DESAFIOS METODOLÓGICOS NA PESQUISA DA ARGUMENTAÇÃO EM ENSINO DE CIÊNCIAS
METHODOLOGICAL CHALLENGES IN ARGUMENTATION RESEARCH IN SCIENCE EDUCATION
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.1590/1983-2117201517s08%20Palavras-chave:
Argumentação; Metodologia; Análise da argumentação.Resumo
Este artigo apresenta uma revisão crítica dos principais desafios metodológicos envolvidos na pesquisa da argumentação em ensino de ciências. Distinguimos três tipos de desafios que estão conectados: teóricos - como se caracteriza, como se enquadra; metodológicos - como se estuda, como se analisa, o que analisar, objeto deste trabalho; didáticos - como planejar situações de aula para promover a sua prática, como articulá-la com a aprendizagem das ciências. Identificam-se cinco tipos de desafios metodológicos: 1) o que conta como argumento; 2) o objeto de estudo e a unidade de análise; 3) a adequação das distintas ferramentas metodológicas; 4) como definir, como identificar e utilizar distintos elementos das ferramentas na pesquisa; e 5) como analisar as dimensões mais sofisticadas da argumentação.
A critical review of methodological challenges posed by research about argumentation in science education is presented. We distinguish three types of challenges, which are interconnected: theoretical, how it is characterized, how it is framed; methodological, how it is studied and analyzed, what is analyzed, object of this paper; didactic, how to design classroom environments to promote its practice, how to articulate it with science learning. Five types of methodological challenges are identified: 1) what counts as argument; 2) the object of study and the unit of analysis; 3) the adequacy of different methodological tools; 4) how to define, identify and use different tools' elements in research; and 5) how to analyze sophisticated dimensions of argumentation.
Downloads
Referências
BERLAND, L. K.; MCNEILL, K. L. A learning progression for scientific argumentation: Understanding student work and designing supportive instructional contexts. Science Education, v. 94, n. 5, p. 191-216, 2010. [ Links ]
BERLAND, L. K.; REISER, B. Classroom communities' adaptation of the practice of scientific argumentation. Science Education, v. 95, n. 2, p. 473-498, 2011. [ Links ]
BILLIG, M. Arguing and thinking: A rhetorical approach to social psychology. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1987. [ Links ]
BLOOME, D.; CARTER, S.; CHRISTIAN, B.; OTTO, S.; SHUART-FARIS, N. Discourse analysis and the study of classroom language and literacy events: A Microethnographic approach. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum, 2005. [ Links ]
BRICKER, L. A.; BELL, P. Argumentation and reasoning in life and in school: Implications for design of school science learning environments. In: KHINE, M. S. (Ed.). Perspectives on scientific argumentation: Theory, practice and research. Dordrecht: Springer, 2012, p. 117-133. [ Links ]
CHINN, C. A.; BUCKLAND, L. A.; SAMARAPUNGAVAN, A. Expanding the dimensions of epistemic cognition: Arguments from philosophy and psychology. Educational Psychologist, v. 46, n. 3, p. 141-167, 2011. [ Links ]
DUSCHL, R. A. Quality argumentation and epistemic criteria. In: ERDURAN, S. M.; JIMÉNEZ-ALEIXANDRE, M. P. (Eds.) Argumentation in science education: Perspectives from classroom-based research. Dordrecht: Springer, 2008, p. 159-175. [ Links ]
ERDURAN, S. Methodological foundations in the study of argumentation in science classrooms. In: ERDURAN, S.; JIMÉNEZ-ALEIXANDRE, M. P. (Eds.). Argumentation in science education: Perspectives from classroom-based research. Dordrecht: Springer, 2008, p. 47-69. [ Links ]
ERDURAN, S.; SIMON, S.; OSBORNE, J. TAPping into argumentation: Developments in the application of Toulmin's argument pattern for studying science discourse. Science Education, v. 88, n. 6, p. 915-933, 2004. [ Links ]
