Supporting Science Argumentation Through Professional Development: How Facilitators Promote Teacher Learning of Challenging Practices

[1] Akerson, V. L., & Carter, I. S. (2021). Introduction. In V. L. Akerson & I. S. Carter (Eds.), Science education during the COVID-19 pandemic: Tales from the front lines (pp. 1–4). ISTES Organization.

[2] Al-Adeimi, S., & Baumann, J. (2024). Navigating controversial discussions: The role of talk moves in dialogic teaching. Language and Education, 39(2), 303–321. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500782.2024.2401883 | DOI 10.1080/09500782.2024.2401883

[3] Alexander, R. (2018). Developing dialogic teaching: Genesis, process, trial. Research Papers in Education, 33(5), 561–598. https://doi.org/10.1080/02671522.2018.1481140 | DOI 10.1080/02671522.2018.1481140

[4] Alexander, R. (2020). A dialogic teaching companion. Taylor & Francis.

[5] Ball, D. L., & Cohen, D. K. (1999). Developing practice, developing practitioners: Toward a practice-based theory of professional education. In L. Darling-Hammond & G. Sykes (Eds.), Teaching as the learning profession: Handbook of policy and practice (pp. 3–32). Jossey-Bass Publishers.

[6] Borko, H., Jacobs, J., & Koellner, K. (2010). Contemporary approaches to teacher professional development. In P. L. Peterson, E. L. Baker, & B. McGaw (Eds.), International encyclopedia of education (Vol. 7, pp. 548–556). Elsevier. | DOI 10.1016/b978-0-08-044894-7.00654-0

[7] Borko, H., Gómez Zaccarelli, F., Reigh, E., & Osborne, J. (2021). Teacher facilitation of elementary science discourse after a professional development initiative. The Elementary School Journal, 121(4), 561–585. https://doi.org/10.1086/714082 | DOI 10.1086/714082

[8] Boyd, M. P., & Markarian, W. C. (2015). Dialogic teaching and dialogic stance: Moving beyond interactional form. Research in the Teaching of English, 49 (3), 272–296. https://doi.org/10.58680/rte201526870 | DOI 10.58680/rte201526870

[9] Braun, V., & Clarke, V. (2006). Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qualitative Research in Psychology, 3(2), 77–101. https://doi.org/10.1191/1478088706qp063oa | DOI 10.1191/1478088706qp063oa

[10] Chen, Y.-C., Benus, M. J., & Yarker, M. B. (2016). Using models to support argumentation in the science classroom. American Biology Teacher, 78(7), 549–559. https://doi.org/10.1525/abt.2016.78.7.549 | DOI 10.1525/abt.2016.78.7.549

[11] Chen, G., Chan, C. K. K., Chan, K. K. H., Clarke, S. N., & Resnick, L. B. (2020). Efficacy of video-based teacher professional development for increasing classroom discourse and student learning. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 29(4/5), 642–680. https://doi.org/10.1080/10508406.2020.1783269 | DOI 10.1080/10508406.2020.1783269

[12] Chi, M. T. H. (2009). Active-constructive-interactive: A conceptual framework for differentiating learning activities. Topics in Cognitive Science, 1(1), 73–105. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1756-8765.2008.01005.x | DOI 10.1111/j.1756-8765.2008.01005.x

[13] Chi, M. T. H., Kang, S., & Yaghmourian, D. L. (2017). Why students learn more from dialoguethan monologue-videos: Analyses of peer interactions. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 26(1), 10–50. https://doi.org/10.1080/10508406.2016.1204546 | DOI 10.1080/10508406.2016.1204546

[14] Chowning, J. T. (2022). Science teachers in research labs: Expanding conceptions of social dialogic dimensions of scientific argumentation. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 59(8), 1388–1415. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.21760 | DOI 10.1002/tea.21760

[15] Creswell, J. W., & Creswell, J. D. (2018). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods approaches (5th Ed.). SAGE Publications.

