David Lee Pauli
Published: 2017
Total Pages: 262
Get eBook
With the advent of the Next Generation Science Standards (NGSS), instruction in the science classroom needs to change (Lee, Quinn, & Vald©♭s, 2013). The NGSS values argumentation in the science classroom (Lead States, 2013) by specifically naming argumentation as one of the eight scientific processes. Writing is also a valued instructional strategy (Keys, 1999). The problem is to define a practical, useful instructional strategy that blends argumentation and writing to promote student subject matter learning. Understanding the mechanisms by which writing and argumentation work together to promote student learning will enable researchers and teachers to enact writing and argumentation in the classroom efficiently. This study purposes to investigate the Answer, Cite, Organize, Respond, and Note (ACORN) as a new framework for written argumentation specifically designed to elicit metacognition. . In this mixed methods study, the three research questions were addressed as follows: Using the ACORN framework, to what extent can students produce a high scoring structured argument as measured by the Total Argument (TA) Rubric or the Holistic Argument (HA) Rubric? (Choi, Notebaert, Diaz, & Hand 2010) What metacognitive components do students engage in when using the ACORN framework? Do Total Argument scores and/or Holistic Argument scores on written arguments developed from the ACORN framework correlate with student subject matter learning? Eighth grade students (N=48) were taught a nine week unit on gravity, Newton's Laws, forces, speed, velocity, acceleration, and simple machines. During the course of regular instruction, students engaged in written argumentation and metacognition using the ACORN framework in five different writing tasks. Results showed that using the ACORN framework, a student can produce a high scoring, structured argument. Additionally, students who used the ACORN framework primarily engaged in metacognition through use of regulation of cognition. While there was only a weak correlation quantitatively between written argumentation ability and subject matter learning, qualitative evidence suggests otherwise. One important result to come from ACORN for argumentation was the ability of the students help distinguish between evidence and reasoning. Implications of this research include establishing the ACORN framework as tool for argumentation as well as directions for future research.