Assessing complexity: The interface of arugmentation and modeling practices in genetics modeling assessments

The Next Generation Science Standards present a practice-oriented approach to science in which students integrate core ideas with scientific practices (NGSS Lead States, 2013; NRC, 2012). The practices of argumentation and modeling help students explore natural phenomena by providing opportunities for students to explain critical aspects related to the process and nature of science. Students can describe phenomena using evidence-based explanations (Grooms, Sampson, Mayweg-Paus Schwarz et al., 2009).The work extends research on argumentation, rebuttal, and learning progressions in science classrooms in several ways. First, I developed an argumentation framework and demonstrated its utility in written arguments during assessments. This framework served to integrate ideas from structural, epistemic, and dialectical perspectives to assess nuance and complexity. Currently, none of the existing frameworks take all of these aspects into consideration concomitantly. Second, the research extends our understanding of how students employ rebuttal strategies to discredit competing models in science assessments. While other work evaluates argumentation complexity and considers refutation as much more cognitively demanding (Henderson et al., 2015; Osborne et al., 2016) this work generally aims to identify whether students can refute as opposed to how. The research extends this work by identifying the approaches that students undertake when refuting. This departure elucidates the kinds of epistemic values that students integrate into their refutations with respect to the competing model. Finally, the research aims to evaluate how genetics core ideas progressions interface with practice progressions in the context of a genetics core ideas. Research on LPs often takes a developmental approach of how students develop increasingly robust understandings of either scientific practices or core ideas in a domain. There is less work that investigates the intersection of both practice and core ideas.This body of work more broadly serves to demonstrate the ways in which students explore and communicate complex ideas. The research aims to examine how students make increasingly nuanced arguments including their approaches to refutations, and how students develop their understanding of both core ideas and practice simultaneously.