Pre-service Science Teacher Argumentation Self-Efficacy

Appendix A. Argumentation Self-Efficacy Inventory

Items / Question No
Planning dimension(6 items)
I do not feel confident in my ability to teach science through argumentation in different contexts (during instruction, in lab settings). / P 1
I feel confident about my ability to design learning tasks to engage my students in small-group argumentation. / P 2
I feel confident about my ability to design learning activities to engage my students in whole class argumentation. / P 3
I do not feel confident in my ability to develop written argumentation tasks. / P 4
I feel confident in my ability to develop argumentation tasks using different tools (concept maps, videos). / P 5
I do not feel confident in my ability to teach science through argumentation in different contexts (during instruction, in lab settings). / P 6
Implementation dimension (19 items)
I feel confident about my content knowledge to guide my students to effectively engage in argumentation. / I 1
I feel confident in my ability to guide my students to think critically during an argumentation session. / I 2
I do not feel confident in my ability to guide my students to reach scientifically accurate conclusions after I have given them enough time to discuss the topic under investigation. / I 3
I feel confident in my ability to motivate my students to engage in argumentation around core disciplinary ideas. / I 4
I feel confident in my ability to ask my students questions that have alternative explanations. / I 5
I don’t think that argumentation can improve students’ conceptual understanding. / I 6
I know what to do when a student with scientifically inaccurate knowledge convinces other students in his/her group of the accuracy of their knowledge. / I 7
I feel confident in my ability to ensure that every student gets his/her point across. / I 8
I feel confident in my ability not to tell my students the correct answer, while guiding their thinking / I 9
I fear that when the students cannot reach the correct answer; argumentation can negatively affect their motivation to learn. / I 1O
I feel confident in my ability to motivate my students to engage in argumentation beyond finding the correct answer. / I 11
I think that middle school students are not developmentally ready for learning science through argumentation. / I 12
I do not feel confident in my ability to point out the inaccurate scientific claims made by the students during argumentation. / I 13
I feel confident in my ability to challenge my students to justify their claims to knowledge. / I 14
I do not think I will have enough time to use argumentation in my teaching. / I 15
I feel confident in my ability to detect whether the students are talking off topic. / I 16
I know what to do pedagogically when all group members quickly agree with the claims of a dominant group member. / I 17
I feel confident in my ability to make sure that students come to a scientifically accurate conclusion at the end of an argumentation session. / I 18
I fear that I may lose control of my class if I teach through argumentation. / I 19
Assessment dimension (5 items)
I can identify different elements of argumentation from my students’ arguments. / A1
I do not feel confident in my ability to identify the important elements of an argument in my evaluation of students’ arguments. / A2
I do not feel confident in my ability to detect whether a student has developed an authentic argument or copied it from his/her peer’s argument. / A3
I do not know how to use students’ arguments as a measure of their learning. / A4
I feel confident in my ability to evaluate my students’ effective participation in argumentation. / A5

