|
Makale Özeti:
|
Argumentation in science education is a well-established and successful
research programme. Key theoretical underpinnings of this approach come
from situated cognition perspective, the theory of communicative action and
the sociocultural perspective, language studies and social semiotics,
philosophy of science studies, and developmental psychology. In this paper, it
will be argued that all these theoretical frameworks that aim to provide a
rationale for promoting argument-based inquiry approach to science
education stand to benefit if their unique insights can be brought together
within the theory of Deweyan pragmatist aesthetics. It is my contention that
learners first need to experience the most fundamental human situation,
namely, the problematic as the ontological condition of experiencing the
world as a human, in carefully calibrated pedagogically appropriate settings
to get the process of collaborative inquiry going. One such setting is provided
by the Science Writing Heuristic (SWH), an argument-based collaborative
inquiry approach to experience negotiation of meaning in relation to science
content in school. It will be claimed that the SWH approach, which is an
immersion-oriented argument intervention model, is successful to the extent
that it enacts a learning situation whereby the process of collaborative inquiry
as understood by Dewey unfolds and provides a consummatory experience
for the learners as well as the teachers.
|