knowledge and argumentation skills through dilemmas in human genetics
Zohar, A., & Nemet, F. (2002) · Journal of Research in Science Teaching · doi:10.1002/tea.10008 · Cited by 1,346
Epistemologically authentic inquiry in schools: A theoretical framework for evaluating inquiry tasks
Chinn, C. A., & Malhotra, B. A. (2002) · Science Education · doi:10.1002/sce.10001 · Cited by 1,302
Improving science teachers' conceptions of nature of science: a critical review of the literature
Abd-El-Khalick, F., & Lederman, N. G. (2000) · International Journal of Science Education · doi:10.1080/09500690050044044 · Cited by 1,252
Metadata
- Authors
- Sampson, V., & Blanchard, M. R.
- Venue
- Journal of Research in Science Teaching
- Publisher
- Wiley
- Published
- 2012-08-24
- Volume
- 49
- Issue
- 9
- Pages
- 1122-1148
- ISSN
- 0022-4308 (ISSN-L)
- 1098-2736
- OpenAlex
- W2045384015
- Cited by
- 275
- References
- 51
- FWCI
- 44.77
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Science teachers and scientific argumentation: Trends in views and practice. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1002/tea.21037
- The paper
- Sampson, V., & Blanchard, M. R. (2012). Science teachers and scientific argumentation: Trends in views and practice. Journal of Research in Science Teaching. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.21037
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.