Appendix B: Descriptive Statistics

Item / N / Pre-Test / Post-Test
Min / Max / Mean / S.D / Min / Max / Mean / S.D.
1 / 40 / 1,00 / 5,00 / 3,375 / ,807 / 2,00 / 5,00 / 3,575 / ,844
2 / 40 / 2,00 / 5,00 / 3,550 / ,714 / 1,00 / 5,00 / 4,000 / ,817
3 / 40 / 2,00 / 5,00 / 3,525 / ,784 / 1,00 / 5,00 / 3,925 / ,888
4 / 40 / 1,00 / 5,00 / 3,375 / 1,079 / 1,00 / 5,00 / 4,050 / ,904
5 / 40 / 1,00 / 5,00 / 3,575 / ,844 / 2,00 / 5,00 / 3,975 / ,698
6 / 40 / 1,00 / 5,00 / 3,725 / ,933 / 1,00 / 5,00 / 3,775 / ,947
7 / 40 / 2,00 / 4,00 / 3,175 / ,781 / 2,00 / 5,00 / 3,975 / ,619
8 / 40 / 2,00 / 5,00 / 3,575 / ,781 / 2,00 / 5,00 / 4,150 / ,579
9 / 40 / 1,00 / 5,00 / 3,175 / 1,035 / 1,00 / 5,00 / 3,675 / 1,072
10 / 40 / 1,00 / 5,00 / 3,750 / ,742 / 1,00 / 5,00 / 4,025 / ,768
11 / 40 / 1,00 / 5,00 / 3,575 / ,781 / 2,00 / 5,00 / 4,075 / ,729
12 / 40 / 2,00 / 5,00 / 4,075 / ,829 / 1,00 / 5,00 / 4,100 / 1,128
13 / 40 / 1,00 / 5,00 / 3,275 / 1,037 / 1,00 / 5,00 / 3,875 / ,966
14 / 40 / 1,00 / 5,00 / 3,500 / ,987 / 1,00 / 5,00 / 4,075 / ,944
15 / 40 / 1,00 / 5,00 / 3,525 / ,987 / 1,00 / 5,00 / 3,600 / 1,033
16 / 40 / 2,00 / 4,00 / 3,700 / ,607 / 1,00 / 5,00 / 3,900 / ,900
17 / 40 / 2,00 / 5,00 / 3,650 / ,579 / 1,00 / 5,00 / 3,825 / ,813
18 / 40 / 2,00 / 5,00 / 3,450 / ,815 / 1,00 / 5,00 / 2,800 / 1,324
19 / 40 / 2,00 / 5,00 / 3,675 / ,656 / 1,00 / 5,00 / 3,850 / ,802
20 / 40 / 2,00 / 5,00 / 3,850 / ,579 / 2,00 / 5,00 / 4,150 / ,662
21 / 40 / 2,00 / 5,00 / 3,425 / ,931 / 1,00 / 5,00 / 3,475 / 1,062
22 / 40 / 2,00 / 5,00 / 3,700 / ,823 / 2,00 / 5,00 / 4,150 / ,662
23 / 40 / 1,00 / 5,00 / 3,175 / ,931 / 1,00 / 5,00 / 3,725 / 1,062
24 / 40 / 2,00 / 4,00 / 3,400 / ,744 / 2,00 / 5,00 / 3,725 / ,816
25 / 40 / 2,00 / 5,00 / 3,025 / ,862 / 2,00 / 5,00 / 3,750 / 1,006
26 / 40 / 2,00 / 5,00 / 3,725 / ,679 / 1,00 / 5,00 / 3,900 / ,841
27 / 40 / 1,00 / 5,00 / 3,450 / ,986 / 1,00 / 5,00 / 3,825 / ,958
28 / 40 / 2,00 / 5,00 / 3,250 / ,927 / 2,00 / 5,00 / 3,575 / ,844
29 / 40 / 1,00 / 5,00 / 2,925 / 1,047 / 2,00 / 5,00 / 3,875 / ,911
30 / 40 / 1,00 / 5,00 / 3,100 / 1,033 / 1,00 / 5,00 / 3,575 / 1,196

Appendix C. Open-ended Questions

  1. What types of challenges did you experience while teaching through argumentation?
  2. How do you plan to overcome these challenges once you become a full-time teacher?
  3. What types of challenges did your students experience in learning science through argumentation?
  4. How do you plan to help your students to overcome these challenges?
  5. What types of challenges did you experience in evaluating your students’ arguments?
  6. How do you plan to overcome these challenges?

Appendix D. Peer Evaluation of Argumentation Lesson

Using the scale provided, please rate how consistent you think your peer displayed the stated behaviors during his/her teaching.

1=Strongly Disagree, 2= Disagree, 3=Somewhat Agree, 4=Agree, 5=Strongly Agree.

