scieee Open visual document viewer

Young Children's Epistemic Operations and Emergent Argumentation in Inquiry-Based Discussions: The Role of Teacher Questioning and Collaborative Interactions

Caño Pérez, Lidia,Sanz Alonso, Josu

Abstract

This work was supported by Euskal Herriko Unibertsitatea, GIU21/031, Ministerio de Ciencia e Innovación, PID2022-137010OB-I00.

Full text

Jou nal o Resea ch in Science Teaching, 2025; 0:1–20 h ps://doi.o g/10.1002/ ea.70010 1 o 20 Jou nal o Resea ch in Science Teaching RESEARCH ARTICLE OPEN ACCESS Young Child en's Epis emic Ope a ions and Eme gen A gumen a ion in Inqui y- Based Discussions: The Role o Teache Ques ioning and Collabo a i e In e ac ions LidiaCaño | JosuSanz Depa men o Didac ics o Ma hema ics, Expe imen al and Social Sciences, Uni e si y o he Basque Coun y (UPV/EHU),Spain Co espondence: Lidia Caño ([email protected]) Recei ed: 2 Ap il 2022 | Re ised: 30 Ap il 2025 | Accep ed: 2 May 2025 Funding: This wo k was suppo ed by Euskal He iko Unibe si a ea, GIU21/031, Minis e io de Ciencia e Inno ación, PID2022- 137010OB- I00. Keywo ds: a gumen a ion| epis emic ope a ions| p ima y school science| eache ques ioning| use o e idence ABSTRACT P omo ing a gumen a ion based on e idence allows s uden s o gi e meaning o he phenomena obse ed, enabling he cons uc- ion o knowledge. Child en's a gumen a i e discou se can be ac i a ed by app op ia e ins uc ion, bu he e is li le in o ma ion on a gumen a ion a ea ly ages and he e is a need o he eache o unde s and how o os e and guide he a icula ion o ideas a his s age. In his s udy we aim o assess how eache s' dialogical p ac ices s imula e young child en o engage in a gumen- a ion and knowledge cons uc ion h ough simul aneously analyzing he eache 's ques ions and child en's answe s, om he double scope o he epis emic and a gumen a i e ope a ions. We analyzed elemen a y class oom discussions o s uden s in ol ed in inqui y ac i i ies on plan g ow h led by wo di e en ainee eache s. Ou esul s show ha 6–7- yea - olds we e able o no only use expe imen al da a and p io knowledge as e idence o gene a e explana ions and d aw conclusions bu also e alua e and ques ion he ideas o o he s. This ga e ise o small a gumen a i e nodes in which a p ocess o co- cons uc ion o knowledge on plan g ow h and co e concep s o he li ing being ook place. We ha e iden i ied h ee undamen al cha ac e is ics o he dia- logical s a egies ha can condi ion he quali y o he s uden s' p ac ice: he ype o eache 's ques ions, he o de o ques ioning sequence, and ce ain alk mo es o manage co ec o inco ec esponses and o s imula e pee collabo a ion. Ou esul s indi- ca e ha eache s could in ol e s uden s in high- le el epis emic ope a ions bu also implemen app op ia e dialogic echniques o aise he le el o a gumen a ion and scien i ic easoning om an ea ly age. 1 | In oduc ion Lea ning akes place h ough social in e ac ion, so ha knowledge eme ges om complex and con inuous exchanges be ween hough , language, and he en i onmen (Me ce e  al. 2004; Si y e  al. 2012). Social in e ac ions be ween s u- den s and eache s h ough he use o discou se allow ideas o be es ed and acili a e he cons uc ion o scien i ic unde - s anding o phenomena (D i e e al.2000). Child en wo king oge he and wi h he eache in small- g oup si ua ions can use e idence and easoning o gene a e scien i ic knowledge, o explain na u al phenomena, and o a gue and c ea e a sha ed unde s anding, hus engaging in he p ac ice o a gumen a ion (Jiménez- Aleixand e e al.2000; Jin and Kim2020; Lemke1990; Naylo e al.2007; Oli ei a2010; Si y e al.2012). Bu o s u- den s o ac i a e hei a gumen a i e science discou se, hey mus be engaged in se e al epis emic ope a ions in ol ed in he p ocesses o gene a ing o ga he ing da a (e.g., obse ing o measu ing), and in using e idence o ex ac knowledge (e.g., cons uc ing o e alua ing explana ions) (Ch is odoulou This is an open access a icle unde he e ms o he C ea i e Commons A ibu ion-NonComme cial-NoDe i s License, which pe mi s use and dis ibu ion in any medium, p o ided he o iginal wo k is p ope ly ci ed, he use is non-comme cial and no modi ica ions o adap a ions a e made. © 2025 The Au ho (s). Jou nal o Resea ch in Science Teaching published by Wiley Pe iodicals LLC on behal o Na ional Associa ion o Resea ch in Science Teaching. 2 o 20 Jou nal o Resea ch in Science Teaching, 2025 and Osbo ne2014; Jiménez- Aleixand e e al.2000; Kelly2008; Lemke1990; NRC2012). When s uden s gene a e and e alua e e idence h ough class discussions, p oduc i e dialogue akes place (Hogan e al.1999). Howe e , he eache acili a es he cons uc ion o knowledge h ough dialogue by guiding he s uden s' discou se owa ds he lea ning o he co e scien i ic ideas (Chen e al.2014; Windschi l e al.2008; Yip2004) h ough app op ia e discu si e p ac ices, such as ques ioning and alk mo es (Chin2007; Els gees 1985; Soysal and Yilmaz- Tuzun2021). The main goal o his s udy is o imp o e ou unde s anding o science alk in elemen a y class ooms and ge insigh s o in o m e ec i e eache 's dialogical s a egies. Unde s anding which dialogic p ac ices a e mos e ec i e in p omo ing s uden s' co- cons uc ion o knowledge equi es a comp ehensi e exam- ina ion o he class discou se and he eache - s uden dialogic in e ac ions in a eal class oom con ex . Resea ch on class oom scien i ic dialogue has ocused on he analysis o he s uden s' s a emen s and explana- ions (e.g., E du an e al.2004; Jin and Kim2020; Maloney and Simon 2006), he eache s' ques ions and p omp s (e.g., Benedic - Chambe s e  al. 2017; Ch is odoulou and Osbo ne2014; Kawalka and Vijapu ka  2013; Soysal2019) o bo h (Chin 2006, 2007; Lee and Kinzie 2012; Lowell e al.2022; Manz and Renga2017). To cap u e he complexi y o class oom scien i ic dialogue, we unde ake a mul idimen- sional analysis o bo h eache –s uden and s uden –s uden in e ac ions ha in eg a es he simul aneous ca ego iza ion o se e al cons uc s o class oom con e sa ion ha a e in i- ma ely ela ed o each o he . Speci ically, in his s udy, we analyze scien i ic discussions o a g oup o 6–7- yea - old child en engaged in expe imen al in- qui y wi h plan s. Resea ch on a gumen a i e p ac ices has mos ly ocused on seconda y and uppe elemen a y school class ooms (e.g., Jiménez- Aleixand e e  al. 2000; Kawalka and Vijapu ka  2013; McNeill and Pimen el 2010), bu om he age o 4–6 yea s, child en a e able o gene a e p edic ions, use obse a ions as e idence, and e alua e and ques ion each o he (F ejd2019; Kim and Ro h2018; Me z 2011; Manz and Allen2017; Ru man e al.1993; Si y e al.2012). Since young child en a e o en mis ep esen ed in he scien i ic li e a u e, ou esea ch aims o p o ide e idence on he abili y o s uden s in he p eope a ional s age o engage in a gumen a i e and epis- emic ope a ions. We speci ically seek o answe he ollowing esea ch ques ions RQ1. Wha epis emic and a gumen a i e ope a ions eme ge in young child en's alk du ing a eache - guided a gumen - based inqui y ac i i y? RQ2. Wha is he con ibu ion o he eache 's dialogical s a - egies o he child en's pe o mance o epis emic ope a ions and a gumen a ion? RQ3. How does guided a gumen a ion p omo e sense- making o concep ual co e ideas? 2 | Theo e ical Backg ound In his s udy, we assess ou majo cons uc s in class oom alk h ough discou se analysis: child en's a gumen a ion, child en's epis emic ope a ions, he eache ques ions ha guide he dis- cussion, and he co e scien i ic ideas add essed. In his sec ion, we de ine and e iew hese cons uc s and hei implica ions in he con ex o science lea ning and he me hodological ap- p oaches adop ed o analyze hei accomplishmen in science class oom se ings. 2.1 | Engaging in A gumen a ion and Epis emic Ope a ions o Sense- Making and Knowledge Cons uc ion In a gumen a ion p ac ice, empi ical o heo e ical e idence is used o cons uc and e alua e knowledge claims indi idually and collabo a i ely (E du an and Jiménez- Aleixand e 2007). Class oom communi ies should allow s uden s o engage in a gumen s and discussions abou he easons and c i e ia hey use o choosing one explana ion o e ano he by es ablish- ing explici ela ionships be ween e idence and conclusion (Duschl2008; Kim and Ro h2018; McNeill and Pimen el2010). The mos widely used me hodological ool o analyze a gumen- a ion in class oom alk is Toulmin's a gumen pa e n (TAP) (Toulmin2003), which consis s o a claim, e idence, wa an s, backings, ebu als, and quali ie s (e.g., Ca agne o e al.2010; McNeill2011; Maloney and Simon2006; Mon ei a and Jiménez- Aleixand e 2016; Soysal 2023). Howe e , some s udies ha e highligh ed me hodological limi a ions associa ed wi h he cod- ing p ocess o a gumen a ion and o he ac ha i p o ides li le speci ic in o ma ion abou he quali y o he a gumen (E du an e al.2004; Jiménez- Aleixand e e al.2000; Kelly e al.1998). In o de o allow he global na u e o he a gumen a ion o be in- es iga ed, E du an e al.