Development Of Argumentation Skills Research Articles

Argumentation and Knowledge Construction in Higher Education: A Vygotskian Perspective

Empirical research indicates that the utilization of argumentation as an educational strategy fosters the acquisition of argumentation skills and disciplinary knowledge. Furthermore, there is evidence to show that argumentation skills development mediates the effect of oral argumentation on disciplinary knowledge. However, studies have also shown that argumentation is scarce in higher education and that although lecturers see argumentation as a relevant pedagogical goal, they think that students need to first acquire knowledge in order to develop argumentation skills. Therefore, a crucial pedagogical resource to promote scientific knowledge in higher education is being overlooked. This paper is aimed at shedding light onto argumentation as a key practice in higher education teaching, disputing the idea that to argue, students first need to acquire knowledge. We elaborate further on Vygotsky’s notion of scientific concepts, highlighting their dialectic structure, which accounts for the epistemic potential of argumentation. This paper extends an invitation to higher education lecturers to prompt argumentation in classrooms as a form of disciplinary learning. Limitations and implications are discussed throughout the paper

“My brain doesn't communicate with my hands”: navigating negotiated interaction in Swedish and Indonesian supervision

IntroductionThe importance of supervisory interaction facilitated by dialogic feedback is known to create a shared understanding between supervisors and students. However, previous studies of supervisory interaction mainly focus on exploring feedback provision as an input for specific improvement rather than as a process of interaction regardless of its discursivity. Informed by learning community theory, this study explores how thesis supervision in English as an Additional Language contexts is negotiated to identify the supervisory interaction patterns and strategies.MethodThis study applied a qualitative case study by involving six supervisory dyads (six supervisors and 15 students) in English- medium study programs. Thematic analysis was used to analyze 18 video-recorded supervision sessions from the beginning, the middle, and the end of the supervision process.Findings and discussionThe findings illuminate the negotiated interaction patterns and strategies in supervisory meetings that can be organized into three themes: (1) managing correction, (2) managing scaffolding, and (3) managing students' emotional expressions. The supervisory interaction patterns tend to take the form of a common institutional talk due to the students' desire for confirmation and suggestions. Prompting strategies through exploratory questions can scaffold students' development of argumentative skills although students' deviant responses frequently lead to supervisors' further explanation. The theoretical analysis underscores that learning community theory emphasizes the development of student's academic literacy and argumentative proficiency through dialogic inquiry. Yet, effective engagement in such inquiry necessitates prerequisite academic literacy and rhetorical competencies.ConclusionThis study highlights the need for developing student's academic literacy, research literacy, and communication skills to achieve an effective inquiry dialogue in thesis supervision.

Inquiry and argumentation skill development work in conjunction

The argument and inquiry families of scientific thinking skills overlap. Yet they rarely are investigated together, with researchers instead focusing on one or the other. Here we hypothesize that inclusion of an additional intervention focused on inquiry will enhance the outcome of an established intervention known to be successful in developing argument skills, compared to the argument intervention alone. An Argument only (A) and an Argument and Inquiry (A&I) group of young adolescents participated in one or the other of these intensive intervention groups for four hours daily over a two-week period. Both groups made progress in argument skills as expected, but the A&I group showed greater gains in use of evidence to support claims, stronger forms of counterargument, and integrative however arguments that connect opposing claims to one another. The A&I group showed a particular advantage in reconciling contrasting claims, an epistemological understanding that lies at the core of scientific thinking. These findings suggest the value of conceptualizing argument skill development in a broader framework that includes an investigative component as well as the skill of coordinating claims and evidence that is fundamental to argument.

