JavaScript is disabled for your browser. Some features of this site may not work without it.

    Listar

    Todo RIUMAComunidades & ColeccionesPor fecha de publicaciónAutoresTítulosMateriasTipo de publicaciónCentrosDepartamentos/InstitutosEditoresEsta colecciónPor fecha de publicaciónAutoresTítulosMateriasTipo de publicaciónCentrosDepartamentos/InstitutosEditores

    Mi cuenta

    AccederRegistro

    Estadísticas

    Ver Estadísticas de uso

    DE INTERÉS

    Datos de investigaciónReglamento de ciencia abierta de la UMAPolítica de RIUMAPolitica de datos de investigación en RIUMAOpen Policy Finder (antes Sherpa-Romeo)Dulcinea
    Preguntas frecuentesManual de usoContacto/Sugerencias
    Ver ítem 
    •   RIUMA Principal
    • Investigación
    • Ponencias, Comunicaciones a congresos y Pósteres
    • Ver ítem
    •   RIUMA Principal
    • Investigación
    • Ponencias, Comunicaciones a congresos y Pósteres
    • Ver ítem

    Identification of evidence by engineering undergraduates and pre-service science teachers in an argumentation activity

    • Autor
      Cano-Iglesias, María JoséAutoridad Universidad de Málaga; Blanco-López, ÁngelAutoridad Universidad de Málaga; Franco-Mariscal, Antonio JoaquínAutoridad Universidad de Málaga
    • Fecha
      2019-09-05
    • Palabras clave
      Toma de decisiones
    • Resumen
      Scientific argumentation is considered as one of the general competencies that engineering students must achieve. This paper analyses the capacity to identify evidence in an argumentation activity on characteristics of materials, developed with 46 engineering undergraduates of the second year of the Degree in Industrial Technologies Engineering and 81 pre-service science teachers of the University of Malaga (Malaga, Spain). These pre-service science teachers studied a Master's Degree in Secondary Education and were classified for this study in two groups depending on whether or not their previous degree was related to the knowledge necessary to solve the activity. The activity proposes to argue the choice of a bicycle according to the material of manufacture (steel or aluminium), focusing this paper on the analysis of the evidence shown in their arguments. A number of evidence, their type, their quality in terms of the level of adequacy and precision, and the inclusion or not of personal ideas, were considered as dimensions. The results show that engineering undergraduates are capable of offering arguments with a greater number of evidence and of different types (economic, physical-chemical and mechanical) as opposed to pre-service science teachers. On the contrary, pre-service teachers offer arguments with a better quality of evidence than undergraduates. Pre-service science teachers from degrees unrelated to the activity used a great number of personal ideas when arguing. These results highlight the need to continue training both undergraduates and pre-service teachers so that they can argue in their profession in the best possible way.
    • URI
      https://hdl.handle.net/10630/18271
    • Compartir
      RefworksMendeley
    Mostrar el registro completo del ítem
    Ficheros
    ESERA 2019 Cano-Iglesias, Franco y Blanco.pdf (138.9Kb)
    Colecciones
    • Ponencias, Comunicaciones a congresos y Pósteres

    Estadísticas

    Buscar en Dimension
    REPOSITORIO INSTITUCIONAL UNIVERSIDAD DE MÁLAGA
    REPOSITORIO INSTITUCIONAL UNIVERSIDAD DE MÁLAGA
     

     

    REPOSITORIO INSTITUCIONAL UNIVERSIDAD DE MÁLAGA
    REPOSITORIO INSTITUCIONAL UNIVERSIDAD DE MÁLAGA