(2004) ex ended he uni o analysis o b oade sequences a he han indi idual componen s. S udies adop ing his app oach (di e en amewo ks e iewed in Cla k e al.2007) ca ego ize di e en a gumen a i e ope a ions, such as ein o cing a claim wi h addi ional da a and/o wa an s, o p o iding coun e a gumen s ha challenge he alidi y o he claim. Mo eo e , he analysis o con e sa ional sequences p o- ides insigh in o he di e en pa e ns o in e ac ion and he quan i y and quali y o exchanges (s uden –s uden o eache – s uden ) ha occu du ing he discussion (Soysal2023). In ou s udy, we ha e adop ed he a o emen ioned amewo ks o he analysis o bo h he a gumen cons uc ion and a gu- men a i e p ocess. In addi ion, in o de o accoun also o he quali y o he a gumen , we belie e i is necessa y o examine he epis emic na u e o easoning, ha is, wha s uden s ap- peal o in hei explana ions, since he e is an in e nal link be ween epis emic and a gumen a i e ope a ions (Pon eco o and Gi a de 1993). The p ac ice o a gumen a ion in ol es in- deed he sum o a se ies o epis emic ope a ions ha con ibu e o he cons uc ion o knowledge h ough scien i ic dialogue (Ch is odoulou and Osbo ne2014; Kelly2008). In his ega d, some s udies ha e de eloped a amewo k ela ing a gumen- a i e ope a ions and epis emic ope a ions h ough a double ca ego iza ion o s uden s' discou se elemen s. Mason(1996) 10982736, 0, Downloaded om h ps://onlinelib a y.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/ ea.70010 by Uni e sidad Del País Vasco, Wiley Online Lib a y on [26/09/2025]. See he Te ms and Condi ions (h ps://onlinelib a y.wiley.com/ e ms-and-condi ions) on Wiley Online Lib a y o ules o use; OA a icles a e go e ned by he applicable C ea i e Commons License 3 o 20 and Jiménez- Aleixand e e  al. (2000) de eloped Pon eco o and Gi a de 's(1993) amewo k o he social sciences o in- es iga e how s uden s cons uc and e alua e a gumen s in he expe imen al sciences domain. The epis emic ope a ions iden i ied in hese and subsequen s udies (e.g., Ch is odoulou and Osbo ne2014) included iden i ying a iables, desc ibing, classi ying, o appealing o analogies o a ibu es. This ap- p oach allows o a mo e de ailed analysis o he epis emic c i e ia (how he claim is jus i ied) used o es ablish he qual- i y and soundness o he a gumen (E du an and Jiménez- Aleixand e 2007; Jiménez- Aleixand e e  al. 2000; Sampson and Cla k2008). The e o e, in his s udy we iden i ied bo h he a gumen a i e and epis emic ope a ions in child en's dialogue in an inqui y se ing. Inqui y si ua ions p o ide s uden s wi h a amewo k o es ablishing explici ela ionships be ween e idence and conclusion (Duschl 2008; Kim and Ro h 2018; McNeill and Pimen el2010), as lea ne s go h ough se e al epis emic ope a- ions (obse e, desc ibe, explain, ques ion…) o gene a e da a ha u n in o e idence o knowledge cons uc ion (Ch is odoulou and Osbo ne2014; Jiménez- Aleixand e e al.2000; Kelly2008; Lemke1990; NRC2012). Howe e , along wi h epis emic p ac- ices, s uden s mus also be in ol ed wi h scien i ic con en (Chen e  al.2014; Windschi l e al. 2008; Yip 2004). E du an and Jiménez- Aleixand e(2007) a gue ha i we wan o know whe he a gumen a ion skills in luence he acquisi ion o scien- i ic knowledge, we should simul aneously measu e a gumen- a ion skills and concep ual knowledge in class oom scien i ic dialogue (e.g., F ejd2019; Yip2004). 2.2 | The Role o he Teache in P omo ing S uden s' A gumen a ion and Knowledge Cons uc ion Teache s' discu si e p ac ices a e de e minan in os e ing he eache - s uden ela ionship and he collec i e sense- making. This is pa icula ly ue o young child en, who need app o- p ia e ins uc ional s a egies o mo e beyond obse a ion and desc ip ion o engage in explana o y and e alua i e easoning (Maloney and Simon2006; Manz and Allen2017; Me z2011; Va elas and Pappas2013). S uden s can eel encou aged o pa icipa e in he co- cons uc ion o science meaning when he eache 's discou se o e comes he “ iadic dialogue” (ini ia ion- esponse- e alua ion, IRE pa e n, Lemke1990; Chin2006). This ole encompasses eache s o - mula ing ques ions in a neu al non- e alua i e way (i.e., a e- lec i e ques ioning) by cap u ing he meaning o he s uden 's s a emen s and e u ning he esponsibili y o e lec ion back o he s uden s ( an Zee and Mins ell1997). Howe e , adop ing his esponsi e eaching s a egy inc eases he unp edic abili y o s uden esponses and equi es eache s o make con inu- ous decisions o suppo o e ame ideas in a p oduc i e way (K is and Shim2024; Wa kins and Manz2022). In his ega d, a majo challenge o esea ch is o iden i y and p o ide ools o in- se ice bu also p e- se ice science eache s o engage s u- den s in p oduc i e dialogue, especially in he ea ly educa ional s ages. Se e al s udies ha e in eg a ed esea ch and p ac ice o de elop pedagogical s a egies o eaching science eache s o suppo a gumen a ion in he class oom (Simon e al.2006; Zembal- Saul2009). In his wo k, we in end o cha ac e ize he discu si e s a egies used by p e- se ice eache s wi h young child en in o de o gain insigh s ha we can, in u n, use in eache aining p og ams. P e ious s udies ha e de ined speci ic ca ego ies o ques ions and alk mo es used by eache s o elici ing, challenging, and ex ending s uden s' ideas. Els gees  (1985) desc ibed di e en ypes o p oduc i e ques ions (e.g., a en ion, ocusing o ea- soning ques ions), and, om empi ical esea ch, Chin (2006) ca ego ized eache ques ions acco ding o hei pu pose o cog- ni i e unc ion (elici ing, p obing, ex ending, cla i ying o chal- lenging). Wi hin he amewo k o eache eedback on s uden con ibu ion, an Zee and Mins ell(1997) desc ibed a numbe o e lec i e osses o e u n he esponsibili y o knowledge cons uc ion back o he lea ne . Likewise, Chin(2006) iden- i ied ollow- up mo es such as “Ex ension by esponsi e ques- ioning” o co ec answe s and “Cons uc i e challenge” o inco ec answe s. She also included “ e oicing” s a emen s, p e iously desc ibed by O'Conno and Michaels(1993), in which he eache es a ed o e o mula e s uden s' o al con ibu ions o a i m hei esponses and make hei ideas a ailable o all. Mo e ecen ly, V ikki and E ago ou (2023) de eloped a cod- ing scheme ha g ouped p e iously conside ed and new ques- ions ypes in o con en - ela ed ca ego ies and o ma - ela ed ca ego ies. In he con ex o inqui y- based eaching, empi ical wo ks (Benedic - Chambe s e al.2017; Kawalka and Vijapu ka 2013; S udhal e e al.2021) ha e desc ibed a p og ession o ques ion- ing ca ego ies o sca old inqui y and a gumen a ion p ocesses h ough he inqui y phases: explo e, make p edic ions, eco d obse a ions, explain, p o e o challenge ideas, e ine, and ex- end ideas. O he s udies ha e also ca ego ized he cogni i e demand o eache s' ques ions as lowe ( hose used o e alua e he knowledge le el o s uden s, such as ecogni ion o ecall ques ions) o highe ( easoning o e alua ion ques ions) (e.g., Lee and Kinzie2012; Oli ei a2010; Soysal2019, 2023; V ikki and E ago ou2023). Se e al au ho s ha e join ly e alua ed eache and s uden u e - ances by iden i ying he unc ion o cogni i e le el o he ques- ion, and he cogni i e p ocess o quali y o he a gumen a ion o easoning gene a ed in he lea ne 's esponse (Chin 2007; Manz and Renga2017; Pimen el and McNeill2013; Soysal and Yilmaz- Tuzun2021; V ikki and E ago ou2023). Mo e ecen s udies emphasize he impo ance o esponsi e eaching s a e- gies o s uden s' easoning a c i ical momen s o sense- making, e en cha ac e izing he a ious pedagogical decisions made by he eache du ing en i e episodes (K is and Shim 2024; Soysal2023; Wa kins and Manz2022). 2.3 | Ou F amewo k We wo k on he assump ion ha he eache 's ques ions s im- ula e he pe o mance o epis emic ope a ions by he s uden s, which in u n leads o he cons uc ion o a gumen s and en- gagemen in he a gumen a ion p ocess, he con en o which is ocused on he co e scien i ic ideas. The e o e, al hough mos 10982736, 0, Downloaded om h ps://onlinelib a y.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/ ea.70010 by Uni e sidad Del País Vasco, Wiley Online Lib a y on [26/09/2025]. See he Te ms and Condi ions (h ps://onlinelib a y.wiley.com/ e ms-and-condi ions) on Wiley Online Lib a y o ules o use; OA a icles a e go e ned by he applicable C ea i e Commons License 4 o 20 Jou nal o Resea ch in Science Teaching, 2025 s udies on class oom alk ocus in one aspec o he s uden 's and/o he eache 's discou se ( he abo e- desc ibed ame- wo ks), we p opose a mul idimensional analysis o add ess he ou cons uc s e iewed abo e by simul aneously coding he eache 's ques ions, he epis emic ope a ions hey encou age, hei linguis ic exp ession— he a gumen a ion p ac ice—and he concep ual knowledge ha a ises. Th ough his de ailed analysis, we in end o cap u e and cha - ac e ize he mos ele an aspec s o class oom discu si e and easoning p ac ices, and o iden i y eache s' mos e ec i e di- alogical s a egies du ing guided inqui y wi h young child en. 3 | Me hods 3.1 | S udy Design and Pa icipan s We quan i a i ely and quali a i ely analyzed wo case s ud- ies consis ing o elemen a y class oom discussions a ound he esul s o inqui y ac i i ies and he ways in which p e- se ice eache s suppo ed s uden alk du ing hose ac i i ies. The ex- plo a o y case s udy was ound o be he mos con enien e- sea ch design o cap u e he complexi y o eache –s uden and s uden –s uden discu si e in e ac ions. The case s udy acil- i a es he esea ch conce ning con ex s in eal ime when he objec i e o he in es iga ion is mo e he lea ning p ocess han he esul i sel and when he esea che has limi ed con ol (Yin2009). The