Leaning Into The Science And Engineering Practices Part 5 - Engaging in Argument From Evidence1/9/2022 
(Note: This is part 5 of a series of posts. To read the introduction to the series, click here.)
Part of a truly great science education is developing an understanding of what science really is in the first place. In day to day life, we (and therefore kids, too) hear science referred to
Really, all science is to those who understand it deeply is the pursuit and presentation of evidence - evidence of what is certainly or probably true about how the world works. That’s it. Any scientific fact, idea, or theory you’ve ever heard or learned is something we know to be true or incredibly likely based on evidence that has been collected, verified, and subjected to scrutiny. If we want kids to understand science truly and deeply, we have to teach them about evidence. The fifth NGSS Science and Engineering Practice I want to lean into is "Engaging in Argument from Evidence." 
When will I use This PRactice?
It depends.
One of the best parts of the Next Generation Science Standards is that they pre-assign a Science and Engineering Practice to each content area. Most states have either adopted these standards or modeled their standards in this way. So if you teach in one of these states (as I do), when you use this practice will be decided for you. For example, it has come up in two different units of my 7th grade curriculum so far this year: 
If you teach in a state that hasn't adopted the NGSS at all, you'll simply have to decide for each standard if "engaging in arguments from evidence" is a good choice of practice for the standard or not. What’s particularly nice about this practice is that, since any science knowledge stems from evidence in the first place, this one will be a good fit for almost anything. For example, I looked up four middle school standards from Florida, and sure enough, in the right circumstances, “engaging in arguments from evidence” could be a good fit for all four:
What Are The Barriers To Leaning Into This PRactice?
In the introduction to this series, I listed the eight reasons I recently heard teachers give for not having the kind of exciting, engaging, and dynamic science classrooms we dream of:
Some of these barriers may apply to your situation while others may not. Personally, at some point or another, I've dealt with all of these except for #6. Later in this piece, I’m also going to address two challenges that I’ve found are unique to this particular Science and Engineering Practice:
Once I got this practice down, it became one I can prepare for and teach very reliably. It has also been one that, once it rolls around multiple times in the year or years I have with my students, they can perform it with incredible ease and consistency. So, what do you need to know about the practice of "Engaging in Arguments from Evidence" to make your classroom sparkle and sing? Let's lean in. STEP #1 - KNOW HOW STUDENTS WILL BE TAUGHT TO WRITE IN THIS STYLE IN OTHER CLASSES
Linking this science and engineering practice to similar types of writing in other genres not only helps students make connections across disciplines, it also helps them streamline their understanding of it. This isn’t something new. You’ve seen it before in other classes, and adults do this type of work and communicating in a wide variety of career paths.
Step #2 - decide on a format template
I find that students master this practice quickly if given a format template - a pre-set structure they can simply fill in. A pre-set format removes the burden of organizing or structuring the writing as part of the process and leaves students to focus only on the argument and the evidence themselves. It really speeds up the process and allows me to focus my time on the most important parts of the work.
My school uses the claim-evidence-reasoning (C-E-R) format in several classes, so I find it easiest to use this as well since they will see it across classes and across grade levels (see step #1), with caveat that I teach them the word “argument” as a synonym for claim since it is in the name of the practice in science.
STEP #3 - DECIDE WHAT TYPES OF EVIDENCE WILL BE USED AND HOW STUDENTS WILL ACCESS IT
STEP #4 - TEACH THE CONTENT PART OF THE STANDARD FIRST
Let’s say I’m planning on giving this standard shown earlier a week of class time.
I mentally think of each class having some "learning time" (where I teach them something new in some way) and some "working/practicing/doing" time. I think that's common to many classes. If I'm devoting five days to this standard, the first few days will be spent familiarizing the class with the characteristics of life and how cells exhibit those.
For some Science and Engineering Practices, content learning can come alongside learning the practice. For the “engaging in argument from evidence” practice, I have not found this to be so. Students can’t construct good arguments about the content unless they know the details of that content first. Learning the argument writing process will certainly reinforce the content learning, but it can’t replace it.
