1 of 35

Argumentation from Evidence

Secondary Session 4

Building Student Sense-Making Through Disciplinary Literacy

CA NGSS Statewide Implementation

2 of 35

ZOOM NORMS�

Put yourself on MUTE unless you are speaking.
Be respectful of others. Take turns speaking by “raising your hand” and waiting for the facilitator to call your name. Keep comments and sharing concise.
Use the “Chat” feature to ask questions.
Be present and stay engaged
Video on when possible. Kids and pets are always welcome to make guest appearances.
Name (First & Last).

3 of 35

Accessing Session Resources, Activities, and Handouts

Padlet: See the chat for the URL
Electronic Hyperlinked Agenda & Notetaking Guide
Hyperlinks in Zoom Chat

3

Zoom Chat

4 of 35

Session 3 Gots & Needs Summary

Needs...

Gots...

CA NGSS Statewide Implementation: Building Sense-Making 5.* Argumentation

4

Putting things together and seeing connections!
Resources: Simulations, Readings, Case studies
Text as another form of evidence
Posters to organize ideas and share
Scaffolding reasoning

Where is the 5E?

Engage / Explore / Explain

Time to find texts and use resources
From a facilitator: Reorientation - Remember that…

5 of 35

Session 4 Goals

Plan for phase 3 and 4 classroom implementation of scientific argumentation.
Experience protocols/strategies/instructional routines for making them visible by making arguments public, critiquing, evaluating, and revising around a driving question.
Deepen understanding of classroom culture that supports equitable sensemaking.
Collaborate with a community of practice.

CA NGSS Statewide Implementation: Building Sense-Making 5.* Argumentation

5

6 of 35

Classroom Planning -

Independent Think Time

Strategies and Tools

Equity/

Classroom Culture

CCC Sentence Stems

6

Identify strategies, tools, equity/classroom culture and CCC sentence stems to support the implementation of argumentation in your classroom.

5 Minutes

7 of 35

Sharing in Break - Out Rooms

Share the following with your group:

Strategies to support strengthening argumentation.

7

12 Minutes

8 of 35

Argumentation Phase IV

How can students make argumentation visible through critique, revision, and evaluation?

CA NGSS Statewide Implementation: Building Sense-Making 5.* Argumentation

8

Making Argumentation Visible

Strengthening Argumentation

Developing Initial Ideas and Making a Claim

Gathering and Interpreting Evidence

9 of 35

Components of a scientific arguments

Claim
Data
Warrants
Backing
Qualifiers
Rebuttals

CA NGSS Statewide Implementation: Building Sense-Making 5.* Argumentation

9

“Students need opportunities not just to hear explanations being given to them by experts (teachers, books, film, computer programs), but they also need to practice using the ideas themselves to gain confidence in their use, and through this process develop a familiarity with, and understanding of, scientific practices and ways of thinking”

Driver, R., Newton, P., & Osborne, J. (2000). Establishing the norms of scientific argumentation in classrooms. Science education, 84(3), 287-312.

Main Room

Set up Zoom Poll

Zoom Poll: (potentially an alternative polling software?)

How often during a school year do you ask students to engage with CLAIMS?

Frequently / Weekly
Sometimes / Monthly
Very few / Not at all

How often during a school year do you ask students to engage with DATA?

Frequently / Weekly
Sometimes / Monthly
Very few / Not at all

How often during a school year do you ask students to engage with WARRANTS?

Frequently / Weekly
Sometimes / Monthly
Very few / Not at all

How often during a school year do you ask students to engage with BACKING?

Frequently / Weekly
Sometimes / Monthly
Very few / Not at all

How often during a school year do you ask students to engage with QUALIFIERS?

Frequently / Weekly
Sometimes / Monthly
Very few / Not at all

How often during a school year do you ask students to engage with REBUTTALS?

Frequently / Weekly
Sometimes / Monthly
Very few / Not at all

Display slide S9 (Components of a scientific arguments )

Driver, Newton, and Osborne (2000) and others (Krajcik & Sutherland, 2013) have compiled the needs of an argument. They say that arguments are essential for knowledge attainment.They say young people need to act like scientists in order to learn. Ask participants to read the quote: “Students need opportunities not just to hear explanations being given to them by experts (teachers, books, film, computer programs), but they also need to practice using the ideas themselves to gain confidence in their use, and through this process develop a familiarity with, and understanding of, scientific practices and ways of thinking” (Driver, Newton, & Osborne, 2000).

This list of argument components will help participants make sure they can construct a logical, rational argument to support their claim about returning to homeostasis. Ask participants to think about what each of the components of a scientific argument might “look like” in their lessons. Ask individual participants to provide an explanation of each of the components.