i s case s udy consis ed o a g oup o 1s - g ade s uden s who ca ied ou an expe imen al inqui y ac i i y on plan s and a discussion on he esul s led by Teache Ai o (pseud- onym), who was a school pa en and had expe ience as an adul eache . The second case s udy consis ed o he same g oup o s uden s du ing he 2nd g ade who ca ied ou an expe imen al inqui y ac i i y ela ed o he p e ious one and a discussion on he esul s led by Teache No a (pseudonym), who had no eaching expe ience a he ime o he s udy. The wo p e- se ice eache s we e senio s om he uni e si y, o - me pupils o he i s au ho , and hey we e also alumni o he s udy school. A he ime o he s udy, bo h p e- se ice eache s had ecei ed gene al ins uc ion on science educa- ion du ing hei unde g adua e cou ses bu no speci ic ain- ing in eache ques ioning. Add essing hese wo cases allowed us o ob ain mo e in o ma- ion abou he deg ee o consis ency o he esul s and de ec pos- sible di e ences be ween he eache 's discu si e pa e ns. The selec ion o pa icipan s was based on con enience sampling. A eache in cha ge o a g oup o p ima y school s uden s ag eed o pa icipa e in he in es iga ion by aking and men o ing wo ainee eache s who collabo a ed in he esea ch p ojec o 12 weeks pe yea o wo consecu i e yea s. A he ime o he s udy, he main eache had 14 yea s o eaching expe ience in he school, du ing which ime she had men o ed 14 p e- se ice eache s. The pa icipan s consis ed o 21 s uden s, 10 gi ls and 11 boys, and all s uden s we e bo n in he small own o he s udy school. The na i e ongue o all he pa icipan s is Basque, and eaching was conduc ed en i ely in he Basque language. The school was loca ed in a small coas al own o abou 6000 inhabi an s in he Basque Coun y (Spain). The main pedagogical s a egy o he school is p ojec - based lea ning (PBL) whe e s uden s ollow hei own in e es s, esponding o challenges and si ua ions cen- e ed on eal issues. 3.2 | Con ex o he S udy and Da a Collec ion This s udy was no an in e en ion s udy since he speci ic lea ning ac i i y was join ly designed by he head eache and co esponding p e- se ice eache . The se ings o bo h lea ning ac i i ies we e es ablished be o ehand and ag eed upon wi h he esea che s, namely (1) engaging s uden s in an in es iga ion o ga he and use e idence, (2) add essing he main co e ideas o he li ing being h ough plan s, and (3) o he 2nd yea , ollow- ing up he concep s add essed du ing he 1s yea . The guidelines o leading class oom discussions we e designed and conduc ed by Teache Ai o and Teache No a, who had ag eed wi h he esea che s o adop he ollowing eaching se- quence: (1) de ec ing p e ious ideas abou li ing beings; (2) en- gaging s uden s in science p ac ices o knowledge cons uc ion: designing an expe imen (in 2nd g ade), ob aining and using e idence, and e alua ing he ideas o o he s; (3) s uc u ing and gene alizing eme ging scien i ic ideas. Se e al ini ial d awings o 1s g ade s showed ha some inan- ima e elemen s we e conside ed as li ing beings while plan s we e no . Fo his eason, Teache Ai o p oposed wo king on he cha ac e is ics o li ing beings by ob aining e idence ela ed o plan s h ough an expe imen al in es iga ion o plan ge mi- na ion and g ow h p ocesses. The inqui y ques ion aised by Teache Ai o was “Is he plan a li ing being? Why?” The ex- pe imen al design consis ed o g owing le uce plan s and sow- ing bean and le uce seeds wi h and wi hou wa e . The child en conduc ed a isual ollow- up o he expe imen and a discussion o he esul s. Teache No a con i med h ough d awings ha 2nd g ade chil- d en conside ed plan s o be li ing beings bu some misconcep- ions a ose ega ding he p ocess o ge mina ion and g ow h. The e o e, she guided he child en in designing an expe imen consis ing o sowing pea seeds in and ou side he class oom and s udying he e ec o wo a iables, wa e and ligh , on ge mina- ion and ea ly g ow h. The inqui y ques ion o he second case s udy was: “Wha does a plan need o be bo n? And o g ow?” Child en indi idually moni o ed he esul s o he expe imen using a simple da a collec ion empla e and engaged in he dis- cussion o he esul s. Each eache subdi ided he g oup in o wo subg oups o abou 10 s uden s o acili a e s uden pa icipa ion, he ea e g oups A and B o Teache Ai o 's s uden s and g oups C and D o Teache No a's. Each eache led a 15–20- min discus- sion wi h each subg oup based on obse a ions made du ing he expe imen , so ha child en had he oppo uni y o con- s uc e idence- based explana ions. Resea che s and eache s esol ed o use ques ions o ge he child en o alk abou wha hey obse ed, o use e idence o answe he ini ial ques ion, 10982736, 0, Downloaded om h ps://onlinelib a y.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/ ea.70010 by Uni e sidad Del País Vasco, Wiley Online Lib a y on [26/09/2025]. See he Te ms and Condi ions (h ps://onlinelib a y.wiley.com/ e ms-and-condi ions) on Wiley Online Lib a y o ules o use; OA a icles a e go e ned by he applicable C ea i e Commons License 5 o 20 and o b ing ou hei ideas and allow in e ac ion. Bo h each- e s elabo a ed a sc ip o speci ic ques ions acco ding o hese c i e ia and hei own, wi hou elying on any bibliog aphic ma e ial. In he i s case s udy, he ques ions posed as a guide by Teache Ai o we e he ollowing: “Wha has happened hese days wi h he plan s?”, “Do you hink plan s a e li ing beings? Why?”, “When do you know ha some hing you see is a li ing being?”, “How do you dis inguish i i is a li ing o non- li ing hing?”. In he second case s udy, he ques ions posed as a guide by Teache No a we e: “Wha ha e you lea ned om his expe imen ? Why?”, “Why do you hink ha happened?”, “Wha do plan s need o be bo n? And o g ow? Why?”. In bo h cases, deba es a ose ollowing hese guid- ing ques ions, leading o bo h eache s ha ing o aise mo e spon- aneous ques ions and s a emen s as eedback, always wi h a iew o helping s uden s ques ion and e o mula e hei ini ial ideas and disco e pa e ns based on wha had been obse ed. In bo h case s udies, eache s pe o med o maliza ion ac i i ies o s uc u e he concep s lea ned du ing he inqui y using ad- di ional explana ions and Suppo ing In o ma ion. All he nec- essa y pe mission consen s we e ob ained, and he p ocess o ensu e anonymi y and o gua an ee he e hical managemen o he da a was ca e ully obse ed. 3.3 | Da a Analysis Reco dings o he discussion sessions we e ansc ibed and pseudonyms we e assigned o he child en. The uni o analy- sis was he speaking u n, de ined as each o he s a emen s o he pa icipan s in he discussion. S a emen s in which he chil- d en de ia ed comple ely om he opic being add essed we e excluded om he analysis. We ca ego ize epis emic and a gumen a i e ope a ions ha eme ge in young child en's alk (RQ1) based on bibliog aphy. Since we aimed o engage s uden s in ope a ions o iden i ica- ion and use o e idence, we applied a double ca ego iza ion o s uden s' s a emen s o ela e a gumen a i e ope a ions and epis emic ope a ions, as in Mason(1996), Jiménez- Aleixand e e al.(2000) and Pon eco o and Gi a de (1993). In his s udy, we adop ed he TAP amewo k (Toulmin2003) o iden i y in child en's u e ances e idence, claim, easoning, o wa an s ha jus i y he connec ion be ween he e idence and he claim, modal quali ie s ha e e o he eliabili y o be placed on he claim, and backing s a emen s, ha is, heo e ical o empi ical knowledge on which easoning elies. When he claim and he co esponding easoning we e included in he same s a emen , we conside ed he s a emen as a comple e a gumen , sensu McNeill(2011). We also analyzed he a gumen a ion p ocess, i.e., he s a emen s in esponse o he cons uc ed a gumen s adap ed om E du an e al.(2004). On he one hand, we iden i ied coun e a gumen s and p o- a gumen s and e alua ed whe he hese consis ed o simple claims o i hey used e idence. On he o he hand, we iden i ied and examined episodes o s uden collabo a ion in which a gumen a ion ook place h ough s uden –s uden in e ac ions. We analyzed he epis emic ope a ions pe o med by child en and he epis emic c i e ia used in hei easoning, ha is, wha s uden s appeal o in hei explana ions, acco ding o he li e - a u e (Ch is odoulou and Osbo ne 2014; Jiménez- Aleixand e e al.2000; Lemke1990; Mason1996). In ou pa icula con ex , we ha e iden i ied six key epis emic ope a ions in ela ion o he collec ing and using o e idence: obse e, desc ibe, compa e, in e p e , explain, and e alua e. Obse a ion is linked o di ec expe ience in he class oom while desc ibing can be based on bo h di ec obse a ion and p io knowledge. Compa ing (e.g., be ween expe imen al condi ions) is he ac ion o iden i ying pa e ns and beginning o in e p e da a. In e p e a ion e e s o he induc i e s a emen s ha child en make on aw da a p io o cons uc ing a mo e sound explana ion. Explaining in ol es ex- p essing easoning on a phenomenon based on da a o e idence, and e alua ing in ol es making judgmen s abou easoning p e- iously explained by o he s uden s. In he case o explana ions and e alua ions, we u he iden i ied wha s uden s appealed o in suppo o hei easoning. Two epis emic le els we e de ined in ela ion o he use o e idence (Duschl2008): ope a ions lead- ing o he iden i ica ion o e idence (le el 1), such as obse ing, desc ibing, and compa