The Acquisition of General Purpose Strategic Knowledge for Argumentation

Abstract

We describe the implementation and testing of a program designed to develop critical-reading and writing skills in psychology students through the acquisition of a general knowledge structure for argumentation. To investigate the acquisition of this knowledge structure, two introductory psychology classes, one getting critical-thinking skills instruction and another not receiving it, were compared on their use of argumentative language in constructing generic outlines for a persuasive term paper at the beginning and end of the course. After training, the critical thinking-trained group showed greater use of language similar to that used in instruction and significantly greater use of argumentative language, judged to be appropriate by critical-thinking experts, than the group not getting the instruction.