0% found this document useful (0 votes)

62 views71 pages

Nist Cer Framework

Uploaded by

Prohamer Liao

We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.

Available Formats

Download as PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd

0% found this document useful (0 votes)

62 views71 pages

Nist Cer Framework

Uploaded by

Prohamer Liao

We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.

Available Formats

Download as PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd

You are on page 1/ 71

scientific

“Individuals who are proficient in science

scientific argumentation IN BIOLOGY

should be able to understand the language of
science and participate in scientific practices,
such as inquiry and argumentation. Empirical

argumentation research, however, indicates that many stu-

dents do not develop this knowledge or these
abilities in school. One way to address this

IN BIOLOGY
problem is to give students more opportuni-
ties to engage in scientific argumentation as
part of the teaching and learning of science.

30 ACTIVITIES
This book will help teachers with this task.”
—Authors Victor Sampson and Sharon Schleigh

CLASSROOM Develop your high school students’ under-

standing of argumentation and evidence-based
reasoning with this comprehensive book. Like
three guides in one, Scientific Argumenta-
scientific
tion in Biology combines theory, practice, and
biology content.
It starts by giving you solid background in
why students need to be able to go beyond
argumentation
expressing mere opinions when making
research-related biology claims. Then it pro-
vides 30 thoroughly field-tested activities IN BIOLOGY
30 ACTIVITIES
your students can use when learning to:
• propose, support, and evaluate claims;
• validate or refute them on the basis of CLASSROOM

30
scientific reasoning; and
• craft complex written arguments.
Detailed teacher notes suggest specific ways
in which you can use the activities to enrich
and supplement (not replace) what you’re

ACTIVITIES
CLASSROOM
doing in biology class already.
VICTOR SAMPSON
Scientific Argumentation is an invaluable
resource for learning more about argumen- SHARON SCHLEIGH
tation and designing related lessons. You’ll
find it ideal for helping your students learn
standards-based content; improve their bio-

SCHLEIGH
SAMPSON
logical practices; explain, interpret, and evalu-
ate evidence; and acquire the habits of mind
to become more proficient in science.

PB269X
ISBN 978-1-935155-08-9
PB304X
ISBN 978-1-936137-27-5
Grades Grades
6–12 9–12

VICTOR SAMPSON, PhD

SHARON SCHLEIGH, EdD

Arlington, Virginia

Copyright © 2016 NSTA. All rights reserved. For more information, go to www.nsta.org/permissions.
TO PURCHASE THIS BOOK, please visit www.nsta.org/store/product_detail.aspx?id=10.2505/9781936137275
Claire Reinburg, Director
Jennifer Horak, Managing Editor
Andrew Cooke, Senior Editor
Wendy Rubin, Associate Editor
Agnes Bannigan, Associate Editor
Amy America, Book Acquisitions Coordinator

Art and Design

Will Thomas Jr., Director
Rashad Muhammad, Graphic Designer, Cover and Interior Design

Printing and Production

Catherine Lorrain, Director

National Science Teachers Association

Gerald F. Wheeler, Executive Director
David Beacom, Publisher

1840 Wilson Blvd., Arlington, VA 22201

www.nsta.org/store
For customer service inquiries, please call 800-277-5300.

Copyright © 2013 by the National Science Teachers Association.

NSTA is committed to publishing material that promotes the best in inquiry-based science education. However, conditions of actual use may
vary, and the safety procedures and practices described in this book are intended to serve only as a guide. Additional precautionary measures
may be required. NSTA and the authors do not warrant or represent that the procedures and practices in this book meet any safety code or
standard of federal, state, or local regulations. NSTA and the authors disclaim any liability for personal injury or damage to property arising out
of or relating to the use of this book, including any of the recommendations, instructions, or materials contained therein.

Permissions
Book purchasers may photocopy, print, or e-mail up to five copies of an NSTA book chapter for personal use only; this does not
include display or promotional use. Elementary, middle, and high school teachers may reproduce forms, sample documents, and
single NSTA book chapters needed for classroom or noncommercial, professional-development use only. E-book buyers may
download files to multiple personal devices but are prohibited from posting the files to third-party servers or websites, or from
passing files to non-buyers. For additional permission to photocopy or use material electronically from this NSTA Press book,
please contact the Copyright Clearance Center (CCC) (www.copyright.com; 978-750-8400). Please access www.nsta.org/permissions
for further information about NSTA’s rights and permissions policies.

Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data

Sampson, Victor, 1974-
Scientific argumentation in biology : 30 classroom activities / by Victor Sampson and Sharon Schleigh.
p. cm.
Includes bibliographical references.
ISBN 978-1-936137-27-5
1. Qualitative reasoning. 2. Biology. I. Schleigh, Sharon, 1963- II. Title.
Q339.25.S26 2012
570.71’2--dc23
2012029423
eISBN 978-1-936959-56-3

INTRODUCTION xv

Generate an Argument 1
Framework Matrix 2
Activity 1: Classifying Birds in the United States 5
(Species Concept)

Activity 2: Color Variation in Venezuelan Guppies 19

(Mechanisms of Evolution)

Activity 3: Desert Snakes 29

(Mechanics of Evolution)

Activity 4: Fruit Fly Traits 45

(Genetics)

Activity 5: DNA Family Relationship Analysis 55

(Genetics)

Activity 6: Evolutionary Relationships in Mammals 67

(Genetics and Evolution)

Activity 7: Decline in Saltwater Fish Populations 81

(Ecology and Human Impact on the Environment)

Activity 8: History of Life on Earth 103

(Trends in Evolution)

Activity 9: Surviving Winter in the Dust Bowl 113

(Food Chains and Trophic Levels)

Activity 10: Characteristics of Viruses 123

(Characteristics of Life)

Copyright © 2016 NSTA. All rights reserved. For more information, go to www.nsta.org/permissions.
TO PURCHASE THIS BOOK, please visit www.nsta.org/store/product_detail.aspx?id=10.2505/9781936137275
Contents
Evaluate Alternatives 133
Framework Matrix 134
Activity 11: Spontaneous Generation 137
(Cell Theory)

Activity 12: Plant Biomass 149

(Photosynthesis)

Activity 13: Movement of Molecules in or out of Cells 159

(Osmosis and Diffusion)

Activity 14: Liver and Hydrogen Peroxide 171

(Chemical Reactions and Catalysts)
Activity 15: Cell Size and Diffusion 181
(Diffusion)

Activity 16: Environmental Influence on Genotypes

and Phenotypes 191
(Genetics)

Activity 17: Hominid Evolution 203

(Macroevolution)

Activity 18: Plants and Energy 219

(Respiration and Photosynthesis)

Activity 19: Healthy Diet and Weight 229

(Human Health)

Activity 20: Termite Trails 239

(Animal Behavior)

Copyright © 2016 NSTA. All rights reserved. For more information, go to www.nsta.org/permissions.
TO PURCHASE THIS BOOK, please visit www.nsta.org/store/product_detail.aspx?id=10.2505/9781936137275
Contents
Refutational Writing 249
Framework Matrix 250
Activity 21: Misconception About Theories and Laws 253
(Nature of Science)

Activity 22: Misconception About the Nature of

Scientific Knowledge 261
(Nature of Science)

Activity 23: Misconception About the Work of Scientists 269

(Nature of Science)

Activity 24: Misconception About the Methods of Scientific

Investigations 277
(Nature of Science)

Activity 25: Misconception About Life on Earth 285

(Evolution)

Activity 26: Misconception About Bacteria 293

(Microbiology)

Activity 27: Misconception About Interactions That

Take Place Between Organisms 301
(Ecology)

Activity 28: Misconception About Plant Reproduction 309

(Botany)

Activity 29: Misconception About Inheritance of Traits 315

(Genetics)

Activity 30: Misconception About Insects 321

(Ecology)

ASSESSMENTS & STUDENT SAMPLES 329

APPENDIX 361

INDEX 373

Copyright © 2016 NSTA. All rights reserved. For more information, go to www.nsta.org/permissions.
TO PURCHASE THIS BOOK, please visit www.nsta.org/store/product_detail.aspx?id=10.2505/9781936137275
Copyright © 2016 NSTA. All rights reserved. For more information, go to www.nsta.org/permissions.
TO PURCHASE THIS BOOK, please visit www.nsta.org/store/product_detail.aspx?id=10.2505/9781936137275
Preface
What Is Scientific ideas of uniformitarianism advocated by
Lyell, while others were more empirical
Argumentation?
in nature, such as the appeals he made to
Scientific argumentation is an important
the data that he gathered during his voy-
practice in science. We define scientific
age to Central and South America. What
argumentation as an attempt to validate
made “Darwin’s one long argument”
or refute a claim on the basis of reasons
in a manner that reflects the values of (Mayr 1964, p. 459) so convincing and
the scientific community (Norris, Phil- persuasive to others, however, was the
ips, and Osborne 2007). A claim, in this way he was able to coordinate theory and
context, is not simply an opinion or an evidence in order to validate his claims.
idea; rather, it is a conjecture, explana- It is also important for teachers and
tion, or other conclusion that provides a students to understand how an argument
sufficient answer to a research question. (i.e., a written or spoken claim and sup-
The term reasons is used to describe the port provided for it) in science is different
support someone offers for a conclu- than an argument that is used in everyday
sion. The term evidence is often used to contexts or in other disciplines such as his-
describe the reasons used by scientists, tory, religion, or even politics. In order to
especially when the support is based on make these differences explicit, we use the
data gathered through an investigation. framework illustrated in Figure 1 (p. x).
Yet reasons do not have to be based on In this framework, a claim is a
measurements or observations to be conjecture, conclusion, explanation, or
viewed as scientific. Charles Darwin, for a descriptive statement that answers
example, provided numerous reasons in a research question. The evidence
The Origin of Species to support his claims component of the argument refers to
that all life on Earth shares a common measurements, observations, or even
ancestor, biological evolution is simply findings from other studies that have
descent with modification, and the been collected, analyzed, and then
primary mechanism that drives biologi- interpreted by the researchers. Biolo-
cal evolution is natural selection. Some gists, for example, will often examine the
of the reasons that Darwin used were data they collect in order to determine
theoretical in nature, such as appealing to if there is (a) a trend over time, (b) a
population theory from Malthus and the difference between groups or objects, or

SCIENTIFIC ARGUMENTATION IN BIOLOGY:

BIOLOGY 30 CLASSROOM ACTIVITIES ix
Copyright © 2016 NSTA. All rights reserved. For more information, go to www.nsta.org/permissions.
TO PURCHASE THIS BOOK, please visit www.nsta.org/store/product_detail.aspx?id=10.2505/9781936137275
PREFACE

Figure 1. A Framework That Can Be Used to Illustrate the Components of

a Scientific Argument and Some Criteria That Can and Should Be Used to
Evaluate the Merits of a Scientific Argument

A Scientific Argument
The quality of an argument is evaluated by using …
The Claim
A conjecture, conclusion, explanation, generalizable
principle or some other answer to a research question Empirical Criteria
The claim fits with the available evidence.
Fits with… The amount of evidence is sufficient.
The evidence used is relevant.
Supports… The method used to collect the data was appropriate.

The Evidence Theoretical Criteria

Data (measurements and observations) or findings The claim is sufficient.
from other studies that have been collected, The claim is useful in some way.
analyzed, and then interpreted by the researchers The claim is consistent with accepted theories or laws.
Supported by…
Analytical Criteria
The method used to analyze data was appropriate.
Explains
The interpretation of the data is sound.
A Justification of the Evidence
A statement that explains the importance and the
relevance of the evidence by linking it to a specific
concept, principle, or underlying assumption

important models, theories, and laws in the discipline;

The generation and evaluation
accepted methods for inquiry within the discipline;
of arguments reflect discipline-
standards of evidence within the discipline; and
based norms that include …
the ways scientists within the discipline share ideas.

(c) a relationship between variables, and linking it to a specific principle, concept,

then they interpret their analysis in light or underlying assumption.
of their research question, the nature of It is also important for students to
their study, and the available literature. understand that some forms of evidence
Finally, the justification of the evidence and some types of reasons are better than
component of the argument is a state- others in science. An important compo-
ment or two that explains the importance nent of scientific argumentation involves
and the relevance of the evidence by the evaluation of the acceptability and

x NATIONAL SCIENCE TEACHERS ASSOCIATION

sufficiency of the evidence or reasons that Why Integrate

are used to support or challenge a claim.
Argumentation Into the
Therefore, in addition to the structural
components of an argument, the frame-
Teaching and Learning
work in Figure 1 also highlights several of Biology?
empirical and theoretical criteria that A major aim of science education in the
students can and should use to evaluate United States is for all students to become
the quality or merits of an argument in proficient in science by the time they
science. Empirical criteria include (a) finish high school. Science proficiency
how well the claim fits with all available consists of four interrelated aspects
evidence, (b) the sufficiency of the evi- (Duschl, Schweingruber, and Shouse
dence included in the argument, (c) the 2007). First, it requires an individual to
quality of the evidence (i.e., validity and know important scientific explanations
reliability), and (d) the predictive power about the natural world, to be able to
of the claim. Theoretical criteria, on the use these explanations to solve prob-
other hand, refer to standards that are lems, and to be able to understand new
important in science but are not empiri- explanations when they are introduced.
cal in nature. These include criteria such Second, it requires an individual to be
as (a) the sufficiency of the claim (i.e., it able to generate and evaluate scientific
includes everything it needs to), (b) the explanations and scientific arguments.
usefulness of the claim (e.g., it allows us Third, individuals need to understand
to engage in new inquiries or understand the nature of scientific knowledge and
a phenomenon), and (c) how consistent how scientific knowledge develops over
the claim and the reasoning is with other time. Finally, and perhaps most impor-
accepted theories, laws, or models. What tantly, individuals that are proficient in
counts as quality within these different science should be able to understand
categories, however, varies from disci- the language of science and be able to
pline to discipline (e.g., physics, biology, participate in scientific practices (such as
geology) and within the fields that are inquiry and argumentation). Empirical
found with a discipline (e.g., cell biology, research, however, indicates that many
evolutionary biology, genetics) due to students do not develop this knowledge
differences in the types of phenomena or these abilities while in school (Duschl,
investigated, what counts as an accepted Schweingruber, and Shouse 2007; NRC
mode of inquiry (e.g., experimentation vs. 2005, 2008).
fieldwork), and the theory-laden nature of One way to address this problem is to
scientific inquiry. It is therefore important engage students in scientific argumenta-
to keep in mind that the nature of scientific tion as part of the teaching and learning
arguments and what counts as quality in of biology (Driver, Newton, and Osborne
science is discipline- and field-dependent. 2000; Duschl 2008; Duschl and Osborne

SCIENTIFIC ARGUMENTATION IN BIOLOGY:

BIOLOGY 30 CLASSROOM ACTIVITIES xi
Copyright © 2016 NSTA. All rights reserved. For more information, go to www.nsta.org/permissions.
TO PURCHASE THIS BOOK, please visit www.nsta.org/store/product_detail.aspx?id=10.2505/9781936137275
PREFACE

2002). In order to help students develop therefore used the available literature on
science proficiency by engaging them in argumentation in science education (e.g.,
scientific argumentation, however, the Berland and Reiser 2009; Clark, Schleigh,
focus and nature of instruction inside and Menekse 2008; McNeill and Krajcik
biology classrooms will need to change 2008a; Osborne, Erduran, and Simon
from time to time. This change in focus, 2004; Sampson and Clark 2008; Sandoval
in part, will require teachers to place more and Reiser 2004) to develop two different
emphasis on “how we know” in biology instructional models that teachers can use
(i.e., how new knowledge is generated to promote and support student engage-
and validated) in addition to “what we ment in scientific argumentation in the
know” about life on Earth (i.e., the theo- biology classroom. We have also designed
ries, laws, and unifying concepts). Science several stand-alone writing activities that
teachers will also need to focus more on teachers can use to help students learn
the abilities and habits of mind that stu- how to write extended arguments that
dents need to have in order to construct consist of multiple lines of reasoning that
and support scientific knowledge claims will help solidify their understanding of
through argument and to evaluate the important biology content as part of the
claims or arguments developed by others. process.
In order to accomplish this goal, sci- All of these activities are designed
ence teachers will need to design lessons so they can be used at different points
that give students an opportunity to learn during a biology course and in a variety
how to generate explanations from data, of grade levels to help students learn
identify and judge the relevance or suffi- how to generate a convincing scientific
ciency of evidence, articulate and support argument and to evaluate the validity or
an explanation in an argument, respond acceptability of an explanation or argu-
to questions or counterarguments, and ment in science. In fact, we have used
revise a claim (or argument) based on the these activities included in this book to
feedback they receive or in light of new engage learners in scientific argumenta-
evidence. Science teachers will also need tion in middle school classrooms, high
to find a way to help students learn, adopt, school classrooms, and in science teacher
and use the same criteria that biologists education programs. The activities in this
use to determine what counts as war- book can also be used to help students
ranted scientific knowledge in a particular understand the practices, crosscutting
field of biology. This task, however, can be concepts, and core ideas found in A
difficult for teachers to accomplish given Framework for K–12 Science Education
the constraints of a science classroom (NRC 2012) and develop the literacy in
without the development of new instruc- science skills outlined in the Common
tional strategies or techniques (Price Core State Standards for English Language
Schleigh, Bosse, and Lee 2011). We have Arts and Literacy (NGA and CCSSO 2010).

xii NATIONAL SCIENCE TEACHERS ASSOCIATION

Development of the We used teacher comments and sugges-

tions to refine the activities and to provide
Activities
the guidance teachers need to implement
The integration of scientific argumenta-
the activities as Teacher Notes.
tion into the teaching and learning of biol-
ogy can be difficult for both the teachers
and students. In fact, teachers often ask for
References
Berland, L., and K. McNeill. 2010. A learning
specific instructional strategies and engag-
progression for scientific argumentation:
ing activities based on these instructional Understanding student work and
activities that would allow students to designing supportive instructional
learn how to engage in scientific argumen- contexts. Science Education 94 (5):
765–793.
tation as part of the inquiry process (see
Berland, L., and B. Reiser. 2009. Making
Sampson and Blanchard, forthcoming). sense of argumentation and explanation.
We have also received many requests Science Education 93 (1): 26–55.
to help teachers develop the skills in Clark, D., S. P. Schleigh, M. Menekse, and
facilitating this kind of activity inside the C. D’Angelo. 2008. Improving the quality
classroom. We have designed this book to of student argumentation through the
initial structuring of online discussions.
satisfy these requests. This book’s instruc- Paper presented at the proceedings of
tional strategies and the activities based the American Educational Research
on these strategies are grounded in not Association (AERA) Annual Meeting.
only current research on argumentation Driver, R., P. Newton, and J. Osborne. 2000.
Establishing the norms of scientific
in science education (Berland and McNeill
argumentation in classrooms. Science
2010; Clark et al. 2008; Driver, Newton, Education 84 (3): 287–313.
and Osborne 2000; Erduran and Jimenez- Duschl, R. 2008. Science education in three-
Aleixandre 2008; Jimenez-Aleixandre, part harmony: Balancing conceptual,
Rodriguez, and Duschl 2000; McNeill and epistemic, and social learning goals.
Review of Research in Education 32:
Krajcik 2008b; McNeill et al. 2006; Osborne, 268–291.
Erduran, and Simon 2004; Sampson and
Duschl, R. A., and J. Osborne. 2002.
Blanchard, forthcoming; Sampson and Supporting and promoting argumentation
Clark 2008, 2009; Sampson, Grooms, and discourse in science education. Studies in
Walker 2011) but also our experiences Science Education 38: 39–72.

inside the classroom. Each activity has Duschl, R., H. Schweingruber, and A.
Shouse, eds. 2007. Taking science to
been field-tested in at least one middle school: Learning and teaching science
school or high school (see Appendix A, p. in grades K–8. Washington, DC: National
367, for a list of field test sites and teach- Academies Press.
ers). The classrooms we used to test the Erduran, S., and M. Jimenez-Aleixandre,
activities were diverse and represented a eds. 2008. Argumentation in science
education: Perspectives from classroom-
wide range of student achievement levels based research. Dordreht, Neth.:
(honors, general, advanced, and so on). Springer Academic Publishers.

