Search

In this article we approach the problem of identification and recognition of argumentation by teacher educators of a physics undergraduate course of a large university in the southeast of Brazil. Our proposed markers criteria, such as "opposing" of ideas and "reciprocal justifications" were partially validated by the investigated teacher educators in conducted interview processes. Most of them mixed aspects of argumentation with explanation and others offered alternative visions of argumentation in science teaching. These results are problematic since changes in basic education passes through the formation and education of new teachers and in-service teachers in teachers' science programs. Implications of the study are raised as well the need to clarify more to the community of teacher educators the nature of argumentation and how it differs from explanations.

In this article, we focus on the contributions that a simulated jury-based activity might have for pre-service teachers, especially for their active participation and learning in teacher education. We observed a teacher educator using a series of simulated juries as teaching resources to help pre-service teachers develop their pedagogical knowledge and their argumentation abilities in a physics teacher methods course. For the purposes of this article, we have selected one simulated jury-based activity, comprising two opposed groups of pre-service teachers that presented aspects that hinder the teachers' development of professional knowledge (against group) and aspects that allow this development (favor group). After the groups' presentations, a group of judges was formed to evaluate the discussion. We applied a multi-level method for discourse analysis and the results showed that (1) the simulated jury afforded the pre-service teachers to position themselves as active knowledge producers; (2) the teacher acted as "animator" of the pre-service teachers' actions, showing responsiveness to the emergence of circumstantial teaching and learning opportunities and (3) the simulated jury culminated in the judges' identification of the pattern "concrete/obstacles--ideological/possibilities" in the groups' responses, which was elaborated by the teacher for the whole class. Implications from this study include using simulated juries for teaching and learning and for the development of the pre-service teachers' argumentative abilities. The potential of simulated juries to improve teaching and learning needs to be further explored in order to inform the uses and reflections of this resource in science education.

In this paper, we present and apply a multi-level method for discourse analysis in science classrooms. This method is based on the structure of human activity (activity, actions, and operations) and it was applied to study a pre-service physics teacher methods course. We argue that such an approach, based on a cultural psychological perspective, affords opportunities for analysts to perform a theoretically based detailed analysis of discourse events. Along with the presentation of analysis, we show and discuss how the articulation of different levels offers interpretative criteria for analyzing instructional conversations. We synthesize the results into a model for a teacher's practice and discuss the implications and possibilities of this approach for the field of discourse analysis in science classrooms. Finally, we reflect on how the development of teachers' understanding of their activity structures can contribute to forms of progressive discourse of science education.