by V SAMPSON · 2016 — pdf. Teachers can use these activities to integrate more scientific argumentation into the teaching and learning of biology. When teachers use several

355 KB – 71 Pages

PAGE – 1 ============
Grades 9Œ12PB269XISBN 978-1-935155-08-9scientificargumentation IN BIOLOGYVICTOR SAMPSONSHARON SCHLEIGH30CLASSROOMACTIVITIES PB304XISBN 978-1-936137-27-5Grades 6Œ12SAMPSON SCHLEIGHscientificargumentation IN BIOLOGY – – ŠAuthors Victor Sampson and Sharon Schleigh – – – is an invaluable – – – 30CLASSROOM ACTIVITIES scientific argumentation IN BIOLOGY30CLASSROOMACTIVITIES

PAGE – 5 ============
Claire Reinburg, Director Jennifer Horak, Managing Editor Andrew Cooke, Senior Editor Wendy Rubin, Associate Editor Agnes Bannigan, Associate Editor Amy America, Book Acquisitions Coordinator ART AND DESIGN Will Thomas Jr., Director Rashad Muhammad, Graphic Designer, Cover and Interior Design PRINTING AND PRODUCTION Catherine Lorrain, Director NATIONAL SCIENCE TEACHERS ASSOCIATIONGerald F. Wheeler, Executive Director David Beacom, Publisher 1840 Wilson Blvd., Arlington, VA 22201 For customer service inquiries, please call 800-277-5300. Copyright © 2013 by the National Science Teachers Association. All rights reserved. Printed in the United States of America. 18 17 16 15 6 5 4 3NSTA is committed to publishing material that promotes the best in inquiry-based science education. However, conditions of actual use may vary, and the safety procedures and practices described in this book are intended to serve only as a guide. Additional precautionary measures may be required. NSTA and the authors do not warrant or represent that the procedures and practices in this book meet any safety code or standard of federal, state, or local regulations. NSTA and the authors disclaim any liability for personal injury or damage to property arising out of or relating to the use of this book, including any of the recommendations, instructions, or materials contained therein. PERMISSIONSBook purchasers may photocopy, print, or e-mail up to ˜ve copies of an NSTA book chapter for personal use only; this does not include display or promotional use. Elementary, middle, and high school teachers may reproduce forms, sample documents, and single NSTA book chapters needed for classroom or noncommercial, professional-development use only. E-book buyers may download ˜les to multiple personal devices but are prohibited from posting the ˜les to third-party servers or websites, or from passing ˜les to non-buyers. For additional permission to photocopy or use material electronically from this NSTA Press book, please contact the Copyright Clearance Center (CCC) ( ; 978-750-8400). Please access for further information about NSTA™s rights and permissions policies. Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data Sampson, Victor, 1974- Scienti˜c argumentation in biology : 30 classroom activities / by Victor Sampson and Sharon Schleigh. p. cm. Includes bibliographical references. ISBN 978-1-936137-27-5 1. Qualitative reasoning. 2. Biology. I. Schleigh, Sharon, 1963- II. Title. Q339.25.S26 2012 570.71™2–dc23 2012029423 eISBN 978-1-936959-56-3

PAGE – 6 ============
ContentsPREFACE ixINTRODUCTION xvGenerate an Argument 1Framework Matrix 2Activity 1: Classifying Birds in the United States 5 (Species Concept)Activity 2: Color Variation in Venezuelan Guppies 19 (Mechanisms of Evolution)Activity 3: Desert Snakes 29 (Mechanics of Evolution) Activity 4: Fruit Fly Traits 45 (Genetics) Activity 5: DNA Family Relationship Analysis 55 (Genetics)Activity 6: Evolutionary Relationships in Mammals 67 (Genetics and Evolution) Activity 7: Decline in Saltwater Fish Populations 81 (Ecology and Human Impact on the Environment) Activity 8: History of Life on Earth 103 (Trends in Evolution) Activity 9: Surviving Winter in the Dust Bowl 113 (Food Chains and Trophic Levels) Activity 10: Characteristics of Viruses 123 (Characteristics of Life)