Addressing socio-scientific issues with interactive concept cartoons: design of a web-based educational instrument

ABSTRACT A goal of science education is for students to develop scientific literacy. Scientific literacy involves the acquisition of factual scientific knowledge and the ability to assess the credibility of scientific assertation. Furthermore, students should be able to include ethical considerations. Realising this goal is complicated because it requires the development of argumentation skills, content knowledge, and an understanding of Nature of Science. Teachers struggle to apply effective strategies in the classroom. Few studies have shed light on usable, effective strategies. Therefore, the research goal is to identify features that encourage students to explore socio-scientific issues. To stimulate the development of scientific literary and support teachers, a web-based educational instrument was designed. In this study, the effects and influences of its features in the context of socio-scientific issues are investigated. The instrument provides a sequence of concept cartoons alternated with an interactive diagram. The instrument is deployed in 14 classrooms in both primary and secondary schools. In this paper, we present the educational instrument and report on its practical implementation and its constituent features. The results indicate that students show active involvement during their interaction with the instrument and reveal both the merits and challenges regarding the various features.

Learning Argumentative Capacities at the Primary and Junior School Levels: A Practical Teaching Pedagogy

The development of argumentative skills is often postponed until after students complete their compulsory education, creating a gap in their understanding and abilities. This gap can be attributed to issues with the curriculum and teaching methods. To address this, we propose that teaching argumentative skills at the primary school level is crucial for enhancing students’ comprehension of the world and its inhabitants. To support this idea, we have designed practical teaching modules that can be introduced in primary and junior schools. Our pedagogical approach emphasizes relatable examples, interactive discussions, peer reviews, and recommendations, with a focus on teacher-to-teacher training. It is vital that teachers receive thorough training on implementing these pedagogical strategies and consider the context to achieve early development of argumentative skills in the modern classroom.

Improving pre-service teachers’ argumentation skills: A holistic online scaffolding design approach

The literature widely reports that pre-service teachers repeatedly demonstrate inadequate argumentation skills. Through a mixed-methods research approach, this study investigated the effectiveness of a holistic online scaffolding design for guiding the development of pre-service teachers’ argumentation skills. Participants were randomly assigned to either a control or experimental group and then applied argumentation skills to solve case-based problem scenarios on teaching methods for two weeks. The experimental group had a significant improvement in the following argumentation skills: evidence, alternative theory, and counterargument. Qualitative data collected shows diverse metacognition concerning argumentation skills within experimental group. This study suggests that embedding a holistic online scaffolding approach into teacher training programs for the development of argumentation skills offers meaningful learning opportunities for pre-service teachers.

Transformation Of Learner Learning: Improving Reasoning Skills Through Artificial Intelligence (AI)

The research aims to explore the potential of artificial intelligence (AI) in the context of Learning as a solution to the challenges in developing thinking skills. Through the use of AI technology, the study focuses on finding out the relationship between AI and students' ability to argue. The approach used in this research is quantitative with correlational methods. Research results show that AI in learning can be a significant catalyst for the development of critical and analytical thinking skills. Students engaged in learning environments using AI showed an improvement in problem-solving, information-analysis, and critical thinking skills so that their ability to argue improved. In addition, learning efficiency, and motivates the learners to reach their maximum potential. This research contributes to an understanding of how AI in education can have a positive impact on the development of argumentation skills. The practical implications of these findings can open the door to the development of more effective and personalized learning strategies in the future, creating a responsive and adaptive educational environment.

Penerapan Argumentasi dan Bahan Ajar dalam Meningkatkan Pemahaman Materi Biologi Mahasiswa

Scientific argumentation aimed at reaching a rational perspective on science, scientific concepts, or elements within a scientific procedure. This study is experimental research employing a pretest-posttest control group design. The research was conducted with a population of 44 fifth-semester students majoring in biology education. The sample selection was performed using random sampling, consisting of two classes (experimental and control), each comprising 22 students. Data for the research were collected through pretests and posttests, which included 10 questions with five argumentation indicators via the minimum structure essay test. The research findings demonstrated an enhancement in students' ability to articulate their comprehension of the material when utilizing teaching materials compared to those who did not. As a result, it is recommended that the incorporation of teaching materials into the learning process be implemented in various other courses to foster the development of argumentation skills, including the presentation of claims, data, warrants, backing, and effective rebuttals in the learning process.