STEP #5 - MAKE SURE STUDENTS WILL HAVE ACCESS TO ENOUGH EVIDENCE TO LEARN AND PRACTICE THIS SKILL
Earlier, I said that this particular Science and Engineering Practice comes with two unique challenges:
In this step, we need to address problem #1. In order to write good arguments from evidence, students are going to need teaching and practice, both of which will require sufficient evidence to do so. Typically, I’d want to do four examples in my gradual release lesson on this topic. I’d also want 3-4 opportunities to practice, plus an assessment question and a re-assessment question. Add it all up, and I need evidence to present (or for students to collect) for ten examples. That’s a lot! So much so, in fact, that I’d include it as part of the planning process. I’d plan on finding or creating ten data sets, scenarios, collection opportunities or texts (whatever the evidence source may be) to do this practice right. That can be a lot to prepare for, but it is very important. Kids won't learn this skill without enough repetition to make it sink in. STEP #6 - TEACH THE PRACTICE EXPLICITLY, STARTING WITH WRITING
I think that sometimes the Science and Engineering Practices come across as HOW we're supposed to teach, not WHAT we're supposed to teach. So in my example here, the standard might come across to some readers as:
Don't buy into that.
You need to teach students how to write good arguments from evidence (and all the other practices). It isn't intuitive. We can't just teach students what they need to know; we have to teach them what to do. The practice comes up over and over again from kindergarten to 12th grade. Teach the practice explicitly. 
I would specifically devote the next day's learning time to an explicit lesson on writing arguments from evidence. Students don't naturally know how to do that. They have to be taught.
If you'd care to see it, here are the slides I made to guide one of my lessons on this practice. You'll notice that the materials themselves are pretty bare bones. I reviewed the content briefly, modeled an example (I do), had the students help me with a second example (we do), then work a third example with a partner (you do together), and finally demonstrate their learning on their own (you do alone). In doing so, they saw several examples of arguments constructed from evidence and thought through the process and the pitfalls several times, too. The next day, I also extended this same skill for using multiple pieces of evidence in the same argument.
STEP #7 - BE VERY CLEAR ABOUT ARGUMENTS, EVIDENCE, AND REASONING
Getting students to mastery of “constructing arguments from evidence” takes time and practice. I’m grateful that this practice usually comes around several times a year because sometimes it even takes multiple rounds of effort with different content standards for some students to get there.
As with teaching anything, knowing ahead of time what mistakes students are likely to make really helps streamline the instructional process. I start addressing them as early as the very first example when I teach this practice. The first common mistake with this practice isn’t really so much a mistake as it is a core part of what must be learned, which is differentiating between the three parts of my format template: argument, evidence, and reasoning:
These are not easy for students to keep separate when they begin learning this. However, I find that the best way to teach this and the quickest route to mastery is to help students keep these three things VERY separate. Arguments are typically one sentence, and oftentimes they are consistently a re-statement of the content part of what we’re learning. For example, arguments written about this standard
will usually be “this cell exhibits the characteristics of life” or “this specimen does not exhibit the characteristics of life.”
And that’s it. For every example. For this standard, 
the argument will typically be “in this scenario, the _________ and __________ systems are interacting to carry out the life process of __________________.
Every time. Arguments are simple, which is part of what confuses students. In other opinion writing exercises, students have probably had to work very hard at forming their argument and at creating a whole introductory paragraph around it. In science, however, arguments are short, sweet, and often just restatement of the standard being learned. Evidence is proof. And only proof. No explanation or input from the writer in any way. JUST the proof. I typically teach students to write their data with sentence structures that keep the writer out of it.