ing, and ope a ions ha in ol e he use o e idence h ough e alua i e judgmen s, such as in e p e ing, explaining, and e alua ing easoning (le el 2) (Table1). To assess he con ibu ion o eache 's dialogical s a egies o he child en's pe o mance o epis emic ope a ions and a gu- men a ion (RQ2) we i s ca ego ized he eache s' ques ions and alk mo es acco ding o he li e a u e and hen e al- ua ed he pa e ns o s uden – eache and s uden –s uden in e ac ions. We ocused on ques ions ha po en ially s imula ed he use o e idence and he epis emic ope a ions equi ed o i . Fo ha eason, we combined Els gees 's(1985) app oach o p o- duc i e ques ions and Chin's(2006) conside a ion o ypes o eache eedback h ough di e en ques ions o alk mo es (O'Conno and Michaels 1993; Oli ei a 2010; Pimen el and McNeill2013; Soysal2019). The ca ego iza ion o p oduc i e ques ions o alk mo es used in his s udy, i s desc ip ion, and co esponding examples and bibliog aphical e e ences a e shown in Table1. We e alua ed he pa e ns o in e ac ions by assessing whe he each s uden ope a ion occu ed in di ec esponse o he each- e 's ques ion o s a emen (s uden - eache in e ac ions), in esponse o ano he s uden 's s a emen (s uden –s uden in e - ac ion), o spon aneously. Fo each discussion g oup, he p o- po ion o ope a ions o each epis emic le el pe o med h ough each pa e n o in e ac ion was calcula ed. Likewise, we calcu- la ed he p opo ion o p oduc i e ques ions and epis emic op- e a ions o each le el and he esponse a e o he ques ions o each le el. To isualize he knowledge cons uc ion h ough he a gu- men a ion p ocess (RQ3) we elabo a ed an a gumen a ion– concep ualiza ion map o he co e ideas ha a ose in he discussion guided by Teache Ai o . We did so by in eg a ing hese eme ging ideas in a Toulmin's layou o a gumen a ion ha summa izes he e idences, easoning, and coun e - and p o- a gumen s issued du ing he en i e discussion ha led o 10982736, 0, Downloaded om h ps://onlinelib a y.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/ ea.70010 by Uni e sidad Del País Vasco, Wiley Online Lib a y on [26/09/2025]. See he Te ms and Condi ions (h ps://onlinelib a y.wiley.com/ e ms-and-condi ions) on Wiley Online Lib a y o ules o use; OA a icles a e go e ned by he applicable C ea i e Commons License 6 o 20 Jou nal o Resea ch in Science Teaching, 2025 he claim ha plan s a e li ing hings (in esponse o he in- qui y ques ion). The coding o he s a emen s based on he ca ego ies ag eed upon by bo h esea che s was ca ied ou by each o hem in- dependen ly. In he case o he eache 's ques ions and s uden s' a gumen a i e ope a ions, a single ca ego y was a ibu ed o each s a emen . Epis emic ope a ions we e no mu ually ex- clusi e, so mo e han one ope a ion could be a ibu ed o each s a emen . Fo ins ance, an explana ion s a emen could include a p ocess o obse a ion and desc ip ion. In he i s ound o independen coding, we checked in e - a e eliabili y using kappa coe icien s. The Kappa alue was 0.98 o p oduc i e ques ions and alk mo es, 0.85 o a gumen a ion componen s, 0.78 o epis emic ope a ions, and 0.73 o co e ideas. Acco ding o Fleiss(1981), kappa coe icien s abo e 0.75 a e ega ded as excellen ag eemen indica o s. A e an ini ial independen analysis he wo esea che s me o each ag eemen on each disc epan coding by amilia izing ou sel es wi h he da a o seek common in e p e a ions. C i e ia o disambigua ion we e ag eed on be ween esea ch- e s o deal wi h issues ha a ose du ing he ca ego iza ion p ocess. One o he main conce ns was ela ed o he ac ha child en o en oiced incomple e u e ances. Fo he ca ego i- za ion p ocess bo h esea che s ag eed o conside as expla- na ion o easoning hose desc ip i e s a emen s ha clea ly answe ed a easoning ques ion despi e no including con- nec o s such as “because” (e.g., “Why (do you say hey don' always need soil)?”, “One had no soil and i was bo n e y quickly”). Ano he issue a ose when i came o iden i ying e alua i e ope a ions h ough collabo a i e s uden –s uden in e ac ions. The s a emen o one child ha ollowed ano he child's s a emen did no necessa ily co espond o an e alua- i e judgmen in esponse o ha child bu a delayed esponse o he eache . The dis inc ion be ween s uden –s uden and eache –s uden in e ac ions was esol ed by lis ening di ec ly o he eco dings. Finally, when a s a emen ha p o ided an explana ion o easoning was no based on e idence, was no ela ed o he ques ion o be answe ed o he conclusion o was TABLE 1 | Types o p oduc i e ques ions o alk mo e made by he eache , co esponding epis emic ope a ion ca ied ou by s uden s, and epis emic le el a ibu ed. Ques ion/ alk mo e ype De ini ion Example Associa ed ope a ion Le el 0. Con ex ques ion I allows ecalling he con ex o he discussion Wha ha e we done? — — 1. Focusing ques iona–c I p omp s s uden s o ocus on he da a Wha ha e you seen? Wha happened? Obse e, desc ibe 1 2. Compa ison ques ionb I p omp s o iden i y pa e ns h ough compa isons We e he ones in he back like hese ones? Compa e 3. Reasoning ques iona,c I p omp s s uden s o build ideas and explana ions upon hei expe iences o obse a ions Why do you hink ha has happened? How do you know ha plan s a e li ing beings? In e p e , explain, e alua e 2 3.1. Cons uc i e challenged,e I aises a cogni i e con lic and p omp s o amend disc epancies o con adic ions. Bu do beans ha e eyes? and you jus said ha hey a e li ing beings… 3.2. Toss back I p omp s o e alua e o he 's s a emen s Jon says ha …wha do you hink? 4. Cla i ica ion eques b, I p omp s o elabo a e, quali y o cla i y p e ious answe s. … hey a e like s ones, wha do you mean by “like s ones”? Obse e, desc ibe 1 Why do you say ha some needs wa e while o he s don' ? Explain 2 5. Re oicinggI epea s, ewo ds o syn hesizes he easoning p o ided by he s uden s So we a e li ing beings because we die — — 6. Posi i e eed- backdI alida es he s a emen made by he s uden Fine Al igh — — aEls gees (1985). bOli ei a(2010). cBenedic - Chambe s e al.(2017). dChin(2006). eSoysal(2019). Pimen el and McNeill(2013). gO'Conno and Michaels(1993). 10982736, 0, Downloaded om h ps://onlinelib a y.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/ ea.70010 by Uni e sidad Del País Vasco, Wiley Online Lib a y on [26/09/2025]. See he Te ms and Condi ions (h ps://onlinelib a y.wiley.com/ e ms-and-condi ions) on Wiley Online Lib a y o ules o use; OA a icles a e go e ned by he applicable C ea i e Commons License 7 o 20 based on “ an as ic” c i e ia, hey we e conside ed as “o he easoning” (e.g., “… he seeds a e sma ”). Con lic ing cases we e discussed acco ding o he a o emen- ioned c i e ia un il a consensus was eached. Following hese nego ia ions, we e iewed and, i necessa y, modi ied he de i- ni ions o he ca ego ies (see Table1). 4 | Resul s In his sec ion, we i s iden i y he epis emic ope a ions and componen s o a gumen a ion ha eme ged in he child en's s a emen s (RQ1). We hen iden i y he p oduc i e ques ions posed by bo h eache s and quan i a i ely and quali a i ely analyze he ela ionship be ween he eache 's dialogical s a e- gies and he ope a ions pe o med by he child en (RQ2). In he las pa o he sec ion, we summa ize he co e ideas abou he li ing beings ha eme ged h ough he a gumen a i e p ocess and i s componen s (RQ3). 4.1 | Epis emic Ope a ions and Componen s o A gumen a ion (RQ1) To answe RQ1, we desc ibe quan i a i e pa e ns in he ope a- ions and a gumen s ha eme ge in he child en's discou se ha a ise om Figu e1 and Table2 (quan i a i e da a on speci ic ea u es o he s uden s' u e ances) and hen illus a e hem quali a i ely wi h exce p s p o ided in Tables3 and 4. FIGURE 1 | F equency o (a) each ype o epis emic ope a ion and (b) a gumen componen pe o med by s uden s and (c) each ype o eache 's p oduc i e ques ion in Teache Ai o 's (g ay) and Teache No a's (whi e) class. 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 Obse e (1)Desc ibe (1)Compa e (1)In e p e (2)Explain (2)E alua e (2) % wi h espec o o o al ope aons Epis emic ope aon (le el) A (N=76) B (N=85) C (N=91) D (N=69) 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 E idence ClaimReasoning Claim+ eas.Coun e -p o.Backing Quali ie % wi h espec o al a gumen a e ue ances A gumen a e componen A (N=46) B (N=78) C (N=59) D (N=56) 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 Focus (1)Compa ison (1)Cla i icaon (1/2)Reasoning (2)Challenge(2) % wi h espec o o al p oduc e quesons Type o poduc e queson (Epis emic le el) A (N=30) B (N=49) C (N=43) D (N=29) 10982736, 0, Downloaded om h ps://onlinelib a y.