New Look at Soft Skills Development Through Debate Technology

The article highlights theoretical and practical aspects of the relevant contemporary issue of development of soft skills of pre-service primary school teachers by means of intensification of debate in the classroom. Modern society requires from specialists not only deep knowledge in their fields, but also the ability to effectively communicate and interact with others. Soft skills development through debate technology is a contemporary and innovative approach to enhancing essential interpersonal and communication skills. Debate technologies contribute to the development of argumentation skills, the ability to listen, respond to the arguments of opponents and express one's opinions clearly and convincingly. The approach combines the traditional practice of debate with modern technology to provide a more engaging and effective learning experience. The author analyses the problem from two perspectives: development of students’ soft skills, on the one hand, and pedagogical potential of debate in this context, on the other. The definition of the concepts “soft skills” vs “hard skills” is generalized, the factors of efficient application of debate technologies are outlined. The researcher proved that ability to arrange engaging debate in different academic courses at the university is a characteristic feature of professional competence of an innovative educator as it helps develop students’ key skills. The formation of the latter takes place both in individual subjects teaching and in the process of subjects’ integration.

Contribution of the Inquiry Learning Model to Student Scientific Argumentation Skills on Fluid

The inquiry learning model is a model that facilitates the construction of students' scientific knowledge which can also improve students' argumentation skills. According to several research results, inquiry-based learning has proven to be effective in improving scientific argumentation skills because in the learning process students are directed in investigative activities to find scientific evidence as a basis for scientific argumentation. By considering the student learning process, the aim of this research is to describe whether the use of three types of inquiry learning models can teach fluid material and influence the student learning process, one of which is students' argumentation abilities. This research method uses mixed method triangulation. The instruments used were interview questionnaires and argumentation tests. The data obtained was then analyzed using simple statistical tests and N-gain scores. Interview data was analyzed to find out clarification of students' answers. The research results of the inquiry learning model were successful in developing argumentation skills, namely the n-gain score resulted in the use of the structured inquiry learning model gaining 0.88, the guided inquiry learning model 0.84 and the open inquiry learning model 0.74.

Teachers’ support in developing year 7 students’ argumentation skills about water-based socioscientific issues

ABSTRACT Internationally, there are calls for students to be able to use their scientific understandings to make informed decisions about the world in which they live. Using a mixed methods case study design, this study investigated the impact of behaviours and strategies used by two early career science teachers who taught argumentation about a water-based socioscientific issues (SSI) to their Year 7 students. Students’ argument quality, measured using Toulmin’s argument structure, improved significantly from pre- to post-instruction (p = .0033). There was also a significant increase (p = .0037) in the number of types of categories. Qualitative data comprising classroom audio-transcripts, field notes, student work samples, teacher interviews and student reflections were analysed using inductive analysis to identify four themes related to teacher behaviours and teaching strategies: (1) developing and maintaining a safe classroom environment; (2) providing clear instructions about the features of quality arguments; (3) providing opportunities for all students to think and work individually and collaboratively; and (4) practising oral and written argument construction with gradual removal of scaffolds. While the findings are not generalisable teacher educators can use their expertise to decide the extent to which the teacher strategies and behaviours would support the development of argumentation skills in their particular context.

