Analyzing Teacher Supports for Collective Argumentation in Integrative STEM Classrooms (RTP)
- Conference
- Location
-
Minneapolis, MN
- Publication Date
-
August 23, 2022
- Start Date
-
June 26, 2022
- End Date
-
June 29, 2022
- Conference Session
- Page Count
-
13
- DOI
-
10.18260/1-2--41277
- Permanent URL
-
https://peer.asee.org/41277
- Download Count
-
403
Paper Authors
Shaffiq Welji University of Georgia
Shaffiq Welji is a PhD candidate in mathematics education at the University of Georgia and is interested in the connections among school and classroom culture, student learning, and teacher development across STEM education. He is currently a member of the Collective Argumentation Learning and Coding research team. Prior to joining UGA, Shaffiq became a National Board certified teacher and taught mathematics and engineering at the high school level for 12 years. He has coached multiple robotics teams during that time. He has a BA from the University of Chicago in mathematics and a PhD from Columbia University in mathematics where he studied low-dimensional topology and geometry.
James Drimalla University of Georgia
James Drimalla is a Ph.D. candidate in Mathematics Education at the University of Georgia in Athens, GA. He received a B.A. from Trinity International University in Mathematics and Secondary Education and an M.S. from Loyola University of Chicago in Mathematics. His research focuses on the philosophy of mathematics education.
Aida Alibek University of Georgia
Aida Alibek is a PhD student in Mathematics Education at the University of Georgia. Her research interests are in undergraduate mathematics education, especially entry-level math courses for STEM majors, learning environments and students' learning experiences. Before getting into education research Aida Alibek did mathematics research in the area of mathematical logic and model theory. She got her Master of Science in mathematics from the Al-Farabi Kazakh National University and her Bachelor of Science in mathematics from Suleyman Demirel University back in her home city of Almaty, Kazakhstan.
AnnaMarie Conner
AnnaMarie Conner is a professor of mathematics education at the University of Georgia. Her work research is classroom-based and longitudinal, crossing boundaries between instruction in university courses and classroom teaching in school districts. She investigates teachers’ beliefs and identity construction during teacher education and how teachers learn to support collective argumentation in mathematics classes. These two lines of research come together in findings describing how teachers’ beliefs impact their classroom practice with respect to collective argumentation. Dr. Conner’s work investigates the complex connections between teacher education, teacher characteristics, and teacher practice. She is currently collaborating with secondary mathematics teachers in supporting mathematical arguments as well as investigating how elementary teachers navigate infusing argumentation into integrative STEM instruction.
Lorraine Franco
Lorraine Franco received her undergraduate degree from the University of Northern Colorado. She talk middle school before pursuing a graduate degree. Lorraine is now a PhD student at the University of Georgia. Her research interests are problem solving, elementary education, and social emotional learning.
Jenna Menke University of Georgia
I earned my B.A. in mathematics, secondary education, and theology from the University of Saint Thomas in Houston, Texas and my Masters in mathematics education from the University of Dayton in Dayton, Ohio. I taught high school mathematics in Cincinnati, Ohio before coming to the University of Georgia to complete my Ph.D. in mathematics education. My research focuses on teacher preparation programs and how we assess teachers' feelings of preparedness.
Tim Foutz University of Georgia
Dr. Foutz, a professor in the College of Engineering, is a Josiah Meigs Distinguished Teaching Professors, the university’s highest recognition for excellence in instruction at the undergraduate and graduate levels. Dr. Foutz has active projects in the general area of engineering education, including Humanistic studies into engineering education to enhance service learning, Identifying faculty-based specifications for improving instruction and enhancing student success in STEM disciplines and Developing a Collective Argumentation Framework for infusing computer programming into elementary school mathematics.
• Teaching Technology to Elementary Students While Teaching Design to Engineering Majors
• Connecting and Aligning Teaching, Assessment, and Project-Based Understanding for Learners in the 21st Century: Teachers Empowering All Math and Science Students
• Integrating Mathematics, Science and Engineering in Middle Grades
• Development of a Instructional Manual for Incorporating Engineering and Technology into Georgia’s Elementary Science Program
• Bridges for Engineering Education
Barbara Crawford
Barbara A, Crawford, Ph.D., is a recently retired Professor and Department Head of Mathematics and Science Education at The University of Georgia, USA. She currently serves as Consultant and Adjunct Professor. She was elected President of NARST: A worldwide organization for improving science teaching and learning through research. She is an Elected Fellow of the American Association for the Advancement of Science (AAAS). She earned three degrees from The University of Michigan; including a bachelor’s degree in Microbiology, a master’s degree in Biology, and a Ph.D. in Educational Studies/Science Education. Crawford taught science in 7th-12th public school classrooms for 16 years. Her research interests include inquiry-based science teaching and learning, teacher professional development, nature of science, models and modeling, authentic science, argumentation, and STEM teaching. The ultimate goal of her research is to facilitate the majority of students in classrooms in developing images of science consistent with current practice, and in understanding what science is and what science is not, and the relevancy of science to society.
Abstract
The Next Generation Science Standards [1] recognized evidence-based argumentation as one of the essential skills for students to develop throughout their science and engineering education. Argumentation focuses students on the need for quality evidence, which helps to develop their deep understanding of content [2]. Argumentation has been studied extensively, both in mathematics and science education but also to some extent in engineering education (see for example [3], [4], [5], [6]). After a thorough search of the literature, we found few studies that have considered how teachers support collective argumentation during engineering learning activities.
The purpose of this program of research was to support teachers in viewing argumentation as an important way to promote critical thinking and to provide teachers with tools to implement argumentation in their lessons integrating coding into science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (which we refer to as integrative STEM). We applied a framework developed for secondary mathematics [7] to understand how teachers support collective argumentation in integrative STEM lessons. This framework used Toulmin’s [8] conceptualization of argumentation, which includes three core components of arguments: a claim (or hypothesis) that is based on data (or evidence) accompanied by a warrant (or reasoning) that relates the data to the claim [9], [8]. To adapt the framework, video data were coded using previously established methods for analyzing argumentation [7].
In this paper, we consider how the framework can be applied to an elementary school teacher’s classroom interactions and present examples of how the teacher implements various questioning strategies to facilitate more productive argumentation and deeper student engagement. We aim to understand the nature of the teacher’s support for argumentation—contributions and actions from the teacher that prompt or respond to parts of arguments. In particular, we look at examples of how the teacher supports students to move beyond unstructured tinkering (e.g., trial-and-error) to think logically about coding and develop reasoning for the choices that they make in programming. We also look at the components of arguments that students provide, with and without teacher support. Through the use of the framework, we are able to articulate important aspects of collective argumentation that would otherwise be in the background. The framework gives both eyes to see and language to describe how teachers support collective argumentation in integrative STEM classrooms.
Welji, S., & Drimalla, J., & Alibek, A., & Conner, A., & Franco, L., & Menke, J., & Foutz, T., & Crawford, B. (2022, August), Analyzing Teacher Supports for Collective Argumentation in Integrative STEM Classrooms (RTP) Paper presented at 2022 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition, Minneapolis, MN. 10.18260/1-2--41277
ASEE holds the copyright on this document. It may be read by the public free of charge. Authors may archive their work on personal websites or in institutional repositories with the following citation: © 2022 American Society for Engineering Education. Other scholars may excerpt or quote from these materials with the same citation. When excerpting or quoting from Conference Proceedings, authors should, in addition to noting the ASEE copyright, list all the original authors and their institutions and name the host city of the conference. - Last updated April 1, 2015