[16] Darling-Hammond, L., Hyler, M. E., & Gardner, M. (2017). Effective teacher professional development. Learning Policy Institute.

[17] Denzin, N. K., & Lincoln, Y. S. (2017). The SAGE handbook of qualitative research. SAGE Publications.

[18] Dillon, J. T. (1994). Using discussion in classrooms. Open University Press.

[19] Duschl, R. A. (1990). Restructuring science education: The importance of theories and their development. Teachers College Press.

[20] Fishman, E. J., Borko, H., Osborne, J., Gomez, F., Rafanelli, S., Reigh, E., Tseng, A., Million, S., & Berson, E. (2017). A practice-based professional development program to support scientific argumentation from evidence in the elementary classroom. Journal of Science Teacher Education, 28(3), 222–249. https://doi.org/10.1080/1046560X.2017.1302727 | DOI 10.1080/1046560x.2017.1302727

[21] Gomez Zaccarelli, F., Candido Vendrasco, N., & Arriagada Jofré, V. (2024). Discusiones y argumentación en la enseñanza de las ciencias: Prácticas y desafíos docentes. Enseñanza de las Ciencias, 42(2), 25–43. https://doi.org/10.5565/rev/ensciencias.5958 | DOI 10.5565/rev/ensciencias.5958

[22] Gröschner, A., Seidel, T., Kiemer, K., & Pehmer, A.-K. (2015). Through the lens of teacher professional development components: The ‘Dialogic Video Cycle’ as an innovative program to foster classroom dialogue. Professional Development in Education, 41(4), 729–756. https://doi.org/10.1080/19415257.2014.939692 | DOI 10.1080/19415257.2014.939692

[23] Grossman, P. L. (2018). Teaching core practices in teacher education. Harvard Education Press.

[24] Grossman, P. L., Hammerness, K., & McDonald, M. (2009). Redefining teaching, re-imagining teacher education. Teachers and Teaching, 15(2), 273–289. https://doi.org/10.1080/13540600902875340 | DOI 10.1080/13540600902875340

[25] Grossman, P. L., & McDonald, M. (2008). Back to the future: Directions for research in teaching and teacher education. American Educational Research Journal, 45(1), 184–205. https://doi.org/10.3102/0002831207312906 | DOI 10.3102/0002831207312906

[26] Hähkiöniemi, M., Lehesvuori, S., Nieminen, P., Hiltunen, J., Jokiranta, K. (2019). Three dimensions of dialogicity in dialogic argumentation. Studia Paedagogica, 24(4), 199–219. https://doi.org/10.5817/SP2019-4-9 | DOI 10.5817/sp2019-4-9

[27] Haroutunian-Gordon, S. (2009). Learning to teach through discussion: The art of turning the soul. Yale University Press.

[28] Howe, C., & Mercer, N. (2007). Children’s social development, peer interaction and classroom learning. (Primary Review Research Survey 2/1b). University of Cambridge Faculty of Education.

[29] Howe, C., Tolmie, A., Thurston, A., Topping, K., Christie, D., Livingston, K., Jessiman, E., & Donaldson, C. (2007). Group work in elementary science: Towards organisational principles for supporting pupil learning. Learning and Instruction, 17(5), 549–563. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.learninstruc.2007.09.004 | DOI 10.1016/j.learninstruc.2007.09.004

[30] Jiménez-Tenorio, N., Vicente-Martorell, J. J., & Aragón, L. (2020). Fomentar la argumentación en clases de ciencias a través de una controversia sociocientífica en futuros docentes. Ápice. Revista de Educación Científica, 4(1), 79–86. | DOI 10.17979/arec.2020.4.1.4639

[31] Joglar, C. L., & Quintanilla, M. (2015, October). Preguntas en la clase de biología. Concepciones del profesorado desde un taller de reflexión docente. IV Jornadas de Enseñanza e Investigación Educativa en el campo de las Ciencias Exactas y Naturales, Ensenada, Argentina. http://www.memoria.fahce.unlp.edu.ar/trab_eventos/ev.8098/ev.8098.pdf | DOI 10.59524/2344-9225.v26.n2.40014