10 of 35

Components of a scientific arguments

Claim (I think...): this is the conclusion whose merits are to be established.
Data (...because…): these are the facts that those involved in the argument appeal to in support of their claim.
Warrants (...since…): these are the reasons (rules, principles, etc.) that are proposed to justify the connections between the data and the knowledge claim, or conclusion.
Backing (...account of…): these are basic assumptions, usually taken to be commonly agreed that provide the justification for particular warrants.

10

Main Room

Display Slide S10 (Components of a scientific arguments )

Share with the participants the following definitions by Driver, Newton, and Osborne (2000) and others (Krajcik & Sutherland, 2013):

Data: these are the facts that those involved in the argument appeal to in support

of their claim.

Claim: this is the conclusion whose merits are to be established.
Warrants: these are the reasons (rules, principles, etc.) that are proposed to justify the connections between the data and the knowledge claim, or conclusion.
Backing: these are basic assumptions, usually taken to be commonly agreed that provide the justification for particular warrants.

Based on this model, the basic structure of argument as represented in sentences is thus:

(Here is the stem:)

“I think...because (data)... since (warrant) . . . on account of (backing)... therefore (conclusion).”

Tell participants that these elements of an argument take us well beyond a simple Claim, Evidence and Reasoning argument. Our arguments are more sophisticated, taking into account situations in which our claims might not hold up, reaching consensus, utilizing feedback from peers, etc. It is a much more nuanced and mature argument. Students will need scaffolding and supports, like this sentence frame, to help them improve their arguments.

[Trainer Note: warrants and backing are types of evidence collected or researched. Qualifiers might be a person’s age or athletic ability, or exercise routines]

Krajcik, J. S., & Sutherland, L. M. (2010). Supporting students in developing literacy in science. science, 328(5977), 456-459.

11 of 35

Claim, Data, Analysis (Warrants), Evidence and Reasoning (Backing) Poster

As a group,

share your individual claim from session 3
identify a group claim based on all the evidence that exists (explore activity, readings, simulations, data, group collaboration, etc…) to address the driving question: What factors contribute the most to the efficiency of the return to homeostasis?
Create a poster based on your group claim.

CA NGSS Statewide Implementation: Building Sense-Making 5.* Argumentation

11

12 of 35

Claim, Data, Analysis (Warrants), Evidence and Reasoning (Backing) Poster

Use:

CA NGSS Statewide Implementation: Building Sense-Making 5.* Argumentation

12

45 Minutes

POST TO CHATBOX�Link for poster:

https://docs.google.com/presentation/d/1xwFnCaRVFfuV8GRXkkHyCWDKoTlVJ1vgFPVhLE04UU4/edit#slide=id.ga706eb56a4_0_216

Links to earlier data, posters and findings that might be helpful for your poster.

Links to Asynchronous Session 1 Data: https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1xmrKE9804dmr-Rtk1L1Rs9sgUuF18_mb1tBqtm-Woqw/edit#gid=1556733083

Data and Analysis https://docs.google.com/presentation/d/15LcEKAYgqaUm85XkZvH7BJlsyDsI-kgmlB9M3-bX89Q/edit#slide=id.g93c4bde0ff_0_0

Science Text Findings

https://docs.google.com/presentation/d/1FKSdsvUjxF_jDzcW9U7PeXsrEYbNyDrgGYl0Ywuzns0/edit#slide=id.gaf2aca7fa4_2_0

BREAKOUT ROOM

Open breakout rooms when everyone has the links they need.

Time = 45 minutes

Display slide S12 (Poster Template for Google slides )

Show a poster template that participants will use. Remind participants that you only need one per group. This is how you will make you argument visible by outlining your data, warrants, and backing.

Posters can be a way to share information and communicate ideas. They are a way to make your argument public and get feedback from others.

This tool is a good way to display content and students’ ideas. It is quick to start and use; digitally or in class. This is a sample of the types of Scientific poster we can make. The scientific poster is a Tool that scientists use to show their experiments, data, and analysis. Essentially is it a scientific argument on display. We will mimic this process and make our own scientific poster to display our arguments. Similar to this one.

Remind participants that all their data and findings from earlier sessions are in the session’s group folders. You can access these via the padlet (day 2 mini posters, excel sheet of data, etc.) or in the chat.

13 of 35

Characteristics of Scientific Argumentation

How can we evaluate the quality of your claim? Use the “Checklist” feature to reflectively think about your own poster.