SCIENTIFIC ARGUMENTATION IN BIOLOGY:

BIOLOGY 30 CLASSROOM ACTIVITIES xiii
Copyright © 2016 NSTA. All rights reserved. For more information, go to www.nsta.org/permissions.
TO PURCHASE THIS BOOK, please visit www.nsta.org/store/product_detail.aspx?id=10.2505/9781936137275
PREFACE

Jimenez-Aleixandre, M., M. Rodriguez, M., National Research Council (NRC). 2012. A

and R. A. Duschl. 2000. “Doing the framework for K–12 science education:
lesson” or “doing science:” Argument in Practices, crosscutting concepts, and
high school genetics. Science Education core ideas. Washington, DC: National
84 (6): 757–792. Academies Press.
Mayr, E., ed. 1964. On the origin of species Norris, S., L. Philips, and J. Osborne.
by Charles Darwin: A facsimile of the 2007. Scientific inquiry: The place of
first edition. Cambridge, MA: Harvard interpretation and argumentation. In
University Press. Science as Inquiry in the Secondary
Setting, ed. J. Luft, R. Bell and J. Gess-
McNeill, K., and J. Krajcik. 2008a. Assessing
Newsome. Arlington, VA: NSTA Press.
middle school students’ content
knowledge and reasoning through written Osborne, J., S. Erduran, and S. Simon. 2004.
scientific explanations. In Assessing Enhancing the quality of argumentation in
science learning: perspectives from science classrooms. Journal of Research
research and practice, ed. J. Coffey, R. in Science Teaching 41 (10): 994–1020.
Douglas, and C. Stearns. Arlington, VA: Price Schleigh, S., M. Bosse, and T. Lee.
National Science Teachers Association 2011. Redefining curriculum integration
(NSTA) Press. and professional development: In-service
McNeill, K., and J. Krajcik. 2008b. Scientific teachers as agents of change. Current
explanations: Characterizing and Issues in Education 14 (3).
evaluating the effects of teachers’ Sampson, V., and M. Blanchard. Forthcoming.
instructional practices on student Science teachers and scientific
learning. Journal of Research in Science argumentation: Trends in practice and
Teaching 45 (1): 53–78. views. Journal of Research in Science
McNeill, K. L., D. J. Lizotte, J. Krajcik, and Teaching.
R. W. Marx. 2006. Supporting students’ Sampson, V., and D. Clark. 2008. Assessment
construction of scientific explanations by of the ways students generate
fading scaffolds in instructional materials. arguments in science education: Current
The Journal of the Learning Sciences 15 perspectives and recommendations for
(2): 153–191. future directions. Science Education 92
National Governors Association Center (3): 447–472.
(NGA) for Best Practices, and Council Sampson, V., and D. Clark. 2009. The effect
of Chief State School Officers (CCSSO). of collaboration on the outcomes of
2010. Common core state standards argumentation. Science Education 93
for English language arts and literacy. (3): 448–484.
Washington, DC: National Governors
Sampson, V., J. Grooms, and J. Walker. 2011.
Association for Best Practices, Council of
Argument-driven inquiry as a way to
Chief State School.
help students learn how to participate
National Research Council (NRC). 2005. in scientific argumentation and craft
America’s lab report: Investigations in written arguments: An exploratory study.
high school science. Washington, DC: Science Education 95 (2): 217–257.
National Academies Press. Sandoval, W. A., and B. J. Reiser. 2004.
National Research Council (NRC). 2008. Ready, Explanation driven inquiry: Integrating
set, science: Putting research to work in conceptual and epistemic scaffolds for
K–8 science classrooms. Washington, DC: scientific inquiry. Science Education 88
National Academies Press. (3): 345–372.

xiv NATIONAL SCIENCE TEACHERS ASSOCIATION

M
any science educators this data, and then drawing a conclu-
view inquiry as a key sion” (Sandoval and Reiser 2004, p. 345).
component of any effort Instruction, therefore, tends to focus on
to help students develop helping students master specific skills that
science proficiency (Duschl, Schweingru- are important to this process. Examples of
ber, and Shouse 2007; NRC 2008, 2012). such skills are formulating good research
Scientific inquiry refers to the diverse questions, designing controlled experi-
ways in which scientists study the ments, making careful observations, and
natural world and propose explanations organizing or graphing data. Although
based on the evidence derived from their these types of skills are an important
work. Inquiry refers to the understand- part of the inquiry process, they are often
ing of how scientists study the natural overemphasized at the expense of other
world as well as the activities that stu- important practices in inquiry such as
dents engage in when they attempt to proposing and testing alternatives, judg-
develop knowledge and understanding ing the quality or reliability of evidence,
of scientific ideas (NRC 1999). Students evaluating the potential viability of sci-
who learn science through inquiry are entific claims, and constructing scientific
able to participate in many of the same arguments. As a result, typical science
activities and thinking processes as classrooms tend to place too much
scientists do when they are seeking to emphasis on individual exploration and
expand our understanding of the natural the importance of experimentation in the
world (NRC 2000). Yet educators seek- inquiry process, which can cause students
ing to engage students in inquiry inside to develop an inaccurate understanding
the classroom do not always emphasize of how scientists study the natural world
many of the activities and thinking pro- and how new knowledge is generated,
cesses used by scientists to generate and justified, and evaluated by scientists
evaluate scientific knowledge. (Duschl and Osborne 2002; Lederman
Within the context of schools, sci- and Abd-El-Khalick 1998; Osborne 2002;
entific inquiry is often conceptualized Sandoval 2005).
as a straightforward process of “asking In light of this issue, A Framework for
a question, devising a means to collect K–12 Science Education: Practices, Crosscut-
data to answer the question, interpreting ting Concepts, and Core Ideas highlights a

SCIENTIFIC ARGUMENTATION IN BIOLOGY:

BIOLOGY 30 CLASSROOM ACTIVITIES xv
Copyright © 2016 NSTA. All rights reserved. For more information, go to www.nsta.org/permissions.
TO PURCHASE THIS BOOK, please visit www.nsta.org/store/product_detail.aspx?id=10.2505/9781936137275
INTRODUCTION

set of practices—such as asking ques- that science is a body of knowledge

tions, developing and using models, rooted in evidence. (2012, p. 44)
analyzing data, and communicating
information—that students need to learn In order to make engaging in argu-
in order to be able to engage in inquiry
ment from evidence an important practice
(NRC 2012). The Framework also calls for
within a science classroom, teachers need
explanation and argument to play a more
to help students develop the abilities and
central role in the teaching and learning
habits of mind needed to generate expla-
of science. The Framework views explana-
nations and evaluate the conclusions or
tion and argument as both the goal of an
claims put forth by others. Teachers, there-
inquiry and the means to get there; that is,
fore, need to give students opportunities
students construct explanations and sup-
to learn how to articulate a claim, support
porting arguments in order to understand
it with evidence, respond to critiques,
the phenomenon under investigation,
and revise a claim based on feedback or
and they also use explanation and argu-
new evidence. This type of focus sup-
ment as a guide to engage in the inquiry
ports learning by establishing a context
process (Bell and Linn 2000; Goldman et
for students that allows them to contrast
al. 2002; Sandoval and Reiser 2004). The
varied forms of evidence, link evidence
National Research Council (NRC) made
to methods, explore the criteria for select-
argumentation a foundation of the new
ing evidence, and reflect on the nature of
framework because:
scientific investigation (Abell, Anderson,
All ideas in science are and Chezem 2000). Driver et al. (1994)
evaluated against alternative argue that these types of goals are not
explanations and compared
additional extraneous aspects of science
with evidence; acceptance of
but instead represent an essential element
an explanation is ultimately an
of science education. Jimenez-Aleixandre
assessment of what data are
et al. emphasize the same idea:
reliable and relevant and a decision
about which explanation is the Argumentation is particularly
most satisfactory. Thus knowing relevant in science education
why the wrong answer is wrong since a goal of scientific inquiry
can help secure a deeper and is the generation and justification
stronger understanding of why of knowledge claims, beliefs
the right answer is right. Engaging and actions taken to understand
in argumentation from evidence nature. Commitments to theory,
about an explanation supports methods, and aims are the
students’ understanding of the outcome of critical evaluation and
reasons and empirical evidence for debates among communities of
that explanation, demonstrating scientists. (2000, p. 758)

xvi NATIONAL SCIENCE TEACHERS ASSOCIATION

Current research in science education engaging students in the production

also supports calls to integrate argumen- and evaluation of scientific arguments.
tation in the teaching and learning. First, This approach frames the goal of inquiry
several studies have demonstrated that as the construction of a good argument
students who engage in argumentation as that provides and justifies a conclusion,
part of an inquiry often change or refine explanation, or some other answer to a
their image of science (Bell and Linn 2000; research question. Students develop one
Price Schleigh, Bosse, and Lee 2011) or or more ways to investigate the phenom-
enhance their understanding of the nature enon, make sense of the data they gather,
of scientific knowledge (Yerrick 2000), and produce an argument that makes
because learners are able to experience the clear their understanding. The quality of
nature of science firsthand (Driver et al. these arguments then becomes the focal
1994; Duschl 2000). Second, several stud- point of discussion in the classroom as
ies have shown that students can learn to students evaluate and critique methods,
develop a better understanding of impor-
explanations, evidence, and reasoning
tant content knowledge by engaging in
(Erduran and Jimenez-Aleixandre 2008;
argumentation (Bell and Linn 2000; Zohar
Sandoval and Reiser 2004).
and Nemet 2002). Third, current research
Another common framework for
indicates that argumentation encourages
promoting and supporting scientific
learners to develop different ways of
argumentation in classrooms has focused
thinking, because they have more oppor-
on designing activities or tasks that
tunities to engage in the reasoning and
require students to examine and evaluate
discursive practices of scientists (Brown
alternative theoretical interpretations
and Palincsar 1989; Kuhn 1993; Sandoval
of a particular phenomenon (Erduran
and Millwood 2005). Finally, research
and Jimenez-Aleixandre 2008; Monk
has demonstrated that opportunities to
engage in argumentation as part of the and Osborne 1997; Osborne, Erduran,
inquiry process can improve students’ and Simon 2004). This type of approach
investigative competencies (Sandoval provides opportunities for students to
and Reiser 2004; Tabak et al. 1996). Taken examine competing explanations, evalu-
together, these studies provide strong sup- ate the evidence that does or does not
port for efforts to integrate argumentation support each perspective, and construct
into science education. arguments justifying the case for one
There are a number of strategies or explanation or another.
approaches that biology teachers can Finally, teachers can also engage
use to integrate argumentation into the students in argumentation by requiring
teaching and learning of biology. One them to write a refutational essay. A refu-
approach, which is frequently described in tational essay—which is designed to give
the science education literature, involves students an opportunity to not only write

SCIENTIFIC ARGUMENTATION IN BIOLOGY

BIOLOGY: 30 CLASSROOM ACTIVITIES xvii
Copyright © 2016 NSTA. All rights reserved. For more information, go to www.nsta.org/permissions.
TO PURCHASE THIS BOOK, please visit www.nsta.org/store/product_detail.aspx?id=10.2505/9781936137275
INTRODUCTION

to learn but also learn how to write at the opportunity to share their ideas during
same time— requires students to explain an argumentation session. These sessions
why a common misconception is inac- are designed to create a need for students
curate and then explain why a scientific to discuss the validity or acceptability
view is more valid or acceptable from a of the various arguments based on the
scientific perspective. available information. Based on the
The activities included in this book outcomes of these discussions, students
were designed based on this literature. refine their claims in order to better
The first 10 activities were designed using explain or describe the phenomenon
an instructional model called Generate an under investigation. Each student is
Argument (Sampson and Grooms 2010). required to write and submit a final
This model requires students to develop argument to his or her teacher for the
a claim that answers a research question purpose of assessment. To conclude the
based on a supplied data set. The second activity, the teacher leads a whole-class
set of 10 activities were designed using reflective discussion and encourages
the Evaluate Alternatives instructional students to consider what they learned
model (Sampson and Grooms 2009). about the content and the nature of
This model requires students to collect science. This model consists of five stages
data in order to test the merits of two (see Figure 2).
or three alternative explanations. The
remaining 10 activities are refutational Stage 1: The Identification of a Problem
writing activities. These activities are and the Research Question
designed to give students an opportunity The teacher initiates the activity by
to write to learn and learn to write at the identifying a problem to investigate and
same time. In the sections that follow, we a research question for the students to
will describe how each of the models or answer. The goal of the teacher at this
techniques work. stage is to capture the students’ interest
and provide them with a reason to engage
Generate an Argument in the activity. To do this, the teachers
Instructional Model should make photocopies of the activity
This instructional model is designed to and distribute to each student in the class.
provide an opportunity for small groups The pages include a brief introduction to
of students to develop a claim that a puzzling phenomenon or a discrepant
answers a research question based on an event and a research question to answer.
available data set. As part of this process, The pages also include information
groups create a tentative argument that about the nature of the artifact they will
provides this claim and the evidence that need to produce (i.e., an argument), the
supports it, using a medium that can be data set they will use to develop these
viewed by others. Each group then has an artifacts, and some criteria that will be

xviii NATIONAL SCIENCE TEACHERS ASSOCIATION

Figure 2. Stages of the Generate an Argument Instructional Model

The Teacher Identifies the

Task and Question

Students work in small groups to make sense of the data set and then …

Generate a
Tentative Argument

Groups then share and critique each other’s arguments during an …

Argumentation Session

The teacher then helps students reflect on what they have learned
about the content and the nature of science during …

The Reflective Discussion

The students then use what they have learned to produce a …

Final Written Argument

used to judge argument quality (e.g., the students into small groups (we rec-
the sufficiency of the explanation, the ommend three students per group), and
quality of the evidence, and so on). The move on to the second stage of the model.
classroom teacher should have a different
student read each section of the activity Stage 2: The Generation of a Tentative
aloud and then pause after each section to Argument
clarify expectations, answer questions, or The next stage of the instructional model
provide additional information as needed. calls for students to use the raw data
Once all the students understand the goal that is supplied during the first stage
of the activity, the teacher should divide of the model to develop an answer to

SCIENTIFIC ARGUMENTATION IN BIOLOGY

BIOLOGY: 30 CLASSROOM ACTIVITIES xix
Copyright © 2016 NSTA. All rights reserved. For more information, go to www.nsta.org/permissions.
TO PURCHASE THIS BOOK, please visit www.nsta.org/store/product_detail.aspx?id=10.2505/9781936137275
INTRODUCTION

the research question. To do this, each whiteboard, such as the example shown
group of students need to be encour- in Figure 4, a large piece of butcher paper,
aged to first make sense of the provided or a digital display on a group computer.
measurements (e.g., size, temperature) or The intention of this stage is to
observations (e.g., appearance, location, provide students with an opportunity
behavior) by looking for trends over to make sense of what they are seeing or
time, difference between groups, or rela- doing. As students work together to cre-
tionships between variables. Once the ate a tentative argument, they must talk
groups have examined and analyzed the with each other and determine how to
data, they are instructed to create a tenta- analyze the data and how to best interpret
tive argument that consists of (1) their the trends, difference, or relationships
answer to the research question, (2) their that they uncover. They must also decide
evidence (the data that has been analyzed if the evidence (i.e., data that have been
and interpreted), and (3) a rationale (i.e., analyzed and interpreted) they decide
a statement that explains why the evi- to include in their argument is relevant,
dence they decided to use is important or sufficient, and convincing enough to
relevant) on a medium that can be easily support their claim. This, in turn, enables
viewed by their classmates (see Figure students to evaluate competing ideas and
3). We recommend using a 2 ft. × 3 ft. weed out any claim that is inaccurate,

Figure 3. The Components of an Argument for Stage 2 of the Generate an

Argument Instructional Model

The Research Question:

Your Claim:

Your Evidence: Your Justification

of the Evidence:

xx NATIONAL SCIENCE TEACHERS ASSOCIATION

Figure 4. An Example of an Argument Created by High School Students

contains contradictions, or does not fit enon based on raw data. We therefore
with all the available data. recommend that the classroom teacher
This stage is also designed to focus circulate from group to group in order to
students’ attention on the importance act as a resource person for the students.
of argument in science. In other words, It is the goal of the teacher at this stage of
students need to understand that the model to ensure that students think
scientists must be able to support a about what they are doing and why. For
conclusion, explanation, or an answer example, teachers should ask students
to a research question with appropriate probing questions to help them remember
evidence and then justify their use or the goal of the activity (e.g., What are you
choice of evidence with an adequate trying to figure out?), to encourage them
rationale. It also helps students develop to think about whether or not the data
new standards for what counts as high- are relevant (e.g., Why is that characteristic
quality evidence and a sufficient or important?), or to help them to remember
adequate rationale (i.e., statements that to use rigorous criteria to evaluate the
explains why the evidence is important merits of an idea (e.g., Does that fit with
or relevant to the task at hand). all the data or what we know about the solar
This stage of the model can be chal- system?). It is also important to remember
lenging for students because they are that students will struggle with this type
rarely asked to make sense of a phenom- of practical work at the beginning of the

SCIENTIFIC ARGUMENTATION IN BIOLOGY

BIOLOGY: 30 CLASSROOM ACTIVITIES xxi
Copyright © 2016 NSTA. All rights reserved. For more information, go to www.nsta.org/permissions.
TO PURCHASE THIS BOOK, please visit www.nsta.org/store/product_detail.aspx?id=10.2505/9781936137275
INTRODUCTION

year and will often rely on inappropriate the content and how to engage in better
criteria such as plausibility (e.g., “That critical thinking when they are exposed to
sounds good to me”) or personal experi- the ideas of others, respond to the ques-
ence (e.g., “But that is what I saw on TV tions and challenges of other students,
once”) as they attempt to make sense of articulate more substantial warrants for
the content. However, over time and with their views, and evaluate the merits of
enough practice students will improve competing ideas (NRC 2008). It also pro-
their skills. This is an important principle vides an opportunity for students to learn
underlying this instructional model. how to distinguish between ideas using
rigorous scientific criteria and to develop
Stage 3: The Argumentation Session more scientific habits of mind (such as
The third stage in the Generate an Argu- treating ideas with initial skepticism,
ment instructional model is called the insisting the reasoning and assumptions
argumentation session. In this stage, are made explicit, and insisting that
students are given an opportunity to claims are supported by valid reasons).
share, evaluate, and revise the products It is important to note, however, that
or process of their investigations with supporting and promoting this type of
their classmates (see Figure 5). This stage interaction among students inside the
is included in the model because research classroom is often difficult because this
indicates that students learn more about type of discussion is foreign to most stu-

Figure 5. The Argumentation Session

xxii NATIONAL SCIENCE TEACHERS ASSOCIATION

dents. This is one reason why students are sion during the argumentation session.
required to generate their arguments on a The teacher should move from group
medium that can be seen by others. This to group not only to keep students on
helps students to focus their attention on task but also to model good scientific
evaluating evidence and reasoning rather argumentation. The teacher can ask the
than attacking the source of the ideas. We presenter questions such as How did you
also recommend that teachers use a round- analyze the available data? or Was there
robin format rather than a whole-class any data that did not fit with your claim?
presentation format. In the round-robin to encourage students to use empirical
format, one member of the group stays at criteria to evaluate the quality of the
the workstation to share the group’s ideas arguments. The teacher can also ask the
while the other group members will go presenter to explain how the claim fits
to different groups one at a time in order with the theories, laws, or models of
to listen to and critique the explanations science or to explain why the evidence
developed by their classmates. (See Fig- is important. In addition, the teacher can
ures 6 below and 7 [p. xxiv]. In Figure 7, also ask the students who are listening
students A1, B1, and C1 stay at their table to the presentation questions such as Do
while other students move from table to you think their analysis is accurate? or Do
table in sequence to listen to and evalu- you think their reasoning is appropriate?
ate the arguments of the other groups.) or even Do you think their interpretation
This type of format ensures that all ideas is correct? in order to remind them to
are heard and more students are actively use analytical criteria during the discus-
involved in the process. sions. Overall, the goal of the teacher at
It is also important for the classroom this stage of the lesson is to encourage
teacher to be involved in the discus- students to think about how they know