[32] Kennedy, M. M. (2016). How does professional development improve teaching? Review of Educational Research, 86(4), 945–980. https://doi.org/10.3102/0034654315626800 | DOI 10.3102/0034654315626800

[33] Kilpelä, J., Hiltunen, J., Hähkiöniemi, M., Jokiranta, K., Lehesvuori, S., Nieminen, P., & Viiri, J. (2023). Analyzing science teachers’ support of dialogic argumentation using teacher roles of questioning and communicative approaches. Dialogic Pedagogy: An International Online Journal, 11(3), A88–A118. https://doi.org/10.5195/dpj.2023.547 | DOI 10.5195/dpj.2023.547

[34] Larraín, A., Freire, P., & Howe, C. (2014). Science teaching and argumentation: One-sided versus dialectical argumentation in Chilean middle-school science lessons. International Journal of Science Education, 36(6), 1017–1036. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500693.2013.832005 | DOI 10.1080/09500693.2013.832005

[35] Lefstein, A., & Snell, J. (2013). Better than best practice: Developing teaching and learning through dialogue. Taylor & Francis.

[36] Lehesvuori, S., Hähkiöniemi, M., Jokiranta, K., Nieminen, P., Hiltunen, J., & Viiri, J. (2017). Enhancing dialogic argumentation in mathematics and science. Studia Paedagogica, 22(4), 55–76. https://doi.org/10.5817/SP2017-4-4 | DOI 10.5817/sp2017-4-4

[37] Lemke, J. L. (1990). Talking science: Language, learning, and values. Ablex Publishing Corporation.

[38] Levitt, H. M., Morrill, Z., Collins, K. M., & Rizo, J. L. (2021). The methodological integrity of critical qualitative research: Principles to support design and research review. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 68(3), 357–370. https://doi.org/10.1037/cou0000523 | DOI 10.1037/cou0000523

[39] Maxwell, J. A. (2005). Qualitative research design: An interactive approach. Sage Publications.

[40] McDonald, M., Kazemi, E., & Kavanagh, S. S. (2013). Core practices and pedagogies of teacher education: A call for a common language and collective activity. Journal of Teacher Education, 64(5), 378–386. https://doi.org/10.1177/0022487113493807 | DOI 10.1177/0022487113493807

[41] McNeill, K. L., González-Howard, M., Katsh-Singer, R., & Loper, S. (2016). Pedagogical content knowledge of argumentation: Using classroom contexts to assess high-quality PCK rather than pseudoargumentation. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 53(2), 261–290. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.21252 | DOI 10.1002/tea.21252

[42] Mercer, N. (2008). The seeds of time: Why classroom dialogue needs a temporal analysis. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 17(1), 33–59. https://doi.org/10.1080/10508400701793182 | DOI 10.1080/10508400701793182

[43] Michaels, S., & O’Connor, C. (2015). Conceptualizing talk moves as tools: Professional development approaches for academically productive discussions. In L. B. Resnick, C. S. C. Asterhan, & S. N. Clark (Eds.), Socializing intelligence through academic talk and dialogue (pp. 333–347). American Educational Research Association. | DOI 10.3102/978-0-935302-43-1_27

[44] MINEDUC. (2012). Bases curriculares Primero a Sexto Básico Ciencias Naturales [Curriculum First to Sixth Grade Natural Sciences]. Unidad de Currículum y Evaluación, Ministerio de Educación de Chile, Gobierno de Chile. https://www.curriculumnacional.cl/614/articles-22394_bases.pdf

[45] MINEDUC. (2024, June). Propuesta de Actualización Curricular CCNN [Science national curriculum update proposal]. Ministerio de Educación de Chile, Santiago de Chile. https://consultacurricular.cl/wp-content/uploads/2024/06/Ciencias-Naturales-Propuestade- Actualizacion-de-BBCC.pdf