Characteristics of scientific argumentation

Qualifiers of the Claim
Rigorous data collection
Replication
Sample size
Underlying scientific concepts
Consensus
Peer reviewed
Strong link between evidence

and initial claim

Reasoning

CA NGSS Statewide Implementation: Building Sense-Making 5.* Argumentation

13

3 Minute

Main Room

POST TO CHAT BOX.

Checklist of argument characteristics: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1hKpI8_eejzO7JIV5D5vTQsB3IMvzbGMqW4GvVual_u8/edit?usp=sharing

Display Slide S13 (Characteristics of Scientific Argumentation)

Participants will evaluate the evidence from the presentations and posters, marking opportunities for “Qualifiers and Rebuttals.” Explain the different features and what they might look like.

Students need to learn the qualities of high quality evidence

Rigourous, replicable data should be stressed

Students need to understand why a large sample strengthens data while a small sample size can weaken it

Students should be introduced to the idea of peer review and why that is the common practice amongst scientists

Students need to be able to make a strong link between their evidence and their claim if it is to be strong

14 of 35

Feedback, Critique, and Rebuttal

14

Feedback Handout

Response Form

*Response frames are suggestions for students.

Group A Presents Poster & Group B Fills Out Feedback Form

Group A Uses this form to record feedback provided by Group B*.

POST TO CHAT:

Handout for Feedback and Response Forms

https://docs.google.com/document/d/1eW9OYu2ueserLmZjF-BWM997A-g3a8Vakfl3toJWP2Y/edit

Peer Feedback Response Form

BREAKOUT ROOMS

Create breakout rooms that combine two of the original groups

Display slide S14 (Feedback, Critique, and Rebuttal)

Tell participants that we will now present our posters to another group. This is part of making our findings public. Teams will provide each other with feedback. When you get feedback from others you will have the opportunity to respond. Group A presents their poster to Group B. Group B will use the Feedback Handout to take notes while Group A presents. Group B will give their feedback to Group A. Group A can record the feedback on the Response Form. This is where you can make notes of things that were strong and things that need to be strengthened or modified. You will then trade roles with Group B presenting to Group A.

Participants will have 20 minutes to do this. 5 minutes to present and 5 minutes for feedback for each team.

15 of 35

Zoom Breakout: Evaluating Posters for Improvement

In breakout rooms, please share your mini-poster with your group.

Each group will present their scientific argument and findings.
Reviewers will fill out the “Qualifiers and Rebuttal” Feedback Handout (“Feedback for Presenting Group”) to help improve the presenter’s argument and mini-poster.
Presenters can use the “Response Sheet” to collect and respond to feedback.

CA NGSS Statewide Implementation: Building Sense-Making 5.* Argumentation

15

30 Minutes

Group A

5 Minute Presentation

Group A

5 Minute Rebuttal

Group A

Receives Feedback from Group B

(5 Minutes)

BREAKOUT ROOMS

Combinations of two original groups
time = 30 minutes

Display slide S15 (Zoom Breakout: Evaluating Posters for Improvement)

Participants will evaluate the evidence from the presentations and posters, marking feedback in the comment section of the _______________.

The best way to improve your arguments is to make your thinking public. For your posters, we will practice this. In our digital platform, we will use the tools at hand. We will share our posters to the Padlet we’ve been using. We will pair groups up. One group will present their poster Arguments to the other group. It will be the job of the second group to purposefully help the first group improve their argument by providing feedback on their poster. Use the Evaluating Evidence list, and your expertise to listen and view the poster and actively look for areas of improvement. You will have a chance to share your feedback and improvements to the first group. This practice is to help, so only feedback that is directly connected to the poster can be evaluated. After the group presents, the feedback can be shared. Then your groups will shift roles and repeat the task.

You will have time to complete the revisions and incorporate the improvements through the next few slides.

JL: Send posters to facilitator. Facilitator creates a jamboard with the images of the posters.

16 of 35

Debrief: Revision of an argument

After criticism of an argument, rebuttal and revision is needed

Cite more evidence if needed

use and find well vetted and replicated evidence

If your original evidence was misunderstood explain and clarify it
Stress consensus and peer reviewed data
If you cannot respond, then explain why not

CA NGSS Statewide Implementation: Building Sense-Making 5.* Argumentation

16

Display Slide S16 (Revision of an argument )

Ask participants to share something they found useful during this last process. [allow a few participants to share]

Tell participants that after these initial criticisms have been shared via the checklist, the original presenters of the data would have an opportunity for rebuttal and to revise any initial statements

This slide should could be used to guide your students as they begin planning and preparation for rebuttal. If we had more time, we’d allow you to present again using the new evidence they may have found or to clarify an original position that was misunderstood

Emphasis is on being respectful and polite

It’s important to notice that this phase is where we are starting to make arguments visible and get feedback and critique. This process strengthens our arguments. In doing so we are able to

Directly address the arguments and either provide and cite evidence strengthening your initial claim or improving upon your initial claim
Make sure to dispel any misconceptions individuals may have using vetted evidence and data
Try to use data that is recent and reflects our most current understanding of the topic

Questions we may want to ask ourselves at this point include

Does the argument have a logical progression?