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/ ea.70010 by Uni e sidad Del País Vasco, Wiley Online Lib a y on [26/09/2025]. See he Te ms and Condi ions (h ps://onlinelib a y.wiley.com/ e ms-and-condi ions) on Wiley Online Lib a y o ules o use; OA a icles a e go e ned by he applicable C ea i e Commons License 8 o 20 Jou nal o Resea ch in Science Teaching, 2025 Mos s uden s' s a emen s in ol ed some kind o epis emic op- e a ion (Table2). As seen in Figu e1a, s uden s om all o he g oups we e able o obse e, desc ibe, explain, and e alua e. Ope a ions in ol ing he use o e idence (le el 2: in e p e , ex- plain, e alua e) we e mo e equen han hose in which only e idence was iden i ied (le el 1: obse e, desc ibe, compa e) in G oups B and D (Table2). The pe o mance o di e en ope a ions engaged s uden s in he p ac ice o a gumen a ion, as a high pe cen age o o al child en's s a emen s (68% o 87% acco ding o g oups) was conside ed a componen o a gumen a ion (Table 2). As seen in Figu e1b, he mos equen componen s o a gumen a ion co esponded o e idence s a emen s (25.3% a e aged ac oss g oups ±4.1 S.E.), claims (24.4% ± 4.9 S.E.) and easoning (20.1% ± 4.2 S.E), al- hough s uden s also coun e ed o suppo ed he ideas o o he s, backed hei s a emen s wi h p io knowledge, and used modal quali ie s. Nex , we conside sequences o s a emen s o illus a e he epis emic and a gumen a ion ope a ions pe o med by he child en. We i s co e hose elemen s ela ed o e idence iden i ica ion (Le el 1, Table3) and second, hose in ol ing he use o e idence o he cons uc ion and e alua ion o ideas (Le el 2, Table4). As seen in he examples in Table3 (“desc ibe” and “compa e” ope a ion), all g oups o s uden s elabo a ed desc ip ions and compa isons (in he p esence s. absence o wa e o ligh ) on ge mina ion o plan g ow h. The child en's desc ip ions we e mos ly based on obse a ions made in he expe imen (“obse e” on Table3), bu hey also desc ibed ac s de i ed om hei p io knowledge o pe sonal expe iences (sou ce o da a in Table2), as in hese examples: A.40- Ane: I hea d on TV ha he e's a ideo on YouTube (…) he ees and so (…) i hey b eak a bi o some hing like ha , hey s a o die. A.51- My g andpa has a ga den… i s he oma oes a e g een, hen o ange- yellow and hen hey a e ed. Th ough hese Le el 1 epis emic ope a ions child en elici e i- dences. Fo ins ance, bo h g oups o 2nd g ade s es ablished ha plan s bo n ea lie , g ow alle bu a e less heal hy (“ wis ed and yellow colo ”) in he absence o ligh , as in C1 episode (Table3). In Table4, we p o ide examples o exce p s illus a ing he use o Le el 2 epis emic ope a ions (in e p e , explain, e alua e) and TABLE 2 | Quan i a i e da a o ele an indica o s o he s uden s' alk. Teache Ai o Teache No a G oup A G oup B G oup C G oup D Tu ns in ol ing epis emic ope a ion 71.4% 70.6% 82.8% 84.5% Le el 1 68.4% 31.8% 53.8% 43.5% Le el 2 28.9% 63.5% 42.9% 56.5% Sou ce o da a Class oom obse a ion 13 814 8 P e ious knowledge 2 3 4 1 Explana ions appeal o: Fea u es 54.5% 58.8% 023.8% Analogy ( o human) 13.6% 15.7% 0 0 Causali y 27.3% 17.6% 61.5% 52.4% In e n consis ency 05.9% 23.1% 9.5% New ac o (hypo hesis) 0 0 7.7% 9.5% Al e na i e concep ions 4.5% 2% 04.8% Tu ns in ol ing a gumen a ion componen s 67.9% 87.1% 84.4% 84.5% Coun e a gumen s 0 8 1 2 P o- a gumen s 1 4 1 0 Type o e alua ion Uses a claim 1 3 2 1 Uses an e idence o e alua e an e idence 8 0 5 1 Uses a wa an (can include e idence) 2 11 6 3 10982736, 0, Downloaded om h ps://onlinelib a y.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/ ea.70010 by Uni e sidad Del País Vasco, Wiley Online Lib a y on [26/09/2025]. See he Te ms and Condi ions (h ps://onlinelib a y.wiley.com/ e ms-and-condi ions) on Wiley Online Lib a y o ules o use; OA a icles a e go e ned by he applicable C ea i e Commons License 9 o 20 a gumen a ion. We i s add ess he p ocess o a gumen cons uc- ion by iden i ying wha ypes o easoning ( he epis emic c i e ia) s uden s used o suppo hei claims, ha is, wha s uden s appeal o in hei explana ions (obse a ions, al e na i e concep ions, analogies…). We hen exempli y how s uden s e alua ed each o h- e 's explana ions and hei use o coun e - and p o- a gumen s. TABLE 3 | Examples o exce p s illus a ing he in e ac ion among he ypes o ques ions, epis emic ope a ions, and a gumen a ion componen s du ing he e idence iden i ica ion p ocess (Le el 1). Collabo a i e in e ac ions a e in bold. Tu n P oduc i e ques ion Epis emic ope a ion A gumen a ion A1 episode A.6- T. Ai o : We sowed he beans and…wha else? Con ex ques ion A.7- Xabi: g ow he le uces. A.8- T. Ai o : Tha 's igh ; we sowed he beans and g ew he le uce Re oicing A.9- Ane: wo le uces wi h ( oo much) wa e a e ge ing sick … Obse ./Desc ./In e p. E idence A.10- Ike : Tha le uce is poo ly … Obse e/Desc ibe E idence A.11- Unai: And he ones on he o he side (no wa e ed) a e dead … Obs./Compa e/Desc . E idence A.28- T. Ai o : The ones a he back we e di e en , we en' hey? Wha we e hey like? We e hey like hese? Compa ison ques ion A.29- Ane: Some o hem ha e g own, he ones wi h wa e , and o he s ha e no g own Obs./ Compa e/Desc . E idence B1 episode B.11- T. Ai o : … And wha did you see he e? Wha hings ha e happened? Focus ques ion B.12- Ike : i 's go bigge Obse e/Desc ibe E idence B.13- Asie : one o he le uces has g own Obse e/Desc ibe E idence B.14- Uxue: one o hem is dead Obse e/Desc ibe E idence B.15- Ione: and he ones wi hou wa e ha e died Obs./Compa e/Desc . E idence … B.21- Julen: one o he beans has allen Desc ibe E idence B.22- T. Ai o : So whe e did i all? Cla i ica ion eques B.23- Julen:…down o he bo om Desc ibe E idence B.24- T. Ai o : And whe e was i be o e hen? Cla i ica ion eques B.25- Julen: On he plan Desc ibe E idence B.26- T. Ai o : and om he plan , wha has allen? Cla i ica ion eques B.27- Julen: he bean seed Desc ibe E idence C1 episode C.1- T. No a: Does anyone wan o s a elling us wha we ha e lea ned om his expe imen ? Focusing ques ion C.2- Mai e: ha some o hem ha e been bo n be o e some o he ones. Obs./Desc ./Compa e E idence C.3- Ande : he ones ha we e in he da k ha e been bo n be o e E al./Obs./Desc./Comp. E idence … C.8- Jokin: he one ha was in he da k is wis ed. Obse e/Desc ibe E idence C.9- Ande : and i 's go yellow lea es. E alua e/Obse e/ Desc ibe E idence 10982736, 0, Downloaded om h ps://onlinelib a y.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/ ea.70010 by Uni e sidad Del País Vasco, Wiley Online Lib a y on [26/09/2025]. See he Te ms and Condi ions (h ps://onlinelib a y.wiley.com/ e ms-and-condi ions) on Wiley Online Lib a y o ules o use; OA a icles a e go e ned by he applicable C ea i e Commons License 16 o 20 Jou nal o Resea ch in Science Teaching, 2025 appealing o da a and acqui ed knowledge, child en cons uc ed pieces o e idence and easoning o suppo hei claims, ha is, o answe he inqui y ques ions. In e es ingly, in ou s udy some s uden s we e also able o e ine hei conclusion (“plan s need wa e ”) by using modal quali ie s ha allowed hem o be cau ious in hei conclusions (“only he plan s used in he expe - imen ”) be o e ex ending he case s udied o o he s no consid- e ed in he expe imen (e.g., cac i). We obse ed, along wi h o he au ho s (Kim and Ro h 2018; Mon ei a and Jiménez- Aleixand e 2016), ha a hese ea ly s ages child en cons uc ed e idence and a gumen s h ough mul iple u ns, so mos single s a emen s co esponded ei he o claims o e idence s a emen s ( ha some imes migh be in ended as easoning o wha had p e iously been said). Howe e , i is pa icula ly in e es ing ha 1s g ade s we e able o o mula e up o six comple e a gumen s (sensu McNeill2011), ha is, o link he conclusion and he easoning in he same s a emen . Acco ding o Be na d e  al. (2012), child en do indeed ha e an epis emic knowledge o he connec o “because” as ea ly as 4 yea s o age, and hus possess ce ain ea ly skills o a gu- men a ion. The sho u e ances egis e ed in his s udy may no be a consequence o limi ed e idence- based easoning skills bu a he he esul o a lack o o al communica ion de- elopmen o gene a e well- s uc u ed a gumen s in a s anda d way a hese ea ly ages, as also indica ed by Con e ini and A cidiacono(2021). In addi ion o elabo a ing easoning and cons uc ing a gu- men s, child en in ou s udy we e also able o e alua e he a gumen s o o he s, es ablishing small s uden –s uden a gu- men a i e nodes, ha is, hey we e able o cons uc p o- and coun e a gumen s based on e idence. F ejd(2019) and Va elas and Pappas(2013) also epo ed ha child en as young as 6 yea s old challenged and ques ioned each o he by p o iding addi- ional in o ma ion as a esponsi e ac , o exp ess ei he ag ee- men o disag eemen . In his sense, one o he mos ele an indings o ou esea ch is ha child en eso ed o e idence in mos o hei e alua ions o hei pee s' s a emen s. As also seen in o he s udies (Maloney and Simon2006; Manz and Allen 2017; Ru man e  al. 1993; Sando al e  al. 2014; Sodian e  al. 1991), he ac ha young child en can e bally coun e - a gue a alse causal claim by p o iding e idence clea ly indica es an ini ial unde s anding ha e idence is a means o assessing he e aci y o claims. Since he use o coun e a gu- men s o ebu als in a gumen a ion is, acco ding o E du an e al.(2004), indica i e o a highe le el o a gumen a ion, ou esul s sugges ha young child en po en ially ha e he capaci y o each such a le el. S udies conduc ed wi h child en o ages abo e se en ha e ound ha ebu als a e in equen in discou ses o s uden s engaged in inqui y when he eache does no guide hem (Ca agne o e al.2010), o when he o she does so in a e y di ec i e way, while ebu als inc ease when he eache adop s a mo e open- ended dialogic s a egy (Manz and Allen 2017; Soysal 2023). Taken oge he , hese conside a ions sugges ha he eache 's in e en ion de e mines he pe o mance o child en's a gu- men a i e p ac ice. In ac , ou s udy has documen ed, along wi h p e ious ones (F ejd2019; Kim and Ro h2018; Manz and Allen2017; Me ce e al.2004; Si y e al.2012; S udhal e e al.2021; Va elas and Pappas2013), ha young child en a e able o pe o m e idence- based easoning o some complexi y as long as hey a e pa - icipa ing in empi ical ac i i ies, such as guided inqui y and pu pose ul obse a ion. Hence, ou esul s suppo he idea ha young child en's epis emic easoning is o some ex en sen- si i e o ins uc ional inpu s o e de elopmen al cons ain s (Me z2011; Mon ei a and Jiménez- Aleixand e2016). 