Figure 6. A Round-Robin Argumentation Session

SCIENTIFIC ARGUMENTATION IN BIOLOGY

BIOLOGY: 30 CLASSROOM ACTIVITIES xxiii
Copyright © 2016 NSTA. All rights reserved. For more information, go to www.nsta.org/permissions.
TO PURCHASE THIS BOOK, please visit www.nsta.org/store/product_detail.aspx?id=10.2505/9781936137275
INTRODUCTION

Figure 7. Example of a Round-Robin Argumentation Session

A1 B1 C1

A2 Table 1 A3 B2 Table 2 B3 C2 Table 3 C3

A4 B4
C4

A1 B1 C1

C2 Table 1 C3 A2 Table 2 A3 B2 Table 3 B3

A4 B4
C4

what they know and why some claims to explain what they learned about the
are more valid or acceptable in science. phenomenon under investigation. This
It is not the time to tell the students if enables the classroom teacher to ensure
they are right or wrong. the class reaches a scientifically accept-
able conclusion and thinks about ways
Stage 4: A Reflective Discussion to improve the nature of their arguments
The next stage in this instructional model in the future. The teacher can also discuss
is for the original groups to reconvene any issues that were a common challenge
and discuss what they learned by inter- for the groups during the second and
acting with individuals from the other third stage of the activity.
groups. They should then modify their
tentative argument as needed or conduct Stage 5: The Production of a Final
an additional analysis of the data. After Written Argument
the teacher gives the students a chance In the final stage of the model, each stu-
to debrief with their group, the teacher dent is required to make sense of his or her
should lead a whole-class discussion. The experience by producing a final argument
teacher should encourage the students in writing. This component is included in

xxiv NATIONAL SCIENCE TEACHERS ASSOCIATION

the instructional model because writing is designed to encourage students to think

an important part of doing science. Scien- about what they know, how they know it,
tists must be able to read and understand and why they accept it over alternatives.
the writing of others as well as evaluate It is also designed to encourage students
its worth. They also must be able to share to think about the organization, sentence
the results of their own research through fluency, word choice, and writing con-
writing. In addition, writing helps ventions. Teachers can make a photocopy
students learn how to articulate their of the prompt for each student and have
thinking in a clear and concise manner; it the student write his or her argument
encourages metacognition and improves under the prompt. To reduce photocop-
student understanding of the content ies and paper usage, the teacher can also
(Wallace, Hand, and Prain 2004). Finally, project the prompt on a screen by using
and perhaps most importantly, writing a document camera, an overhead projec-
makes each student’s thinking visible to tor, or a computer for all students in the
the teacher (which facilitates assessment) class to see and have students write their
and enables the teacher to provide stu- argument on their own piece of paper. In
dents with the educative feedback they addition, teachers can have students write
need to improve. their arguments using a word processing
In order to help students learn how application (or in another digital medium
to write a persuasive and convincing such as a wiki). A rubric for scoring these
scientific argument, we use the prompt arguments is provided in Appendix B
provided in Figure 8. This prompt is (p. 366). This rubric includes criteria that

Figure 8. Writing Prompt for the Generate an Argument Instruction Model

In the space below, write an argument in order to persuade another biologist that
your claim is valid and acceptable. As you write your argument, remember to do
the following:
• State the claim you are trying to support
• Include genuine evidence (data + analysis + interpretation)
• Provide a justification of your evidence that explains why the evidence is
relevant and why it provides adequate support for the claim
• Organize your argument in a way that enhances readability
• Use a broad range of words including vocabulary that we have learned
• Correct grammar, punctuation, and spelling errors

SCIENTIFIC ARGUMENTATION IN BIOLOGY

BIOLOGY: 30 CLASSROOM ACTIVITIES xxv
Copyright © 2016 NSTA. All rights reserved. For more information, go to www.nsta.org/permissions.
TO PURCHASE THIS BOOK, please visit www.nsta.org/store/product_detail.aspx?id=10.2505/9781936137275
INTRODUCTION

target many of the components of a qual- an argumentation session. After the criti-
ity argument in science outlined on the cal discussions are finished, the students
previous page as well as the quality of are given a chance to meet with their
the students’ writing (e.g., organization, original groups to refine their arguments
word choice, and conventions). in an effort to better support or challenge
the various explanations. To conclude the
Evaluate Alternatives activity, each student is required to write
Instructional Model and submit a final argument in support
The Evaluate Alternatives instructional of one of the explanations and a counter-
model is similar in many ways to the argument that challenges the validity of
Generate an Argument model. This the other two explanations.
model, however, places more emphasis This instructional model, like the
on the evaluation of alternative explana- Generate an Argument model, is also
tions and the importance of designing an designed to help students develop a
informative investigation that can be used deeper understanding of (1) the content,
to test the merits of an explanation. To do (2) the empirical and theoretical ground-
this, students are placed into groups and ing for that content, and (3) what counts
then introduced to a phenomenon that as warranted knowledge in science, by
needs to be explored, a research question, providing students with an opportunity
and two or three alternative explanations to discuss what they know, how they
that provide an answer to the research know it, and why they should accept
question. The groups of students are then the knowledge as the most valid or
directed to design and carry out an inves- acceptable explanation. It will also give
tigation that will allow them to gather students an opportunity to improve their
the data needed to either support or chal- verbal communication and writing skills,
lenge the validity or acceptability of an their understanding of argumentation in
explanation. Students are also provided science, and their critical-thinking skills,
with information about relevant scientific or scientific habits of mind. An activity
theories, laws, or models so they can use designed using this model consists of six
this information to provide a rationale for stages (see Figure 9).
their evidence (i.e., data that has been col-
lected, analyzed, and interpreted by the Stage 1: Introduce the Phenomenon to
students). Once the groups of students
gather the data they need, they create a
Investigate, the Research Question, and
tentative argument for the explanation the Alternative Explanations
that they consider most valid or accept- The teacher, as noted earlier, initiates
able and one or more counterarguments the activity by introducing a puzzling
that challenge the other explanations. phenomenon to investigate. This stage
Each group then shares their ideas during of the model is designed to capture the

xxvi NATIONAL SCIENCE TEACHERS ASSOCIATION

Figure 9. Stages of the Evaluate Alternatives Instructional Model

The Teacher Identifies the Task,

the Research Question, and the Alternatives

Small groups of students then develop and implement a method to …

Collect Data

The small groups make sense of the data they collect and then …

Generate a Tentative
Argument and Counterargument

Groups then share and critique each other’s arguments during an …

Argumentation Session

The teacher then helps students reflect on what they have learned
about the content and the nature of science during …

The Reflective Discussion

The students then use what they have learned to …

Write an Argument

SCIENTIFIC ARGUMENTATION IN BIOLOGY

BIOLOGY: 30 CLASSROOM ACTIVITIES xxvii
Copyright © 2016 NSTA. All rights reserved. For more information, go to www.nsta.org/permissions.
TO PURCHASE THIS BOOK, please visit www.nsta.org/store/product_detail.aspx?id=10.2505/9781936137275
INTRODUCTION

students’ attention, or spark their curios- ignoring or distorting everything else).

ity, and to give them a reason to engage This type of thinking will often prevent
in scientific argumentation. To do this, students from designing an investigation
the teacher should make a photocopy of that tests the merits of each potential
the activity pages for each student (or the explanation in a systematic manner.
teacher can project the activity on a screen Therefore, it is important for the teacher
using a document camera, an overhead to circulate from group to group and act
projector, or a computer). The activity as a resource. It is also the goal of the
pages provide students with information teacher to ensure that students think
about the phenomenon under investiga- about what they are doing and why. For
tion, a research question to answer, and example, teachers should ask students
two or more alternative explanations probing questions to help them remem-
to evaluate. The teacher should use the ber the goal of the activity (e.g., What are
information provided to create a need for you trying to do?) and to encourage them
the students to make sense of the under- to think about what type of data they will
lying cause of the phenomenon. Once the need to collect (e.g., What will you try to
students have read the information and measure or observe?). The teacher can also
the teacher has answered any of their ask a probing question in order to remind
questions about the goal of the activity the students of the importance of using a
or the materials available for them to use, rigorous method (e.g., If you don’t include
the teacher can then break the students a comparison group how will you know that
into small groups (we suggest groups of it changed? Do you think a single trial is
three) and begin Stage 2 of the lesson. enough?) and to get them to think about
how they will analyze their data once
Stage 2: The Generation of Data they have it collected (e.g., How will you
Each group must design and carry out show that there is a difference between the
an investigation that they can use to two groups?). Lastly, it is important for
determine which alternative explanation teachers to remember that students will
provided on the activity pages is the most struggle with this type of practical work
valid or acceptable. This stage provides when this instructional model is first
students with an opportunity to learn implemented, but over time students will
how to design informative investigation get better at designing investigations.
and collect high-quality data. However,
this type of practical work can be chal- Stage 3: The Generation of Tentative
lenging for students because the strate- Arguments and Counterarguments
gies they use to generate data or to test Next, the students should be directed to
ideas are often guided by a confirmation create a tentative argument on a medium
bias (i.e., the tendency to seek out data that can be easily seen by others (see
that support an existing belief while Figure 10). This argument should include

xxviii NATIONAL SCIENCE TEACHERS ASSOCIATION

a claim that is supported by evidence and Figure 10. Students Develop Tentative Arguments
rationales. We also suggest that students and Counterarguments on a Whiteboard
develop a challenge for at least one of
the alternative explanations on the same
whiteboard. We recommend that teachers
require students to construct their argu-
ments and challenge using the template
provided in Figure 11, which can also be
found on each of the activity pages. This
will help students understand and adopt
new standards for what counts as war-
ranted knowledge in science.
As in the other instructional model,
we recommend that the classroom teacher
circulate from group to group in order to
act as a resource. The main goal of the
teacher at this point is to help students
think about what makes an argument
persuasive or convincing in science (i.e.,
claims need to be supported by sufficient Figure 11. The Components of an Argument
evidence and an adequate rationale). To and Challenge
do this, teachers should ask students
probing questions to help them think
The Research Question:
about what counts as evidence and to
encourage them to articulate the reasons
Your Claim: An Alternative Claim:
behind their decision to collect a particu-
lar type of data or to complete a specific
type of analysis. Teachers should also
Your Evidence: Your Challenge to the
encourage students to include relevant Alternative Claim:
theories and laws in their argument or
counterargument in order to support the Your Justification
claims they are attempting to make. of the Evidence:

Stage 4: An Argumentation Session

The fourth stage in the Evaluate Alter-
natives instructional model is an argu-
mentation session. As in the Generate
an Argument model, students are given
an opportunity to share and critique

SCIENTIFIC ARGUMENTATION IN BIOLOGY

BIOLOGY: 30 CLASSROOM ACTIVITIES xxix
Copyright © 2016 NSTA. All rights reserved. For more information, go to www.nsta.org/permissions.
TO PURCHASE THIS BOOK, please visit www.nsta.org/store/product_detail.aspx?id=10.2505/9781936137275
INTRODUCTION

the various arguments in a small group provided in Figure 11 is included as part

format. We once again recommend that of the activity pages for each Evaluate
teachers use the round-robin structure Alternatives activity. This prompt is
so more students have an opportunity to designed to encourage students to think
determine if the data gathered by other about what they know, how they know it,
groups is relevant, sufficient, and con- and why one explanation is more valid or
vincing enough to support one explana- acceptable than the alternatives. It is also
tion over another. designed to encourage students to think
about sentence fluency, word choice,
Stage 5: The Reflective Discussion and writing conventions. Perhaps more
The next stage in this instructional model importantly, the writing prompt pro-
is for the original groups to reconvene and vides a summative assessment of student
discuss what they learned by interacting learning. Teachers can use the arguments
with individuals from the other groups. and counterargument that students write
Based on the discussion, they should to determine how well each student
then modify their tentative argument understands the content and how well he
or collect and analyze additional data or she can provide evidence to support
as needed. After the teacher gives the or challenge an explanation. A rubric
students a chance to debrief with their for scoring the students’ arguments is
group, the teacher should lead a whole- provided in Appendix C (p. 367).
class discussion. The teacher should, as in
the Generate an Argument instructional Refutational Writing
model, encourage the students to explain Activities
what they learned about the phenomenon This book, as discussed earlier, also
under investigation and to think about includes several refutational writing
ways to improve the nature of their argu- activities (see Dlugokienski and Sampson
ments in the future. The teacher should 2008) that can be integrated into a unit.
also pose questions to discuss ways to A refutational text introduces a common
improve future investigations (e.g., Why concept or idea; refutes it; offers an alter-
is it important to include a control? Why is native concept, idea, or theory; and then
it important that we conduct multiple trials?). attempts to show that this alternative
way of thinking is more valid or accept-
Stage 6: The Production of a Final able (Guzzetti et al. 1997). An example
Written Argument of a refutation of the misconception that
In the last stage of the lesson, each stu- hypotheses become theories that in turn
dent is required to produce a written become laws can be seen in the following
argument in support of one of the expla- excerpt from a chapter written by William
nations that also includes a challenge to McComas, “The principal elements of the
an alternative explanation. The prompt nature of science: Dispelling the myths of

xxx NATIONAL SCIENCE TEACHERS ASSOCIATION

Figure 11. The Evaluate Alternatives Writing Prompt

In the space below, write a one- to three-paragraph argument to support the

explanation that you think is the most valid or acceptable. Your argument must
also include a challenge to one of the alternative explanations.

As you write your argument, remember to do the following:

• State the explanation you are trying to support
• Include genuine evidence (data + analysis + interpretation)
• Explain why the evidence is important and relevant
• State the explanation you are trying to refute
• Explain why the alternative explanation is invalid or unacceptable
• Organize your argument in a way that enhances readability
• Use a broad range of words including vocabulary that we have learned
• Correct grammar, punctuation, and spelling errors

science.” The key sentence that identifies upon it. Theories and laws are very
this passage as refutational in nature is in different kinds of knowledge, but
in italics. the misconception portrays them as
[There is a] general belief that different forms of the same knowledge
with increased evidence there is a construct. Of course there is a
developmental sequence through relationship between laws and
which scientific ideas pass on theories, but it is not the case that
their way to final acceptance as one simply becomes the other—no
mature laws. The implication is matter how much empirical
that hypotheses and theories are evidence is amassed. Laws are
less secure than laws. A former generalizations, principles, or
U.S. president expressed his patterns in nature and theories
misunderstanding of science by are the explanations of those
saying that he was not troubled generalizations. (Lederman and
by the idea of evolution because it Abd-El-Khalick1998, p. 56)
was, in his words, “just a theory.”
The president’s misstatement is A text that is refutational in nature,
the essence of this myth; an idea is such as the example provided, is one of
not worthy of consideration until three kinds of persuasive arguments that
“law-ness” has been bestowed are often found in scientific writing (Hynd

SCIENTIFIC ARGUMENTATION IN BIOLOGY

BIOLOGY: 30 CLASSROOM ACTIVITIES xxxi
Copyright © 2016 NSTA. All rights reserved. For more information, go to www.nsta.org/permissions.
TO PURCHASE THIS BOOK, please visit www.nsta.org/store/product_detail.aspx?id=10.2505/9781936137275
INTRODUCTION

2003). A one-sided persuasive argument Each refutational writing prompt

only presents the concept, idea, or theory begins with a particular misconception to
the author prefers a reader to adopt. Two- refute. It then outlines all the information
sided arguments can be nonrefutational or a student will need such as the topic, the
refutational. A two-sided, nonrefutational audience, the purpose, the form of the
argument presents both sides of an issue text, and reminders (Turner and Broem-
but makes one side seem stronger by pre- mel 2006). The reminders are designed to
senting more evidence, explaining it more focus the writer’s attention on important
logically, or in some other way making the components of a quality refutational text
argument more compelling yet without that novices often forget or overlook in
explicitly stating that the author prefers their writing. The prompt then concludes
it. A refutational argument, in contrast, is with information about the steps of the
more explicit than a nonrefutational argu- writing process that the student should
ment about which is the preferred side. follow (e.g., conducting research, creat-
Most textbooks and science trade ing an outline, producing a rough draft,
books are written in an expository and editing, and publication). It also provides
authoritative style, and as a result usually a space for the teacher to assign a due
do not include arguments. When they date for each step of the process. A rubric
do, they often use one-sided arguments for scoring the argument is provided in
rather than refutational two-sided argu- Appendix D (p. 368).
ments. Thus, students are likely to be We recommend that teachers treat
unfamiliar with this type of writing and these writing activities as opportunities
will need explicit instruction, a great deal for students to conduct literature reviews
of practice, and good feedback in order to as part of the writing process. We also
learn how to write in this manner. Science suggest that the essays are at least 100
teachers, however, can help students words long, that students type their ini-
learn to write a high-quality essay that is tial and final draft, and include properly
refutational in nature (and develop a bet- formatted in-text citations. Students need
ter understanding of the content as part to write to learn but also need to learn
of the process) by using the refutational how to write in the context of science. The
writing activities included in this book. refutational writing activities provide
These writing activities require students students with an opportunity to do both
to produce an extended essay that refutes inside the biology classroom.
a common misconception related to an
important biological concept (e.g., species The Activities in This
do not evolve over time, or all bacteria Book
cause disease) or to the nature of science This book includes 30 activities. These
(e.g., there is one scientific method, or activities have been organized into three
theories turn into laws). sections based on type. Ten of the activi-

xxxii NATIONAL SCIENCE TEACHERS ASSOCIATION

ties are designed around the Generate an of A Framework for K–12 Science Educa-
Argument model, and 10 are designed tion that are aligned with each activity
using the Evaluate Alternatives model. and the particular Common Core State
The remaining 10 activities are refutational Standards for English Language Arts
writing activities. The investigations in and Literacy that the activity addresses.
many of these activities require safety Lastly, the teacher notes also provide
considerations. Certain activities contain some suggestions for how to implement
safety notes as needed, but before any the activity in a particular context. It is
activity, teachers should review NSTA’s suggested that teachers review the Cur-
“Safety in the Science Classroom,” which ricular and Instructional Considerations
can be found at http://www.nsta.org/pdfs/ section of each activity’s teacher notes to
SafetyInTheScienceClassroom.pdf. best determine how the activity might
Teachers can use these activities to supplement an existing curriculum.
integrate more scientific argumentation While we believe that the purpose of the
into the teaching and learning of biology. activity is to help students understand
When teachers use several of these activi- important content and practices in sci-
ties over the course of an academic year ence, teachers often need guidance about
(e.g., two or three per semester), students when to implement an activity and what
will not only have an opportunity to learn to do before, during, and after a lesson.
important content (i.e., learn from scien- Reviewing this section will help teachers
tific argumentation), but they will also make these types of decisions.
learn more about scientific argumenta- The activities are flexible in that they
tion (i.e., what counts as evidence, how to can be used to at different points in the
support claims, how to evaluate scientific curriculum. A teacher can use these activ-
argument) in Biology. These activities can ities as a way to introduce students to
also be used to improve students’ com- new content or as a way to give students
munication and critical-thinking skills. an opportunity to apply a theory, law,
or unifying concept to a novel situation.
How to Use the Teachers can even use these activities as
Activities a way to allow students to demonstrate
The activities in this book are not what they have learned after an instruc-
designed to replace an existing curricu- tional unit. To support student learning,
lum but to supplement what teachers we provide research related to miscon-
are already doing in the classroom. ceptions and suggestions to address the
The teacher notes for each activity will misconceptions.
suggest content that should be covered In the Recommendations for Imple-
before, during, and after the activities in menting the Activity section, we provide
order to best foster student learning. The information about what teachers should
teacher notes also highlight the aspects look for while teaching and strategies