And again, that’s it. Not much to write, and no input from the writer. Evidence is something you point to, not your insight. If done right, students will typically feel like they didn’t do anything in writing their argument and their evidence. Their main mistake will be OVER-DOING it on these two steps. “All I did was say what you gave us!” is a common way I hear students explain their confusion when learning this. And they’re right! Arguments and evidence, if done right, are pretty formulaic and dry. Reasoning is where students FINALLY get to have their own words, personality, and style show up. This part is connection. WHY does the evidence lead to the argument? What knowledge do you have to put the pieces of this puzzle together? Explain. Connect. Show off a little. But not until this part.
STEP #8 - evidence vs knowledge
Earlier, I said that this particular Science and Engineering Practice comes with two unique challenges:
In this step, I want to help prepare you for the second one. Students want to use their own knowledge as evidence. Let’s take an example of a student having to write an argument that the amoeba in the video below is exhibiting the characteristics of life:
Good evidence for the argument in this case would be something like “I see the amoeba obtaining energy by eating the other organism.”
Substituting knowledge for evidence would be something like “living things have to obtain energy to stay alive.” Students often want to write what they know (second example) rather than pointing to evidence of it (first example). The evidence version feels like they didn’t say enough because they just pointed something out that was obvious. But that’s what evidence is. Evidence is something you see, find, or otherwise observe. Evidence is there for you to point to. It doesn’t come from your personal knowledge. In the formative stage of learning this, I usually suggest students start their evidence with a predictable sentence stem that forces them to cite evidence rather than knowledge.
STEP #9 - CONSIDER Venturing Beyond WRITTEN FORMATS
Depending on how long you’re allotted to teach an “argument from evidence” standard, writing these for several days can get old pretty quick. It is important, but once kids have done enough repetition to get the hang of it, doing more examples can get tiresome.
Arguments from evidence don’t have to be limited to pencil-paper writing assignments. While there isn’t a lot of room for creativity in arguments from evidence themselves, there might be room for creativity in the delivery format. Recordings, speeches, videos, Ted Talks, and other spoken formats can be motivating alternatives once the ball is rolling. I rarely have enough time devoted to these standards to go as crazy with this as I’d like, but next time I do, that’s how I’d allot some work time for the kids who have mastered the basic, written argument.
STEP #10 - KEEP TEACHING AND PRACTICING THE CONTENT AND the PRACTICE!
In the example above, there is still teaching time! The students’ arguments from evidence might reveal gaps in their knowledge about the content itself, and there are extensions of the argument-writing practice to consider as well. Don’t forget to use that valuable teaching time wisely. Arguments from evidence may occupy the work/practice part of class, but they don’t have to shut down the teaching part.
STEP #11 - KEEP AT IT
If this is totally new for you, it will feel uncomfortable at first to devote an entire lesson (or two!) merely to writing. It will seem awkward, and you'll wonder if the kids are actually learning (they are!), and there will be ways you want to personalize and modify things.
That's ok. Like everything in teaching, you'll know what to do when the time comes. You make a thousand decisions every day and fix a thousand little problems. This is no different. You'll figure it out. Over time, you'll get better at this, and so will the kids. Just wait until the third time this practice comes up in your curriculum, and you're teaching argument writing for the third time, and the kids give you a "yeah, we remember" look the entire time you're teaching them what to do. And then wait and see how wonderful it feels to see a class full of kids who understand - truly and deeply - that science isn’t about facts or textbooks or dead geniuses, but rather about evidence. They feel so incredibly capable. They'll know that for the next few days, when I go to science class, I'm going to really, truly do the real work that scientists do and really, truly see the world the way that scientists see it.
This is part 5 of a 10-part series called "Leaning Into The Science and Engineering Practices for a More Dynamic Classroom." The rest of the series can be accessed here.
If you enjoyed this post, please share it!
Want to make sure you never miss a new post? Subscribe below for email notifications of new content.
Want to read more right now? You're in luck - you can browse past posts by category:
0 Comments
Your comment will be posted after it is approved.
Leave a Reply. |
About MeI'm an award-winning teacher in Atlanta with experience teaching at every level from elementary school to college. Categories
All
|
