The aim of this study was to investigate the studies of rhetoric and dialectical argumentation stuides published in four leading academic journals in the field of science education through thematic content analysis method. For this purpose, 34 articles, which are in accordance with the examination criteria, were determinedby content analysis method. The studies were examined considering the following themes: aim, features of sample, subject, data collection and analysis method, argumentation process, and result. Results revealed that majority of the studies were conducted according to rhetorical argumentation (n=26, %76) and that the studies with dialectic argumentation (n=8, %24) were fewer. Moreover, it has been shown that the mostof studies were conducted to analyze student argumentation and to improve students' argumentation skills. It was seen that the sample size is usuallysmallin the argumentation studies. In addition, it was determined that the qualitative and mixed methods were mostly used in the studies and argumentation was mostly applied on science topics and concepts rather than socioscientific issues. Results showed that various rubrics or argumentative indicators were used to evaluate the argumentation process in most of the studies. In addition, in some rhetorical studies, it has been observed that new argumentation elements are added to adapt argumentation models to science education. It is suggested that in the future studies, dialectical argumentation studies that determine the role of teacher in the argumentation process and studies on the socioscientific topics with larger samples will fill the gap in this area.
Key words: Argumentation, rhetorical argumentation, dialectical argumentation, science education, thematic content analysis
|