[46] Newton, P., Osborne, J., & Driver, R. (1999). The place of argumentation in the pedagogy of school science. International Journal of Science Education, 21(5), 553–576. https://doi.org/10.1080/095006999290570 | DOI 10.1080/095006999290570

[47] O’Connor, C., Michaels, S., Chapin, S., & Harbaugh, A. G. (2017). The silent and the vocal: Participation and learning in whole-class discussion. Classroom Dialogue and Learning Outcomes, 48(Supplement C), 5–13. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.learninstruc.2016.11.003

[48] Oliveira, A. W. (2010). Improving teacher questioning in science inquiry discussions through professional development. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 47(4), 422–453. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.20345 | DOI 10.1002/tea.20345

[49] Osborne, J. (2010). Arguing to learn in science: The role of collaborative, critical discourse. Science, 328(5977), 463–466. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1183944 | DOI 10.1126/science.1183944

[50] Osborne, J., Simon, S., Christodoulou, A., Howell-Richardson, C., & Richardson, K. (2013). Learning to argue: A study of four schools and their attempt to develop the use of argumentation as a common instructional practice and its impact on students. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 50(3), 315–347. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.21073 | DOI 10.1002/tea.21073

[51] Osborne, J. F., Henderson, J. B., MacPherson, A., Szu, E., Wild, A., & Yao, S.-Y. (2016), The development and validation of a learning progression for argumentation in science. Journal in Research in Science Teaching, 53(6), 821–846. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.21316 | DOI 10.1002/tea.21316

[52] Osborne, J., Borko, H., Fishman, E., Gomez Zaccarelli, F., Berson, E., Busch, K. C., Reigh, E., & Tseng, A. (2019). Impacts of a practice-based professional development program on elementary teachers’ facilitation of and student engagement with scientific argumentation. American Educational Research Journal, 56(4), 1067–1112. https://doi.org/10.3102/0002831218812059 | DOI 10.3102/0002831218812059

[53] Patton, M. Q. (2002). Qualitative research and evaluation methods. Sage Publications.

[54] Pearson, P. D., Moje, E., & Greenleaf, C. (2010). Literacy and science: Each in the service of the other. Science, 328(5977), 459–463. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1182595 | DOI 10.1126/science.1182595

[55] Penney, K., Norris, S. P., Phillips, L. M., & Clark, G. (2003). The anatomy of junior high school science textbooks: An analysis of textual characteristics and a comparison to media reports of science. Canadian Journal of Science, Mathematics and Technology Education, 3(4), 415–436. https://doi.org/10.1080/14926150309556580 | DOI 10.1080/14926150309556580

[56] Perry, E., & Booth, J. (2024). The practices of professional development facilitators. Professional Development in Education, 50(1), 144–156. https://doi.org/10.1080/19415257.2021.1973073 | DOI 10.1080/19415257.2021.1973073

[57] Perry, E., & Boylan, M. (2018). Developing the developers: Supporting and researching the learning of professional development facilitators. Professional Development in Education, 44(2), 254–271. https://doi.org/10.1080/19415257.2017.1287767 | DOI 10.1080/19415257.2017.1287767

[58] Pimentel, D. S., & McNeill, K. L. (2013). Conducting talk in secondary science classrooms: Investigating instructional moves and teachers’ beliefs. Science Education, 97(3), 367–394. https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.21061 | DOI 10.1002/sce.21061

[59] Resnick, L. B., Asterhan, C. S. C., & Clark, S. N. (Eds.) (2015). Socializing intelligence through academic talk and dialogue. American Educational Research Association.

[60] Reznitskaya, A., & Gregory, M. (2013). Student thought and classroom language: Examining the mechanisms of change in dialogic teaching. Educational Psychologist, 48(2), 114–133. https://doi.org/10.1080/00461520.2013.775898 | DOI 10.1080/00461520.2013.775898

[61] Sanmartí, N. (2007). Hablar, leer y escribir para aprender ciencia [Talking, reading and writing to learn science]. In T. Á. Angulo & M. P. F. Martínez (Eds.), La competencia en comunicación lingüística en las áreas del currículo (pp. 103–128). Ministerio de Educación.

