The DOI matches its Crossref record; 2 of the 2 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Knowledge producers or knowledge consumers? Argumentation and decision making about environmental management
Abstract
This paper describes a case study involving decision making and argumentation, in the context of wetland environmental management, by 11th-grade students (16-17 years old). The purpose was to study the components of knowledge and skills needed to reach a decision in socio-scientific contexts and to identify them in classroom discourse. The following dimensions of decision making were explored: the use of relevant knowledge to understand and make decisions about the problem; and the critical processing of sources of information and authority and the development of criteria for evaluating possible solutions to the problem. Students' conversations were recorded and analysed using Toulmin's (1958) and Walton's (1996) argument schemes. The students' arguments and warrants were compared with the argument of an external 'official' expert. Issues such as expert status, that is, who can be considered as a source of knowledge and authority and the participation of citizens in scientific practice are also discussed.
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
Situated Cognition and the Culture of Learning
Brown, J. S., Collins, A., & Duguid, P. (1989) · Educational Researcher · doi:10.3102/0013189x018001032 · Cited by 13,645 · cited 4×
“As Brown et al. (1989) point out, there is usually a difference between practitioners’ tasks and stereotyped school tasks and, it could be added, students are not used to being confronted with the complexity of ‘life-size’ problems.”
BackgroundInfluentialToulmin, S. E. (2003) · doi:10.1017/cbo9780511840005 · Cited by 7,101
Cited by
Classroom dialogue: a systematic review across four decades of research
Howe, C., & Abedin, M. (2013) · Cambridge Journal of Education · doi:10.1080/0305764x.2013.786024 · Cited by 606
Venville, G. J., & Dawson, V. M. (2010) · Journal of Research in Science Teaching · doi:10.1002/tea.20358 · Cited by 399
Reconceptualizing the teaching of controversial issues
Oulton, C., Dillon, J., & Grace, M. M. (2004) · International Journal of Science Education · doi:10.1080/0950069032000072746 · Cited by 369
Rapanta, C., Garcia-Mila, M., & Gilabert, S. (2013) · Review of Educational Research · doi:10.3102/0034654313487606 · Cited by 228
Mapping Children’s Discussions of Evidence in Science to Assess Collaboration and Argumentation
Maloney, J., & Simon, S. (2006) · International Journal of Science Education · doi:10.1080/09500690600855419 · Cited by 131
Metadata
- Authors
- Jime´nez-Aleixandre, M.-P.
- Venue
- International Journal of Science Education
- Publisher
- Informa UK Limited
- Published
- 2002-11
- Volume
- 24
- Issue
- 11
- Pages
- 1171-1190
- ISSN
- 0950-0693 (ISSN-L)
- 1464-5289
- OpenAlex
- W1992467452
- Cited by
- 320
- References
- 2
- FWCI
- 34.52
- 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: Knowledge producers or knowledge consumers? Argumentation and decision making about environmental management. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1080/09500690210134857
- The paper
- Jime´nez-Aleixandre, M.-P. (2002). Knowledge producers or knowledge consumers? Argumentation and decision making about environmental management. International Journal of Science Education. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500690210134857
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.