5.2 | Teache 's Dialogical S a egies o Fos e Child en's Pe o mance o Epis emic Ope a ions and A gumen a ion In ou s udy, mos o he epis emic ope a ions pe o med by s uden s we e s imula ed by he eache 's ques ions, which in u n led o an a gumen a i e and collabo a i e class oom dis- cou se p omp ing he collec i e cons uc ion and e alua ion o scien i ic ideas. Howe e , in some cases, he le els o cog- ni i e demand o he ques ion and he answe did no ma ch. Se e al pa e ns iden i ied in his s udy migh shed some ligh on wha o he ac o s could con ibu e o elici ing s uden s' epis- emic alk. On he one hand, in line wi h p e ious esea ch, open- ended ques ions allowed o a mo e linguis ically and cogni i ely challenging discou se han closed- ended ques ions (Lee and Kinzie2012; McNeill and Pimen el2010). On he o he hand, we ound ha he wo ding and he sequence o eache s' ques ions ma e . Fo ins ance, eache No a's “why” ques ions (“Does i need wa e and da kness o g ow?…Why?”) could ha e led he child en o unde s and ha hey we e being asked o a mech- anis ic answe ega ding he unc ion o wa e and ligh in he plan , a he han an e idence- based jus i ica ion. This use o he easoning ques ion may cause some cogni i e o e load ha equi es some ollow- up assis ance om he eache . An inap- p op ia e use o sca olding u e ances o s imula e ad anced easoning may no ob ain he expec ed esul and may e en ha e nega i e e ec s, especially wi h young child en (Manz and Allen2017; S udhal e e al.2021). By ha ing wo discussion si ua ions led by di e en eache s, we we e able o de ec ha he o de in which ques ions we e asked may induce di e en sense- making sequences. Teache Ai o ollowed a mo e linea sca olding pa e n han Teache No a, inc easing he cogni i e demand h ough lowe - le el ques ions om obse able phenomena (wha happens), be o e mo ing h ough he easoning ques ions (why i happens). The p og es- sion o ques ioning in inqui y eaching has been also desc ibed by o he s udies (Benedic - Chambe s e al.2017; Kawalka and Vijapu ka  2013), and sequencing ques ions helps s uden s o mo e up a “cogni i e ladde ” h ough le els o inc easingly com- plex easoning Chin(2006, 2007). Unlike Teache Ai o , Teache No a induced child en o s a e hei claims om he beginning by ph asing he ocusing ques- ion as “Wha ha e we lea ned?”. She encou aged small cycles o ocusing + easoning o easoning + ocusing ques ions o iden i y each a iable and o wo k on hem sepa a ely in o de 10982736, 0, Downloaded om h ps://onlinelib a y.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/ ea.70010 by Uni e sidad Del País Vasco, Wiley Online Lib a y on [26/09/2025]. See he Te ms and Condi ions (h ps://onlinelib a y.wiley.com/ e ms-and-condi ions) on Wiley Online Lib a y o ules o use; OA a icles a e go e ned by he applicable C ea i e Commons License 17 o 20 o co ec ly s uc u e hei sca olding. In ea ly elemen a y scien i ic discussion, eache s may apply di e en pa e ns o sequencing s a egies, as long as hey a e awa e o he accompa- nying cogni i e demands o he ques ions posed. Al hough eache s may depa om a p e iously o ches a ed ques ioning sequence, in he cou se o he discussion hey a e o en challenged o in oduce a numbe o alk mo es o capi al- ize on he lea ning oppo uni ies ha a ise. Recen s udies show ha , in o de o os e s uden s' sense- making, eache s ha e o decide which ideas o pa hs o easoning o emphasize and ix, and which ones o open o s uden s o igu e ou by poin ing ou plausible ways o wa d (K is and Shim2024; Wa kins and Manz2022). In his s udy, we iden i ied a se ies o ques ions o alk mo es in he o m o e bal sca olds in esponse o s u- den s' p eceding answe s ha se ed h ee unc ions: o s im- ula e child en o ques ion o e ise hei own o o he s' claims o a gumen s, o manage inco ec and co ec answe s, and o enhance pee collabo a ion. Bo h eache s used e bal sca olds in he o m o a cons uc- i e challenge o espond o inco ec o en a i e answe s by challenging hem o e iew inconsis en ideas, as also epo ed in o he s udies (Chin 2006; Kawalka and Vijapu ka  2013; Soysal2019; S udhal e e al.2021; Yip2004). Fo ins ance, in- s ead o explici ly co ec ing misconcep ions (e.g., i i does no mo e i is no ali e), Teache Ai o , challenged he s uden s o econside hei answe s by con on ing hem wi h possible con- adic ions (e.g., “…bu he ees a e also s ill…”), and Teache No a p omp ed child en o econside s a emen s ha we e inconsis en wi h he e idence (e.g., “(A e you su e he seeds need)… ligh ?”). This s a egy esembles a neu al e alua ion ha a oids a iadic dialogue ( eache 's judgmen on whe he i is co ec o no ) and a o s a collabo a i e cons uc ion o knowledge (Chin2007; Lemke1990; Soysal2023). We ha e also documen ed some app op ia e echniques o e- in o cing o ex ending child en's “co ec ” esponses. Young child en o en needed eache media ion o comple e s uc u e and e balize hei ideas by means o ce ain echniques, such as cla i ica ion eques and he e oicing echnique (O'Conno and Michaels1993). A e ecapi ula ing s uden s' ideas and gi ing posi i e eed- back o co ec s a emen s bo h eache s o en ossed back o he g oup o o pa icula s uden s (e en men ioning hei name) a ela ed ques ion ha buil on he p e ious ones o ex end he line o concep ual hough . By doing his, he eache s no only alida e he s uden s' ideas and es ablish hem as a baseline on which o build, bu hey shi he esponsibili y o knowledge cons uc ion back o he s uden and p omo e s uden –s uden collabo a ion (Chin2007; Pimen el and McNeill2013; an Zee and Mins ell1997; Va elas and Pappas2013). The e o e, hese kinds o “ esponsi e ques ioning” echniques bo h help s uden s p og essi ely make sense o he concep ual ideas (Chin2006) and also equi e hem o engage in mo e highe - o de hinking (Chin2007). To achie e a p oduc i e dialogue, he eache mus also be able o open up he discussion and ac i ely engage s uden s in collab- o a i e class oom discussion. We ound ha he mos cogni i ely demanding epis emic ope a ions (i.e., explaining and e alua - ing) we e ca ied ou h ough collabo a ion among he s uden s, a he han in di ec esponse o he eache . In ou s udy, i was p ecisely when small a gumen a i e nodes wi hou he eache 's pa icipa ion ook place, ha ideas we e collec i ely cons uc ed and e ined. Likewise, Soysal(2023) ecen ly ound ha each- e 's excessi e ollow- up e alua ions limi s uden s' a emp s o cons uc al e na i e explana ions and educe he dialogical space o s uden s. Adop ing a non- di ec i e ole s imula es he use o e idence o explain he scien i ic phenomena and o ques ion o eques e idence and wa an s om each o he , he eby sca olding s uden s h ough inc easing cogni i e le els in a collabo a i e way (Be land and Hamme  2012; Hogan e  al. 1999; Jin and Kim2020; McNeill and Pimen el2010; Soysal2023). 5.3 | A gumen a ion and Sense- Making o Concep ual Co e Ideas In he coun e - and p o- a gumen a ion episodes in ou s udy, child en cons uc ed au hen ic knowledge by alida ing and e alua ing concep ual ideas issued in he con ex o plan s ap- plied o o he se ings (human beings o non- li ing hings in Teache Ai o 's class, o o he plan kinds, i.e., cac i, in Teache No a's class). By doing so, co e ideas on li ing beings' li e unc- ions and s uc u es we e add essed and es ablished as scien i ic c i e ia o answe he inqui y ques ion conce ning he equi e- men s o being a li ing being and he needs o plan s o ge mi- na ion and g ow h. Al hough p e ious s udies ha e shown ha collabo a ion among s uden s enables he co- cons uc ion o knowledge in elemen a y school child en (F ejd2019; Manz and Allen2017; Naylo e al.2007), ou esea ch also indica es ha cogni i ely high- o de ac s o doing science, such as induc i e easoning and e alua ion h ough hese collabo a i e pee in e ac ions, con e ge wi h highe - le el a gumen a ion o enable sense- making o co e scien i ic ideas. In his ega d, we ha e de el- oped an a gumen a ion- concep ualiza ion map o help isualize how agmen s o ideas a e cons uc ed h ough he di e en a gumen a i e ope a ions, by ep esen ing simul aneously he s uc u e and con en o he discou se. Since ideas a e ypically e iewed i e a i ely du ing he discussion, a diag am such as he one we use in his s udy may help summa ize all he compo- nen s o a gumen a ion (e idence, easoning and coun e - and p o- a gumen s) and concep ual knowledge buil in esponse o he inqui y ques ion h oughou he en i e discussion. In his way, he p ocess o cons uc ing ideas h ough a gumen a ion and i s complexi y can o some ex en be e lec ed isually. This ype o diag am, by in eg a ing he scien i ic concep s add essed in a Toulmin's layou o a gumen a ion, allows he eache o an icipa e he co e ideas ha he o she wan s o sca - old and o o esee he co esponding e idences and claims ha could be wo ked on in class. C ea ing esea ch- based didac ic ools and amewo ks o eaching science h ough a gumen- a ion can help eache s ocus hei a en ion on os e ing he cons uc ion o e idence- based explana ions in hei classes (Zembal- Saul2009). 