Özet:

Argumentative discourse in classrooms is given much importance by science educators due to its potential contributions to teachers' general pedagogical knowledge of teaching higher order thinking skills and strategies as well as its learner-centered nature. For this reason, the present study searched for a possible link between pre-service teachers' domain-specific knowledge and the quality of their arguments. For data collection, Lyngved's (2009)'Cloning Conceptual Understanding Exam' (CCUE) was administered to PSTs. Given the results of the CCUE, the PSTs (44 female and 10 male) were divided into three cohort groups as high, middle, and low-achievers. Further, semi-structured interviews were conducted with three PSTs. They were exposed to three (controversial) cloning scenarios and asked to constitute scientific arguments. The arguments generated by the PSTs were qualitatively analyzed using an analytical assessment tool by Erduran, Simon, and Osborne (2004). The results showed no straightforward relationship between the PSTs' content knowledge and the quality of their argumentation. The findings concerning the link between content knowledge and argumentation quality were discussed. Further studies could look at the relationship between content knowledge and argumentation quality with a different subject matter and larger-size samples

Anahtar Kelimeler: