Developing Students’ Skills in Experimental Data Analysis and Scientific Argumentation in Physics through a Claim-Evidence Reasoning and Content and Language Integrated Learning Approach

Background and purpose: Physics learning requires students not only to calculate numerical answers, but also to interpret experimental data and justify conclusions. In the observed Grade 12 physics classes, students could often identify a trend in count-rate data, but they found it difficult to connect quantitative evidence with scientific reasoning in English. This Lesson Study therefore examined whether a Claim-Evidence-Reasoning (CER) framework integrated with Content and Language Integrated Learning (CLIL) support could improve students’ data analysis and scientific argumentation during the topic of radioactive decay. Aims: The study focused on improving students’ ability to analyse count-rate data, construct graphs, explain the probabilistic nature of radioactive decay, and write evidence-based explanations using appropriate subject-specific English vocabulary. Research design or methodology: The research was conducted as a Lesson Study cycle in two Grade 12 physics classes with students aged 16-17. The final analysis included 28 students: 14 in the experimental group and 14 in the comparison group. Physics in Grades 11 and 12 at the school is delivered fully in English; therefore, the CLIL element was used to strengthen students’ academic and scientific language rather than to replace subject instruction. Three research lessons were designed around guided inquiry, graph interpretation, and written CER explanations. Data were collected through a physics subject test, a CER writing rubric, a CLIL scientific communication rubric, observation checklists, focus-student observations, and short post-lesson interviews. Findings: The experimental group outperformed the comparison group in the post-test total CER score: 8.4 ± 1.6 versus 6.9 ± 1.5 points; t(26) = 2.56, p = .017, d = 0.97. Checklist data also showed positive changes: students correctly connecting evidence with reasoning increased from 42.9% to 71.4%, and students using at least two pieces of quantitative evidence increased from 50.0% to 78.6%. Conclusions, originality, value and implications: The findings suggest that CER-oriented CLIL scaffolding can help students move from simple observation of data to structured, evidence-based scientific explanation. The model is practical for physics topics requiring data interpretation, graph construction, and written argumentation in English-medium science classrooms.

Keywords

Claim-Evidence-Reasoning scaffolding, Content and Language Integrated Learning, physics education, lesson study, guided inquiry, count-rate data analysis, scientific argumentation, radioactive decay

Permanent link to cite this item

https://hdl.handle.net/20.500.14069/1410
https://doi.org/10.71779/800

Collections

Camtree Research Reports