[62] Sedova, K., Sedlacek, M., & Svaricek, R. (2016). Teacher professional development as a means of transforming student classroom talk. Teaching and Teacher Education, 57, 14–25. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2016.03.005 | DOI 10.1016/j.tate.2016.03.005

[63] Shure, V., Lehmann, M., Friesen, M., Roesken-Winter, B., & Prediger, S. (2025). Professional development research on promoting productive practices for teachers’ handling of typical tasks of mathematics teaching: A systematic review. ZDM – Mathematics Education. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11858-025-01659-2 | DOI 10.1007/s11858-025-01659-2

[64] The University of Washington’s College of Education. (2014). Teacher education by design. https://tedd.org/

[65] Trust, T., & Whalen, J. (2020). Should teachers be trained in emergency remote teaching? Lessons learned from the COVID-19 pandemic. Journal of Technology and Teacher Education, 28(2), 189–199. https://www.learntechlib.org/primary/p/215995/ | DOI 10.70725/307718pkpjuu

[66] van der Veen, C., Dobber, M., & van Oers, B. (2017). Engaging children in dialogic classroom talk: Does it contribute to a dialogical self? In F. Meijers & H. Hermans (Eds.), The dialogical self theory in education: A multicultural perspective (pp. 49–64). Springer International Publishing. | DOI 10.1007/978-3-319-62861-5_4

[67] van Es, E. A., & Sherin, M. G. (2008). Mathematics teachers’ “learning to notice” in the context of a video club. Teaching and Teacher Education, 24(2), 244–276. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2006.11.005 | DOI 10.1016/j.tate.2006.11.005

[68] Vescio, V., Ross, D., & Adams, A. (2008). A review of research on the impact of professional learning communities on teaching practice and student learning. Teaching and Teacher Education, 24(1), 80–91. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2007.01.004 | DOI 10.1016/j.tate.2007.01.004

[69] Walshaw, M., & Anthony, G. (2008). The teacher’s role in classroom discourse: A review of recent research into mathematics classrooms. Review of Educational Research, 78(3), 516–551. https://doi.org/10.3102/0034654308320292 | DOI 10.3102/0034654308320292

[70] Webb, N. M. (2009). The teacher’s role in promoting collaborative dialogue in the classroom. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 79(1), 1–28. https://doi.org/10.1348/000709908X380772 | DOI 10.1348/000709908x380772

[71] Weiss, I. R., Pasley, J. D., Smith, P. S., Banilower, E. R., & Heck, D. J. (2003). Looking inside the classroom: A study of K-12 mathematics and science education in the United States. Horizon Research.

[72] Weiss, K. A., McDermott, M. A., & Hand, B. (2022). Characterising immersive argument-based inquiry learning environments in school-based education: A systematic literature review. Studies in Science Education, 58(1), 15–47. https://doi.org/10.1080/03057267.2021.1897931 | DOI 10.1080/03057267.2021.1897931

[73] Wess, R., Priemer, B., & Parchmann, I. (2023). Professional development programs to improve science teachers’ skills in the facilitation of argumentation in science classroom—A systematic review. Disciplinary and Interdisciplinary Science Education Research, 5(9). https://doi.org/10.1186/s43031-023-00076-3 | DOI 10.1186/s43031-023-00076-3

[74] Wilson, S. M. (2013). Professional development for science teachers. Science, 340(6130), 310–313. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1230725 | DOI 10.1126/science.1230725

[75] Windschitl, M., Thompson, J., & Braaten, M. (2020). Ambitious science teaching. Harvard Education Press.

[76] Zembal-Saul, C., & Vaishampayan, A. (2019). Research and practice on science teachers’ continuous professional development in argumentation. In S. Erduran (Ed.), Argumentation in chemistry education: Research, policy and practice (pp. 142–172). The Royal Society of Chemistry. https://doi.org/10.1039/9781788012645-00142 | DOI 10.1039/9781788012645-00142