Suellen Fonsêca da Conceição Santos, Elder Sales Teixeira, Rosiléia Oliveira de Almeida

Analysis of Arguments about Mendel’s First Law in High School Natural Sciences Textbooks

Introduction

Analysis of arguments about mendel’s first law in high school natural sciences textbooks. Examines arguments for Mendel's First Law in high school natural sciences textbooks. Reveals significant gaps in argumentative quality, highlighting the need to improve science education.

Abstract

Studies have highlighted the contributions of argumentation to the teaching of Natural Sciences. However, analyses investigating its presence and quality in textbooks are still scarce. This qualitative study examines arguments expressed in the statements of Mendel’s First Law in high school Natural Sciences textbooks approved by the PNLD/2021. For the analysis, Toulmin’s Argument Pattern was adopted as the theoretical and methodological framework, complemented by the instrument proposed by Penha and Carvalho (2015) and adapted by Silva (2021). Among the seven textbook collections analyzed, one does not present any argumentative elements in its approach to Mendel’s First Law, five display only partially satisfactory argumentation, with elements that do not fully fulfill their functions, and only one contains a satisfactory argument, in which each identified element adequately serves its purpose. The results reveal significant gaps in the arguments related to Mendel’s First Law, highlighting the need to improve this approach in textbooks.

Review

This qualitative study, "Analysis of Arguments about Mendel’s First Law in High School Natural Sciences Textbooks," addresses a critical gap in science education research by meticulously examining the presence and quality of argumentation within a fundamental biological concept as presented in widely used high school textbooks. The authors appropriately leverage established theoretical and methodological frameworks, specifically Toulmin’s Argument Pattern, complemented by adaptations from Penha and Carvalho (2015) and Silva (2021). This robust approach allows for a granular analysis of how arguments are constructed, or fail to be constructed, around Mendel's First Law, a topic central to genetics and often a point of conceptual difficulty for students. The study's focus on textbooks approved by PNLD/2021 further enhances its relevance, as these are the materials directly influencing countless students. The findings reveal a concerning landscape regarding the pedagogical quality of argumentation in these essential educational resources. Across the seven analyzed textbook collections, the study uncovered significant variability, ranging from a complete absence of argumentative elements in one collection to only partially satisfactory argumentation in the majority (five collections). Strikingly, only one textbook collection presented a truly satisfactory argument, where each identified element adequately fulfilled its purpose. These results underscore substantial deficiencies in how Mendel's First Law is framed, suggesting that current textbooks largely fail to adequately engage students in the scientific reasoning process. This lack of robust argumentation likely hinders students' development of critical thinking skills, their understanding of scientific inquiry, and their ability to construct coherent scientific explanations. While the study provides a valuable snapshot of argumentation quality concerning Mendel's First Law, its scope is naturally focused on this specific concept and a particular set of textbooks. Future research could expand this vital analysis to other foundational scientific laws and theories across various disciplines within Natural Sciences, and potentially investigate textbooks from different educational systems or countries for comparative insights. Moreover, exploring the direct impact of these argumentative deficiencies on student learning outcomes and conceptual understanding would be a logical next step. Ultimately, this paper serves as a significant contribution to science education literature, providing compelling evidence that calls for immediate attention from curriculum developers, textbook authors, and educators to enhance the quality of argumentation in high school Natural Sciences textbooks, thereby fostering more sophisticated scientific literacy among students.

Full Text

Comments

You need to be logged in to post a comment.