When does science become 'junk'? An examination of junk science claims in mainstream print media
In: International Journal of Sustainable Society, Volume 3, Issue 2, p. 116
ISSN: 1756-2546
2194487 results
Sort by:
In: International Journal of Sustainable Society, Volume 3, Issue 2, p. 116
ISSN: 1756-2546
In: Air & space power journal, Volume 24, Issue 2, p. 110-111
In: Le débat: histoire, politique, société ; revue mensuelle, Volume 114, Issue 2, p. 141-152
ISSN: 2111-4587
In: Journal of drug issues: JDI, Volume 29, Issue 2, p. 199-201
ISSN: 1945-1369
In: The American journal of sociology, Volume 97, Issue 1, p. 259-261
ISSN: 1537-5390
In: The Soviet review, Volume 30, Issue 2, p. 39-53
In: Pacific affairs: an international review of Asia and the Pacific, Volume 56, Issue 1, p. 38
ISSN: 1715-3379
In: American anthropologist: AA, Volume 64, Issue 1, p. 176-178
ISSN: 1548-1433
In: History of political economy, Volume 32, Issue 3, p. 699-701
ISSN: 1527-1919
In: History of political economy, Volume 12, Issue 4, p. 629-631
ISSN: 1527-1919
Background: Argumentation, that is the coordination of evidence and reasons to support claims, is an important skill for democratic society, developing subject-specific literacies, and can be embedded in multiple school subjects. While argumentation has been extensively researched in science education, interdisciplinary argumentation is less explored, particularly between subjects where collaboration is not the norm, such as science and religious education (RE). Yet everyday issues often involve considering information from multiple sources, such as scientific information or ethical, moral, or religious perspectives. Purpose: The purpose of this study was to better understand students' abilities in argumentation within and across the school subjects of science and RE to inform research and practice of interdisciplinary argumentation. Sample: The participants of this study were 457 students, aged between 11 and 14 years, from 10 secondary schools in England. Following data cleaning, 394 student responses were analysed. Design and Methods: Students completed simultaneous written assessments for argumentation in three tasks which are situated within three different subject contexts: (1) science (2) RE, and (3) an interdisciplinary context which involved argumentation from science and RE. Results: In each of the three contexts, high proportions of students achieve all available marks for identifying claims and evidence. These proportions drop when constructing the link between claim and evidence (warrant) and constructing an evaluative argument. Higher performances were generally noted in the context of science and that students experience particular challenges in argumentation in the RE scenario. Conclusions: This study contributes to our understanding of the challenges and successes of students' argumentation within and across the subjects of science and RE. Implications for both research and practice are discussed.
BASE
In: Current history: a journal of contemporary world affairs, Volume 119, Issue 820, p. 303-309
ISSN: 0011-3530
Comparing the virus response in Germany, the United Kingdom, and the United States shows that in order for scientific expertise to result in effective policy, rational political leadership is a must.
World Affairs Online
In: BioSocieties: an interdisciplinary journal for social studies of life sciences, Volume 9, Issue 2, p. 219-223
ISSN: 1745-8560
In: Proceedings of the Estonian Academy of Sciences, Volume 62, Issue 4, p. 213
ISSN: 1736-7530
Dr Aligwekwe's previous books have been exceptionally focused on reviewing African culture/tradition through history; aimed at both recapturing and, thus, perpetuating those laudable elements that could be submerged by some contemporary indiscriminate and harmful forces of change. These publications called for the elimination of the non-meritorious and contemptible, and the enhancement of the favourable. The present volume, Behavioural Science for Students of Science and Technology, is approx