I must say that I really like Generate an Argument Instructional Model. After reading the article, I can see how this activity encourages critical thinking. By using an example, I thought that the article did an excellent job of describing/showing how the model could be used. Often when inquiry is described in science education, we tend to focus on the experimentation aspect. The Generate and Argument Model does a good job of providing another, less stressed aspect of inquiry, that of analyzing data and being able to communicate your conclusions to others.
At first, when I read the article I was concerned that the instructional model was neglecting an important aspect of science. The aspect of asking a good testable question. Because the Generate an Argument Model has the teacher generating the question, students may not be working on an important skill. However, as I reflect, if a student is exposed to the model several times, they will have hopefully been exposed to several good questions. Also, as they learn to analyze and evaluate data sets, hopefully they will begin to formulate their own questions. With time and practice, by using the Generate an Argument I believe that students should have the necessary skills to start to develop their own testable questions.
I really like the model. I just wonder how many times a year I would do an activity based on the model. Obviously, the more exposure to the model a student has, more critical thinking skills have reinforced. I'm just a bit concerned about the time it would take to create a lesson for each class I teach. Although it will take some time, I'm sure that as I navigate the online data sets I will find that this will become easier and take less time. Overall, I'm very excited to try this in my classroom.
On a related note, the chapter text "Acquiring Online Data Sets for Scientific Analysis" to me was not as useful. It was a bit too simplistic, and its only real value was a list of different websites with different data sets that were available when the book was published. Of course, I may feel this way because I read this second, and I am really intrigued with the Generate an Argument Model. Hopefully, as I explore this new tool, I'll become more adept with it and incorporate it more often into my instruction.
You are absolutely right about how this model allows students to analyze data and communicate conclusions, two important parts of inquiry. I think that this model is the first I have seen where these are highlights of the inquiry process. I am trying to think back to other readings, discussions, and conference sectionals on inquiry, and I do not recall these two components being expressed or enhanced as much as they are in this model.
ReplyDeleteBut I guess if I would have taken John Graves MSSE inquiry class this summer, I would be exposed to more models...Is anyone here taking that class? If so, are you learning about similar models?
I too spent a fair amount of time thinking about how to get kids to start generating the question to be researched. It really does take practice and a lot of guidance on the teacher's part, but I found the guidance tends to take away from the authenticity. It's a tough one, but should be worthwhile when it works smoothly. The time component does become an issue too. When I've done similar things at the beginning of the year and attempt to leave a lot "open" for the kids to set up, it ends up taking a ton of time during the process. When I really set up the project ahead of time, then there seems to be less ongoing management, but I do feel that the kids are not really having to think as much. What a paradox.
ReplyDeleteI agree that the Generating an Argument model is a different look at inquiry by focusing on the data and conclusion instead of creating the experiment. I have a hard time letting the students design an experiment, since it seems they need a lot of guidance. I feel like I could really let my 10th grade students work on the Generating an Arguement model on their own and see good results.
ReplyDeleteCreating a question in a "vacuum" is almost impossible. I think it is great to work backwards and have students create evidence-based explanations from provided data and then eventually begin asking questions about the data (or other data.
ReplyDelete