Does the Evidence support the claim?

Is the reasoning valid and incorporates facts rather than opinions?

17 of 35

Learning Sequence Elaborate/Evaluate Ideas

Qualifiers and rebuttals activity - learners critique each other in small groups

“Final” argument display - recorded presentation, written output, lab report
Research the question and compare to student generated data
Design/evaluate a workout/exercise plan based on the class findings

CA NGSS Statewide Implementation: Building Sense-Making 5.* Argumentation

17

18 of 35

Reflection

18

19 of 35

Making Argumentation Visible

Reflect on the activities the identified strategies for making argumentation visible experienced in learning experience.

At this point you should have strategies for your own lesson/unit for all four phases of argumentation.

19

20 of 35

Deepening Equity in your Classroom

20

Classroom Culture

21 of 35

Promoting Classroom Culture (Lenses)

Collaboration Routines
Classroom Norms
Group and independent routines
Safe Space Practices
Discourse Routines
Scaffolding Tools
Consensus Routines

21

How do we deepen our knowledge and implementation of these routines, norms and tools to support an equitable classroom culture?

22 of 35

Asynchronous Classroom Culture Activity

Watch the video (0:48 - 10:06) and consider the following questions:

1. Who is engaged in (or excluded from) classroom activity?

2. Who is treated as a “knower” in the classroom?

3. What ways of knowing -prior knowledge from home/school and/or language - are privileged in the classroom?

CA NGSS Statewide Implementation: Building Sense-Making 5.* Argumentation

22

20 Minutes

https://vimeo.com/98818858

23 of 35

Whole Group Discussion

How did the teacher support scientific argumentation in the classroom?

CA NGSS Statewide Implementation: Building Sense-Making 5.* Argumentation

23

1. Who was engaged in (or excluded from) classroom activity?

2. Who was treated as a “knower” in the classroom?

3. What ways of knowing -prior knowledge from home/school and/or language - are privileged in the classroom?

POST TO CHAT:

wait until after the facilitator advances the slide animation to show the rubric to share (It is not visible initially)

Classroom Culture Handout: https://drive.google.com/file/d/1ZlzYU-CBG20QvxWHWtXCS5ymHfOx69D6/view?usp=sharing

Display S23 (Whole Group Discussion): Discuss the questions on classroom culture from the asynchronous activity as a whole group.

Facilitator needs to select an example or two from the google form to highlights responses to the following questions:

1. Who was engaged in (or excluded from) classroom activity?

2. Who was treated as a “knower” in the classroom?

3. What ways of knowing -prior knowledge from home/school and/or language - are privileged in the classroom?

Return to the rubric and identify features of the equitable classroom culture.

24 of 35

Importance of Culture and Context

“All settings for learning, including schools, are socially constructed contexts shaped by culture.”
Learning occurs in “...social, emotional, motivational, cognitive, developmental, biological, and temporal contexts.”
Learning requires more than content to occur
The experiences will affect the learning
“Learning is an active verb.”
Argumentation is an action we can take to enable learning
How do we make sure that ALL students have these opportunities?

CA NGSS Statewide Implementation: Building Sense-Making 5.* Argumentation

24

Display Slide S24 (Importance of Culture and Context)

These quotes come from How People Learn 2. Have participants read them and think about the implication for their students’ learning and the environment the create and maintain. These points are to remind participants that argumentation thrives in learning environments and will be effective when the right culture and climate of learning exists. Our goal is to create experiences that allow learning to occur. If we don’t explicitly think about and plan for this we decrease the learning opportunities for our students.

FOCUS ON THE LAST QUESTION -- WE NEED TO BE SURE THAT ALL STUDENTS HAVE ACCESS TO THIS KIND OF CLASSROOM. SO WHAT DO WE DO TO HELP ENSURE THAT ALL STUDENTS HAVE EQUITABLE ACCESS TO SENSEMAKING. (This is a tenet of the NGSS: All students , all standards)

25 of 35

Refining Implementation

Putting it all together!