SCIENTIFIC ARGUMENTATION IN BIOLOGY

BIOLOGY: 30 CLASSROOM ACTIVITIES xxxiii
Copyright © 2016 NSTA. All rights reserved. For more information, go to www.nsta.org/permissions.
TO PURCHASE THIS BOOK, please visit www.nsta.org/store/product_detail.aspx?id=10.2505/9781936137275
INTRODUCTION

that teachers can use to execute the activ- into large-group interactions and then
ity. We also provide information about lead back to the individual. Some develop
how much instructional time the activity argumentation skills more quickly by
takes to complete and ways a teacher starting in small groups in which they
can break the activity over several days can feel comfortable and safe in sharing
of instruction. Appendix E (p. 369) pro- their ideas and expressing disagreement
vides two options for implementing the with others. Teachers, however, need
Generate an Argument Activities, and to be aware of the types of interactions
Appendix F (p. 370) provides two options that are taking place within each group
for implementing the refutational writing and how individual member’s skills are
activities. These tricks of the trade come developing (or not developing) over
from both the feedback we received from time. We also recommend that teachers
the pilot teachers and our personal expe- group students who have different ideas
riences with this type of instruction. and varying skills in scientific processes
The development of a discourse and critical thinking. Heterogeneous
community through the organization of groups will lead to better argumentation
group structures and interactions also and more learning.
plays an important role in promoting stu-
dent engagement in scientific argumen- The Role of the Teacher
tation and the negotiation of meaning During the Activities
on both the group and individual level. The goal of the teacher during these
While the activities that are based on the activities is to support the groups as they
Generate an Argument and the Evalu- work and encourage students to negoti-
ate Alternatives instructional models ate meaning with one another. Teachers
provide opportunities for small-group should, therefore, encourage students to
and whole-class discussions, teachers critique one another’s ideas about how
must encourage all students to become they design and conduct their investiga-
active participants in the community. tions, analyze data, and develop conclu-
It is also important that interactions, sions. Teachers need to guide or coach but
whether in large or small groups, include should not explain or correct. The more
opportunities for students to make their independence students have to make
ideas explicit through oral, graphical, decisions, the more ownership, responsi-
and written communication forms, in bility, and accountability they gain when
order to promote learning for both the creating their conclusions and argu-
student and the audience (Black et al. ments. Students become more engaged,
2003). Although the activities could be more motivated, more interested, and
implemented to take advantage of a wide more invested, and learn more as a
variety of group interactions, our models result. Teachers, however, need to ensure
rely on small-group interactions that lead that throughout each activity students

xxxiv NATIONAL SCIENCE TEACHERS ASSOCIATION

are using criteria valued in science to able and are implemented at the right
critique and evaluate ideas. Teachers also moment during instruction. Because
need to assist students as they attempt to each of the activities in this book requires
negotiate meaning during the activities. students to share their ideas and content
Collaborative intra- and intergroup dis- knowledge, the activities can serve as
cussions provide ample opportunity for assessments as well as instructional tools.
socially constructing concepts or ideas by In the Assessments section, we provide
making claims (i.e., drawing inferences) suggestions on how each activity, as an
and then supporting them with evidence assessment tool, may best serve the cur-
based on the supplied data or data they riculum based on the purpose; however,
collected during their investigations. The the activities can easily be used at any
social construction and evaluation of time within the curriculum to serve
claims requires students to use their own many purposes of assessment or learning
ideas but also interact with the ideas of events. We suggest that the purpose of
the entire class. the activity and the action of the students
In order to promote and support be considered in determining when to
learning during these activities, teachers use each activity and for what role in the
need to engage in certain behaviors and assessment.
avoid others. Tables 1 and 2 (pp. xxxvi– We also provide suggested rubrics to
xxxvii), therefore, provide examples of facilitate reliability during the teacher’s
teacher behaviors that are consistent and evaluation of student work. In addition,
inconsistent with each stage of the Gen- we include student samples from our test
erate an Argument instructional model classrooms to illustrate not only the kinds
and the Evaluate Alternatives instruc- of work teachers might anticipate but
tional model. These recommendations, also the way that the rubrics can be used
however, are not an exhaustive list; they to assess. It should be noted that these
are intended to illustrate what we think samples, although identified as high,
teachers should do and not do during medium, and low quality, are collected
these activities in order to make them as from different classrooms, different
effective as possible. students, and different points within the
curriculum and therefore do not serve as
Assessments examples of learning progression.
We have provided a section dedicated The student samples from these
to supporting the teacher in considering activities can serve as assessments for
how to assess student learning. Knowing different points within the curriculum
what students know and how their ideas depending on the point of implementa-
may have changed is fundamental in tion, the follow-up, and emphasis of
being an effective teacher. This requires the teacher. For diagnostic assessment,
assessments that are both valid and reli- for example, a teacher might use one of

SCIENTIFIC ARGUMENTATION IN BIOLOGY

BIOLOGY: 30 CLASSROOM ACTIVITIES xxxv
Copyright © 2016 NSTA. All rights reserved. For more information, go to www.nsta.org/permissions.
TO PURCHASE THIS BOOK, please visit www.nsta.org/store/product_detail.aspx?id=10.2505/9781936137275
INTRODUCTION

Table 1. Generate an Argument Instructional Model Teacher Behaviors

What the teacher does that is …
Consistent with the Generate an Inconsistent with the Generate an
Stage Argument instructional model Argument instructional model
1. The Identification • Sparks the students’ curiosity • Provides students with possible answers to the
of the Problem • Creates a need for the students to develop research question
and the Research arguments • Allows students to organize into groups of existing
Question consensus
• Organizes the students into collaborative groups
• Supplies the students with the materials they will • Tells students that there is one correct answer
need
• Provides the students with hints

2. The Generation • Reminds students of the research questions and • Requires only one student to be prepared to
of a Tentative what counts as appropriate evidence in science discuss the argument
Argument • Requires students to generate an argument • Moves to groups to check on progress without
that provides and supports a claim with genuine asking students questions about why they are
evidence doing what they are doing
• Suggests that a model, diagram, or representation • Does not interact with students (uses the time to
is created catch up on other responsibilities)
• Asks students what opposing ideas or rebuttals • Does not expect students to address validity or
they might anticipate reliability of data collection
• Provides related theories and reference materials • Tells students which theories are best to support
as tools their ideas

3. Argumentation • Reminds students of appropriate and safe • Tells students when a good point was posed
Session behaviors in the learning community • Allows students to negatively respond to others
• Encourages students to ask peers the questions • Asks questions about students’ claims before other
that the teacher asked in the previous stage students can ask
• Keeps the discussion focused on the evidence and • Allows students to be satisfied with ideas that are
data not supported by evidence
• Encourages students to use appropriate criteria for • Allows students to use inappropriate criteria for
determining what does and does not count determining what does and does not count

4. Reflective • Encourages students to discuss what they learned • Provides a lecture on the content
Discussion about the content and how they know what they • Provides a lecture about the nature of science
know
• Tells students what they should have learned or
• Encourages students to discuss what they learned identifies what they should have figured out
about the nature of science
• Encourages students to discuss ways in which
they could be more productive in the future

5. The Production • Provides an authentic purpose for the writing of the • Places emphasis on spelling and grammar
of a Final Written final argument • Moves on to the next activity or topic without
Argument • Reminds students about the audience, topic, and providing feedback
purpose
• Provides a rubric in advance

xxxvi NATIONAL SCIENCE TEACHERS ASSOCIATION

Copyright © 2016 NSTA. All rights reserved. For more information, go to www.nsta.org/permissions.
TO PURCHASE THIS BOOK, please visit www.nsta.org/store/product_detail.aspx?id=10.2505/9781936137275
INTRODUCTION
Table 2. Evaluate Alternatives Instructional Model Teacher Behaviors
What the teacher does that is …
Consistent with the Evaluate Alternatives Inconsistent with the Evaluate
Stage instructional model Alternatives instructional model
1. Introduce the • Sparks the students’ curiosity • Provides students with a specific explanation
Phenomenon to • Creates a need for the students to develop • Allows students to organize into groups of existing
Investigate, the arguments consensus
Research Question
and the Alternative • Organizes the students into collaborative groups • Tells students that there is one correct answer or a
Explanations • Provides the students with hints grade connected to an answer

2. The Generation • Supplies the students with the materials they will • Tells students what they should have noticed in the
of Data need data
• Asks students what relationships or patterns they • Provides a step-by-step procedure to conduct an
see in the data experiment or collect data
• Asks students questions about how they plan to • Requires only one student to make meaning of the
interpret the data data
• Asks students if everyone in the group has shared • Limits the resources students identify as means of
ideas about the data data collection or sense making
• Provides suggestions about use of tools or
methods of data collection

3. The Generation • Reminds students of the research questions and • Requires only one student to be prepared to
of Tentative what counts as appropriate evidence in science discuss the argument
Arguments and • Requires students to generate an argument that • Moves to groups to check on progress without
Counterarguments provides and supports a claim with genuine evidence asking students questions about why they are
• Suggests that a model, diagram, or representation doing what they are doing
is created • Does not expect students to address validity or
• Asks students what opposing ideas or rebuttals reliability of data collection
they might anticipate • Tells students which theories are best to support
• Provides related theories and reference materials their ideas
as tools

4. An Argumentation • Reminds students of appropriate and safe • Tells students when a good point was posed
Session behaviors in the learning community • Allows students to negatively respond to others
• Encourages students to ask their peers the questions • Asks questions about students’ claims before other
that the teacher asked in the previous stage students can ask
• Keeps the discussion focused on the evidence and • Allows students to be satisfied with ideas that are
data not supported by evidence
• Encourages students to use appropriate criteria for • Allows students to use inappropriate criteria for
determining what does and does not count determining what does and does not count

5. The Reflective • Encourages students to discuss what they learned • Provides a lecture on the content
Discussion about the content and how they know what they • Provides a lecture about the nature of science
know
• Tells students what they should have learned or
• Encourages students to discuss what they learned what they should have figured out
about the nature of science
• Encourages students to discuss ways they could to
improve their investigation in the future

6. The Production • Requires students to complete both writing prompts • Does not include expectations for refutation or
of Final Written • Reminds students about the structure of an inclusion of misconceptions
Argument argument and the audience, topic, and purpose of • Moves on to the next activity or topic without
the writing task providing feedback
• Provides the rubric in advance

SCIENTIFIC ARGUMENTATION IN BIOLOGY

BIOLOGY: 30 CLASSROOM ACTIVITIES xxxvii
Copyright © 2016 NSTA. All rights reserved. For more information, go to www.nsta.org/permissions.
TO PURCHASE THIS BOOK, please visit www.nsta.org/store/product_detail.aspx?id=10.2505/9781936137275
INTRODUCTION

the activities before engaging students dards, to uncover common misconcep-

in the instructional content to find tions and discover prior knowledge. The
out what the students know, to help sections also include additional resources
students think about what they already that will support both the teacher and the
know, to initiate students’ exploration, student during the activity.
and to challenge ideas that may be sup-
ported by misconceptions. For formative Purpose
assessment, a teacher might use one of This section of the teacher notes describes
the activities in the middle of a unit to the value of the activity in terms of both
help identify how well students under- conceptual and the nature of science
stand the information and how well they skills development, and its relevance to
can apply it to a real-world event. This the student. Identifying which concepts
would allow the teacher to then decide are covered and what skills are being
if more instruction is needed. For sum- addressed will help the teacher make
mative assessment, an activity could be decisions about the strategies for intro-
used at the end of a unit to determine if ducing and scaffolding the activity and
the students have a deep understanding the model.
of the content and practices of science.
In this case, the teacher would look to The Content and Related Concepts
see if the students are using content This section of the teacher notes will
and vocabulary introduced during the provide background information to sup-
unit and if they are able to design an port content knowledge that the teacher
investigation, analyze data, or craft a will need to best address students’ ques-
high-quality scientific argument. tions during the data collection and the
discussions. Key terms, current theories,
Teacher Notes and descriptions of data provided in
An effective science teacher must consider the activities will support the teacher in
when to implement a specific activity, identifying standards connections and
how to use an instructional activity most creating assessments. The standards that
effectively in terms of promoting and sup- are addressed for each activity are also
porting student learning, and the desired described in this section.
outcomes for student learning. To help
teachers make instructional decisions Curricular and Instructional
about when and how to use the activities Considerations
in a science classroom, each of the activi- The activities in this book have been
ties includes a section with suggestions on designed for both middle and high school,
how to identify placement in the curricu- grades 6–12. To be able to implement
lum related to assessments, to link ideas these activities at these grades, teachers
addressed within the activities to stan- should have some ideas not only about

xxxviii NATIONAL SCIENCE TEACHERS ASSOCIATION

what students at each grade level may Framework Matrices

have learned related to the content and The Framework matrices indicate how
concepts of the activities but also about well an activity is aligned with the
common misconceptions that may have practices, crosscutting concepts, and core
been developed through previous experi- ideas in A Framework for K–12 Science
ences. This information should be used to Education (NRC 2012). The matrices also
make decisions about when to implement provide information about how well an
the activities, what content should be cov- activity is aligned with the Literacy in
ered before implementing the activities, Science components of the Common Core
and whether to return to the same activity State Standards for English Language Arts
later to identify how students’ ideas may and Literacy (NGA and CCSSO 2010). This
or may not have changed as a result of information provides a quick reference
completing an activity. for teachers interested in a specific topic.

Recommendations for Implementing the References

Activity Abell, S. K., G. Anderson, and J. Chezem.
This section provides suggestions about 2000. Science as argument and
explanation: Exploring concepts of sound
how to implement the activity to focus
in third grade. In Inquiry into inquiry
on the main concepts and suggestions to learning and teaching in science, ed. J.
address misconceptions. The suggestions Minstrell and E. H. Van Zee. Washington,
are sometimes age-specific and some- DC: American Association for the
Advancement of Science (AAAS).
times content-specific. This section also
Bell, P., and M. C. Linn. 2000. Scientific
includes practical information about the arguments as learning artifacts:
time needed to implement the activity Designing for learning from the web with
and possible ways to break up the activ- KIE. International Journal of Science
Education 22 (8): 797–818.
ity over multiple days.
Black, P. J., C. Harrison, C. Lee, B. Marshall,
and D. Wiliam. 2003. Assessment
Assessment for learning: Putting it into practice.
To help the teacher develop criteria for Berkshire, England: Open University
identifying student content knowledge Press, McGraw-Hill Education
and learning development in argumen- Brown, A. L., and A. Palincsar. 1989. Guided,
tation and the nature of science, this cooperative learning and individual
knowledge acquistion. In Knowing,
section provides student samples and learning, and instruction: Essays in honor
a scored rubric with grading sugges- of Robert Glaser, ed. L. B. Resnick.
tions. For a more in-depth look at the Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum
Associates.
student products for assessments at a
low, medium, and high level, teach- Dlugokienski, A., and V. Sampson. 2008.
Learning to write and writing to learn in
ers should review the material in the science: Refutational texts and analytical
Assessments chapter. rubrics. Science Scope 32 (3): 14–19.

SCIENTIFIC ARGUMENTATION IN BIOLOGY

BIOLOGY: 30 CLASSROOM ACTIVITIES xxxix
Copyright © 2016 NSTA. All rights reserved. For more information, go to www.nsta.org/permissions.
TO PURCHASE THIS BOOK, please visit www.nsta.org/store/product_detail.aspx?id=10.2505/9781936137275
INTRODUCTION

Driver, R., H. Asoko, J. Leach, E. Mortimer, scientific thinking. Science Education 77

and P. Scott. 1994. Constructing scientific (3): 319–337.
knowledge in the classroom. Educational
Lederman, N., G., and F. Abd-El-Khalick.
Researcher 23: 5–12.
1998. Avoiding denatured science:
Duschl, R. 2000. Making the nature of Activities that promote understandings
science explicit. In Improving science of the nature of science. In The Nature
education: The contribution of research, of Science in Science Education:
ed. R. Millar, J. Leach, and J. Osborne. Rationales and Strategies, ed. W.
Philadelphia: Open University Press. McComas, 83–126. Dordrecht, Neth.:
Duschl, R. 2008. Science education in three- Kluwer Academic.
part harmony: Balancing conceptual, Monk, M., and J. Osborne. 1997. Placing the
epistemic, and social learning goals. history and philosophy of science in the
Review of Research in Education 32: curriculum: A model for the development
268–291. of pedagogy. Science Education 81 (4):
Duschl, R. A., and J. Osborne. 2002. 405–424.
Supporting and promoting argumentation National Governors Association Center
discourse in science education. Studies (NGA) for Best Practices, and Council
in Science Education 38: 39–72. of Chief State School Officers (CCSSO).
Duschl, R., H. Schweingruber, and A. 2010. Common core state standards
Shouse, eds. 2007. Taking science to for English language arts and literacy.
school: Learning and teaching science Washington, DC: National Governors
in grades K–8. Washington, DC: National Association for Best Practices, Council of
Academies Press. Chief State School.
Erduran, S., and M. Jimenez-Aleixandre, National Research Council (NRC). 1999.
eds. 2008. Argumentation in science Improving student learning. Washington,
education: Perspectives from classroom- DC: National Academies Press.
based research. Dordreht: Springer
Academic Publishers. National Research Council (NRC). 2000.
Inquiry and the national science
Goldman, S. R., R. A. Duschl, K. Ellenbogen, education standards. Washington, DC:
S. M. Williams, and C. Tzou. 2002. National Academies Press.
Science inquiry in a digital age:
Possibilities for making thinking visible. National Research Council (NRC). 2008.
In Cognition in a digital age, ed. V. Ready, set, science: Putting research
Oostendorp, 253–281. Mahwah, NJ: to work in K–8 science classrooms.
Erlbaum. Washington, DC: National Academies
Press.
Guzzetti, B., W. Williams, S. Skeels, and S.
Wu. 1997. Influence of text structure National Research Council (NRC). 2012. A
on learning counterintuitive physics framework for K–12 science education:
concepts. Journal of Research in Practices, crosscutting concepts, and
Science Teaching 34: 701–719. core ideas. Washington, DC: National
Academies Press.
Hynd, C. 2003. Conceptual change in
response to persuasive messages. In Osborne, J. 2002. Science without literacy: A
Intentional Conceptual Change, ed. G. ship without a sail? Cambridge Journal
Sinatra and P. R. Pintrich. Mahwah, NJ: of Education 32: 203–215.
Erlbaum. Osborne, J., S. Erduran, and S. Simon. 2004.
Kuhn, D. 1993. Science as argument: Enhancing the quality of argumentation
Implications for teaching and learning in science classrooms. Journal of

xl NATIONAL SCIENCE TEACHERS ASSOCIATION

Research in Science Teaching 41 (10): conceptual and epistemic scaffolds for

994–1020. scientific inquiry. Science Education 88
Price Schleigh, S., M. Bosse, and T. Lee. (3): 345–372.
2011. Redefining curriculum integration Tabak, I., B. K Smith, W. A. Sandoval, and
and professional development: In-service B. J. Reiser. 1996. Combining general
teachers as agents of change. Current and domain-specific strategic support
Issues in Education 14 (3). for biological inquiry. In Proceedings of
Sampson, V., and J. Grooms. 2009. the Third International Conference on
Promoting and supporting scientific Intelligent Tutoring Systems (ITS ‘96), eds.
argumentation in the classroom: The C. Frasson, G. Gauthier and A. Lesgold,
evaluate alternatives instructional model. Montreal, New York: Springer-Verlag.
Science Scope 32 (10): 67–73. Turner, T., and A. Broemmel. 2006. Fourteeen
Sampson, V., and J. Grooms. 2010. Generate writing strategies. Science Scope (Dec):
an argument: An instructional model. The 27–31.
Science Teacher 77 (5): 33–37.
Wallace, C., B. Hand, and V. Prain, eds. 2004.
Sandoval, W. A. 2005. Understanding Writing and learning in the science
students’ practical epistemologies and classroom. Boston: Kluwer Academic.
their influence on learning through
inquiry. Science Education 89 (4): Yerrick, R. 2000. Lower track science
634–656. students’ argumentation and open
inquiry instruction. Journal of
Sandoval, W. A., and K. Millwood. 2005. The Research in Science Teaching 37 (8):
quality of students’ use of evidence in 807–838. Zohar, A., and F. Nemet. 2002.
written scientific explanations. Cognition Fostering students’ knowledge and
and Instruction 23 (1): 23–55. argumentation skills through dilemmas in
Sandoval, W. A., and B. J. Reiser. 2004. human genetics. Journal of Research in
Explanation driven inquiry: Integrating Science Teaching 39 (1): 35–62.