EUROPEAN UNION - EU. Recommendation of the European Parliament and of the Council of 18 December 2006 on key competences for lifelong learning. Official Journal of the European Union, 30-12-2006, L 394/10-L 394/18. [ Links ]
FORD, M. 'Grasp of practice' as a reasoning resource for inquiry and nature of science understanding. Science & Education, v. 17, n. 2-3, p. 147-177, 2008. [ Links ]
GARCIA-MILA, M.; ANDERSEN, C. Cognitive foundations of learning argumentation. In: ERDURAN, S. M.; JIMÉNEZ-ALEIXANDRE, M. P. (Eds.) Argumentation in science education: Perspectives from classroom-based research. Dordrecht: Springer, 2008, p. 29-45. [ Links ]
GEE, J. P. An introduction to discourse analysis: Theory and methods. London: Routledge, 2005. [ Links ]
JIMÉNEZ-ALEIXANDRE, M. P. 10 Ideas clave: Competencias en argumentación y uso de pruebas. Barcelona: Graó, 2010. [ Links ]
JIMÉNEZ-ALEIXANDRE, M. P. Argumentación y uso de pruebas: construcción, evaluación y comunicación de explicaciones en Biología y Geología. In: P. CAÑAL (Ed.). Didáctica de la Biología y la Geología. Barcelona: Graó, 2011, p. 129-149. [ Links ]
JIMÉNEZ-ALEIXANDRE, M. P.; ERDURAN, S. Argumentation in science education: An overview. In: ERDURAN, S.M.; JIMÉNEZ-ALEIXANDRE, M. P. (Eds.) Argumentation in science education: Perspectives from classroom-based research. Dordrecht: Springer, 2008, p. 3-27. [ Links ]
JIMÉNEZ-ALEIXANDRE, M. P.; ERDURAN, S. Argumentation. In: GUNSTONE, R. (Ed.) Encyclopedia of Science Education. Dordrecht: Springer, 2015, p. 54-59. [ Links ]
JIMÉNEZ-ALEIXANDRE, M. P.; PEREIRO, C. Knowledge producers or knowledge consumers? Argumentation and decision making about environmental management. International Journal of Science Education, 24(11), p. 1171-1190, 2002. [ Links ]
JIMÉNEZ-ALEIXANDRE, M. P.; AGRASO, M. F.; EIREXAS, F. Scientific authority and empirical data in argument warrants about the Prestige oil spill. Trabalho apresentado na National Association for Research in Science Teaching (NARST) Annual Meeting. Vancouver, April 2004. [ Links ]
JIMÉNEZ-ALEIXANDRE, M. P.; BUGALLO, A.; DUSCHL, R. A. "Doing the lesson" or "doing science": Argument in High School Genetics', Science Education, v. 84, n. 6, p. 757-792, 2000. [ Links ]
JIMÉNEZ-aleixandre, M. P.; Gallástegui Otero, J. R.; Eirexas Santamaría, F.; Puig Mauriz, B. Actividades para trabajar el uso de pruebas y la argumentación en ciencias. Santiago de Compostela: Danú {Há edições em galego e inglês}, 2009. Disponível em: http://www.rodausc.eu >. Acesso em: 5 out. 2015. [ Links ]
JIMÉNEZ-ALEIXANDRE M. P.; PUIG, B.; BRAVO, B.; CRUJEIRAS, B. The role of discursive contexts in argumentation. Trabalho apresentado na NARST Annual Meeting, Pittsburgh, PA, March 30 - April 2, 2014. [ Links ]
KELLY, G. J. Inquiry, activity and epistemic practice. In: DUSCHL, R.; GRANDY, R. (Eds.). Teaching Scientific Inquiry: Recommendations for research and implementation. Rotterdam: Sense Publishers, 2008, p. 99-117. [ Links ]
KELLY, G. J.; TAKAO, A. Epistemic levels in argument: An analysis of university oceanography students' use of evidence in writing. Science Education, v. 86, n. 3, p. 314-342, 2002. [ Links ]
KELLY, G. J.; REGEV, J.; PROTHERO, W.Analysis of lines of reasoning in written argumentation. In: ERDURAN, S. M.; JIMÉNEZ-ALEIXANDRE, M. P. (Eds.). Argumentation in science education: Perspectives from classroom-based research. Dordrecht: Springer, 2008, p. 137-159. [ Links ]
KOSLOWSKI, B.; MARASIA, J.; CHELENZA, M.; DUBLIN, R. Information becomes evidence when an explanation can incorporate it into a causal framework. Cognitive Development, v. 23, n. 4, p. 472-487, 2008. [ Links ]
KUHN, D.The skills of argument. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1991. [ Links ]
KUHN, D.; FRANKLIN, S. The second decade: What develops (and how)? In: DAMON, W.; LERNER, R. M. (Series Eds.),; KUHN, D. SIEGLER, R. (Vol. Eds.), Handbook of child psychology: Vol 2. Cognition, perception, and language. 6 ed. Hoboken, NJ: Wiley, 2006, p. 953-993. [ Links ]
