ANALOGICAL-MAPPING-BASED COMPARISON TASKS AS A SCAFFOLD FOR ARGUMENTATION
Open Access
- Author:
- Emig, Brandon
- Graduate Program:
- Curriculum and Instruction
- Degree:
- Doctor of Philosophy
- Document Type:
- Dissertation
- Date of Defense:
- May 16, 2011
- Committee Members:
- Scott Mc Donald, Dissertation Advisor/Co-Advisor
Scott P Mcdonald, Committee Chair/Co-Chair
Richard Alan Duschl, Committee Member
Carla Zembal Saul, Committee Member
Susan G Strauss, Committee Member - Keywords:
- scaffolding
curriculum
analogical mapping
analogy
Argumentation - Abstract:
- Given the centrality of the argumentation process to science and consequent importance to science education, inviting science students to engage in argumentation and scaffolding that argumentation in order that it lead to learning and not frustration is important. The present research invites small groups of science content learners (54 preservice elementary teachers at a large research university) to use analogical mapping-based comparison tasks in service of argumentation to determine which of two possible analogues, in this case simple machines, is most closely related to a third. These activities and associated instruction scaffolded student small-groups’ argumentation in four ways: 1. supporting new analogical correspondences on the heels of prior correspondences; 2. discerning definitions and descriptions for simple machine elements; 3. identifying and dealing with ambiguity in potential correspondences; and 4. making reflections on prior analogical correspondences in service of their final arguments. Analogical-mapping-based comparison activities scaffolded student small groups both in their argumentation and in content learning about simple machines. Implications, limitations, and directions for future related research are also discussed.