How does the use of analogical mapping as a scaffold for science learners' argumentation support their learning and talking about science?

Brandon Emig, Scott P. McDonald

Research output: Chapter in Book/Report/Conference proceedingConference contribution

Abstract

Analogical mapping is evaluated as a scaffold for small -group argumentation and learning. In this study, groups of four students are invited analogically map simple machines while creating an argument about which two are most analogically similar. Qualitative and quantitative analysis of video and transcripts show dense argumentation with mutual understanding among students numerous claims. Fifteen out of eighteen claims were normative, suggesting student learning was directed toward functional features of simple machines.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Title of host publicationLearning in the Disciplines: ICLS 2010 Conference Proceedings - 9th International Conference of the Learning Sciences
Pages324-325
Number of pages2
Volume2
StatePublished - 2010
Event9th International Conference of the Learning Sciences, ICLS 2010 - Chicago, IL, United States
Duration: Jun 29 2010Jul 2 2010

Other

Other9th International Conference of the Learning Sciences, ICLS 2010
CountryUnited States
CityChicago, IL
Period6/29/107/2/10

Fingerprint

argumentation
Scaffolds
Students
science
learning
student
study group
small group
video
Chemical analysis

All Science Journal Classification (ASJC) codes

  • Computer Science (miscellaneous)
  • Education

Cite this

Emig, B., & McDonald, S. P. (2010). How does the use of analogical mapping as a scaffold for science learners' argumentation support their learning and talking about science? In Learning in the Disciplines: ICLS 2010 Conference Proceedings - 9th International Conference of the Learning Sciences (Vol. 2, pp. 324-325)
Emig, Brandon ; McDonald, Scott P. / How does the use of analogical mapping as a scaffold for science learners' argumentation support their learning and talking about science?. Learning in the Disciplines: ICLS 2010 Conference Proceedings - 9th International Conference of the Learning Sciences. Vol. 2 2010. pp. 324-325
@inproceedings{0a7e104882964e6583432928d0548bff,
title = "How does the use of analogical mapping as a scaffold for science learners' argumentation support their learning and talking about science?",
abstract = "Analogical mapping is evaluated as a scaffold for small -group argumentation and learning. In this study, groups of four students are invited analogically map simple machines while creating an argument about which two are most analogically similar. Qualitative and quantitative analysis of video and transcripts show dense argumentation with mutual understanding among students numerous claims. Fifteen out of eighteen claims were normative, suggesting student learning was directed toward functional features of simple machines.",
author = "Brandon Emig and McDonald, {Scott P.}",
year = "2010",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "2",
pages = "324--325",
booktitle = "Learning in the Disciplines: ICLS 2010 Conference Proceedings - 9th International Conference of the Learning Sciences",

}

Emig, B & McDonald, SP 2010, How does the use of analogical mapping as a scaffold for science learners' argumentation support their learning and talking about science? in Learning in the Disciplines: ICLS 2010 Conference Proceedings - 9th International Conference of the Learning Sciences. vol. 2, pp. 324-325, 9th International Conference of the Learning Sciences, ICLS 2010, Chicago, IL, United States, 6/29/10.

How does the use of analogical mapping as a scaffold for science learners' argumentation support their learning and talking about science? / Emig, Brandon; McDonald, Scott P.

Learning in the Disciplines: ICLS 2010 Conference Proceedings - 9th International Conference of the Learning Sciences. Vol. 2 2010. p. 324-325.

Research output: Chapter in Book/Report/Conference proceedingConference contribution

TY - GEN

T1 - How does the use of analogical mapping as a scaffold for science learners' argumentation support their learning and talking about science?

AU - Emig, Brandon

AU - McDonald, Scott P.

PY - 2010

Y1 - 2010

N2 - Analogical mapping is evaluated as a scaffold for small -group argumentation and learning. In this study, groups of four students are invited analogically map simple machines while creating an argument about which two are most analogically similar. Qualitative and quantitative analysis of video and transcripts show dense argumentation with mutual understanding among students numerous claims. Fifteen out of eighteen claims were normative, suggesting student learning was directed toward functional features of simple machines.

AB - Analogical mapping is evaluated as a scaffold for small -group argumentation and learning. In this study, groups of four students are invited analogically map simple machines while creating an argument about which two are most analogically similar. Qualitative and quantitative analysis of video and transcripts show dense argumentation with mutual understanding among students numerous claims. Fifteen out of eighteen claims were normative, suggesting student learning was directed toward functional features of simple machines.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84880518457&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=84880518457&partnerID=8YFLogxK

M3 - Conference contribution

AN - SCOPUS:84880518457

VL - 2

SP - 324

EP - 325

BT - Learning in the Disciplines: ICLS 2010 Conference Proceedings - 9th International Conference of the Learning Sciences

ER -

Emig B, McDonald SP. How does the use of analogical mapping as a scaffold for science learners' argumentation support their learning and talking about science? In Learning in the Disciplines: ICLS 2010 Conference Proceedings - 9th International Conference of the Learning Sciences. Vol. 2. 2010. p. 324-325