Where it is used
Each entry identifies the volume, edition, chapter or appendix in which the work appears.
The evidence behind the series
Follow the research.
Explore every source.
Browse the scientific research and professional literature used across all seven volumes of The Science of Learning for Educators.
7book volumes
8author ranges
1searchable library
Search the collection
Find a paper, author or idea.
Choose an author range, search a title or concept, or narrow the collection by source type. Open any result to see where it appears in the books, read its evidence summary and follow available source links.
2 references
-
- Vol 2 RE: Chapter 9
claim-evidence-reasoning frameworkscientific explanationsevidence-based reasoningdisciplinary argumentationexplanation constructioninstructional scaffoldingpeer discussionscience talkBook Evidence summaryAt a glance
McNeill and Krajcik provide a practical framework for helping middle-grade students construct scientific explanations in speech and writing. An explanation contains a claim that answers a question, evidence drawn from appropriate data, and reasoning that uses scientific principles to show why the evidence supports the claim.
Key ideas
The book explains why each component is difficult for learners and how expectations can become more sophisticated across grades and content areas. Classroom examples, student work, rubrics, and teaching tools illustrate modelling, critique, peer discussion, feedback, and gradual removal of scaffolds. The authors distinguish explanation from description and from argument while showing how the practices overlap. They also emphasise equitable participation and the need to make disciplinary norms explicit rather than assuming students already understand them.
Why it matters
For teachers, CER is not simply a three-part writing template: its value comes from selecting meaningful phenomena and data, teaching relevant science ideas, and pressing students to connect evidence to claims through defensible reasoning.
View or buy the cited work >>Read a similar article free online >>
-
- Vol 2 RE: Chapter 9
scientific argumentationcollaborative discourseevidence-based reasoningconceptual understandingcounterargumentscience educationJournal article Evidence summaryAt a glance
Osborne argues that scientific understanding requires knowing not only established explanations but how claims are evaluated through evidence and critical discourse. Classroom science often privileges authoritative presentation and practical activity while offering too little opportunity to compare explanations, challenge reasoning, and justify conclusions.
Key ideas
Research reviewed in the article suggests that structured argumentation can improve conceptual understanding, reasoning, and understanding of scientific practice. Productive argument involves claims, evidence, warrants, counterarguments, and revision, undertaken collaboratively rather than as competitive debate. Such discourse does not emerge automatically: students need worthwhile questions, relevant knowledge and data, norms for respectful critique, language support, and teachers who press for justification without taking over the reasoning. Teachers therefore require professional learning in recognising and facilitating argument.
Why it matters
For educators, the paper supports designing regular opportunities for students to make thinking public, evaluate alternatives, and change their minds in response to evidence. The aim is disciplined sensemaking, not simply increasing the amount of classroom talk.
A transparent research trail
More than a bibliography.
What it contributes
Evidence summaries explain the central idea and why the source matters to educators.
How to access it
Entries link to lawful full text where available, or to a publisher, library or purchase page.
Edition abbreviations
- TE
- Teacher Edition
- PE
- Practice Edition
- RE
- Research Edition
Citation checks
References are checked against publisher records, scholarly indexes, DOI or ISBN metadata, repositories and author records where available. An entry marked [Citation not verified] preserves the wording found in the relevant volume without attributing findings to an unconfirmed work.
From sources to a coherent pathway