Article published in:
Journal of Argumentation in Context
Vol. 4:2 (2015) ► pp. 200231
Rhetoric. A hypertextual resource http://​rhetoric​.eserver​.org​/aristotle​/oneindex​.html, compiled by Lee Honeycutt, Alpine Lakes Design ( Last modified: 9/27/11, retreived 5/2/14
Andrews, Richard
2010Argumentation in Higher Education: Improving Practice through Theory and Research. New York and Oxon: Routledge.Google Scholar
Barthes, Roland
2002S/Z. New York: Blackwell Publishing.Google Scholar
Barton, David
2007Literacy: An Introduction to the Ecology of Written Language. Malden and Oxford: Blackwell Publishing.Google Scholar
Bazerman, Charles
2013A Rhetoric of Literate Action: Literate Action, (Vol. 11). Perspectives on Writing. Fort Collins, Colorado: The WAC Clearinghouse and Palor Press.Google Scholar
Bell, Thorsten D., S. Schanze Urhane, and R. Ploetzner
2009“Collaborative Inquiry Learning: Models, Tools, and Challenges.” International Journal of Science Education 321:349–337. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Blair, J. Anthony
2012Groundwork in the Theory of Argumentation: Selected Papers of J. Anthony Blair (Vol. 211). London New York: Springer Dordrecht Heidelberg. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Chin, Christine, and J. Osborne
2010. “Students’ Questions and Discursive Interaction: Their Impact on Argumentation during Collaborative Group Discussions in Science.” Journal of Research in Science Teaching 47 (7): 883-908. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Clark, Herbert H., and Edward F. Shaefer
1989 “Contributing to Discourse.” Cognitive Science 131: 259–294. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Derry, Sharon, R.D. Pea, B. Barron, R.A. Engle, F. Erickson, R. Goldman, R. Hall, T. Koschmann, J.L. Lemcke, M.G. Sherin, and B.L. Sherin
2010. “Conducting Video Research in the Learning Sciences: Guidance on Selection, Analysis, Technology, and Ethics.” Journal of the Learning Sciences 19 (1):3-53. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Driver, Rosalind, Paul Newton, and Jonathan Osborne
2000“Establishing the Norms of Scientific Argumentation in Classrooms.” Science Education 841: 287–312. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Du Bois, John, Stephan, Schuetze-Corburn, Danae Paolino, and Susanna Cumming
1993“Outline of discourse transcription”. In Talking data: Transcription and coding in discourse research, ed. by J.A. Edwards and M.D. Lampert, Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.Google Scholar
Eemeren, Frans H. van
2013“Strategic Maneuvering in Argumentative Discourse in Political Deliberation.” Journal of Argumentation in Context 2 (1): 11–32.Google Scholar
Erduran, Sibel
2008“Methodological Foundations in the Study of Argumentation in Science Classrooms.” In Argumentation in Science Education: Perspectives from Classroom-based Research, ed. by S. Erduran and M.P. Jiménez-Aleixandre, 47–69. Philadelphia: Springer.Google Scholar
Erduran, Sibel, and M.P. Jiménez-Aleixandre
2012“Argumentation in Science Education Research: Perspectives from Europe.” In Science Education Research and Practice in Europe: Retrospective and Prospective, ed. by Doris Jorde and Justin Dillon, 253–289. Rotterdam, The Netherlands: Sense Publishers. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Erickson, Fredrick
2012“Qualitative Research Methods for Science Education.” In Second International Handbook of Science Education (Vol. 21), ed. by Barry J. Fraser, Kenneth G. Tobin, and Campbell J. McRobbie, 1451–1469. London New York: Springer Dordrecht Heidelberg. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Gabrielsen, Jonas
2008Topik. Ekskursioner i Retorikkens Toposlære. Åstorp: Retorikforlaget.Google Scholar
Halliday, Michael Alexander Kirkwood
2004An Introduction to Functional Grammar. London: Hodder Education.Google Scholar
Halliday, Michael Alexander Kirkwood, and Ruqaiya Hasan
1985Language, Context, and Text: Aspects of Language in a Social-semiotic Perspective. Greelong: Deakin University Press.Google Scholar
Halliday, Michael Alexander Kirkwood, and J.R. Martin
1993Writing Science: Literacy and Discursive Power. London and Washington, D.C.: The Falmer Press.Google Scholar
Johansen, Gerd
2013‘Science for all’ — a Mission Impossible? A Multimodal Discourse Analysis of Practical Work and Inquiry in Norwegian Upper Secondary School. Ås: Department of Mathematical Sciences and Technology. Norwegian University of Life Sciences.Google Scholar
Jiménez-Aleixandre, Maria Pilar, and Sibel Erduran
2008 “Argumentation in Science Education: An Overview.” In Argumentation in Science Education, ed. by Sibel Erduran and María Pilar Jiménez-Aleixandre, 3–28. Philadelphia: Springer.Google Scholar
Knain, Erik, and Stein Dankert Kolstø
(eds) 2011Elever Som Forskere i Naturfag. Oslo: Universitetsforlaget.Google Scholar
Kock, Christian
2007“Norms of Legitimate Dissensus.” Informal Logic 27 (2): 179–196. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
