Arguing Online: Case Studies of Pre-Service Science Teachers’ Perceptions of Online Tools in Supporting the Learning of Arguments

Abstract

Argumentation as a form of scientific discourse has been advocated as a fruitful method in science teaching. Information and communication technology (ICT) has been proposed as a vehicle to
achieve pedagogic objectives in scientific argumentation. However, ICT as a new tool is likely to be ineffective when other factors are not taken into consideration. The empirical study described in this paper aims to investigate the use of ICT to support teaching and learning of argumentation from the users’ perspectives. Four science pre-service teachers training as teachers at a postgraduate certificate in education programme in England have been introduced to a computer software called Belvedere 4.1, a tool designed particularly for supporting argumentation. The participants were tasked to produce a concept map with Belvedere 4.1, and subsequently they were invited to comment on the utility of Belvedere. Interviews with the participants explored their personal factors, pedagogic beliefs and experiences of using ICT in general in their teaching practice. The results indicate that the external conditions will limit the possibility of the use of ICT to improve teaching and learning of argumentation. Both the design and the structure of Belvedere, as well as the participants’ personal factors contribute to the usability of the tool.