PAGE – 8 ============
Refutational Writing 249 Framework Matrix 250Activity 21: Misconception About Theories and Laws 253 (Nature of Science) Activity 22: Misconception About the Nature of Scienti˚c Knowledge 261 (Nature of Science) Activity 23: Misconception About the Work of Scientists 269 (Nature of Science) Activity 24: Misconception About the Methods of Scienti˚c Investigations 277 (Nature of Science) Activity 25: Misconception About Life on Earth 285 (Evolution) Activity 26: Misconception About Bacteria 293 (Microbiology) Activity 27: Misconception About Interactions That Take Place Between Organisms 301 (Ecology) Activity 28: Misconception About Plant Reproduction 309 (Botany) Activity 29: Misconception About Inheritance of Traits 315 (Genetics) Activity 30: Misconception About Insects 321 (Ecology)ASSESSMENTS & STUDENT SAMPLES 329APPENDIX 361INDEX 373Contents

PAGE – 10 ============
ixixWhat Is Scientific Argumentation?Scienti˜c argumentation is an important practice in science. We de˜ne scienti˜c argumentation as an attempt to validate or refute a claim on the basis of reasons in a manner that re˚ects the values of the scienti˜c community (Norris, Phil- ips, and Osborne 2007). A claim, in this context, is not simply an opinion or an idea; rather, it is a conjecture, explana – tion, or other conclusion that provides a suf˜cient answer to a research question. The term reasons is used to describe the support someone offers for a conclu – sion. The term evidence is often used to describe the reasons used by scientists, especially when the support is based on data gathered through an investigation. Yet reasons do not have to be based on measurements or observations to be viewed as scienti˜c. Charles Darwin, for example, provided numerous reasons in The Origin of Species to support his claims that all life on Earth shares a common ancestor, biological evolution is simply descent with modi˜cation, and the primary mechanism that drives biologi- cal evolution is natural selection. Some of the reasons that Darwin used were theoretical in nature, such as appealing to population theory from Malthus and the Prefaceideas of uniformitarianism advocated by Lyell, while others were more empirical in nature, such as the appeals he made to the data that he gathered during his voy – age to Central and South America. What made fiDarwin™s one long argumentfl (Mayr 1964, p. 459) so convincing and persuasive to others, however, was the way he was able to coordinate theory and evidence in order to validate his claims. It is also important for teachers and students to understand how an argument (i.e., a written or spoken claim and sup- port provided for it) in science is different than an argument that is used in everyday contexts or in other disciplines such as his- tory, religion, or even politics. In order to make these differences explicit, we use the framework illustrated in Figure 1 (p. x). In this framework, a claim is a conjecture, conclusion, explanation, or a descriptive statement that answers a research question. The evidence component of the argument refers to measurements, observations, or even ˜ndings from other studies that have been collected, analyzed, and then interpreted by the researchers. Biolo – gists, for example, will often examine the data they collect in order to determine if there is (a) a trend over time, (b) a difference between groups or objects, or

PAGE – 11 ============
xPREFACE Empirical CriteriaThe claim ˜ts with the available evidence.The amount of evidence is suf˜cient.The evidence used is relevant.The method used to collect the data was appropriate.Theoretical CriteriaThe claim is suf˜cient.The claim is useful in some way. The claim is consistent with accepted theories or laws.Analytical CriteriaThe method used to analyze data was appropriate.The interpretation of the data is sound.The ClaimA conjecture, conclusion, explanation, generalizable principle or some other answer to a research question The EvidenceData (measurements and observations) or ˜ndings from other studies that have been collected, analyzed, and then interpreted by the researchers A Justi˜cation of the Evidence A statement that explains the importance and the relevance of the evidence by linking it to a speci˜c concept, principle, or underlying assumptionThe quality of an argument is evaluated by using –The generation and evaluation of arguments re˚ect discipline- based norms that include –important models, theories, and laws in the discipline; accepted methods for inquiry within the discipline; standards of evidence within the discipline; and the ways scientists within the discipline share ideas.A Scienti˜c ArgumentFits with–Supported by–Supports–Explains(c) a relationship between variables, and then they interpret their analysis in light of their research question, the nature of their study, and the available literature. Finally, the justi˜cation of the evidence component of the argument is a state – ment or two that explains the importance and the relevance of the evidence by linking it to a speci˜c principle, concept, or underlying assumption.It is also important for students to understand that some forms of evidence and some types of reasons are better than others in science. An important compo – nent of scienti˜c argumentation involves the evaluation of the acceptability and Figure 1. A Framework That Can Be Used to Illustrate the Components of a Scienti˜c Argument and Some Criteria That Can and Should Be Used to Evaluate the Merits of a Scienti˜c Argument

355 KB – 71 Pages