2009“Choice Is Not True or False: The Domain of Rhetorical Argumentation.” Argumentation 231: 61–80. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Kock, Christian, and Lisa S. Vildadsen
2012 “Introduction: Citizenship as a Rhetorical Practice.” In Rhetorical Citizenship, ed. by Christian Kock and Lisa S. Villadsen, 1–10. University Park Pennsylvania: The Pennsylvania State University Press.Google Scholar
Kolstø, Stein Dankert
2001“Scientific Literacy for Citizenship: Tools for Dealing with the Science Dimension of Controversial Socioscientific Issues.” Science Education 85 (3):291–310. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Macken-Horarik, Mary
2002“‘Something to Shoot for’: A Systemic Functional Approach to Teaching Genre in Secondary School Science.” In Genre in the Classroom: Multiple Perspectives, ed. by Ann M. Johns, 17–42. Mahwa, New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.Google Scholar
Mendelson, Michael
2001 “Quintilian and the Pedagogy of Argument.” Argumentation 151: 277–293. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Miller, Carolyn R
1994“Genre as Social Action.” In Genre and the New Rhetoric, ed. by Aviva Freedman and Peter Medway, 23–42. London: Taylor & Francis.Google Scholar
Murgatroyd, Stephen
2010. “‘Wicked Problems’ and the Work of the School.” European Journal of Education 45 (2): 259-279. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Nussbaum, E. Michael, Gale M. Sinatra, and Marissa C. Owens
2012“The Two Faces of Scientific Argumentation: Applications to Global Climate Change.” In Perspectives on Scientific Argumentation, ed. by Myint Swe Khine, 17–37. London and New York: Springer Dordrecht Heidelberg. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
OECD, Programme for International Student Asessment (PISA)
Osborne, Jonathan
2010. “Arguing to Learn in Science: The Role of Collaborative, Critical Discourse.” Science 328: 463-466. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Ramage, John, Micheal Callaway, Jennifer Clary-Lemon, and Zachary Waggoner
2009Argument in Composition. West Lafayette, IN: Parlor Press.Google Scholar
Roberts, Douglas A
2007“Scientific Literacy/Science Literacy.” In Handbook of Research on Science Education, ed. by Sandra K. Abell and Norman G. Lederman, 729–780. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.Google Scholar
2011“Competing Visions of Scientific Literacy: The Influence of a Science Curriculum Policy Image.” In Exploring the Landscape of Scientific Literacy, ed. by C. Linder, L. Östman, D.A. Roberts, P.-O. Wickman, G. Erickson, and A. MacKinnon, 11–27. New York and Oxon: Taylor & Francis.Google Scholar
Sadler, Troy D
2010. “Situated Learning in Science Education: Socioscientific Issues as Context for Practice.” Studies in Science Education 45 (1): 1-42. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Schleppegrell, Mary J
2001“Linguistic Features of the Language of Schooling.” Linguistics and Education 91: 49–67. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Silva, Rhetoricae
2007Kairos. In Dr. Gideon Burton: The Forest of Rhetoric. http://​rhetoric​.byu​.edu/. Retreived 07/02/14.Google Scholar
Simonneaux, Jean, and L. Simonneaux
2012“Educational Configurations for Teaching Environmental Socioscientific Issues within the Perspective of Sustainability. Research in Science Education 42 (1): 75–94. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Stewart, Craig O
2009“Socioscientific Controversies: A Theoretical and Methodological Framework.” Communication Theory 191: 124–145. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Svennevig, Jan
1999aGetting Acquainted in Conversation: A Study of Initial Interactions. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
1999b“Talespråket — Mellom Pragmatikk Og Gramatikk.” In Mediet Teller! Tverrfaglige Perspektiver På Skrift Og Tale, ed. by M. Engebretsen and J. Svennevig, 101–116. Agder: Høgskolen i Agder.Google Scholar
2009Språklig Samhandling: Innføring i Kommunikasjonsteori Og Diskursanalyse. Oslo: Cappelen.Google Scholar
Toulmin, Stephen E
2003The Uses of Argument. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Walton, Douglas
2011“An Argumentation Model of Deliberative Decision Making.” In Technologies for Supporting Reasoning Communities and Collaborative Decision Making: Cooperative Approaches, ed. by John Yearwood and Andrew Stranieri, 1–17. Heshey, NY: Information Science Reference. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Walton, Douglas, C. Reed, and F. Macagno
2008Argumentation Schemes. New York: Cambridge University Press. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Walton, Douglas N
1989“Dialogue Theory for Critical Thinking.” Argumentation 31: 169–184. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Yin, Robert K
1994Case Study Research: Design and Methods. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications, Inc.Google Scholar
Zeidler, Dana L., and T.D. Sadler
2008“The Role of Moral Reasoning in Argumentation: Conscience, Character, and Care.” In Argumentation in Science Education, ed. by S. Erduran and M.P. Jiménez-Aleixandre, 201–216. Philadelphia: Springer.Google Scholar