SCIENTIFIC ARGUMENTATION IN BIOLOGY

BIOLOGY: 30 CLASSROOM ACTIVITIES xli
Copyright © 2016 NSTA. All rights reserved. For more information, go to www.nsta.org/permissions.
TO PURCHASE THIS BOOK, please visit www.nsta.org/store/product_detail.aspx?id=10.2505/9781936137275
Copyright © 2016 NSTA. All rights reserved. For more information, go to www.nsta.org/permissions.
TO PURCHASE THIS BOOK, please visit www.nsta.org/store/product_detail.aspx?id=10.2505/9781936137275
GENERATE AN
ARGUMENT Framework Matrix
Activity 1: Classifying Birds in the United States
2
5
(Species Concept)

Activity 2: Color Variation in Venezuelan Guppies 19

(Mechanisms of Evolution)

Activity 3: Desert Snakes 29

(Mechanics of Evolution)

Activity 4: Fruit Fly Traits 45

(Genetics)

Activity 5: DNA Family Relationship Analysis 55

(Genetics)

Activity 6: Evolutionary Relationships in Mammals 67

(Genetics and Evolution)

Activity 7: Decline in Saltwater Fish Populations 81

(Ecology and Human Impact on the Environment)

Activity 8: History of Life on Earth 103

(Trends in Evolution)

Activity 9: Surviving Winter in the Dust Bowl 113

(Food Chains and Trophic Levels)

Activity 10: Characteristics of Viruses 123

(Characteristics of Life)

FRAMEWORK MATRIX

Activities

Evolutionary Relationships in Mammals

Color Variation in Venezuelan Guppies
Classifying Birds in the United States

Decline in Saltwater Fish Populations

DNA Family Relationship Analysis

Surviving Winter in the Dust Bowl

Characteristics of Viruses
History of Life on Earth
Desert Snakes

A Framework for K–12 Science Education Fruit Fly Traits

1. Scientific Practices

Asking questions

Developing and using models    

Planning and carrying out investigations

Using mathematics and computational thinking       

Constructing explanations          

Engaging in argument from evidence          

Obtaining, evaluating, and communicating
         
information
2. Crosscutting Concepts

Patterns       

Cause and effect: Mechanism and explanation         

Scale, proportion, and quantity   

Systems and system models 

Energy and matter: Flows, cycles and conservation  

Structure and function      

Stability and change     

 = Strong alignment  = Weak alignment

2 NATIONAL SCIENCE TEACHERS ASSOCIATION

Activities

Evolutionary Relationships in Mammals

Color Variation in Venezuelan Guppies
Classifying Birds in the United States

Decline in Saltwater Fish Populations

DNA Family Relationship Analysis

Surviving Winter in the Dust Bowl

Characteristics of Viruses
History of Life on Earth
Desert Snakes

Fruit Fly Traits

A Framework for K–12 Science Education
3. Life Sciences Core Ideas
From molecules to organisms: Structures and
    
processes

Ecosystems: Interactions, energy, and dynamics    

Heredity: Inheritance and variation in traits     

Biological evolution: Unity and diversity       

Common Core State Standards for English Language Arts and Literacy: Literacy in the Disciplines
1. Writing

Text types and purposes          

Production and distribution of writing          

Research to build and present knowledge          

Range of writing          
2. Speaking and Listening

Comprehension and collaboration          

Presentation of knowledge and ideas          

 = Strong alignment  = Weak alignment

SCIENTIFIC ARGUMENTATION IN BIOLOGY: 30 CLASSROOM ACTIVITIES 3

CLASSIFYING BIRDS IN THE

UNITED STATES
(SPECIES CONCEPT)
1

M
odern biological classification schemes generally contain a number of categories,
each representing a group of organisms with a particular degree, or level, of related-
ness to one another. Organisms that have the greatest number of shared character-
istics are grouped together in the category of species. However, as important as the
concept of a species is, the category itself is sometimes hard to define in practice. The following task
is an example of this problem.
Figures 1.1–1.10 show 10 different birds that were recently observed in different parts of the
United States.

Figure 1.1. Figure 1.2. Figure 1.3. Figure 1.4. Figure 1.5.
Bird A Bird B Bird C Bird D Bird E

Figure 1.6. Figure 1.7. Figure 1.8. Figure 1.9. Figure 1.10.
Bird F Bird G Bird H Bird I Bird J

All of these birds have very similar body shapes and coloration, but each one has a unique set
of physical characteristics that can be used to distinguish it from the others (see Table 1.1, p. 7). As
a result, some people think that these 10 birds represent 10 different species, while others think that
these 10 birds represent one species consisting of many different varieties.
This has made many people wonder: How many species do these 10 different birds represent?
With your group, develop a claim that best answers this question. Once your group has developed
your claim, prepare a whiteboard that you can use to share and justify your ideas. Your whiteboard
should include all the information shown in the diagram on Figure 1.11(p. 6).

SCIENTIFIC ARGUMENTATION IN BIOLOGY: 30 CLASSROOM ACTIVITIES 5

1 CLASSIFYING BIRDS IN THE UNITED STATES

To share your work with others, we will Figure 1.11. Components of the Whiteboard
be using a round-robin format. This means
that one member of the group will stay at
The Research Question:
your workstation to share your groups’ ideas
while the other group members will go to the
other groups one at a time in order to listen Your Claim:
to and critique the arguments developed by
your classmates.
To share your work with others, we will Your Evidence: Your Justification
be using a round-robin format. This means of the Evidence:
that one member of the group will stay at
your workstation to share your group’s ideas
while the other group members go to the
other groups one at a time in order to listen
to and critique the arguments developed by
your classmates. Remember, as you critique the work of others, you need to decide if their conclu-
sions are valid or acceptable based on the quality of their claim and how well they are able to support
their ideas. In other words, you need to determine if their argument is convincing or not. One way to
determine if their argument is convincing is to ask them some of the following questions:
• How did you analyze or interpret your data? Why did you decide to do it that way?
• How do you know that your analysis of the data is free from errors?
• Why does your evidence support your claim?
• Why did you decide to use that evidence? Why is your evidence important?
• How does your rationale fit with accepted scientific ideas?
• What are some of the other claims your group discussed before agreeing on your claim, and
why did you reject them?

6 NATIONAL SCIENCE TEACHERS ASSOCIATION

Table 1.1. Information About the 10 Birds

Bird Appearance Characteristics
A Habitat: Deciduous woodlands and shade trees
Range: Washington, Oregon, California, Indiana, Nevada, Utah, Arizona, New Mexico, Texas,
Montana, Wyoming, North Dakota, and South Dakota; Winters in tropics
Gender: Male
Length: 18–22 cm
Diet: Insectivorous but will eat fruit when available
Song: Clear and flutelike whistle; single or double notes in short, distinct phrases with much
individual variation; also a rapid chatter
Clutch Size: Four to six grayish eggs
Interactions: Will not mate with Birds A, C, D, E, F, G, H, I, or J
Behavior: Creates a well-woven pendant bag nest that is made of plant fibers, bark, and string and
is suspended from the tip of a branch

B Habitat: Deciduous woodlands and shade trees

Range: Washington, Oregon, California, Indiana, Nevada, Utah, Arizona, New Mexico, Texas,
Montana, Wyoming, North Dakota, and South Dakota; Winters in tropics
Gender: Female
Length: 16–20 cm
Diet: Insectivorous but will eat fruit when available
Song: None
Clutch Size: Four to six grayish eggs
Interactions: Will not mate with Birds B, C, D, E, F, G, H, I, or J
Behavior: Lays eggs in a well-woven pendant bag of plant fibers, bark, and string and is
suspended from the tip of a branch

C Habitat: Deciduous woodlands and shade trees

Range: North Dakota, South Dakota, Nebraska, Kansas, Oklahoma, Montana, Arizona, Texas,
Louisiana, and Virginia; Winters in Florida and the southern Atlantic coast
Gender: Male
Length: 18–22 cm
Diet: Insectivorous but will eat fruit when available
Song: Clear and flutelike whistled single or double notes in short, distinct phrases with much
individual variation
Clutch Size: Four to six grayish eggs
Interactions: Will not mate with Birds A, B, C, D, E, G, H, I, or J
Behavior: Creates a well-woven pendant bag nest that is made of plant fibers, bark, and string and
is suspended from the tip of a branch

(continued)

SCIENTIFIC ARGUMENTATION IN BIOLOGY: 30 CLASSROOM ACTIVITIES 7

1 CLASSIFYING BIRDS IN THE UNITED STATES

Table 1.1. Information About the 10 Birds (continued)

Bird Appearance Characteristics
D Habitat: Tree plantations, city parks, and suburban areas with palm or eucalyptus trees and
shrubbery
Range: California, Nevada, Arizona, New Mexico, and Texas
Gender: Male
Length: 18–20 cm
Diet: Insectivorous but will eat fruit when available
Song: Series of whistles, chatters, and warbles
Clutch Size: Three to five white eggs with dark brown and purple splotches
Interactions: Will not mate with Birds A, B, C, D, E, F, G, H, or I
Behavior: Makes a basket nest of plant fibers with the entrance at the top, hanging from palm
fronds or the branches of eucalyptus trees

E Habitat: Forest and scattered groves of trees that are near water
Range: Texas
Gender: Male
Length: 23–25 cm
Diet: Insectivorous but will eat fruit when available
Song: Series of loud whistles and harsh chatters
Clutch Size: Two to four white eggs with purple streaks
Interactions: Will not mate with A, B, C, D, E, F, G, H, I, or J
Behavior: Creates a cylindrical or bag-shaped nest up 60 cm long, woven of tough fibers and
suspended from a branch

F Habitat: Deciduous woodlands and shade trees

Range: North Dakota, South Dakota, Nebraska, Kansas, Oklahoma, Montana, Arizona, Texas,
Louisiana, and Virginia; Winters in Florida and the southern Atlantic coast.
Gender: Female
Length: 17–21 cm
Diet: Insectivorous but will eat fruit when available
Song: None
Clutch Size: Four to six grayish eggs
Interactions: Will not mate with Birds A, B, C, D, E, F, G, H, I, or J
Behavior: Lays eggs in a well-woven pendant bag nest that is made of plant fibers, bark, and string
and is suspended from the tip of a branch

(continued)

8 NATIONAL SCIENCE TEACHERS ASSOCIATION

Table 1.1. Information About the 10 Birds (continued)

Bird Appearance Characteristics
G Habitat: Woodlands in semidesert areas, yucca trees or palms in deserts, and sycamores or
cottonwoods in canyons
Range: California, Nevada, Utah, Arizona, New Mexico, and Texas
Gender: Male
Length: 19–21 cm
Diet: Insectivorous but will eat fruit when available
Song: A series of rising and falling flutelike notes
Clutch Size: Three to five bluish white eggs
Interactions: Will not mate with Birds A, B, C, D, E, F, G, H, or J
Behavior: Builds a grassy hanging pouch nest in dry yucca fronds, pines, or live oaks

H Habitat: Open country with scattered trees, orchards, or gardens

Range: Florida
Gender: Male
Length: 20 cm
Diet: Insectivorous but will eat fruit when available
Song: Loud, varied, and continuous
Clutch Size: Four whitish eggs with black streaks
Interactions: Will not mate with Birds A, B, C, D, E, F, G, H, I, or J
Behavior: Builds a woven basket nest of palm fibers or other vegetable matter

I Habitat: Woodlands in semidesert areas, yucca trees or palms in deserts, and sycamores or
cottonwoods in canyons
Range: California, Nevada, Utah, Arizona, New Mexico, and Texas
Gender: Female
Length: 18–20 cm
Diet: Insectivorous but will eat fruit when available
Song: None
Clutch Size: Three to five bluish white eggs
Interactions: Will not mate with Birds A, B, C, D, E, F, H, I, or J
Behavior: Lays eggs in a grassy hanging pouch nest in dry yucca fronds, pines, or live oaks

(continued)

SCIENTIFIC ARGUMENTATION IN BIOLOGY: 30 CLASSROOM ACTIVITIES 9

1 CLASSIFYING BIRDS IN THE UNITED STATES

Table 1.1. Information About the 10 Birds (continued)

Bird Appearance Characteristics
J Habitat: Tree plantations, city parks, and suburban areas with palm or eucalyptus trees and
shrubbery
Range: California, Nevada, Arizona, New Mexico, and Texas
Gender: Female
Length: 18–20 cm
Diet: Insectivorous but will eat fruit when available
Song: None
Clutch Size: Three to five white eggs with dark brown and purple splotches
Interactions: Will not mate with A, B, C, E, F, G, H, I, or J
Behavior: Lays eggs in a basket nest of plant fibers with the entrance at the top, hanging from palm
fronds or eucalyptus tree branches

Figure 1.12. A Map of the United States of America

ME
WA VT
MT ND NH
MN
OR MA
NY RI
ID SD WI
MI CT
WY PA NJ
IA
OH DE
NE MD
NV IL IN WV
VA DC
UT CO
CA KS MO KY
NC
TN
OK SC
AZ NM AR
AL GA
MS
LA
TX
AK
FL

10 NATIONAL SCIENCE TEACHERS ASSOCIATION

CLASSIFYING BIRDS IN THE UNITED STATES:

What Is Your Argument?
In the space below, write an argument in order to persuade another biologist that your claim is valid
and acceptable. As you write your argument, remember to do the following:
• State the claim you are trying to support
• Include genuine evidence (data + analysis + interpretation)
• Provide a justification of your evidence that explains why the evidence is relevant and why it
provides adequate support for the claim
• Organize your argument in a way that enhances readability
• Use a broad range of words including vocabulary that we have learned
• Correct grammar, punctuation, and spelling errors

SCIENTIFIC ARGUMENTATION IN BIOLOGY: 30 CLASSROOM ACTIVITIES 11

1 CLASSIFYING BIRDS IN THE

UNITED STATES
TEACHER NOTES

Purpose is reproductively isolated from other groups

The purpose of this activity is to help students of living things. A group of individuals can
understand (1) what counts as a species in the therefore be classified as a species when there
field of biology, (2) some of the various defini- are one or more factors that will prevent them
tions for species that can be used by biologists, from interbreeding with individuals from
and (3) the challenges associated with bio- another group. These factors block genetic mix-
logical classification. This activity also helps ing and lead to reproductive isolation. These
students learn how to engage in practices such factors usually fall into one of two categories:
as constructing explanations, arguing from Prezygotic barriers and postzygotic barriers.
evidence, and communicating information. Prezygotic barriers hinder individuals from
This activity is also designed to give students mating or prevent the fertilization of an egg if
an opportunity to learn how to write in science two individuals attempt to mate. Examples of
and develop their speaking and listening skills, prezygotic barriers include geographic isola-
which are important goals for literacy in sci- tion (i.e., individuals live in different regions),
ence (see Standards Addressed in This Activity habitat isolation (i.e., individuals live in differ-
for a complete list of the practices, crosscutting ent habitats within the same region), temporal
concepts, core ideas, and literacy skills that are isolation (i.e., some organisms are only active
well-aligned with this activity). during specific times of day or breed during
specific seasons), mechanical isolation (i.e.,
The Content and Related anatomical differences that prevent copula-
Concepts tion), and gametic isolation (i.e., egg and sperm
A species can be defined as “a population or fail to fuse to form a zygote). Postzygotic
group of populations whose members have barriers, on the other hand, are factors that
the potential to interbreed with one another in prevent a zygote from developing into a viable
nature to produce viable, fertile offspring, but and fertile adult once sperm and egg fuse. The
who cannot produce viable, fertile offspring two most common postzygotic barriers are
with members of other species” (Campbell and reduced hybrid viability (i.e., the zygote fails to
Reece 2002, p. 465). This definition is known as develop) and reduced hybrid fertility (i.e., the
the biological species concept. The basic principle offspring is sterile).
underlying the biological species concept is In nature, however, the biological species
simple: A species is a group of individuals concept does not always work well. A bacte-
that can exchange genetic information and rium, for example, reproduces by copying its

12 NATIONAL SCIENCE TEACHERS ASSOCIATION

Table 1.2. Classification of the 10 Birds

Rank Name
Kingdom Animalia
Phylum Chordata
Class Aves
Order Passeriformes
Family Icteridae
Genus Icterus

genetic material and then splitting (which is species concept, provide a rationale for doing
called binary fission). Therefore, defining a so, and then use it consistently. Yet, scientists
species as a group of interbreeding individuals tend to use the biological species concept for
only works with organisms that do not use an most purposes and for communication with
asexual form of reproduction. Most plants (and the general public.
some animals) that use sexual reproduction All 10 birds in this activity are members of
can also self-fertilize, which makes it difficult the same genus Icterus, or orioles (see Table 1.2
to determine the boundaries of a species. Biolo- for more information about the way these birds
gists are also unable to check for the ability to are classified by biologists). When the biological
interbreed in extinct forms of organisms found species concept is used, the 10 birds represent
in the fossil record. The biological species six different species. Table 1.3 (p. 14) provides
concept therefore has limitations. In order to the species name for each bird. One of the most
address some of these limitations, many other challenging aspects of classifying the birds is
species concepts have been proposed by sci- the fact that the female and male birds from the
entists, such as the ecological species concept same species do not always have the same color-
(which means a species is defined by its ecologi- ation. This is an example of sexual dimorphism
cal niche or its role in a biological community), or in this specific case, sexual dichromatism
the morphological species concept (which (different coloration). Sexual dichromatism in
means a species is defined using a unique set of male and female birds results from sexual selec-
shared structural features), and the genealogi- tion. The females tend to be most attracted to
cal species concept (which means a species is a the brightest or flashiest males. Therefore, the
set of organisms with a unique genetic history). brightest males tend to reproduce more than
The species concept that a scientist chooses to the dull males. The bright coloration, as a result,
use will often reflect his or her research focus. becomes more common in the population over
Scientists, however, are expected to decide on a time. The frequent occurrence of sexual dimor-

SCIENTIFIC ARGUMENTATION IN BIOLOGY: 30 CLASSROOM ACTIVITIES 13

1 CLASSIFYING BIRDS IN THE UNITED STATES

TEACHER NOTES

Table 1.3. Names of the 10 Birds

Bird Gender Scientific Name Common Name
A Male Icterus bullockii Bullock’s oriole