Penerapan Model Adi (Argument Driven Inquiry) Berbasis Argumentasi Toulmin Untuk Meningkatkan Keterampilan Berpikir Kritis Peserta Didik SMA

Efforts that can be made to facilitate the improvement of students' critical thinking skills are to apply the ADI (Argument Driven Inquiry) learning model. It is a learning model that gives students opportunity to learn in reflective scientific inquiry so they can develop argumentation skills and critical thinking. The purpose of this study was to obtain data on (1) implementation of ADI model on sound wave material, (2) improvement students' critical thinking skills after applying ADI model based on Toulmin's argumentation. The type of research is true experiments with pre-test-post-test control group research design. Data collection was carried out using observation, tests and questionnaires. The results showed that learning physics using ADI model could be carried out very well with percentage score of 94,23%. The results of pre-test and post-test data analysis shows that the increase of critical thinking skills of experimental class students is in medium category and control class is in low category. The results of student response questionnaire data analysis showed that stages of ADI model were implemented well in class with percentage score of 84,16%. This shows that ADI model can be used to improve students' critical thinking skills.

Development and Validation of E-Books Based on Socio-Scientific Issues to Improve The Argumentation Skills of High School Students

This study aims to develop and analyze the validity of the e-book on environmental pollution based on socio-scientific issues to improve students' argumentation skills. The development of the e-book uses the ADDIE design (Analysis, Design, Development, Implementation, and Evaluation), but this research has only reached the development stage (Development/D). This study used a qualitative descriptive analysis using a validation sheet instrument in the form of a questionnaire by two experts: material experts and technology/application experts. Data analysis technique using Content Validity Ratio (CVR). The validation results of material experts got a score of 98.38% in the very feasible category, while the application/technology expert for evaluating the application of content and language feasibility, respectively, got a score of 85.94% and 81.58% in the very feasible category. Based on the assessment results of the two validators, the e-book on environmental pollution based on socio-scientific issues was declared valid and suitable for use in the learning process. The conceptual implication of this study is that environmental pollution e-books based on socio-scientific issues can facilitate students in developing argumentation skills. As for the practical implications, the e-book can be used as an innovation as a Biology learning resource that makes it easier for students to learn independently and streamlines the delivery of material in learning activities in the classroom for teachers.

Digital mind maps (DMM) in developing students’ critical thinking within the course of Business Communication

In the era of information technology development, various interactive computer programmes and electronic resources in educational settings are of particular relevance for effective teacher-student interaction. This paper discusses didactic potential of using Digital Mind Mapping (DMM) technology in the context of developing Masters students’ critical thinking within business communication classes. In this context, mind mapping is an innovative strategy to facilitate recognition and memorization of important information by students, as well as to ensure the depth of their understanding by making connections between pieces of information and to develop critical thinking of students. The study gives an overview of services for creating DMM, a comparative analysis of their functional characteristics, and also offers a model for using DMM consisting of several stages, using the “Business communication” course in a foreign language for Masters students as an example. The authors concludes that the use of DMM in the educational process stimulates the development of creative abilities and critical thinking of students; develops general cultural competencies of students in group work; promotes the development of argumentation skills; justification of their point of view and possession of clear oral and written speech; forms the ability to work in a team, and promotes the development of cooperation skills; makes it possible to ma

Promoting Critical Thinking Through Argument Mapping: A Lab for Undergraduate Students

Aim/Purpose: In undergraduate training, helping students improve argumentative text comprehension (CoT) by identifying the elements of an argumentative text and critical thinking (CT) by reconstructing the meaning of the text and constructing their own reflections is relevant. Argumentative skills are essential on both the personal and professional levels. Background: In recent decades, concern has developed over undergraduates’ poor skills in reframing and articulating their thinking on a topic, which affects critical thinking and the ability to express unique perspectives. Customized interventions in higher education could develop argumentative abilities for professional and personal use. In this regard, argument maps (AM) could be a useful tool for the visualization of arguments. They provide logical relationships between statements to help understand the reasoning chain. Methodology: Hybrid presence-distance research was conducted over four days. A quasi-experiment with one group and three tests – S1, S2, and S3 – was conducted. Contribution: Our study aims to investigate and enrich the research landscape, especially in the Italian university context, regarding the use of AM to support text comprehension and the development of argumentative skills. Findings: Our preliminary descriptive analysis showed that AM improves students’ CoT and CT proficiency levels. These abilities improved from the beginning to the end of the experiment. Inferential analysis showed a beneficial pathway inflection on final learning improvement. Early encouraging results suggest that AMs can improve argumentation comprehension, production, and critical thinking in teaching and learning. Recommendations for Practitioners: The learner could better manage knowledge and understand different perspectives with AM usage rules. Recommendation for Researchers: It is essential to remember that critical thinking is a multifaceted and complex concept. This article examined it as a proxy variable for text comprehension and argumentation skills. The length of exposure to the method, contexts and instruments (analog or digital), and age/education of participants must be considered when doing AM research. Impact on Society: The method would improve awareness of shared ideas and make it easier to enrich and rethink one’s thoughts on the topic. Future Research: To study AM roles in diverse types of information, future research could incorporate quantitative and qualitative approaches. Cross-curricular learning for everyday life in digital and AI-driven environments, as well as text comprehension and critical thinking, could also be examined. Further research could cover other aspects of the topic of critical thinking.

