Beyond the Passive Absorption of Information: Engaging Students in the Critical Reading of Scientific Articles

Author:

Archila Pablo AntonioORCID,Ortiz Brigithe Tatiana,Truscott de Mejía Anne-Marie

Abstract

AbstractThere is a consensus within the science education community that primary scientific literature is a legitimate and desirable educational resource. Moreover, critical reading of scientific articles is widely recognized as a key aspect of scientific literacy. However, university science courses rarely provide students with explicit opportunities to cultivate their critical reading skills. Much of the reason for this is that instructors tend to hold a passive learning view of reading in which students are expected to absorb information from scientific articles. The purpose of this study was to provide research evidence that an active learning scenario (ALS) combining (1) argumentation, (2) peer critique (also referred to as peer assessment), and (3) the Task-Oriented Reading Instruction framework (Ritchey & List, College Teaching, 70(3), 280–295, 2022) could be a concrete and realistic possibility for engaging students in the critical reading of scientific papers. The data analyzed in this study were the written critiques of scientific research articles and written peer feedback produced by sixty-one university students (38 females and 23 males, 19–25 years old). The results indicate that the ALS effectively offered students explicit opportunities to become more active and more critical readers of scientific articles, producing arguments, anticipating counterarguments, and constructing rebuttals. Implications related to critical reading instruction in science education and supporting students’ development of critical reading skills are discussed.

Funder

University of the Andes

Publisher

Springer Science and Business Media LLC

Reference119 articles.

1. Afdal, H. W., Spernes, K., & Hoff-Jenssen, R. (2023). Academic reading as a social practice in higher education. Higher Education, 85(6), 1337–1355.

2. Aikin, S. F., & Casey, J. (2022). Argumentation and the problem of agreement. Synthese, 200(2), 1–23.

3. Airey, J., & Linder, C. (2011). Bilingual scientific literacy. In C. Linder, L. Östman, D. A. Roberts, P.-O. Wickman, G. Erickson, & A. MacKinnon (Eds.), Exploring the landscape of scientific literacy (pp. 106–124). Routledge.

4. American Psychological Association. (2017). Ethical principles of psychologists and code of conduct (2002, amended effective June 1, 2010, and January 1, 2017). https://www.apa.org/ethics/code/index.aspx

5. Amo, E., & Jareño, F. (2011). Self, peer and teacher assessment as active learning methods. Research Journal of International Studies, 18, 41–47.

Cited by 2 articles. 订阅此论文施引文献 订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3