B Female Icterus bullockii Bullock’s oriole

C Male Icterus galbula Baltimore oriole
D Male Icterus cucullatus Hooded oriole
E Male Icterus gularis Altamira oriole
F Female Icterus galbula Baltimore oriole
G Male Icterus parisorum Scott’s oriole
H Male Icterus pectoralis Spot-breasted oriole
I Female Icterus parisorum Scott’s oriole
J Female Icterus cucullatus Hooded oriole

phism and sexual dichromatism in nature is biological species concept can be difficult to
one reason why biologists cannot simply rely use in practice.
on appearance when attempting to define the
boundaries of a species. Curriculum and
It is also important to note that the Bull- Instructional Considerations
ock’s oriole and the Baltimore oriole were This activity can be used at several different
once combined into a single species, called the points in a traditional biology curriculum. It
northern oriole. This reclassification occurred can be used as part of a unit on classification,
after humans began planting trees on the Great ecology, or evolution. It also may be used to
Plains, which allowed the two different types either introduce students to the biological
of birds to extend their ranges and intermingle. species concept or to give students a chance
At this point, the two types of birds began to to apply their understanding of this concept
interbreed, so the birds were combined into in an unfamiliar context. If a teacher decides
a single species. Now, it seems that in some to use this activity as an introduction to the
places in the Central Plain, the birds are choos- biological species concept, students do not
ing mates of their own type (due to a behavioral need any additional information beyond what
prezygotic barrier). The birds are therefore is supplied as part of the student pages in order
considered two separate species again. This to complete the activity. The teacher, however,
situation is an interesting example of how the will need to ask guiding questions, such as Can

14 NATIONAL SCIENCE TEACHERS ASSOCIATION

Table 1.4. Materials Needed to Implement the Activity in a Classroom of 28 Students

Amount Needed With …
Material Groups of 3 Groups of 4
Whiteboards (or chart paper)+ 10 7
Whiteboard markers (or permanent if using chart paper)+ 20 14
Copy of Student Pages (pp. 5–10)* 28 28
Copy of Student Page (p. 11)* 10 7
Copy of Appendix B (p. 366)* 28 28
+
Teachers can also have students prepare their arguments in a digital medium (such as PowerPoint or Keynote).
*
Teachers can also project these materials onto a screen in order to cut down on paper use.

organisms look different and still be part of the same difference between data and evidence using
species? and What type of criteria should you use what the students did during this activity as an
to determine if something is part of the same spe- illustrative example.
cies? as students attempt to make sense of the
data and develop their tentative argument. The Recommendations for
teacher will also need to explicitly discuss the Implementing the Activity
concept and provide a working definition for
This activity takes approximately 100 minutes
the students as part of the reflective discussion
of instructional time to complete, but the
stage of the lesson if the students are expected
amount of time devoted to each activity varies
to develop a nuanced understanding of this
depending on how a teacher decides to spend
important biological principle. On the other
time in class. See Appendix E for more infor-
hand, if the activity is used as a way to allow
mation about how to implement this activity.
students to apply their understanding of the
biological species concept to an unfamiliar Table 1.4 provides information about the
situation, then it will be important for the type and amount of materials needed to imple-
teacher to teach students about the concept ment this activity in a classroom with 28 stu-
before attempting to use this activity. The focus dents with groups of four and groups of three.
of the explicit discussion should then be on
an aspect of nature of science or the nature of Assessment
scientific inquiry. For example, a teacher could The rubric provided in Appendix B can be used
discuss how scientists use theories and laws to to assess the arguments crafted by each student
help make sense of their observations or the at the end of the activity. To illustrate how

SCIENTIFIC ARGUMENTATION IN BIOLOGY: 30 CLASSROOM ACTIVITIES 15

1 CLASSIFYING BIRDS IN THE UNITED STATES

TEACHER NOTES

the rubric can be used to score an argument, justification of the evidence in her argument
consider the following example. This sample, because she does not explain why the evidence
which was written by an eighth-grade student, is important by linking it to a specific principle,
is an example of an argument that is weak in concept, or underlying assumption (0/2). The
terms of content but adequate in terms of writ- author also uses rhetorical references (e.g., “to
ing mechanics. prove this claim” and “I’m supporting and
trying to prove”) that misrepresent the nature
The claim I’m supporting is that
of science (0/1), although her use of scientific
there is seven different species of bird.
terminology is acceptable (1/1). The organiza-
To prove this claim I compared which
tion of the argument overall is good because
birds mate together. Most of the birds
the arrangement of the sentences does not
live in woodlands and shaded tree
distract from the development of the main idea
areas. All the birds ate the same food.
(1/1). Finally, although there are a few gram-
All the females laid eggs in a nest.
matical errors in this student’s argument (0/1),
Also, all the male birds create the
she does use appropriate spelling, punctuation,
nest. Male birds sing songs (whistles)
and capitalization (1/1). The overall score for
to attract females. The information
the sample argument, therefore, is 4 out the 12
from the packet tells what birds don’t
points possible.
interact with each other. Most of the
birds range in Texas. This is all the
Standards Addressed in
evidence that supports the claim that
I’m supporting and trying to prove that
This Activity
This activity can be used to address the fol-
there seven different kinds of birds.
lowing dimensions outlined in A Framework for
The content of the example argument is K–12 Science Education (NRC 2012):
weak for several reasons. The student’s claim
(underlined) is sufficient (1/1) but inaccurate Scientific Practices
(0/1). The student does not use genuine • Constructing explanations
evidence, (in bold); she does not use the sup-
• Engaging in argument from evidence
plied data (0/1) to make comparisons between
the various types of birds (0/1) and does not • Obtaining, evaluating, and
provide an interpretation of such a comparison communicating information
(0/1). Instead, she uses the supplied informa-
tion to show how all the different varieties of
Crosscutting Concepts
bird are similar (which would be evidence for • Cause and effect: Mechanism and
all the birds belonging to the same species). explanation
The student also does not include a sufficient • Structure and function

16 NATIONAL SCIENCE TEACHERS ASSOCIATION

Life Sciences Core Ideas Speaking and Listening

• Heredity: Inheritance and variation of • Comprehension and collaboration
traits • Presentation of knowledge and ideas
• Biological evolution: Unity and
diversity References
Campbell, N., and J. Reece. 2002. Biology. 6th ed.
This activity can be used to address the San Francisco, CA: Benjamin Cummings.
following standards for literacy in science from National Governors Association Center (NGA) for
the Common Core State Standards for English Lan- Best Practices, and Council of Chief State
School Officers (CCSSO). 2010. Common core
guage Arts and Literacy (NGA and CCSSO 2010): state standards for English language arts and
literacy. Washington, DC: National Governors
Writing Association for Best Practices, Council of Chief
State School.
• Text types and purposes
National Research Council (NRC). 2012. A
• Production and distribution of writing framework for K–12 science education:
Practices, crosscutting concepts, and core
• Research to build and present ideas. Washington, DC: National Academies
knowledge Press.
• Range of writing

SCIENTIFIC ARGUMENTATION IN BIOLOGY: 30 CLASSROOM ACTIVITIES 17

A how to use, xxxiii–xxxiv

A Framework for K–12 Science Education: Practices, purpose of, xxxviii
Crosscutting Concepts, and Core Ideas, xii, xv– safety concerns for, xxxiii, 143, 150, 160, 172, 182, 188,
xvi, xxxiii, xxxix 192, 220, 239, 272, 280
standards addressed in Evaluate Alternatives activities, small-group format for, xviii, xix, xix, xxvii, xxviii, xxx,
134–135 xxxiv
Cell Size and Diffusion, 189–190 Teacher Notes for, xiii, xxxiii, xxxviii–xxxix
Environmental Influence on Genotypes and teacher’s role during, xxxiv–xxxv, xxxvi–xxxvii
Phenotypes, 200–201 time required for, xxxiv
Healthy Diet and Weight, 237 Alternative explanations, xviii, xxvi. See also Evaluate
Hominid Evolution, 217 Alternatives instructional model
Liver and Hydrogen Peroxide, 179 introduction of, xxvi–xxviii
Movement of Molecules in or out of Cells, 169 tentative arguments and counterarguments for, xxviii–
Plant Biomass, 158 xxix, xxix
Plants and Energy, 228 Animals
Spontaneous Generation, 146 Classifying Birds in the United States, 5–17
Termite Trails, 247–248 Color Variations in Venezuelan Guppies, 19–27
standards addressed in Generate an Argument Decline in Saltwater Fish Populations, 81–101
activities, 2–3 Desert Snakes, 29–43
Characteristics of Viruses, 130–131 Evolutionary Relationships in Mammals, 67–79
Classifying Birds in the United States, 16–17 Fruit Fly Traits, 45–54
Color Variation in Venezuelan Guppies, 26 Hominid Evolution, 203–218
Decline in Saltwater Fish Populations, 101 Misconceptions About Insects, 321–327
Desert Snakes, 42–43 Termite Trails, 239–248
DNA Family Relationship Analysis, 64–65 Argumentation session
Evolutionary Relationships in Mammals, 78–79 for Evaluate Alternatives, xxix–xxx
Fruit Fly Traits, 54 for Generate an Argument, xxii, xxii–xxiv
History of Life on Earth, 110 round-robin format for, xxiii, xxiii–xxiv, xxx, 6, 19, 30,
Surviving Winter in the Dust Bowl, 122 46, 55, 68, 83, 104, 114, 124, 139, 151, 161,
standards addressed in Refutational Writing activities, 173, 182, 193, 208, 221, 231, 240
250–251 for specific activities
Misconception About Bacteria, 298–299 Cell Size and Diffusion, 182–183, 183
Misconception About Inheritance of Traits, 319 Environmental Influence on Genotypes and
Misconception About Insects, 327–328 Phenotypes, 192–193, 193
Misconception About Interactions That Take Place Healthy Diet and Weight, 231, 231
Between Organisms, 306–307 Hominid Evolution, 208–209, 209
Misconception About Life on Earth, 290 Liver and Hydrogen Peroxide, 173, 173
Misconception About Plant Reproduction, 312, 314 Movement of Molecules in or out of Cells, 160,
Misconception About the Methods of Scientific 161–162
Investigations, 283 Plant Biomass, 151, 151
Misconception About the Nature of Scientific Plants and Energy, 221, 221
Knowledge, 268 Spontaneous Generation, 139, 139–140
Misconception About the Work of Scientists, 274 Termite Trails, 240–241, 241
Misconception About Theories and Laws, 259 Assessment(s), xxxix, xxxv, 331–360. See also Rubrics
Activities, xxxii–xxxix. See also specific activities difficulty of, 331
assessments of, xxxv, xxxviii, xxxix, 331–360 (See also section of Teacher Notes, xxxix
Assessment(s); Rubrics) and student samples for specific activities, 333–360
for Evaluate Alternatives, xxxiii, 133 (See also Evaluate Cell Size and Diffusion, 188
Alternatives instructional model) Characteristics of Viruses, 129–130
field testing of, xiii, 363–365 Classifying Birds in the United States, 15–16, 333–
flexibility of, xxxiii 342, 334, 336, 341
Framework matrices for, xxxix, 2–3, 134–135, 250–251 Color Variations in Venezuelan Guppies activity,
for Generate an Argument, xxxii–xxxiii, 1 (See also 26–27
Generate an Argument instructional model) Decline in Saltwater Fish Populations, 99–101

SCIENTIFIC ARGUMENTATION IN BIOLOGY: 30 CLASSROOM ACTIVITIES 373

Desert Snakes, 41–42 assessment, 188

DNA Family Relationship Analysis, 63–64 content and related concepts, 185–186
Environmental Influence on Genotypes and curriculum and instructional considerations, 186
Phenotypes, 199–200 options for implementation, 186–187, 187
Evolutionary Relationships in Mammals, 77–78 time required for, 186
examples of high, medium, and low quality, 333–360 writing an argument for, 184
Fruit Fly Traits, 53–54 Cell theory: Spontaneous Generation, 137
Healthy Diet and Weight, 234–237 Characteristics of Viruses activity, 123–131
History of Life on Earth, 109–110 developing a claim for, 123–124, 124
Hominid Evolution, 216–217 information about viruses and other objects found on
Liver and Hydrogen Peroxide, 178–179 Earth for, 125–126
Misconception About Bacteria, 296–298, 297 introduction to, 123, 123
Misconception About Inheritance of Traits, 317–319, materials for, 129, 130
318 purpose of, 128
Misconception About Insects, 324–326, 325 research question for, 123
Misconception About Interactions That Take Place standards addressed in, 2–3, 130–131
Between Organisms, 304–306, 305 Teacher Notes for, 128–131
Misconception About Life on Earth, 287–290, 288 assessment, 129–130
Misconception About Plant Reproduction, 311–312, content and related concepts, 128–129
313 curriculum and instructional considerations, 129
Misconception About the Methods of Scientific recommendations for implementation, 129
Investigations, 281–283, 282 time required for, 129
Misconception About the Nature of Scientific writing an argument for, 127
Knowledge, 265–268, 267 Chemical reactions: Liver and Hydrogen Peroxide, 171
Misconception About the Work of Scientists, 272– Cladogram, 71, 71–72
274, 273, 351–360, 352, 355, 359 Claims, ix–x
Misconception About Theories and Laws, 256–259, criteria for evaluation of, x–xi
257 definition of, ix
Movement of Molecules in or out of Cells activity, development of, xviii (See also specific activities)
168–169 evaluation of, ix, xv
Plant Biomass, 155–158 learning to articulate, xvi
Plants and Energy, 226–228 predictive power of, xi
Spontaneous Generation, 145–146 reasons for, ix
Surviving Winter in the Dust Bowl, 121–122 revision of, xvi, xviii
Termite Trails, 246–247, 343–350, 344, 346, 349 supporting evidence for, ix, xvi
in terms of evaluating a learning progression, 332 Classifying Birds in the United States activity, 5–17
developing a claim for, 5–6, 6
B information about the 10 birds for, 7–10
Benedict’s solution, 160, 164, 167, 168 introduction to, 5, 5
Benedict’s test, 160, 168 map of United States for, 10
Botany materials for, 15, 15
Environmental Influence on Genotypes and purpose of, 12
Phenotypes, 191–201 research question for, 5
Misconception About Plant Reproduction, 309–314 standards addressed in, 2–3, 16–17
Plant Biomass, 149–158 Teacher Notes for, 12–17
Plants and Energy, 219–228 assessment, 15–16, 333–342
classification of the 10 birds, 13
C content and related concepts, 12–14
Cell Size and Diffusion activity, 181–190 curriculum and instructional considerations, 14–15
argumentation session for, 182–183, 183 names of the 10 birds, 14
getting started on, 181–182 recommendations for implementation, 14–15
introduction to, 181 student sample scored rubrics, 334, 336, 342
materials for, 181, 187, 188 time required for, 15
recipe for phenolphthalein agar, 188–189 writing an argument for, 11
purpose of, 185 Classroom discussions, xviii, xxxiv
recording your method and observations for, 182 argumentation session, xxii–xxiv, xxii–xxiv, xxix–xxx
standards addressed in, 134–135, 189–190 (See also Argumentation session)
Teacher Notes for, 185–190 within and between groups, xxxv

374 NATIONAL SCIENCE TEACHERS ASSOCIATION

reflective, xxiv, xxx Misconception About the Methods of Scientific

round-robin format for, xxiii, xxiii–xxiv, xxx, 6, 19, 30, Investigations, 278, 283
46, 55, 68, 83, 104, 114, 124, 139, 151, 161, Misconception About the Nature of Scientific
173, 182, 193, 208, 221, 231, 240 Knowledge, 262, 268
Color Variations in Venezuelan Guppies activity, 19–27 Misconception About the Work of Scientists, 270,
developing a claim for, 19–20, 20 274
information about pools where guppies were found for, Misconception About Theories and Laws, 254, 259
21 Critical-thinking skills, xxii, xxvi, xxxiii, xxxiv, 98, 331
information about theory of natural selection for, 22
introduction to, 19, 19 D
map of pool locations for, 22 Darwin, Charles, ix, 67, 68, 289, 319
materials for, 26, 26 Data generation, xxviii
purpose of, 24 Decline in Saltwater Fish Populations activity, 81–101
research question for, 19 developing a claim for, 83, 83
standards addressed in, 2–3, 26 information about selected fish populations found
Teacher Notes for, 24–27 around Florida coast for, 89–95
assessment, 26–27 information on annual observations of young of the
content and related concepts, 24–25 year of select fish along Florida Atlantic coast
curriculum and instructional considerations, 25 for, 87–88
recommendations for implementation, 25–26 information on annual standardized commercial catch
time required for, 25–26 rates along Florida Atlantic coast for, 85–86
writing an argument for, 23 introduction to, 81–83
Common Core State Standards for English Language Arts materials for, 99, 99
and Literacy, xii, xxxiii, xxxix purpose of, 96
standards addressed in Evaluate Alternatives activities, research question for, 82
135 standards addressed in, 2–3, 101
Cell Size and Diffusion, 190 Teacher Notes for, 96–101
Environmental Influence on Genotypes and assessment, 99–101
Phenotypes, 201 content and related concepts, 96–97
Healthy Diet and Weight, 237 curriculum and instructional considerations, 97–98
Hominid Evolution, 217–218 recommendations for implementation, 98–99
Liver and Hydrogen Peroxide, 179–180 time required for, 99
Movement of Molecules in or out of Cells, 169 writing an argument for, 84
Plant Biomass, 158 Desert Snakes activity, 29–43
Plants and Energy, 228 developing a claim for, 30, 30
Spontaneous Generation, 146–147 information about the desert snakes for, 31–32
Termite Trails, 248 information on primary snake predators for, 34–36
standards addressed in Generate an Argument badgers, 36, 36
activities, 3 long-tailed weasel, 35, 35
Characteristics of Viruses, 131 raptors, 34, 34
Classifying Birds in the United States, 17 information on theory of natural selection for, 37
Color Variations in Venezuelan Guppies, 27 introduction to, 29, 29
Decline in Saltwater Fish Populations, 101 materials for, 41, 41
Desert Snakes, 43 population density information for, 33
DNA Family Relationship Analysis, 65 purpose of, 39
Evolutionary Relationships in Mammals, 79 research question for, 29
Fruit Fly Traits, 54 standards addressed in, 2–3, 42–43
History of Life on Earth, 110 Teacher Notes for, 39–43
Surviving Winter in the Dust Bowl, 122 assessment, 41–42
standards addressed in Refutational Writing activities, content and related concepts, 39–40
251 curriculum and instructional considerations, 40–41
Misconception About Bacteria, 294, 299 recommendations for implementation, 41
Misconception About Inheritance of Traits, 316, 320 time required for, 41
Misconception About Insects, 322, 327 writing an argument for, 38
Misconception About Interactions That Take Place Diffusion
Between Organisms, 302, 307 Cell Size and Diffusion, 181
Misconception About Life on Earth, 286, 290 Movement of Molecules in or out of Cells, 159
Misconception About Plant Reproduction, 310, 314 DNA. See Genetics