10982736, 0, Downloaded om h ps://onlinelib a y.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/ ea.70010 by Uni e sidad Del País Vasco, Wiley Online Lib a y on [26/09/2025]. See he Te ms and Condi ions (h ps://onlinelib a y.wiley.com/ e ms-and-condi ions) on Wiley Online Lib a y o ules o use; OA a icles a e go e ned by he applicable C ea i e Commons License 18 o 20 Jou nal o Resea ch in Science Teaching, 2025 6 | Implica ions and Limi a ions One o he con ibu ions o his wo k consis s o he me hod- ology i sel o simul aneous ca ego iza ion o bo h he eache 's ques ions and he child en's answe s h ough he analysis o ou dimensions o class oom scien i ic discussion. Conduc ing such a mul idimensional analysis has p o en use ul in cap u - ing he complexi y o class oom scien i ic dialogue, and he eby, in ex ac ing ele an knowledge abou (i) young child en's po- en ial o engage in cogni i ely demanding and collabo a i e scien i ic p ac ices and (ii) he eache 's dialogic s a egies ha enable hem o de elop ha po en ial. Howe e , ou s udy does ha e some me hodological limi a ions, especially ega ding he coding o sho , delayed, o non- linea esponses and u e ances o child en a his ea ly age. Mo eo e , ou analysis does no allow us o elucida e comple ely why a sig- ni ican numbe o ques ions, especially hose o high cogni i e demand, did no elici esponses a he co esponding le el. We a e also awa e ha class oom discussion is in luenced by o he ac o s no add essed in his s udy ha dese e o be conside ed in u he s udies, such as he indi idual cha ac e is ics o he pa icipan s. Ano he limi a ion is ha we canno gene alize ou indings, as his s udy is based on case s udies. Howe e , he insigh s gained om his wo k can in o m a numbe o dialogic eaching p ac ices o ea ly ages, a g oup unde ep esen ed in he scien i ic li e a u e on class oom alk. As e idenced in ou s udy, he design by eache s o app op i- a e ques ioning s a egies can aise child en's le el o eason- ing based upon child en's cogni i e demand. In his sense, ou esul s ha e p o ided se e al keys ha could con ibu e o he imp o emen o eaching p ac ice in he ea ly yea s o p ima y science educa ion. Fi s , we ha e de ined a se ies o p oduc i e ques ions and alk mo es o p omp young child en's' e idence- based scien i ic ea- soning, s essing ha hei ph asing and sequence can de e mine hei success. Second, we ha e shown ha pe o ming a non- di ec i e eaching p ac ice p omo es he eme gence o nodes o a gumen a ion among he child en, and hus, he highes le el o a gumen a ion. Finally, building he lesson om a p e iously a icula ed a gumen a ion–concep ualiza ion map, as he one p o- posed in his s udy, can help o s uc u e he eache 's dialogic in- e en ion, o e ocus he ac i i y and he discussion, and o collec un o eseen ideas ha a ise in he con e sa ion. Based on ep esen a i e case s udies ea u ing scien i ic discus- sions on he ideas o li ing beings in p ima y school classes, in his pape we ha e ied o o e a se ies o guidelines ha can be use ul o eache s o help child en build scien i ic knowledge om he Vygo skyan socio- cul u al pe spec i e o adul –child collabo a ion. Acknowledgmen s This wo k was suppo ed by he Minis y o Science and Inno a ion o Spain (MCIN/AEI/10.13039/501100011033/FEDER, UE, G an PID2022- 137010OB- I00) and by he Uni e si y o he Basque Coun y (g an GIU21/031) o he KOMATZI esea ch g oup. We hank A. Peña, I. Zaldua, and A. A iola o hei collabo a ion in he de elopmen o he ac i i ies and da a collec ion, and anonymous e iewe s o hei eedback on ea ly e sions o his manusc ip . Re e ences Benedic - Chambe s, A., S. M. Kademian, E. A. Da is, and A. S. Palincsa . 2017. “Guiding S uden s Towa ds Sensemaking: Teache Ques ions Focused on In eg a ing Scien i ic P ac ices Wi h Science Con en .” In e na ional Jou nal o Science Educa ion 39, no. 15: 1977– 2001. h ps:// doi. o g/ 10. 1080/ 09500 693. 2017. 1366674. Be land, L. K., and D. Hamme . 2012. “F aming o Scien i ic A gumen a ion.” Jou nal o Resea ch in Science Teaching 49, no. 1: 68– 94. h ps:// doi. o g/ 10. 1002/ ea. 20446 . Be na d, S., H. Me cie , and F. Clémen . 2012. “The Powe o Well- Connec ed A gumen s: Ea ly Sensi i i y o he Connec i e Because.” Jou nal o Expe imen al Child Psychology 111, no. 1: 128–135. h ps:// doi. o g/ 10. 1016/j. jecp. 2011. 07. 003. Ca agne o, A., B. M. Hand, and L. No on- Meie . 2010. “The Na u e o Elemen a y S uden Science Discou se in he Con ex o he Science W i ing Heu is ic App oach.” In e na ional Jou nal o Science Educa ion 32, no. 4: 427–449. h ps:// doi. o g/ 10. 1080/ 09500 69080 2627277. Chen, Y.- C., J.- L. Lin, and Y.- T. Chen. 2014. “Teaching Scien i ic Co e Ideas Th ough Imme sing S uden s in A gumen : Using Densi y as an Example.” Science Ac i i ies 51, no. 3: 78–88. h ps:// doi. o g/ 10. 1080/ 00368 121. 2014. 915792. Chin, C. 2006. “Class oom In e ac ion in Science: Teache Ques ioning and Feedback o S uden s' Responses.” In e na ional Jou nal o Science Educa ion 28, no. 11: 1315–1346. h ps:// doi. o g/ 10. 1080/ 09500 69060 0621100. Chin, C. 2007. “Teache Ques ioning in Science Class ooms: App oaches Tha S imula e P oduc i e Thinking.” Jou nal o Resea ch in Science Teaching 44, no. 6: 815–843. h ps:// doi. o g/ 10. 1002/ ea. 20171 . Ch is odoulou, A., and J. Osbo ne. 2014. “The Science Class oom as a Si e o Epis emic Talk: A Case S udy o a Teache 's A emp s o Teach Science Based on A gumen .” Jou nal o Resea ch in Science Teaching 51, no. 10: 1275–1300. h ps:// doi. o g/ 10. 1002/ ea. 21166 . Cla k, D. B., V. Sampson, A. Weinbe ge , and G. E kens. 2007. “Analy ic F amewo ks o Assessing Dialogic A gumen a ion in Online Lea ning En i onmen s.” Educa ional Psychology Re iew 19, no. 3: 343–374. h ps:// doi. o g/ 10. 1007/ s1064 8- 007- 9050- 7. Con e ini, J., and F. A cidiacono. 2021. “Embodied A gumen a ion in Young Child en in Kinde ga en.” Educa ion in Science 11: 514. h ps:// doi. o g/ 10. 3390/ educs ci110 90514 . D i e , R., P. New on, and J. Osbo ne. 2000. “Es ablishing he No ms o Scien i ic A gumen a ion in Class ooms.” Science Educa ion 84, no. 3: 287–312. h ps:// doi. o g/ 10. 1002/ (SICI) 1098- 237X(200005) 84: 3< 287:: AID- SCE1> 3.0. CO; 2- A. Duschl, R. 2008. “Science Educa ion in Th ee- Pa Ha mony: Balancing Concep ual, Epis emic, and Social Lea ning Goals.” Re iew o Resea ch in Educa ion 32, no. 1: 268–291. h ps:// doi. o g/ 10. 3102/ 00917 32X07 309371. Els gees , J. 1985. “The Righ Ques ion a he Righ Time.” In P ima y Science: Taking he Plunge, edi ed by W. Ha len, 36–46. Heinemann Educa ional. E du an, S., and M. P. Jiménez- Aleixand e. 2007. A gumen a ion in Science Educa ion. Vol. 35. Sp inge Ne he lands. E du an, S., S. Simon, and J. Osbo ne. 2004. “TAPping In o A gumen a ion: De elopmen s in he Applica ion o Toulmin's A gumen Pa e n o S udying Science Discou se.” Science Educa ion 88, no. 6: 915–933. h ps:// doi. o g/ 10. 1002/ sce. 20012 . Fleiss, J. L. 1981. “Balanced Incomple e Block Designs o In e - Ra e Reliabili y S udies.” Applied Psychological Measu emen 5, no. 1: 105– 112. h ps:// doi. o g/ 10. 1177/ 01466 21681 00500115. 10982736, 0, Downloaded om h ps://onlinelib a y.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/ ea.70010 by Uni e sidad Del País Vasco, Wiley Online Lib a y on [26/09/2025]. See he Te ms and Condi ions (h ps://onlinelib a y.wiley.com/ e ms-and-condi ions) on Wiley Online Lib a y o ules o use; OA a icles a e go e ned by he applicable C ea i e Commons License 19 o 20 F ejd, J. 2019. “When Child en Do Science: Collabo a i e In e ac ions in P eschoole s' Discussions Abou Animal Di e si y.” Resea ch in Science Educa ion 51, no. S1: 21–42. h ps:// doi. o g/ 10. 1007/ s1116 5- 019- 9822- 3. Hogan, K., B. K. Nas asi, and M. P essley. 1999. “Discou se Pa e ns and Collabo a i e Scien i ic Reasoning in Pee and Teache - Guided Discussions.” Cogni ion and Ins uc ion 17, no. 4: 379–432. h ps:// doi. o g/ 10. 1207/ S1532 690XC I1704_ 2. Jiménez- Aleixand e, M. P., A. Bugallo Rod íguez, and R. A. Duschl. 2000. “Doing he Lesson o Doing Science: A gumen in High School Gene ics.” Science Educa ion 84, no. 6: 757–792. h ps:// doi. o g/ 10. 1002/ 1098- 237X(200011) 84: 6< 757:: AID- SCE5> 3.0. CO; 2- F. Jin, Q., and M. Kim. 2020. “Eme gence o A gumen a ion in Elemen a y Science Class ooms.” Canadian Jou nal o New Schola s in Educa ion/ Re ue Canadienne Des Jeunes Che cheu es e Che cheu s en Éduca ion 11, no. 1: 9–17. Kawalka , A., and J. Vijapu ka . 2013. “Sca olding Science Talk: The Role o Teache s' Ques ions in he Inqui y Class oom.” In e na ional Jou nal o Science Educa ion 35, no. 12: 2004–2027. h ps:// doi. o g/ 10. 1080/ 09500 693. 2011. 604684. Kelly, G. J. 2008. “Inqui y, Ac i i y, and Epis emic P ac ice.” In Teaching Scien i ic Inqui y: Recommenda ions o Resea ch and Implemen a ion (pp. 99-117; 288-291), edi ed by R. Duschl and R. G andy. Sense Publishe s. Kelly, G. J., S. D uke , and C. Chen. 1998. “S uden s' Reasoning Abou Elec ici y: Combining Pe o mance Assessmen s Wi h A gumen a ion Analysis.” In e na ional Jou nal o Science Educa ion 20, no. 7: 849–871. h ps:// doi. o g/ 10. 