KUHN, D.; UDELL, W. The development of argument skills. Child Development, v. 74, n. 5, p. 1245-1260, 2003. [ Links ]
LEE, M. H.; WU, Y. T.; TSAI, C. C. Research trends in science education from 2003 to 2007: A content analysis of publication in selected journals. International Journal of Science Education, v. 31, n. 15, p. 1999-2020, 2009. [ Links ]
LÓPEZ, R.; JIMÉNEZ-ALEIXANDRE, M. P. ¿Podemos cazar ranas? Calidad de los argumentos de alumnado de primaria y desempeño cognitivo en el estudio de una charca. Enseñanza de las Ciencias, v. 25n. 3, p. 309-324, 2007. [ Links ]
MCDONALD, S. P.; KELLY, G. J. Beyond argumentation: Sense-making discourse in the science classroom. In: KHINE, M. S. (Ed.). Perspectives on scientific argumentation. Dordrecht: Springer, 2012, p. 265-281. [ Links ]
MCNEILL, K. L.; KRAJCIK, J. Supporting grade 5-8 students in constructing explanations in science. The claim, evidence and reasoning framework for talk and writing. Boston: Pearson, 2012. [ Links ]
MENDONÇA, P. C. C.; JUSTI, R. An instrument for analyzing arguments produced in modeling-based chemistry lessons. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, v. 51, n. 2, p. 192-218, 2014. [ Links ]
MULLER-MIRZA, N.; PERRET-CLERMONT, A. N. (Orgs.) Argumentation and education: Theoretical foundations and practices. Dordrecht: Springer, 2009. [ Links ]
NATIONAL RESEARCH COUNCIL - NRC. A framework for K-12 science education: Practices, cross-cutting concepts and core ideas. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press, 2012. [ Links ]
NGSS. New Generation Science Standards: For States, by States. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press, 2013. [ Links ]
ORGANISATION FOR ECONOMIC COOPERATION AND DEVELOPMENT - OECD. Assessing scientific, reading and mathematical literacy: A framework for PISA 2006. Paris: Author, 2006 [ Links ]
OSBORNE, J.; MACPHERSON, A.; PATTERSON, A.; SZU, E. Introduction. In: KHINE, M. S. (Ed.) Perspectives on scientific argumentation. Dordrecht: Springer, 2012, p. 3-15. [ Links ]
PERELMAN, C.; OLBRECHTS-TYTECA, L. Traité de l'argumentation. La nouvelle rhétorique. Bruxelles: Éditions de l'Université de Bruxelles, 1958. [ Links ]
PLANTIN, C. L'argumentation. Paris: Seuil, 1996. [ Links ]
PLANTIN, C. L'Argumentation. Histoire, théories et perspectives. Paris: Presses Universitaires de France, 2005. [ Links ]
PLANTIN, C. Les bonnes raisons des émotions. Berne: Peter Lang, 2011. [ Links ]
POLO, C. L'eau à la bouche: ressources et travail argumentatif des élèves lors de débats socio-scientifique sur l'eau potable. 2014. 464 f. Tese (Doutorado em Ciências da Educação) - Ecole Doctorale 485 - Education Psychologie Information et Communication, Université Lumière Lyon 2, Lyon, França. 2014. [ Links ]
RIGOTTI, E.; GRECO-MORASSO, S. Argumentation as an object of interest and as a social and cultural resource. In: MULLER-MIRZA, N.; PERRET-CLERMONT, A. N. (Eds.), Argumentation and education. Theoretical foundations and practices. Dordrecht: Springer, 2009, p. 9-66. [ Links ]
SAMPSON, V.; CLARK, D. B. Assessment of the ways students generate arguments in science education: Current perspectives and recommendations for future directions. Science Education, v. 92, n. 3, p. 447-472, 2008. [ Links ]
TOULMIN, S. E. The uses of argument. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1958. [ Links ]
VAN EEMEREN, F. H.; GROOTENDORST, R. A systematic theory of argumentation: the pragma-dialectical approach. New York: Cambridge University Press, 2004. [ Links ]
WALTON, D. N.Informal logic: a handbook for critical argumentation. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1989. [ Links ]
WALTON, D. N. Argumentation schemes for presumptive reasoning. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum, 1996. [ Links ]
WALTON, D. N. Media argumentation: Dialectic, persuasion and rhetoric. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2007. [ Links ]