SCIENTIFIC ARGUMENTATION IN BIOLOGY: 30 CLASSROOM ACTIVITIES 375

DNA Family Relationship Analysis activity, 55–65 overview of, xxvi

developing a claim for, 55–56, 56 scoring rubric for, xxx, 367
introduction to, 55 student samples and, 343–350, 344, 346, 349
materials for, 63, 64 stages of, xxvi–xxx, xxvii
purpose of, 61 1: introduce phenomenon to be investigated,
research question for, 55 research question, and alternative
results from STR family relationship analysis test for, explanations, xxvi–xxviii
57, 57–59 2: generation of data, xxvi–xxviii
standards addressed in, 2–3, 64–65 3: generation of tentative arguments and
Teacher Notes for, 61–65 counterarguments, xxviii–xxix, xxix
assessment, 63–64 4: argumentation session, xxix–xxx
coding and noncoding sequences of DNA, 61 5: reflective discussion, xxx
content and related concepts, 61–63 6: production of final written argument, xxx
curriculum and instructional considerations, 63 teacher’s role during, xxxvii
recommendations for implementation, 63 writing prompt for, xxx, xxxi
results of STR analysis, 62 Evaluation of scientific argument, criteria for, x–xi, xvi
time required for, 63 Evidence, ix–x
writing an argument for, 60 criteria for evaluation of, x–xi, xv, xvi, xvii
justification of, x, xx
E Evolution
Ecology Color Variation in Venezuelan Guppies, 19–27
Decline in Saltwater Fish Populations, 81–101 Desert Snakes, 29–43
Misconception About Insects, 321–327 Evolutionary Relationships in Mammals, 67–79
Misconception About Interactions That Take Place History of Life on Earth, 103–110
Between Organisms, 301–307 Hominid Evolution, 203–218
Environmental Influence on Genotypes and Phenotypes Misconception About Life on Earth, 285–290
activity, 191–201 Evolutionary Relationships in Mammals activity, 67–79
argumentation session for, 192–193, 193 amino acid sequence for hemoglobin subunit alpha
getting started on, 191–192 protein 1–20 for, 73
introduction to, 191 amino acid sequence for hemoglobin subunit alpha
materials for, 191–192, 199, 199 protein 20–40 for, 73
purpose of, 195 creating a cladogram for, 71, 71–72
recording your method and observations for, 192 developing a claim for, 68–70, 69
research question and possible explanations for, 191 introduction to, 67–68, 69
standards addressed in, 134–135, 200–201 homologous structures in seven different vertebrate
Teacher Notes for, 195–201 limbs, 67
allele or alternative versions of a gene, 195 materials for, 77, 77
assessment, 199–200 purpose of, 75
content and related concepts, 195–197 research question for, 68
curriculum and instructional considerations, 197 standards addressed in, 2–3, 78–79
options for implementation, 197–199, 198 Teacher Notes for, 75–79
time required for, 197 assessment, 77–78
writing an argument for, 194 content and related concepts, 75–76
Evaluate Alternatives instructional model, xviii, xxvi–xxx curriculum and instructional considerations, 76–77
activities for, xxxiii, 133 recommendations for implementation, 77
Cell Size and Diffusion, 181–190 time required for, 77
Environmental Influence on Genotypes and writing an argument for, 74
Phenotypes, 191–201
Framework matrix for, 134–135 F
Healthy Diet and Weight, 229–237 Field testing of activities, xiii, 363–365
Hominid Evolution, 203–218 Food chains and trophic levels: Surviving Winter in the
Liver and Hydrogen Peroxide, 171–180 Dust Bowl, 113–122
Movement of Molecules in or out of Cells, 159–169 Fossils. See Evolution
Plant Biomass, 149–158 Fruit Fly Traits activity, 45–54
Plants and Energy, 219–228 developing a claim for, 46, 46
Spontaneous Generation, 137–147 information about the results of various fruit fly crosses
Termite Trails, 239–248 for, 46–47, 47–48
goals of, xxvi, xxviii introduction to, 45, 45

376 NATIONAL SCIENCE TEACHERS ASSOCIATION

materials for, 52–53, 53 considered obese, 229

purpose of, 50 materials for, 234, 236
research question for, 45 purpose of, 233
standards addressed in, 2–3, 54 recording your method and observations for, 230–231
Teacher Notes for, 50–54 research question and possible explanations for, 230
allele or alternative versions of a gene, 51 standards addressed in, 134–135, 237
assessment, 53–54 Teacher Notes for, 233–237
content and related concepts, 50–52 assessment, 234–237
curriculum and instructional considerations, 52 content and related concepts, 233
recommendations for implementation, 52–53 curriculum and instructional considerations, 233–
time required for, 52 234
writing an argument for, 49 options for implementation, 234, 235
time required for, 234
G writing an argument for, 232
Generate an Argument instructional model, xviii–xxvi Heredity. See Genetics
activities for, xxxii–xxxiii, 1 History of Life on Earth activity, 103–110
Characteristics of Viruses, 123–131 developing a claim for, 103–104, 104
Classifying Birds in the United States, 5–17 information about the number of different families that
Color Variations in Venezuelan Guppies, 19–27 have been identified in the fossil record for, 105
Decline in Saltwater Fish Populations, 81–101 introduction to, 103
Desert Snakes, 29–43 number of families within some common types of
DNA Family Relationship Analysis, 55–65 organisms, 103
Evolutionary Relationships in Mammals, 67–79 materials for, 109, 109
Framework matrix for, 2–3 purpose of, 107
Fruit Fly Traits, 45–54 research question for, 103
History of Life on Earth, 103–110 standards addressed in, 2–3, 110
options for implementation of, xxxiv, 369 Teacher Notes for, 107–110
Surviving Winter in the Dust Bowl, 113–122 assessment, 109–110
goals of, xviii content and related concepts, 107–108
overview of, xviii curriculum and instructional considerations, 108
scoring rubric for, xxv–xxvi, 366 recommendations for implementation, 109
student samples and, 333–342, 334, 335, 342 time required for, 109
stages of, xviii–xxvi, xix writing an argument for, 106
1: identification of problem and research question, Hominid Evolution activity, 203–218
xviii–xix argumentation session for, 208–209, 209
2: generation of tentative argument, xix–xxii, xx–xxi getting started on, 207–208
3: argumentation session, xxii–xxiv, xxii–xxiv introduction to, 203
4: reflective discussion, xxiv hominid skull fossils by age, 203
5: production of final written argument, xxiv–xxvii, materials for, 207, 215, 215
xxv purpose of, 211
teacher’s role during, xxxvi recording your method and observations for, 208
writing prompt for, xxv, xxv research question and possible explanations for, 204,
Generation of data, xxviii 204–206
Genetics standards addressed in, 134–135, 217–218
DNA Family Relationship Analysis, 55–65 Teacher Notes for, 211–218
Environmental Influences on Genotypes and assessment, 216–217
Phenotypes, 191–201 content and related concepts, 211–213
Evolutionary Relationships in Mammals, 67–79 curriculum and instructional considerations, 213
Fruit Fly Traits, 45–54 options for implementation, 213, 214
Misconception About Inheritance of Traits, 315–320 phylogenetic relationships of hominids, 212
Misconception About Plant Reproduction, 309–314 time required for, 213
writing an argument for, 210
H Human health: Healthy Diet and Weight, 229
Healthy Diet and Weight activity, 229–237
argumentation session for, 231, 231 I
getting started on, 230 Inquiry-based science, xv–xvii
introduction to, 229–230 as component of science proficiency, xv
percentage of population in different countries that is construction of good argument as goal of, xvii

SCIENTIFIC ARGUMENTATION IN BIOLOGY: 30 CLASSROOM ACTIVITIES 377

definition of, xv time required for, 317

overemphasis on experimentation in, xv Misconception About Insects writing activity, 321–327
skills and practices for, xv–xvi purpose of, 322
Insects standards addressed in, 250–251, 322, 326–327
Fruit Fly Traits, 45–54 student instructions for, 321
Misconception About Insects, 321–327 Teacher Notes for, 322–327
Termite Trails, 239–248 assessment, 324–326
Instructional models, xii, xiii, xvii. See also specific models content and related concepts, 322–323
Evaluate Alternatives, xviii, xxvi–xxx curriculum and instructional considerations, 323–
Generate an Argument, xviii–xxvi 324
options for implementation, 324, 370–371
L student sample scored rubric, 325
Liver and Hydrogen Peroxide activity, 171–180 time required for, 324
argumentation session for, 173, 173 Misconception About Interactions That Take Place
getting started on, 172 Between Organisms writing activity, 301–307
introduction to, 171, 171 purpose of, 302
materials for, 172, 176, 178 standards addressed in, 250–251, 302, 306–307
purpose of, 175 student instructions for, 301
recording your method and observations for, 172 Teacher Notes for, 302–307
research question and possible explanations for, 171 assessment, 304–306
standards addressed in, 134–135, 179–180 content and related concepts, 302–303
Teacher Notes for, 175–180 curriculum and instructional considerations, 303
assessment, 178–179 options for implementation, 304, 370–371
content and related concepts, 175 student sample scored rubric, 305
curriculum and instructional considerations, 176 time required for, 304
options for implementation, 176, 177 Misconception About Life on Earth writing activity, 285–
time required for, 176 290
writing an argument for, 174 purpose of, 286
standards addressed in, 250–251, 286, 290
M student instructions for, 285
McComas, William, xxx–xxxi Teacher Notes for, 286–290
Mendelian inheritance. See Genetics assessment, 287–290
Microbiology content and related concepts, 286
Characteristics of Viruses, 123–131 curriculum and instructional considerations, 286–
Misconception About Bacteria, 293–299 287
Misconception About Bacteria writing activity, 293–299 options for implementation, 287, 370–371
purpose of, 294 student sample scored rubric, 288
standards addressed in, 250–251, 294, 298–299 time required for, 287
student instructions for, 293 Misconception About Plant Reproduction writing activity,
Teacher Notes for, 294–299 309–314
assessment, 296–298 purpose of, 310
content and related concepts, 294–295 standards addressed in, 250–251, 310, 312, 314
curriculum and instructional considerations, 295– student instructions for, 309
296 Teacher Notes for, 310–314
options for implementation, 296, 370–371 assessment, 311–312
student sample scored rubric, 297 content and related concepts, 310
time required for, 296 curriculum and instructional considerations, 311
Misconception About Inheritance of Traits writing activity, options for implementation, 311, 370–371
315–320 student sample scored rubric, 313
purpose of, 316 time required for, 311
standards addressed in, 250–251, 316, 319–320 Misconception About the Methods of Scientific
student instructions for, 315 Investigations writing activity, 277–283
Teacher Notes for, 316–320 purpose of, 278
assessment, 317–319 standards addressed in, 250–251, 278, 283
content and related concepts, 316–317 student instructions for, 277
curriculum and instructional considerations, 317 Teacher Notes for, 278–283
options for implementation, 317, 370–371 assessment, 281–283
student sample scored rubric, 318 content and related concepts, 278–280

378 NATIONAL SCIENCE TEACHERS ASSOCIATION

curriculum and instructional considerations, 280– 165

281 net movement of water into and out of cells in
options for implementation, 281, 370–371 hypertonic, isotonic, and hypotonic solutions,
student sample scored rubric, 282 165
two inaccurate depictions of the nature of scientific options for implementation, 165–168, 166
inquiry, 279 time required for, 165
time required for, 281 writing an argument for, 163
Misconception About the Nature of Scientific Knowledge
writing activity, 261–268 N
purpose of, 262 National Research Council (NRC), xvi
standards addressed in, 250–251, 262, 268 Natural selection
student instructions for, 261 Color Variations in Venezuelan Guppies activity, 19–27
Teacher Notes for, 262–268 Desert Snakes activity, 29–43
assessment, 265–268 Nature of science
content and related concepts, 262–264 Misconception About the Methods of Scientific
curriculum and instructional considerations, 264– Investigations, 277–283
265 Misconception About the Nature of Scientific
options for implementation, 265, 370–371 Knowledge, 261–268
student sample scored rubric, 267 Misconception About the Work of Scientists, 269–274
time required for, 265 Misconception About Theories and Laws, 253–259
Misconception About the Work of Scientists writing activity,
269–274 O
purpose of, 270 Osmosis: Movement of Molecules in or out of Cells, 159
standards addressed in, 250–251, 270, 274
student instructions for, 269 P
Teacher Notes for, 270–274 Persuasive arguments, xxxi–xxxii
assessment, 272–274, 351–360 Phenolphthalein agar preparation, 188–189
content and related concepts, 270–271 Phenotypes. See Genetics
curriculum and instructional considerations, 271– Photosynthesis
272 Plant Biomass, 149–158
options for implementation, 272, 370–371 Plants and Energy, 219–228
student sample scored rubrics, 273, 352, 355, 359 Phylogeny. See Evolution
time required for, 272 Plant Biomass activity, 149–158
Misconception About Theories and Laws writing activity, argumentation session for, 151, 151
253–259 getting started on, 150
purpose of, 254 introduction to, 149, 149
standards addressed in, 250–251, 254, 259 materials for, 150, 155, 157
student instructions for, 253 purpose of, 153
Teacher Notes for, 254–259 recording your method and observations for, 150
assessment, 256–259 research question and possible explanations for, 149
content and related concepts, 254–255 standards addressed in, 134–135, 158
curriculum and instructional considerations, 255 Teacher Notes for, 153–158
options for implementation, 255, 370–371 assessment, 155–158
student sample scored rubric, 257 content and related concepts, 153–154
time required for, 255 curriculum and instructional considerations, 154–
Movement of Molecules in or out of Cells activity, 159–169 155
argumentation session for, 160, 161–162 options for implementation, 155, 156
conducting a Benedict’s test for, 160 time required for, 155
introduction to, 158, 158 writing an argument for, 152
materials for, 167, 167 Plants and Energy activity, 219–228
purpose of, 164 argumentation session for, 221, 221
recording your method and observations for, 161 getting started on, 219–220
research question and possible explanations for, 159 introduction to, 219
standards addressed in, 134–135, 169 materials for, 219–220, 226, 226
Teacher Notes for, 164–169 purpose of, 223
assessment, 168–169 recording your method and observations for, 220
content and related concepts, 164 research question and possible explanations for, 219
curriculum and instructional considerations, 164– standards addressed in, 134–135, 228

SCIENTIFIC ARGUMENTATION IN BIOLOGY: 30 CLASSROOM ACTIVITIES 379

Teacher Notes for, 223–228 Surviving Winter in the Dust Bowl, 114
assessment, 226–228 Termite Trails, 239
content and related concepts, 223 Round-robin format, xxiii, xxiii–xxiv, xxx, 6, 19, 30, 46,
curriculum and instructional considerations, 223– 55, 68, 83, 104, 114, 124, 139, 151, 161, 173, 182,
224 193, 208, 221, 231, 240
options for implementation, 224, 225 Rubrics, 331. See also Assessment(s)
time required for, 224 for Evaluate Alternatives activities, xxx, 367
writing an argument for, 222 Termite Trails, 344, 346, 349
for Generate an Argument activities, xxv–xxvi, 366
R Classifying Birds in the United States, 334, 336, 342
Reflective discussion for Refutational Writing activities, xxxii, 368
for Evaluate Alternatives, xxx Misconception About Bacteria, 297
for Generate an Argument, xxiv Misconception About Inheritance of Traits, 318
Refutational Writing, xvii–xviii, xxx–xxxii Misconception About Insects, 325
activities for, xxxiii, 249 Misconception About Interactions That Take Place
Framework matrix for, 250–251 Between Organisms, 305
Misconception About Bacteria, 293–299 Misconception About Life on Earth, 288
Misconception About Inheritance of Traits, 315–320 Misconception About Plant Reproduction, 313
Misconception About Insects, 321–327 Misconception About the Methods of Scientific
Misconception About Interactions That Take Place Investigations, 282
Between Organisms, 301–307 Misconception About the Nature of Scientific
Misconception About Life on Earth, 285–290 Knowledge, 267
Misconception About Plant Reproduction, 309–314 Misconception About the Work of Scientists, 273,
Misconception About the Methods of Scientific 352, 355, 359
Investigations, 277–283 Misconception About Theories and Laws, 257
Misconception About the Nature of Scientific
Knowledge, 261–268 S
Misconception About the Work of Scientists, 269 Safety Data Sheet (SDS)
Misconception About Theories and Laws, 253–259 for Benedict’s solution, 168
options for implementation of, xxxiv, 370–371 for bromothymol blue, 187, 226
recommendations for, xxxii for hydrogen peroxide, 176
scoring rubric for, xxxii, 368 for phenol red, 226
student samples and, 351–360, 352, 355, 359 for vinegar, 187
writing prompt for, xxxii “Safety in the Science Classroom,” xxxiii
Research question(s) Safety notes, xxxiii, 143, 150, 160, 172, 182, 188, 192,
developing initial answer to, xix–xxii, xx–xxi 220, 239, 272, 280
identification of, xviii–xix Science proficiency, xi, xii, xv
introduction of, xxvi–xxviii Scientific argument(s)
for specific activities assessments of, xxxix, xxxv, 331–360 (See also
Cell Size and Diffusion, 181 Assessment(s))
Characteristics of Viruses, 123 classroom discussions of, xviii, xxxiv
Classifying Birds in the United States, 5 argumentation session, xxii–xxiv, xxii–xxiv, xxix–
Color Variations in Venezuelan Guppies, 19 xxx (See also Argumentation session)
Decline in Saltwater Fish Populations, 82 reflective, xxiv, xxx
Desert Snakes, 29 construction of, xii, xv, xvi, xvii
DNA Family Relationship Analysis, 55 criteria for evaluation of, x–xi
Environmental Influence on Genotypes and vs. everyday arguments, ix
Phenotypes, 191 framework for, ix–x, x
Evolutionary Relationships in Mammals, 68 generation of, xviii (See also Generate an Argument
Fruit Fly Traits, 45 instructional model)
Healthy Diet and Weight, 230 scientific habits of mind for, xii, xvi, xxii, xxvi
History of Life on Earth, 103 tentative arguments, xix–xxii, xx–xxi, xxviii–xxix,
Hominid Evolution, 204 xxix
Liver and Hydrogen Peroxide, 171 role in scientific inquiry, xvi
Movement of Molecules in or out of Cells, 159 scoring rubric for, xxv–xxvi, 366
Plant Biomass, 149 writing of, xii, xviii, xxiv–xxvi, xxv (See also specific
Plants and Energy, 219 activities)
Spontaneous Generation, 138 importance of, xxiv–xxv

380 NATIONAL SCIENCE TEACHERS ASSOCIATION

production of final written argument, xxiv–xxvi, xxv, food chain that consists of four trophic levels, 119
xxx recommendations for implementation, 120
refutational, xvii–xviii, xxx–xxxii (See also time required for, 120
Refutational Writing) writing an argument for, 117
writing prompts for, xxv, xxv, xxx, xxxi
Scientific argumentation T
definition of, ix Teacher Notes, xiii, xxxiii, xxxviii–xxxiv
in A Framework for K–12 Science Education, xvi Assessment section of, xxxix
instructional models to promote student engagement Content and Related Concepts section of, xxxviii
in, xii, xiii, xvii Curricular and Instructional Considerations section of,
integration into biology teaching and learning xxxiii, xxxviii–xxxix
development of activities for, xiii, xvii–xviii Recommendations for Implementing the Activity section
learning outcomes of, xvii of, xxxiii–xxxiv, xxxix
rationale for, xi–xii for specific activities
relevance in science education, xvi Cell Size and Diffusion, 185–190
Scientific habits of mind, xii, xvi, xxii, xxvi Characteristics of Viruses, 128–131
Scientific investigations Classifying Birds in the United States, 12–17
design of, xxviii Color Variations in Venezuelan Guppies, 24–27
identifying research questions for, xviii–xix Decline in Saltwater Fish Populations activity,
Misconception About the Methods of Scientific 96–101
Investigations writing activity, 277–283 Desert Snakes, 39–43
Small-group format, xviii, xix, xix, xxvii, xxviii, xxx, xxxiv DNA Family Relationship Analysis activity, 61–65
Species concept: Classifying Birds in the United States, Environmental Influence on Genotypes and
5–17 Phenotypes activity, 195–201
Spontaneous Generation activity, 137–147 Evolutionary Relationships in Mammals, 75–79
argumentation session for, 139, 139–140 Fruit Fly Traits, 50–54
getting started on, 138 Healthy Diet and Weight, 233–237
introduction to, 137–138 History of Life on Earth, 107–110
Needham’s test of spontaneous generation, 137, Hominid Evolution, 211–218
137 Liver and Hydrogen Peroxide, 175–180
Spallanzani’s test of spontaneous generation, Misconception About Bacteria, 294–299
137–138, 138 Misconception About Inheritance of Traits, 316–320
materials for, 138, 143, 145 Misconception About Insects, 322–327
purpose of, 142 Misconception About Interactions That Take Place
recording your method and observations for, 139 Between Organisms, 302–307
research questions and potential explanations for, 138 Misconception About Life on Earth, 286–290
standards addressed in, 134–135, 146–147 Misconception About Plant Reproduction, 310–314
Teacher Notes for, 142–147 Misconception About the Methods of Scientific
assessment, 145–146 Investigations, 278–283
content and related concepts, 142 Misconception About the Nature of Scientific
curriculum and instructional considerations, 142– Knowledge, 262–268
143 Misconception About the Work of Scientists,
options for implementation, 143, 144 270–274
time required for, 143 Misconception About Theories and Laws, 254–259
writing an argument for, 141 Movement of Molecules in or out of Cells, 164–169
Surviving Winter in the Dust Bowl activity, 113–122 Plant Biomass, 153–158
developing a claim for, 114, 114–115 Plants and Energy, 223–228
information about nutritional values and dietary needs Spontaneous Generation, 142–147
for, 116 Surviving Winter in the Dust Bowl, 118–122
introduction to, 113, 113–114 Termite Trails, 243–248
materials for, 120, 120 Teacher’s role during activities, xxxiv–xxxv
purpose of, 118 for Evaluate Alternatives, xxxvii
research question for, 114 for Generate an Alternative, xxxvi
standards addressed in, 2–3, 122 Termite Trails activity, 239–248
Teacher Notes for, 118–122 argumentation session for, 240–241, 241
assessment, 121–122 getting started on, 239–240
content and related concepts, 118–119 introduction to, 239, 239
curriculum and instructional considerations, 119–120 materials for, 239, 244, 246

SCIENTIFIC ARGUMENTATION IN BIOLOGY: 30 CLASSROOM ACTIVITIES 381

purpose of, 243 W

recording your method and observations for, 240 Writing, xii
research question and possible explanations for, 239 expository, xxxii
standards addressed in, 134–135, 247–248 of final argument, xxiv–xxvi, xxv, xxx
Teacher Notes for, 243–248 importance of, xxiv–xxv
assessment, 246–247, 343–350 persuasive, xxxi–xxxii
content and related concepts, 243 refutational, xvii–xviii, xxx–xxxii, xxxiii (See also
curriculum and instructional considerations, 243–244 Refutational Writing)
options for implementation, 244, 245 Writing prompts
student sample scored rubrics, 344, 346, 349 for Evaluate Alternatives, xxx, xxxi
time required for, 244 for Generate an Argument, xxv, xxv
writing an argument for, 242 for Refutational Writing, xxxii

382 NATIONAL SCIENCE TEACHERS ASSOCIATION

scientific argumentation IN BIOLOGY

should be able to understand the language of
science and participate in scientific practices,
such as inquiry and argumentation. Empirical

argumentation research, however, indicates that many stu-

dents do not develop this knowledge or these
abilities in school. One way to address this

IN BIOLOGY
problem is to give students more opportuni-
ties to engage in scientific argumentation as
part of the teaching and learning of science.

