Identifying Reflective and Non-Reflective Group Consensus Strategies for Evidence-Based Scientific Argumentation

Abstract

This study examines how students come to agreement on evidentiary data they collectively use to support scientific claims or explanations. Student groups were videotaped participating in high school biology units that were scaffolded in inquiry-based experimentation and argumentation with complex systems computer simulations. Interactions around the argumentation prompts revealed extraneous/non-reflective and generative/reflective strategies for collective evidence use. We hypothesize that access to recorded archived data along with access to dynamic just-in-time simulations promoted more generative/reflective strategies. Preliminary data on students' written responses reveal stronger written argumentation responses when students engaged in generative/reflective strategies compared to when students used extraneous/non-reflective strategies. Where extraneous/non-reflective strategies occur, we suggest that teachers be made aware of the tendency toward this kind of group decision making and that greater emphasis be placed on optimal evidence use through active modeling.