The benefits of facilitating argumentation in science education have been well-reported (Jimenez-Aleixandre & Erduran, 2007). Engaging in argumentation has shown to model authentic scientific inquiry as well as promote development of content knowledge. However, less emphasis has been placed on facilitating argumentation in upper level undergraduate courses, though it is important for evaluating undergraduate curricula to characterize upper level students' scientific reasoning. This work considers two POGIL physical chemistry classrooms and evaluates students' scientific argumentation. Whole class sessions were videotaped and transcribed and then analyzed using the Toulmin Argument Pattern (TAP). Arguments were then evaluated using an analytical rubric and a learning progression on chemical thinking (Sevian & Talanquer, 2014). POGIL prompts were then categorized according to the goal of the task and compared to the quality of resulting arguments. The results from this analysis will be used to make appropriate recommendations to the POGIL Physical Chemistry: Thermodynamics curriculum.

Elucidating the relationship between the POGIL physical chemistry curriculum and classroom discourse

251st National Meeting (2016)

The official archive and repository for all ACS Meetings & Expositions abstracts and select posters or presentations.