30 ACTIVITIES
This book will help teachers with this task.”
—Authors Victor Sampson and Sharon Schleigh

CLASSROOM Develop your high school students’ under-

30
scientific reasoning; and
• craft complex written arguments.
Detailed teacher notes suggest specific ways
in which you can use the activities to enrich
and supplement (not replace) what you’re

SCHLEIGH
SAMPSON
logical practices; explain, interpret, and evalu-
ate evidence; and acquire the habits of mind
to become more proficient in science.

PB269X
ISBN 978-1-935155-08-9
PB304X
ISBN 978-1-936137-27-5
Grades Grades
6–12 9–12

Biology How Life Works 3rd Edition by James Morris
100% (11)
Biology How Life Works 3rd Edition by James Morris
3,749 pages
Argument-Driven Inquiry
No ratings yet
Argument-Driven Inquiry
442 pages
DLL Mil Grade 12
90% (20)
DLL Mil Grade 12
63 pages
Unifying Themes of Life
100% (1)
Unifying Themes of Life
32 pages
Biology 13th Edition (Ebook PDF) Download Full Chapters
100% (1)
Biology 13th Edition (Ebook PDF) Download Full Chapters
106 pages
Science Matters 7 - CBSE
No ratings yet
Science Matters 7 - CBSE
299 pages
Science Focus 4 2nd Edition
100% (14)
Science Focus 4 2nd Edition
368 pages
Plus One Grade 4 Study Pack Vol 2
No ratings yet
Plus One Grade 4 Study Pack Vol 2
48 pages
EDUC 6 Module 3
No ratings yet
EDUC 6 Module 3
4 pages
Biology Book
No ratings yet
Biology Book
412 pages
Advanced Professional Chef-2024 - BKS
No ratings yet
Advanced Professional Chef-2024 - BKS
2 pages
2017 ALLEN & BAKER Scientific Process and Social Issues in Bio Ed
No ratings yet
2017 ALLEN & BAKER Scientific Process and Social Issues in Bio Ed
240 pages
Neck and Arm Pain Syndromes Evidenceinformed Screening Diagnosis and Management
No ratings yet
Neck and Arm Pain Syndromes Evidenceinformed Screening Diagnosis and Management
323 pages
Script For Teachers Day
100% (2)
Script For Teachers Day
4 pages
The Biology Teacher S Handbook Fourth Edition Biological Sciences Curriculum Study Digital Download
100% (1)
The Biology Teacher S Handbook Fourth Edition Biological Sciences Curriculum Study Digital Download
128 pages
Citizen Science 15 Lessons That Bring Biology To Life 6 12 1st Edition Nancy Trautmann No Waiting Time
100% (1)
Citizen Science 15 Lessons That Bring Biology To Life 6 12 1st Edition Nancy Trautmann No Waiting Time
136 pages
The Biology Teacher S Handbook Fourth Edition Biological Sciences Curriculum Study - Download The Ebook Now and Read Anytime, Anywhere
100% (4)
The Biology Teacher S Handbook Fourth Edition Biological Sciences Curriculum Study - Download The Ebook Now and Read Anytime, Anywhere
51 pages
Diagnostic Test Bio 12 Sem 1
No ratings yet
Diagnostic Test Bio 12 Sem 1
5 pages
Lesson 2 (Unifying Themes of Life)
No ratings yet
Lesson 2 (Unifying Themes of Life)
7 pages
Written Task No.4
No ratings yet
Written Task No.4
2 pages
Riya Sharma Customer Support
No ratings yet
Riya Sharma Customer Support
1 page
GRADE 8 CREATIVE CURRICULUM DESIGN - Compressed
No ratings yet
GRADE 8 CREATIVE CURRICULUM DESIGN - Compressed
65 pages
2024 McGraw Hill Inspire Science NM Grade 3
No ratings yet
2024 McGraw Hill Inspire Science NM Grade 3
7 pages
Math Lesson Plan
No ratings yet
Math Lesson Plan
14 pages
Theories of Crime Causation Rubric
No ratings yet
Theories of Crime Causation Rubric
1 page
Biology: Textbook For Class Xii
No ratings yet
Biology: Textbook For Class Xii
10 pages
1 2 Themes and Concepts of Biology
No ratings yet
1 2 Themes and Concepts of Biology
22 pages
4 6023987469987350603 1
No ratings yet
4 6023987469987350603 1
90 pages
Carlo Matteo Di Dionisio v2
No ratings yet
Carlo Matteo Di Dionisio v2
20 pages
REPOLLO - ASSESSMENT OF TECHNICAL SKILLS AND COMPETENCY IN SELECTED FSM COURSES OF BTVTEd STUDENTS
No ratings yet
REPOLLO - ASSESSMENT OF TECHNICAL SKILLS AND COMPETENCY IN SELECTED FSM COURSES OF BTVTEd STUDENTS
142 pages
5021 April 27
No ratings yet
5021 April 27
4 pages
I - GCSE Options AY 2024 - 25 - Year 9 Student Indication of Subjects They Wish To Study
No ratings yet
I - GCSE Options AY 2024 - 25 - Year 9 Student Indication of Subjects They Wish To Study
8 pages
Citizen Science 15 Lessons That Bring Biology To Life 6 12 1st Edition Nancy Trautmann PDF Version
No ratings yet
Citizen Science 15 Lessons That Bring Biology To Life 6 12 1st Edition Nancy Trautmann PDF Version
121 pages
Citizen Science 15 Lessons That Bring Biology To Life 6 12 1st Edition Nancy Trautmann PDF Download
No ratings yet
Citizen Science 15 Lessons That Bring Biology To Life 6 12 1st Edition Nancy Trautmann PDF Download
86 pages
Alex Russell CV
No ratings yet
Alex Russell CV
3 pages
Post Activity Report-copyESP
No ratings yet
Post Activity Report-copyESP
1 page
Microproject Proforma
No ratings yet
Microproject Proforma
3 pages
Duncan Et Al 2011 Introductory Biology Textbooks Under Represent Scientific Process
No ratings yet
Duncan Et Al 2011 Introductory Biology Textbooks Under Represent Scientific Process
9 pages
(Michael L. Cain, Carol Kaesuk Yoon, Anu Singh-Cun-Discover Biology
100% (3)
(Michael L. Cain, Carol Kaesuk Yoon, Anu Singh-Cun-Discover Biology
996 pages
Jeff S View On Science and Scientists 1st Edition Gottfried Schatz Ready To Read
100% (3)
Jeff S View On Science and Scientists 1st Edition Gottfried Schatz Ready To Read
106 pages
BIO 3122 - Syllabus 2019
No ratings yet
BIO 3122 - Syllabus 2019
3 pages
Module1 Lesson2 190901124906
No ratings yet
Module1 Lesson2 190901124906
34 pages
Textbook Compressed
No ratings yet
Textbook Compressed
364 pages
Science 9 (First Quarter) : Alta Tierra Integrated School, Inc
No ratings yet
Science 9 (First Quarter) : Alta Tierra Integrated School, Inc
5 pages
Science Module Outline
No ratings yet
Science Module Outline
5 pages
RPS English (MKU)
No ratings yet
RPS English (MKU)
12 pages
Newsletter Emma Garay Biology PDF
No ratings yet
Newsletter Emma Garay Biology PDF
2 pages
Earth Lesson Plan
No ratings yet
Earth Lesson Plan
13 pages
Evolution and Origin of Cells
100% (1)
Evolution and Origin of Cells
59 pages
Biology Useful Guide
No ratings yet
Biology Useful Guide
109 pages
Your Online Portal To Everything You Need: Look For These Icons To Access Exciting Digital Resources
100% (2)
Your Online Portal To Everything You Need: Look For These Icons To Access Exciting Digital Resources
0 pages
(Ebook PDF) Essentials of The Living World 5th Edition Instant Download
No ratings yet
(Ebook PDF) Essentials of The Living World 5th Edition Instant Download
53 pages
Scientific American Biology For A Changing World With Core Physiology (Michele Shuster, Janet Vigna, Gunjan Sinha) (Z-Library)
No ratings yet
Scientific American Biology For A Changing World With Core Physiology (Michele Shuster, Janet Vigna, Gunjan Sinha) (Z-Library)
713 pages
Contents (Philoid In)
No ratings yet
Contents (Philoid In)
10 pages
Science7 Intro PDF
No ratings yet
Science7 Intro PDF
21 pages
Early Years Foundation Stage Profile Handbook 2022
No ratings yet
Early Years Foundation Stage Profile Handbook 2022
25 pages
Grade 9 SciA
No ratings yet
Grade 9 SciA
227 pages
Week 3 Lesson Plan
No ratings yet
Week 3 Lesson Plan
4 pages
Sed 482 Final Unit Plan 2
No ratings yet
Sed 482 Final Unit Plan 2
4 pages
Proposed Activities For The Launching of English Month 2020 1
100% (1)
Proposed Activities For The Launching of English Month 2020 1
5 pages
(Ebook PDF) Essentials of The Living World 5th Edition Instant Download
100% (1)
(Ebook PDF) Essentials of The Living World 5th Edition Instant Download
57 pages
Biology Week 7
No ratings yet
Biology Week 7
4 pages
Sed 482 Final Unit Plan 2
No ratings yet
Sed 482 Final Unit Plan 2
5 pages
2014 02 04 Leibovic Ubd Template
No ratings yet
2014 02 04 Leibovic Ubd Template
5 pages
Assessment Plan
No ratings yet
Assessment Plan
11 pages
Safari
No ratings yet
Safari
3 pages
Edes363ubdunitplan Pennerlorie
No ratings yet
Edes363ubdunitplan Pennerlorie
16 pages
Solutions Manual For Biology 9th Edition by Raven Johnson Losos Singer
No ratings yet
Solutions Manual For Biology 9th Edition by Raven Johnson Losos Singer
11 pages
Biology: Classifying Life Forms
No ratings yet
Biology: Classifying Life Forms
15 pages
Class9 Science Reduced
No ratings yet
Class9 Science Reduced
292 pages
Gmos Lesson Plan - Nature of Science - Karen Patricio
No ratings yet
Gmos Lesson Plan - Nature of Science - Karen Patricio
10 pages
Credentials Evaluation Service Professional Report® - CGFNS International, Inc
No ratings yet
Credentials Evaluation Service Professional Report® - CGFNS International, Inc
6 pages
UCSP Module 8
67% (3)
UCSP Module 8
16 pages
Miras Astana Language Policy Guide
No ratings yet
Miras Astana Language Policy Guide
19 pages
Language Arts Lesson #5 - Is Technology The Solution To The Problem of Global Poverty - PDF
No ratings yet
Language Arts Lesson #5 - Is Technology The Solution To The Problem of Global Poverty - PDF
5 pages
SF 2 Responsibility Blank
No ratings yet
SF 2 Responsibility Blank
28 pages
Aspiring Finance Professional's Resume
No ratings yet
Aspiring Finance Professional's Resume
3 pages
NSTA Evolution Perspective
No ratings yet
NSTA Evolution Perspective
19 pages
Designing and Conducting Formative Evaluation
No ratings yet
Designing and Conducting Formative Evaluation
12 pages
Lebo 1 Ps
No ratings yet
Lebo 1 Ps
10 pages
SHSAT Student Handbook 2009
No ratings yet
SHSAT Student Handbook 2009
111 pages
StartHere PDF
No ratings yet
StartHere PDF
662 pages
Addison Wesly Biology PDF
No ratings yet
Addison Wesly Biology PDF
662 pages
101 Easy and Inexpensive Activities
No ratings yet
101 Easy and Inexpensive Activities
47 pages
The Case For Thinking Evolutionarily: Presentation by Gordon Uno
No ratings yet
The Case For Thinking Evolutionarily: Presentation by Gordon Uno
35 pages

Nist Cer Framework

Uploaded by

Nist Cer Framework

Uploaded by

scientific

“Individuals who are proficient in science

scientific argumentation IN BIOLOGY

argumentation research, however, indicates that many stu-

CLASSROOM Develop your high school students’ under-

VICTOR SAMPSON, PhD

Art and Design

Printing and Production

National Science Teachers Association

1840 Wilson Blvd., Arlington, VA 22201

Copyright © 2013 by the National Science Teachers Association.

Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data

Activity 2: Color Variation in Venezuelan Guppies 19

Activity 3: Desert Snakes 29

Activity 4: Fruit Fly Traits 45

Activity 5: DNA Family Relationship Analysis 55

Activity 6: Evolutionary Relationships in Mammals 67

Activity 7: Decline in Saltwater Fish Populations 81

Activity 8: History of Life on Earth 103

Activity 9: Surviving Winter in the Dust Bowl 113

Activity 10: Characteristics of Viruses 123

Activity 12: Plant Biomass 149

Activity 13: Movement of Molecules in or out of Cells 159

Activity 14: Liver and Hydrogen Peroxide 171

Activity 16: Environmental Influence on Genotypes

Activity 17: Hominid Evolution 203

Activity 18: Plants and Energy 219

Activity 19: Healthy Diet and Weight 229

Activity 20: Termite Trails 239

Activity 22: Misconception About the Nature of

Activity 23: Misconception About the Work of Scientists 269

Activity 24: Misconception About the Methods of Scientific

Activity 25: Misconception About Life on Earth 285

Activity 26: Misconception About Bacteria 293

Activity 27: Misconception About Interactions That

Activity 28: Misconception About Plant Reproduction 309

Activity 29: Misconception About Inheritance of Traits 315

Activity 30: Misconception About Insects 321

ASSESSMENTS & STUDENT SAMPLES 329

SCIENTIFIC ARGUMENTATION IN BIOLOGY:

Figure 1. A Framework That Can Be Used to Illustrate the Components of

The Evidence Theoretical Criteria

important models, theories, and laws in the discipline;

(c) a relationship between variables, and linking it to a specific principle, concept,

x NATIONAL SCIENCE TEACHERS ASSOCIATION

sufficiency of the evidence or reasons that Why Integrate

SCIENTIFIC ARGUMENTATION IN BIOLOGY:

xii NATIONAL SCIENCE TEACHERS ASSOCIATION

Development of the We used teacher comments and sugges-

SCIENTIFIC ARGUMENTATION IN BIOLOGY:

Jimenez-Aleixandre, M., M. Rodriguez, M., National Research Council (NRC). 2012. A

xiv NATIONAL SCIENCE TEACHERS ASSOCIATION

SCIENTIFIC ARGUMENTATION IN BIOLOGY:

set of practices—such as asking ques- that science is a body of knowledge

xvi NATIONAL SCIENCE TEACHERS ASSOCIATION

Current research in science education engaging students in the production

SCIENTIFIC ARGUMENTATION IN BIOLOGY

xviii NATIONAL SCIENCE TEACHERS ASSOCIATION

Figure 2. Stages of the Generate an Argument Instructional Model

The Teacher Identifies the

Groups then share and critique each other’s arguments during an …

The Reflective Discussion

The students then use what they have learned to produce a …

Final Written Argument

SCIENTIFIC ARGUMENTATION IN BIOLOGY

Figure 3. The Components of an Argument for Stage 2 of the Generate an

The Research Question:

Your Evidence: Your Justification

xx NATIONAL SCIENCE TEACHERS ASSOCIATION

Figure 4. An Example of an Argument Created by High School Students

SCIENTIFIC ARGUMENTATION IN BIOLOGY

Figure 5. The Argumentation Session

xxii NATIONAL SCIENCE TEACHERS ASSOCIATION

Figure 6. A Round-Robin Argumentation Session

SCIENTIFIC ARGUMENTATION IN BIOLOGY

Figure 7. Example of a Round-Robin Argumentation Session

Activity 2: Color Variation in Venezuelan Guppies 19

Activity 3: Desert Snakes 29

Activity 4: Fruit Fly Traits 45

Activity 5: DNA Family Relationship Analysis 55

Activity 6: Evolutionary Relationships in Mammals 67

Activity 7: Decline in Saltwater Fish Populations 81

Activity 8: History of Life on Earth 103

Activity 9: Surviving Winter in the Dust Bowl 113

Activity 10: Characteristics of Viruses 123

Activity 12: Plant Biomass 149

Activity 13: Movement of Molecules in or out of Cells 159

Activity 14: Liver and Hydrogen Peroxide 171

Activity 17: Hominid Evolution 203

Activity 18: Plants and Energy 219

Activity 19: Healthy Diet and Weight 229

Activity 20: Termite Trails 239

Activity 23: Misconception About the Work of Scientists 269

Activity 25: Misconception About Life on Earth 285

Activity 26: Misconception About Bacteria 293

Activity 28: Misconception About Plant Reproduction 309

Activity 29: Misconception About Inheritance of Traits 315

Activity 30: Misconception About Insects 321

ASSESSMENTS & STUDENT SAMPLES 329

Activity 2: Color Variation in Venezuelan Guppies 19

Activity 3: Desert Snakes 29

Activity 4: Fruit Fly Traits 45

Activity 5: DNA Family Relationship Analysis 55

Activity 6: Evolutionary Relationships in Mammals 67

Activity 7: Decline in Saltwater Fish Populations 81

Activity 8: History of Life on Earth 103

Activity 9: Surviving Winter in the Dust Bowl 113

Activity 10: Characteristics of Viruses 123