Learning to argue: A study of four schools and their attempt to develop the use of argumentation as a common instructional practice and its impact on students
Abstract
This article reports the outcomes of a project in which teachers' sought to develop their ability to use instructional practices associated with argumentation in the teaching of science—in particular, the use of more dialogic approach based on small group work and the consideration of ideas, evidence, and argument. The project worked with four secondary school science departments over 2 years with the aim of developing a more dialogic approach to the teaching of science as a common instructional practice within the school. To achieve this goal, two lead teachers in each school worked to improve the use of argumentation as an instructional practice by embedding activities in the school science curriculum and to develop their colleague's expertise across the curriculum for 11‐ to 16‐year‐old students. This research sought to identify: (a) whether such an approach using minimal support and professional development could lead to measurable difference in student outcomes, and (b) what changes in teachers' practice were achieved (reported elsewhere). To assess the effects on student learning and engagement, data were collected of students' conceptual understanding, reasoning, and attitudes toward science from both the experimental schools and a comparison sample using a set of standard instruments. Results show that few significant changes were found in students compared to the comparison sample. In this article, we report the findings and discuss what we argue are salient implicat…
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
Previous interventionist studies have achieved only patchy success as regards target dialogue.
“the initiatives have achieved only patchy success as regards target dialogue (e.g.Alexander et al., 2017;Lefstein & Snell, 2014;Osborne et al., 2013;Pehmer et al., 2015;Pimentel & McNeill, 2013;Ruthven et al., 2017;Wells & Arauz, 2006).”
From Teacher–Student Dialogue During Classroom Teaching: Does It Really Impact on Student Outcomes? (2019) · cites this paper as Osborne et al., 2013
Studies that analyze teacher-student dialogue and assess outcomes with an approach concurring with the present one sometimes detect positive outcomes when theoretically productive forms are frequent, but they concern broader packages and do not allow effects of teacher-student dialogue to be isolated.
“Sometimes (not always), these studies detect positive outcomes when theoretically productive forms are frequent.However, concerned with broader 'packages' that include good task design and/or productive small-group dialogue amongst students, these studies do not allow the effects of teacher-student dialogue to be isolated.”
From Teacher–Student Dialogue During Classroom Teaching: Does It Really Impact on Student Outcomes? (2019) · cites this paper as Osborne et al., 2013
Cites
The role of deliberate practice in the acquisition of expert performance
Ericsson, K. A., Krampe, R. T., & Tesch-Römer, C. (1993) · Psychological Review · doi:10.1037/0033-295x.100.3.363 · Cited by 9,564 · see citing works
Sterling, T. D. (1959) · Journal of the American Statistical Association · doi:10.1080/01621459.1959.10501497 · Cited by 964 · cited 1× · see citing works
“Findings such as these then act to prevent the bias that arises in our understanding of a phenomenon (Lehrer, 2010; Moller & Jennions, 2001) such as that identified by Thomas Sterling who noted in 1959 that 97% of all published studies in psychology found the effect they were looking for with statistical significance…”
BackgroundReasoning as a scientist: ways of helping children to use language to learn science
Mercer, N., Dawes, L., Wegerif, R., & Sams, C. (2004) · British Educational Research Journal · doi:10.1080/01411920410001689689 · Cited by 637 · see citing works
At what rate do learners learn and retain new vocabulary from reading a graded reader?
Waring, R., & Takaki, M. (2003) · Reading in a Foreign Language · doi:10.64152/10125/66776 · Cited by 547 · see citing works
Flagged first, then by citations
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Teacher–Student Dialogue During Classroom Teaching: Does It Really Impact on Student Outcomes?
Howe, C., Hennessy, S., Mercer, N., Vrikki, M., & Wheatley, L. (2019) · Journal of the Learning Sciences · doi:10.1080/10508406.2019.1573730 · Cited by 425 · see citing works
Teacher professional development as a means of transforming student classroom talk
Sedova, K., Sedlacek, M., & Svaricek, R. (2016) · Teaching and Teacher Education · doi:10.1016/j.tate.2016.03.005 · Cited by 179 · see citing works
Automatically Measuring Question Authenticity in Real-World Classrooms
Kelly, S., Olney, A. M., Donnelly, P., Nystrand, M., & D’Mello, S. K. (2018) · Educational Researcher · doi:10.3102/0013189x18785613 · Cited by 114 · see citing works
Sheldrake, R., Mujtaba, T., & Reiss, M. J. (2017) · International Journal of Educational Research · doi:10.1016/j.ijer.2017.08.002 · Cited by 111 · see citing works
Mikeska, J. N., Francis, D. C., Lottero-Perdue, P. S., Park Rogers, M., Shekell, C., Bharaj, P. K., Howell, H., Maltese, A., Thompson, M., & Reich, J. (2025) · Teaching and Teacher Education · doi:10.1016/j.tate.2024.104858 · Cited by 9 · see citing works
- Authors
- Osborne, J., Simon, S., Christodoulou, A., Howell‐Richardson, C., & Richardson, K.
- Affiliations
- Stanford University (US)
- University of London (GB)
- University of Southampton (GB)
- King's College London (GB)
- Corresponding author
- Osborne, Jonathan
- Venue
- Journal of Research in Science Teaching
- Publisher
- Wiley
- Published
- 2013-01-17
- Volume
- 50
- Issue
- 3
- Pages
- 315-347
- ISSN
- 0022-4308 (ISSN-L)
- 1098-2736
- OpenAlex
- W2088235020
- Cited by
- 268
- References
- 4
- Citations by year
- 2026: 11 · 2025: 19 · 2024: 12 · 2023: 23 · 2022: 24 · 2021: 18 · 2020: 25 · 2019: 23 · 2018: 21 · 2017: 21 · 2016: 32 · 2015: 20 · 2014: 10 · 2013: 9
- FWCI
- 112.87
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Journal of Research in Science Teaching (publishedVersion)
- ePrints Soton (University of Southampton) (acceptedVersion)
- UCL Discovery (University College London) (submittedVersion)
- Research Portal (King's College London) (submittedVersion)
- Funders
- Economic and Social Research Council (RES-062-23-0571-A)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Education › Science Education and Pedagogy
- Social Sciences › Arts and Humanities › History and Philosophy of Science › Evolution and Science Education
- Social Sciences › Education › Teacher Education and Leadership Studies
- Keywords
- argumentation in science teaching, dialogic teaching, small group work, teacher professional development, instructional practices, secondary school science, student conceptual understanding, scientific reasoning, attitudes toward science, student engagement, teacher learning
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