Search

Meaningful learning for conceptual change in science education should aim to help students change their existing misconceptions to develop an accurate understanding of scientific concepts. Although collaborative argumentation is assumed to support such processes, its value for conceptual change is unclear. Moreover, the roles of argumentative dialogue should be considered in studies on collaborative argumentation. In the present study, using a controlled experiment, we examined the value of collaborative argumentation for conceptual change in science education while fully considering the roles of argumentative dialogue. Twenty-three postgraduate students were each allocated to one of two conditions (individual argumentation [control group] and collaborative argumentation [experimental group]) and participated in two argumentation activities. The results revealed that collaborative argumentation had a delayed but long-lasting effect on conceptual change in science education (i.e., conceptual change induced by collaborative argumentation did not immediately indicate a significant improvement at the moments of argumentation but showed a significant improvement during the delay period). Collaborative argumentation provided opportunities for change in cognitive, ontological, intentional, and other aspects of learning. Dialogue protocol analysis revealed that long-lasting conceptual change was associated with a U-shaped pattern of argumentative dialogue (i.e., two high and one low: both deliberative argumentation and co-consensual construction frequently occurred, while disputative argumentation rarely occurred) in collaborative argumentation. A third argumentation activity was then conducted to confirm this unexpected finding. The results confirmed an association between long-lasting conceptual change and a U-shaped pattern of argumentative dialogue in collaborative argumentation. The current study sheds light on the value of collaborative argumentation for long-lasting conceptual change, deepening our understanding of whether conceptual gains from argumentation activities were contingent on a particular type of verbal dialogue powered by collaborative argumentation. Implications for science education were discussed.

In the present study, using complex network analysis, we conducted a one-year including two semesters to investigate the effect of social network intervention on college students' social perception biases. One hundred and seventy college students participated in this study. Social network intervention was implemented in the second semester. Through changing individuals' social neighbors and being augmented with four collaborative activities, modeling analysis showed students' social perception biases were contingent on the level of homophily of their personal networks. Results also showed students' social perception biases were significantly reduced after old social relationships being broken up and new social relationships being built. Furthermore, in the individual interviews, students reported heterogeneous re-grouping ensued by social network intervention offered them with opportunities of "Diversity of thinking", "Creation of argumentative climates" and "Open-mindedness and inclusiveness change".

Spatial ability is an influential factor for academic performance in Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics (STEM) education. However, the roles of spatial strategies are unclear. Therefore, coupling with virtual Starmaze developed by fields of cognitive neuroscience, this study aimed to explore spatial strategy among STEM students and its role in academic performance. A virtual Starmaze was constructed to test how students complete a navigation test. A total of 172 college students majoring in STEM participated in this study. Modeling analysis showed students tend to use allocentric strategy when the difficulty of spatial tasks increased. Results further showed students with high STEM academic performance tended to use allocentric strategy while ones with low STEM academic performance tended to use egocentric strategy. Specifically, academic performances in science and mathematics learning were associated with the allocentric strategy, while academic performances in technology and engineering learning were associated with proficiency and hands-on ability.

Scientific argumentation as a scientific practice has become an important issue in scientific concept learning. We systematically searched five databases to assess the potential of scientific argumentation to promote multidimensional conceptual change in science education. The systematic literature search and coding of studies were carried out by two independent reviewers. Our search uncovered 12 experimental studies that investigated 12 different types of scientific argumentation-based instructions (scientific argumentation-based instructions in this study referred to lesson activities). With the multidimensional framework of conceptual change developed by McLure, F., Won, M., & Treagust, D. F. ((2020), we performed a narrative synthesis assessing how each type of scientific argumentation-based instruction affected conceptual change through cognitive, ontological and intentional dimensions of learning. Our narrative synthesis suggests scientific argumentation might affect conceptual change through enhancing those dimensions of learning to varying degrees. Moreover, certain added scaffoldings might be particularly useful for enhancing a certain dimension of learning. Finally, the meta-analysis (random effect model) showed that overall, scientific argumentation-based instructions had a large positive influence on conceptual change (Hedge's "g" = 10.49 [7.27, 13.71], I2 = 47%). Overall results indicated that scientific argumentation had the potential to improve conceptual change through offering opportunities for cognitive, ontological and intentional dimensions of learning.

Spatial ability is a powerful systematic source of individual differences in the areas of science, technology, engineering, and technology (STEM). Abundant research has evidenced that psychometrically assessed spatial ability is a strong predictor of STEM achievement. However, its underlying cognitive process and relevant role in STEM education are unknown. From the perspective of cognitive neuroscience, spatial ability is also considered a human intelligence deriving from the cognitive processing of spatial information in the brain. With the help of the cognitive neuroscience paradigm of spatial navigation, in the present work, we investigate the spatial cognitive process among STEM students and its role in STEM education. A total of 172 undergraduates majoring in veterinary science participated in a spatial navigation test. Participants attempted to return a toy to its original place in an arena when given either internal self-motion cues only, external landmark cues only, or both in a spatial navigation task. Modelling analysis of 172 participants' spatial navigation behaviours showed that all the participants' spatial cognitive processes featured navigation cue integration. The results of the different tests showed that students with higher levels of navigation cue integration had better academic performance in STEM learning. The results also indicated that, surprisingly, better academic performance in science and mathematics relied more on the use of internal self-motion cues, while better academic performance in engineering and technology relied more on the use of external landmark cues. This study sheds some light on the spatial cognitive process and its role in STEM education from the cognitive neuroscience perspective, thus deepening the functional understanding of spatial ability as a systemic source of individual differences for STEM education, and provides an empirical reference point for interdisciplinary studies on the role of cognition in the context of STEM education. Implications on STEM learning design and STEM teaching were discussed.