CA NGSS Statewide Implementation: Building Sense-Making 5.* Argumentation

25

Making Argumentation Visible

Strengthening Argumentation

Developing Initial Ideas and Making a Claim

Gathering and Interpreting Evidence

26 of 35

Complete your unit/lesson with strategies for all four phases of argumentation.
Be prepared to share and receive feedback.

26

Independent Work: Complete Your Unit/Lesson

5

Minutes

Sessions 1 - 4

27 of 35

Zoom Breakout Room: Consultancy Protocol

In groups of 3
2 minutes: One person shares his/her individual lesson sequence without any interruption. Describe the lesson sequence in detail and how/when strategies will be implemented to support scientific argumentation. He/She can also expand on what his/her student work might look like to fill the 2 minute time.
3 minutes: The other two friends in the group provide positive considerations (feedback that is additive and specific*) and ask clarifying questions.

CA NGSS Statewide Implementation: Building Sense-Making 5.* Argumentation

27

Main Room

Display S27 (Zoom Breakout: consultancy protocol). The purpose for the consultancy protocol is to provide a structure to enhance the value of collaboration and to provide feedback to lesson sequences. Notice that when feedback is being given, it is additive.

Read the following instructions provided on the slide:

Form groups of 3 and make introductions.
2 minutes: One person shares his/her individual lesson sequence without any interruption. Describe the lesson sequence in detail and how and when he/she plans to use strategies to support scientific argumentation. He/She can also expand on what his/her student work might look like to fill the 2 minute time. As person one shares, the other two friends do not respond, they listen.
3 minutes: The other two friends in the group provide positive considerations (feedback that is additive*) and ask clarifying questions. The next slide will provide some frames to support positive feedback.
Adjust the time if necessary.

If time allows, consider a second consultancy protocol round (15 minutes).

Writer: Nathan

28 of 35

POSITIVE CONSIDERATIONS: ADDITIVE FEEDBACK FRAMES & CLARIFYING QUESTIONS

Have you considered…
I might add …
I like to use...
I have heard ...
Have you thought about…..

*Be specific about your feedback.

How will this strategy support/enhance student meaning-making and/or understanding of the concept?
What part of argumentation are students practicing?
What considerations are needed to support students with disabilities and/or English learners in your classroom?

28

15

Minutes

29 of 35

Woo hoo -- You made it!

29

30 of 35

Follow-up Online Support

30

Student Discourse

Argumentation

Notebooking

Using Text

Change/Refine Instruction

Jan-Mar 2022

Aug 2022

Jan-Apr 2022

Mar-Apr 2022

Mar-Jun 2022

Building Student Sensemaking

Through

Disciplinary Literacy

Teach in Classroom and Gather Student Work

Looking at

Student Work

Follow Up #1

Online

Looking at

Student Work

Follow Up #2

Online

Plan for

Instruction

and Identify

Expected Student Responses

Compare Expected Student Responses

April 28 from 4:00 - 5:30

Student Discourse in the Science Classroom • Building Students Sense-Making in Science Through Disciplinary Literacy, CA NGSS Statewide Implementation Professional Learning #1

Post examples of student work samples for the online pathway in the chat.

Display S30 (Session Learning Pathway: Follow-up Online Support). Remind participants that by attending this session they started a pathway of learning in a community of educators that will span for the remaining of the school year and into the beginning of the next year. Now that they have planned out with the consultancy protocol, they can take the learnings from this lesson and apply in their own classroom.

Brainstorm examples of work that can be collected for the online support.

We want to continue to support each other and the implementation of strategies and tools provided in this session. There will be series of follow-up on-line support opportunities. Please consider joining your colleagues in this opportunity to collaborate and learn with each other.

We want you to try something and share with us your implementation in our follow up sessions.

31 of 35

31

Please make a commitment to yourself to try at least one new idea in your classroom.

Add a resource that you want to share with others.

32 of 35

Gots & Needs

What are 2 - 3 takeaways for you from today (Gots)?

What do you still need (Needs)?

What are 1 or 2 strategies you want to try?

Gots…

Needs...

CA NGSS Statewide Implementation: Building Sense-Making 5.* Argumentation

32

33 of 35

Closing

CA NGSS Statewide Implementation: Building Sense-Making 5.* Argumentation

33

34 of 35

Resources we pulled from (Research that informed this session)

Ambitious Science Teaching

Kate McNeill (Boston College)

Assesments of Argumentation at Stanford

Douglas Llewellyn

Wonder of Science

CA NGSS Statewide Implementation: Building Sense-Making 5.* Argumentation

34

35 of 35

End of Session IV

35