STEMskiller - Valid scientific argumentation - Czech National Library of Technology

STEMskiller: Skill Set Map for Mentors of Early Career Researchers

RESEARCH AND SCHOLARSHIP: Academic reading and writing

[Writing specifics for different academic formats] [Research articles]

Valid scientific argumentation

Definition:

According to Understanding Science:

…in science, all ideas are tested with evidence from the natural world, which may take many different forms—from Antarctic ice cores, to particle accelerator experiments, to detailed descriptions of sedimentary rock layers. You can't move through the process of science without examining how that evidence reflects on your ideas about how the world works—even if that means giving up a favorite hypothesis.^[1]

In other words, valid scientific arguments interpret observations, typically using data (gathered in a variety of forms), across the backdrop of previous scientific understanding:

Taken together, the expectations generated by a scientific idea and the actual observations relevant to those expectations form what we'll call a scientific argument. This is a bit like an argument in a court case—a logical description of what we think and why we think it. A scientific argument uses evidence to make a case for whether a scientific idea is accurate or inaccurate.^[2]

Interpretations (arguments) can support a hypothesis, oppose a hypothesis, inspire revised/new hypothesis, or inspire revised assumptions:

Furthermore:

…though observation and questioning are essential to the process of science, on their own, they are not enough to launch a scientific investigation; generally, scientists also need scientific background knowledge—all the information and understandings they've picked up from their scientific training in school, supplemented by discussions with colleagues and reviews of the scientific literature. …an understanding of what other scientists have already figured out about a particular topic is critical to the process. This background knowledge allows scientists to recognize revealing observations for what they are, to make connections between ideas and observations, and to figure out which questions can be fruitfully tackled with available tools. The importance of content knowledge to the process of science helps explain why science is often mischaracterized as a static set of facts contained in textbooks — science is a process, but one that relies on accumulated knowledge to move forward.^[3]

[1] UC Museum of Paleontology at the University of Berkeley. (2007). Understanding Science: How Science Really Works: A blueprint for scientific investigations. https://undsci.berkeley.edu/article/0_0_0/howscienceworks_03

[2] Ibid. (2007). Understanding Science: How Science Really Works: The logic of scientific arguments. https://undsci.berkeley.edu/article/0_0_0/howscienceworks_07

[3] Ibid. (2007). Understanding Science: How Science Really Works: Exploration and discovery. https://undsci.berkeley.edu/article/0_0_0/howscienceworks_04

Useful resources on Valid scientific argumentation:

Sampson, V., & Schleigh, S. (2016). Scientific Argumentation in Biology: 30 Classroom Activities. https://static.nsta.org/pdfs/samples/PB304Xweb.pdf

Excellent overview to scientific argumentation in the Prelude, together with several useful overview figures/diagrams for anyone (in any discipline) called upon to teach scientific argumentation:

(1.) Figure 1. A Framework That Can Be Used to Illustrate the Components of a Scientific Argument and Some Criteria That Can and Should Be Used to Evaluate the Merits of a Scientific Argument (p. x)

(2.) Figure 2. Stages of the Generate an Argument Instructional Model (p. xix)

(3.) Figure 3: The Components of an Argument for Stage 2 of the Generate an Argument Instructional Model (p. xx)

(4.) Figure 9: Stages of the Evaluate Alternatives Instructional Model (p. xxvii)

(5.) Figure 11: The Components of an Argument and Challenge (p. xxix)

UC Museum of Paleontology at the University of Berkeley. (2007). Understanding Science: How Science Really Works: The core of science: Relating evidence and ideas. https://undsci.berkeley.edu/article/0_0_0/coreofscience_01

Well-crafted, clear description of scientific arguments (more in-depth than the introductory section (below). Includes links to additional reading, materials for instructors, and glossary.

UC Museum of Paleontology at the University of Berkeley. (2007). Understanding Science: How Science Really Works: The logic of scientific arguments. https://undsci.berkeley.edu/article/0_0_0/howscienceworks_07

Well-written, clear description of how scientific arguments are created. While noting that scientific ideas can be tested in many ways, that evidence can reflect upon ideas in different ways, that usually there are multiple lines of evidence that must be examined while evaluating ideas, and that all testing necessarily includes some assumptions:

…that, in the end, hypotheses and theories live and die by whether or not they work—in other words, whether they are useful in explaining data, generating expectations, providing satisfying explanations, inspiring research questions, answering questions, and solving problems. Science filters through many ideas and builds on those that work! ^[4]

Includes links to additional reading, materials for instructors, and glossary.

[4] UC Museum of Paleontology at the University of Berkeley. (2007). Understanding Science: How Science Really Works: The logic of scientific arguments. https://undsci.berkeley.edu/article/0_0_0/howscienceworks_07

Tags: IPS IA; IPS QL; IPS PS; IAL IntL; CompQ; CompTS

Peer Review: None

STEMskiller: Skill Set Map for Mentors of Early Career Researchers

RESEARCH AND SCHOLARSHIP: Academic reading and writing

Valid scientific argumentation

Table of contents:

Contact us

See also