Dialogic teaching of controversial issues: discursive moves to enact two-sided discussions

Yuchen Shi, Zihong Zhang, Shu Cao, Qunying Liu

https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/09500782.2023.2240292

Abstract

Dialogic teaching – in which teachers and students address controversial issues – has become increasingly common in school education to promote civic participation in deliberative democracy. This study addresses this question: when leading whole-class discussions on controversial issues, what discursive moves could teachers adopt to enact two-sided discussions that address conflicting perspectives? The present study analyzed data from an intervention study promoting dialogic teaching of controversial issues in the Morality and Law subject in fourth-grade (9- to 10-year-olds) elementary classrooms in China. We identified and analyzed episodes from transcripts of video-recorded classroom interactions in which the teachers employed a variety of discursive moves to encourage students to consider, negotiate, and debate opposing positions. Our analyses revealed that the teachers did not directly instruct students to consider opposing perspectives but guided their exchange of multiple perspectives. The teachers also partnered with students in the knowledge construction process by directly questioning, countering, or critiquing students’ arguments. Implications for encouraging teachers’ spontaneity and improvisation during dialogic teaching, as well as for using challenging, controversial topics to promote two-sided whole-class discussions, are addressed.

Dialogic teaching of controversial public issues in a Chinese middle school

Yuchen Shi, Xiaomin Shen, Tao Wang, Li Cheng, Anchen Wang

https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S2210656121000441

Abstract

Teaching controversial public issues is essential in preparing students for effective citizenship, with discussion and debate being widely held as the most appropriate pedagogical approach. Employing a design-based research approach, our research team collaborated with a teacher and used a popular Chinese movie, Dying to Survive, to promote dialogic teaching of controversial public issues in a Chinese 7th grade Morality and Law class. Discourse analysis showed that a large proportion of teacher's and students' utterances were dialogic, and that the teacher transitioned between monologic, authoritative teaching and dialogic teaching to ensure student understanding and promote discussion. Students' argumentative discourse was more common during dialogic interactions than monologic interactions dominated by teacher-centered lectures or recitations. We discuss the significance of our study in promoting deliberative discourse surrounding controversial issues to enhance civic skills and values in Chinese middle school students. We also summarize lessons learned and propose suggestions for future interventions.

Talk About Evidence During Argumentation

Yuchen Shi

https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/0163853X.2020.1777498

Abstract

Evidence is widely recognized as an essential component of argumentation. Existing research has primarily focused on students’ use of evidence to construct explanations or claims. In the present study, 54 11- to 12--year-old Chinese students participated in an extended discourse-based argumentation curriculum, along with an equivalent nonparticipating control group consisted of 50 students. We identified and traced progression in students’ meta-talk about evidence during peer-to-peer argumentive discourse and found that meta-talk grew more frequent over time, became increasingly focused on evaluating the source of evidence, and became better sustained over successive turns. Separate pre- and post-assessments suggested that participants had become more advanced in epistemological understanding, manifested in a shift away from absolutist thinking, and were more likely to endorse the values of argumentive discourse. Implications for epistemic vigilance in the Information Age are discussed.

Enhancing evidence-based argumentation in a Mainland China middle school

Yuchen Shi

https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0361476X1930414X

Abstract

While discourse-based educational approaches have become an object of increasing interest in Western countries, they are largely unknown in countries such as China that are characterized by a strong centralized government with limited encouragement of dissent. In the present study, 54 11–12 year-old Chinese students participated in an extended discourse-based curriculum that has been found successful in Western countries in developing skills of both dialogic and individual written argument. Although the curriculum involves activities unfamiliar to Chinese students, they easily became engaged and showed significant gains in post-intervention essays on both the curriculum topics and new ones. An additional component newly added to the curriculum involved explicit reflection on the relations between a claim and evidence and proved effective in enhancing gains relative to a comparison group not experiencing this addition. Underlying mechanisms in the transfer from dialogic to individual skill are considered, and issues with respect to culture and education are addressed.