1080/ 09500 69980 200707. Kim, M., and W.- M. Ro h. 2018. “Dialogical A gumen a ion in Elemen a y Science Class ooms.” Cul u al S udies o Science Educa ion 13, no. 4: 1061–1085. h ps:// doi. o g/ 10. 1007/ s1142 2- 017- 9846- 9. K is , C., and S. Shim. 2024. “Which Ideas, When, and Why? An Expe ienced Teache 's In- The- Momen Pedagogical Reasoning Abou Facili a ing S uden Sense- Making Discussions.” Jou nal o Resea ch in Science Teaching 61, no. 2: 255–288. h ps:// doi. o g/ 10. 1002/ ea. 21908 . Lee, Y., and M. B. Kinzie. 2012. “Teache Ques ion and S uden Response Wi h Rega d o Cogni ion and Language Use.” Ins uc ional Science 40, no. 6: 857–874. h ps:// doi. o g/ 10. 1007/ s1125 1- 011- 9193- 2. Lemke, J. L. 1990. Talking Science: Language, Lea ning, and Values. Ablex Publishing Co po a ion. Lowell, B. R., K. Che bow, and K. L. McNeill. 2022. “Conside ing Discussion Types o Suppo Collec i e Sensemaking Du ing a S o yline Uni .” Jou nal o Resea ch in Science Teaching 59, no. 2: 195–222. h ps:// doi. o g/ 10. 1002/ ea. 21725 . Maloney, J., and S. Simon. 2006. “Mapping Child en's Discussions o E idence in Science o Assess Collabo a ion and A gumen a ion.” In e na ional Jou nal o Science Educa ion 28, no. 15: 1817–1841. h ps:// doi. o g/ 10. 1080/ 09500 69060 0855419. Manz, E., and C. Allen. 2017. “Suppo ing E idence Cons uc ion P ac ices in Elemen a y Class ooms.” In Re aming Science Teaching and Lea ning, 79–94. Rou ledge. Manz, E., and I. P. Renga. 2017. “Unde s anding How Teache s Guide E idence Cons uc ion Con e sa ions.” Science Educa ion 101: 584– 615. h ps:// doi. o g/ 10. 1002/ sce. 21282 . Mason, L. 1996. “An Analysis o Child en's Cons uc ion o New Knowledge Th ough Thei Use o Reasoning and A guing in Class oom Discussions.” In e na ional Jou nal o Quali a i e S udies in Educa ion 9, no. 4: 411–433. h ps:// doi. o g/ 10. 1080/ 09518 39960 090404. McNeill, K. L. 2011. “Elemen a y S uden s' Views o Explana ion, A gumen a ion, and E idence, and Thei Abili ies o Cons uc A gumen s O e he School Yea .” Jou nal o Resea ch in Science Teaching 48, no. 7: 793–823. h ps:// doi. o g/ 10. 1002/ ea. 20430 . McNeill, K. L., and D. S. Pimen el. 2010. “Scien i ic Discou se in Th ee U ban Class ooms: The Role o he Teache in Engaging High School S uden s in A gumen a ion.” Science Educa ion 94, no. 2: 203–229. h ps:// doi. o g/ 10. 1002/ sce. 20364 . Me ce , N., L. Dawes, R. Wege i , and C. Sams. 2004. “Reasoning as a Scien is : Ways o Helping Child en o Use Language o Lea n Science.” B i ish Educa ional Resea ch Jou nal 30, no. 3: 359–377. h ps:// doi. o g/ 10. 1080/ 01411 92041 00016 89689 . Me z, K. E. 2011. “Disen angling Robus De elopmen al Cons ain s F om he Ins uc ionally Mu able: Young Child en's Epis emic Reasoning Abou a S udy o Thei Own Design.” Jou nal o he Lea ning Sciences 20, no. 1: 50–110. h ps:// doi. o g/ 10. 1080/ 10508 406. 2011. 529325. Mon ei a, S. F., and M. P. Jiménez- Aleixand e. 2016. “The P ac ice o Using E idence in Kinde ga en: The Role o Pu pose ul Obse a ion.” Jou nal o Resea ch in Science Teaching 53, no. 8: 1232–1258. h ps:// doi. o g/ 10. 1002/ ea. 21259 . Naylo , S., B. Keogh, and B. Downing. 2007. “A gumen a ion and P ima y Science.” Resea ch in Science Educa ion 37, no. 1: 17–39. h ps:// doi. o g/ 10. 1007/ s1116 5- 005- 9002- 5. NRC. 2012. A F amewo k o K- 12 Science Educa ion: P ac ices, C osscu ing Concep s, and Co e Ideas, edi ed by Di ision o Beha io al and Social Sciences and Educa ion; Boa d on Science Educa ion; Commi ee on a Concep ual F amewo k o New K- 12 Science Educa ion S anda ds. Na ional Academies P ess. O'Conno , M. C., and S. Michaels. 1993. “Aligning Academic Task and Pa icipa ion S a us Th ough Re oicing: Analysis o a Class oom Discou se S a egy.” An h opology & Educa ion Qua e ly 24, no. 4: 318–335. Oli ei a, A. W. 2010. “Imp o ing Teache Ques ioning in Science Inqui y Discussions Th ough P o essional De elopmen .” Jou nal o Resea ch in Science Teaching 47, no. 4: 422–453. h ps:// doi. o g/ 10. 1002/ ea. 20345 . Pimen el, D. S., and K. L. McNeill. 2013. “Conduc ing Talk in Seconda y Science Class ooms: In es iga ing Ins uc ional Mo es and Teache s' Belie s.” Science Educa ion 97, no. 3: 367–394. h ps:// doi. o g/ 10. 1002/ sce. 21061 . Pon eco o, C., and H. Gi a de . 1993. “A guing and Reasoning in Unde s anding His o ical Topics.” Cogni ion and Ins uc ion 11, no. 3–4: 365–395. h ps:// doi. o g/ 10. 1080/ 07370 008. 1993. 9649030. Ru man, T., J. Pe ne , D. R. Olson, and M. Dohe y. 1993. “Re lec ing on Scien i ic Thinking: Child en's Unde s anding o he Hypo hesis E idence Rela ion.” Child De elopmen 64, no. 6: 1617–1636. h ps:// doi. o g/ 10. 2307/ 1131459. Sampson, V., and D. B. Cla k. 2008. “Assessmen o he Ways S uden s Gene a e A gumen s in Science Educa ion: Cu en Pe spec i es and Recommenda ions o Fu u e Di ec ions.” Science Educa ion 92, no. 3: 447–472. h ps:// doi. o g/ 10. 1002/ sce. 20276 . Sando al, W. A., B. Sodian, S. Koe be , and J. Wong. 2014. “De eloping Child en's Ea ly Compe encies o Engage Wi h Science.” Educa ional Psychologis 49, no. 2: 139–152. h ps:// doi. o g/ 10. 1080/ 00461 520. 2014. 917589. Simon, S., S. E du an, and J. Osbo ne. 2006. “Lea ning o Teach A gumen a ion: Resea ch and De elopmen in he Science Class oom.” In e na ional Jou nal o Science Educa ion 28, no. 2–3: 235–260. h ps:// doi. o g/ 10. 1080/ 09500 69050 0336957. Si y, C., G. Ziegle , and C. Max. 2012. “Doing Science Th ough Discou se- In- In e ac ion: Young Child en's Science In es iga ions a he Ea ly Childhood Le el.” Science Educa ion 96: 311–326. h ps:// doi. o g/ 10. 1002/ sce. 20481 . Sodian, B., D. Zai chik, and S. Ca ey. 1991. “Young Child en's Di e en ia ion o Hypo he ical Belie s F om E idence.” Child De elopmen 62, no. 4: 753–766. h ps:// doi. o g/ 10. 2307/ 1131175. 10982736, 0, Downloaded om h ps://onlinelib a y.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/ ea.70010 by Uni e sidad Del País Vasco, Wiley Online Lib a y on [26/09/2025]. See he Te ms and Condi ions (h ps://onlinelib a y.wiley.com/ e ms-and-condi ions) on Wiley Online Lib a y o ules o use; OA a icles a e go e ned by he applicable C ea i e Commons License 20 o 20 Jou nal o Resea ch in Science Teaching, 2025 Soysal, Y. 2019. “In es iga ing Discu si e Func ions and Po en ial Cogni i e Demands o Teache Ques ioning in he Science Class oom.” Lea ning: Resea ch and P ac ice 6, no. 2: 167–194. h ps:// doi. o g/ 10. 1080/ 23735 082. 2019. 1575458. Soysal, Y. 2023. “An Explo a ion o he De e minan s o Middle School S uden s' A gumen Quali y by Class oom Discou se Analysis.” Resea ch in Science & Technological Educa ion 41, no. 1: 343–371. h ps:// doi. o g/ 10. 1080/ 02635 143. 2021. 1908981. Soysal, Y., and O. Yilmaz- Tuzun. 2021. “Rela ionships Be ween Teache Discu si e Mo es and Middle School S uden s' Cogni i e Con ibu ions o Science Concep s.” Resea ch in Science Educa ion 51, no. S1: 325–367. h ps:// doi. o g/ 10. 1007/ s1116 5- 019- 09881 - 1. S udhal e , U. T., M. Leuch e , A. Te enbo n, A. Elme , P. A. Edelsb unne , and H. Saalbach. 2021. “Ea ly Science Lea ning: The E ec s o Teache Talk.” Lea ning and Ins uc ion 71: 101371. h ps:// doi. o g/ 10. 1016/j. lea n ins uc. 2020. 101371. Toulmin, S. E. 2003. The Uses o A gumen . 2nd ed. Camb idge Uni e si y P ess. an Zee, E., and J. Mins ell. 1997. “Using Ques ioning o Guide S uden Thinking.” Jou nal o he Lea ning Sciences 6, no. 2: 227–269. h ps:// doi. o g/ 10. 1207/ s1532 7809j ls0602_ 3. Va elas, M., and C. C. Pappas. 2013. “In eg a ing Science and Li e acy: Fo ms and Func ions.” In Child en's Ways Wi h Science and Li e acy, edi ed by M. Va elas and C. C. Pappas, 3–19. Rou ledge. V ikki, M., and M. E ago ou. 2023. “An Analysis o Teache Ques ioning P ac ices in Dialogic Lessons.” In e na ional Jou nal o Educa ional Resea ch 117: 102107. h ps:// doi. o g/ 10. 1016/j. ije . 2022. 102107. Wa kins, J., and E. Manz. 2022. “Cha ac e izing Pedagogical Decision Poin s in Sense- Making Con e sa ions Mo i a ed by Scien i ic Unce ain y.” Science Educa ion 106, no. 6: 1408–1441. h ps:// doi. o g/ 10. 1002/ sce. 21747 . Windschi l, M., J. Thompson, and M. B aa en. 2008. “Beyond he Scien i ic Me hod: Model- Based Inqui y as a New Pa adigm o P e e ence o School Science In es iga ions.” Science Educa ion 92, no. 5: 941–967. h ps:// doi. o g/ 10. 1002/ sce. 20259 . Yin, R. K. 2009. Case S udy Resea ch: Design and Me hods. 4 h ed. Sage publica ions. Yip, D. Y. 2004. “Ques ioning Skills o Concep ual Change in Science Ins uc ion.” Jou nal o Biological Educa ion 38, no. 2: 76–83. h ps:// doi. o g/ 10. 1080/ 00219 266. 2004. 9655905. Zembal- Saul, C. 2009. “Lea ning o Teach Elemen a y School Science as A gumen .” Science Educa ion 93, no. 4: 687–719. h ps:// doi. o g/ 10. 1002/ sce. 20325 . 10982736, 0, Downloaded om h ps://onlinelib a y.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/ ea.70010 by Uni e sidad Del País Vasco, Wiley Online Lib a y on [26/09/2025]. See he Te ms and Condi ions (h ps://onlinelib a y.wiley.com/ e ms-and-condi ions) on Wiley Online Lib a y o ules o use; OA a icles a e go e ned by he applicable C ea i e Commons License