Teacher Candidate / Evaluator / Date / Lesson Topic
Statements / 1 / 2 / 3 / 4 / 5
The teacher had sufficient content knowledge to facilitate argumentation sessions.
The teacher was able to guide students to think critically during argumentation.
The teacher was able to properly guide student thinking when students failed to reach a consensus at the end of argumentation.
The teacher motivated every student to effectively engage in argumentation.
The teacher was able to ask questions that did not have one right answer when appropriate.
When a student with misconceptions was able to convince the others of his arguments, the teacher intervened to guide the flow of argumentation so students would develop a scientifically accurate understanding.
The teacher was able to create a positive learning environment so all students could equally contribute to argumentation.
The teacher did not give the right answer; rather he/she guided his/her students to scientifically correct understanding through questioning.
The teacher was able to motivate and support students when students got stuck and lost motivation to argue.
The teacher was able to motivate and challenge the unwilling students to justify their answers to the questions being asked.
The teacher was successful at noticing students who were off task and ensuring their participation in and contribution to argumentation.
When all group members easily accepted the ideas/claims of a dominating member and stopped arguing, she/he properly intervened to guide the flow of argumentation.
The teacher was able to present the scientifically acceptable concept to his/her students.
The teacher was able to guide students through questioning and examples so they could identify relevant evidence.
The teacher was able to provide necessary resources for students to collect or access relevant evidence to justify their claims.
The teacher was able to effectively engage the students in the justification or refutation of conflicting claims to knowledge through proper scaffolding.
The teacher had sufficient content knowledge to facilitate argumentation sessions.
The teacher was able to guide students to think critically during argumentation.
The teacher was able to properly guide student thinking when students failed to reach a consensus at the end of argumentation.
The teacher motivates every student to effectively engage in argumentation.

Appendix E. Content of Argumentation Lessons Implemented by Pre-service Teachers (PST).

Group # / # of PST / Argumentation
Lesson Developed in the method course / Argumentation Lessons Implemented (n=3) / # of students
1 / 4 / Freshwater Conservation / Freshwater Conservation
Conservation of Mass in Chemical Reactions
Particulate Nature of Matter-(Phase Change) / 20-30
2 / 3 / Difference between heat and temperature / Difference between Heat and Temperature
Conservation of Mass in Chemical Reactions
Particulate Nature of Matter-(Phase Change) / 22-27
3 / 3 / Acids and Bases / Acids and Bases
Conservation of Mass in Chemical Reactions
Particulate Nature of Matter-(Phase Change) / 11-18
4 / 3 / Properties of Alkali Metals / Properties of Alkali Metals Conservation of Mass in Chemical Reactions
Particulate Nature of Matter-(Phase Change) / 15-21
5 / 4 / Boyle’s Law: Compressibility of Gases / Boyle’s Law: Compressibility of Gases
Conservation of Mass in Chemical Reactions
Particulate Nature of Matter-(Phase Change) / 15-29
6 / 3 / Solution Chemistry / Solution Chemistry
Conservation of Mass in Chemical Reactions
Particulate Nature of Matter-(Phase Change) / 15-16
7 / 4 / Compounds and Mixtures / Compounds and Mixtures
Conservation of Mass in Chemical Reactions
Particulate Nature of Matter-(Phase Change) / 23-30
8 / 3 / Boiling Point / Boiling Point
Conservation of Mass in Chemical Reactions
Particulate Nature of Matter-(Phase Change) / 19-22
9 / 3 / Effects of Temperature on Solubility / Effects of Temperature on Solubility
Conservation of Mass in Chemical Reactions
Particulate Nature of Matter-(Phase Change) / 7-24
10 / 2 / Electron Affinity / Electron Affinity
Conservation of Mass in Chemical Reactions
Particulate Nature of Matter-(Phase Change) / 24-28
11 / 3 / Metalloids / Metalloids
Conservation of Mass in Chemical Reactions
Particulate Nature of Matter-(Phase Change) / 12-18
12 / 3 / Charles’ Law / Charles’ Law
Conservation of Mass in Chemical Reactions
Particulate Nature of Matter-(Phase Change) / 8-12
13 / 2 / Atomic Fission / Atomic Fission
Conservation of Mass in Chemical Reactions
Particulate Nature of Matter-(Phase Change) / 5

Appendix F. Sample Argumentation Case: Conservation of Mass.

A 1-gram sample of solid iodine is placed in a tube and the tube is sealed after all of the air is removed. The tube and the solid iodine together weigh 27 grams.

The tube is then heated until all of the iodine evaporates and the tube is filled with iodine gas. Will the weight after heating be:

a.less than 26 grams.

b.26 grams.

c.between 26 and 27 grams.

d.27 grams.

e.more than 27 grams.

Justify your answer using the template provided (i.e. the CERR template)

Argument Construction Template

State Your Claim
Provide Your Evidence to Support Your Claim
Using given evidence, provide your justification/reasoning for your claim.
Write Your Rebuttal/Possible Counter Arguments