Constructed dialogs reveal skill development in argumentive writing

Yuchen Shi

https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s11145-020-10045-1

Abstract

This study investigates the possibility that solitary dialog, in which individuals construct in writing a hypothetical dialogic argument, may more fully reveal individual skill achievement in argument than do conventional argumentive essays. A sample of 54 11–12-year-old Chinese students individually composed such written dialogs, subsequent to their participation in a 4-month dialog-based argument curriculum that previously reported gains in both dialogic and essay assessments. Also partaking in the constructed dialog task reported on here were two non-intervention control groups from the same school; one the same age (n = 50) as and the other 2years older (n = 52) than the intervention group. As well as outperforming their agemates, the intervention group’s performance on the constructed dialog task showed they had achieved skill equal to that of the older group in counterargument and were superior to them in using evidence to justify claims. The possibility is considered that the my-side bias reported in typical argumentive essays is due to limited understanding of the purpose of essay writing, rather than lack of skills perse.

Perceptions, challenges and coping strategies of science teachers in teaching socioscientific issues: A systematic review

Licui Chen, Sihan Xiao

https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S1747938X2030837X

Abstract

Science education in recent years has increasingly emphasized the connections between knowledge and matters of social importance. Socioscientific issues (SSIs)—complex, often controversial issues linked to the development of science and technology—are widely recognized as a valuable arena for the school curriculum to foster students’ scientific literacy. This paper reviews the research literature on how science teachers teach socioscientific issues with 25 empirical studies published between 2004 and 2019. The results show that teachers generally hold a partially informed understanding of SSI-based teaching. Multifarious challenges facing teachers in teaching SSIs are mainly at the teacher, student, and policy levels. However, our findings suggest that teachers lack explicit strategies to cope with these challenges and that SSI-based teaching should not rely on individual teachers alone. We argue for more support for teachers to improve the quality of their implementation of SSIs. This review has implications for education policymakers, teacher educators, school leaders, and teachers to respond to the challenges facing teachers in teaching SSIs collaboratively. Potential directions for further research are also discussed.

Rhetorical Use of Inscriptions in Students’ Written Arguments About Socioscientific Issues

Sihan Xiao

https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s11165-018-9730-y

Abstract

Educators expect that students be able to make informed decisions about science-related problems in their everyday lives. Engaging science in such problems often entails evaluating available evidence for given arguments. This study explores how students use inscriptions as evidence to argue about socioscientific issues. Fifth- and sixth-grade students (N = 102) in two intact classrooms completed written argument tasks in which they were asked to cite given inscriptions to support their decisions about energy use or genetically modified organisms. Qualitative content analyses of these written arguments, which focused on the coordination between inscriptions and claims, show three patterns of rhetorical use of inscriptions: seeing is believing, believing is seeing, and asserting is inferring. What counts as evidence was not the inscriptions per se, but the rhetorical functions they performed in particular arguments. These findings suggest that justifying socioscientific decisions is functionally different from explaining scientific phenomena. Linking these two activities in school may help students more productively engage with science in their everyday lives.

Associations Between Attitudes Towards Science and Children’s Evaluation of Information About Socioscientific Issues

Sihan Xiao, William Sandoval

https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s11191-017-9888-0

Abstract

Science educators are typically dismayed by the failure of students to use relevant scientific knowledge when reasoning about socioscientific issues. Except for the well-documented association between having more knowledge about a topic and a tendency to use that knowledge, the influences on students’ evaluation of information in socioscientific issues are not well understood. This study presents an initial investigation into the associations between upper elementary students’ attitudes towards science and their evaluation of information about a socioscientific issue. We surveyed the science attitudes of 49 sixth grade students and then asked them to evaluate information about a socioscientific issue (alternative energy use). Positive attitudes were associated with a more scientific approach to evaluating information in the task. When trying to make judgments, students with generally positive attitudes towards science were more likely to attend to scientific information than other sources. Scientific information, nonetheless, served a variety of socially oriented goals in students’ evaluations. These findings warrant further research on the relationship between science attitudes and reasoning about socioscientific issues and support the argument for connecting school science more clearly with everyday concerns.