Which socio-scientific dimensions do 11th graders refer to when deciding whether to be vaccinated against COVID-19?

ABSTRACT This paper presents an analysis of the socio-scientific dimensions which 46 11th graders, enrolled in the subject scientific culture, consider to justify their COVID-19 vaccination decision and how they managed to combine and integrate these dimensions before and after working on a sequence of activities aimed at learning about argumentation in science. Although almost all the students intended to be vaccinated against COVID-19, the results show that before the sequence, they used one or two dimensions to justify their decision, while after it, some combined up to five dimensions. The ethical and social-cultural dimensions were two of the most frequently used. The scientific dimension was infrequent in the initial argument but was, however, the most used dimension in the final argument, after the intervention. Working on socioscientific issues encourages the development of argumentation skills, and, in this specific case, health education skills as well.

Infusing explicit argumentation in science reading activities: Helping prospective science teachers reduce misconception and foster argumentation skills

Science reading activities play an important role in shaping and constructing new knowledge. The enactment of these activities was commonly used to develop scientific literacy and enhance students’ understanding. However, lack of the study focuses on reducing misconceptions and developing argumentation skills. This study, therefore, aimed to investigate the effect of reading activities infusing argumentation activities in reducing misconceptions and advancing argumentation skills. We employed a quasi-experimental (non-equivalent control group design) by involving 72 prospective science teacher students as participants divided into experimental and control groups in the same proportion. The participants in the experimental group were involved to do science reading activities infusing argumentation activities whilst the control group was engaged in only science reading activities. All the groups did these activities for four meetings of which each meeting took 90 minutes. To elicit data, we used a three-tier test to measure students’ misconceptions and a student survey to measure argumentation skills; both of which were tested before and after the learning process. The findings of the research showed argumentation activities infused in science reading activities have succeeded to reduce significantly students’ misconceptions and develop argumentation skills. In addition, argumentation activities in science reading activities also succeed to drive students to propose comprehensive arguments and to improve the scientific quality of students’ arguments. We ultimately discussed the implications arising from this study.

The effectiveness of the four-step jigsaw and jigsaw learning model in improving students' argumentation skills about salt hydrolysis concept

One of the learning models that can train students in developing argumentation skills is the jigsaw learning and its modified forms. This study aimed to see the effectiveness of the four-step jigsaw learning and the Jigsaw learning in improving students' argumentation skills about the concept of salt hydrolysis. This study was conducted with 2 classes of 11 grade students of SMAN 7 Kerinci Jambi. Some 53 students in total were purposively recruited and participated in this experiment. Concurrent embedded mixed method with two-group pretest-posttest control group design was used in this study. The results of independent t-test showed that 4SJ was more effective than the Jigsaw class (t= 2.668; p-value = 0.01 < 0.05). It was supported by the n-Gain of 4SJ which was 0.71 and the n-Gain of jigsaw was 0.67. Two factors that influenced the differences in students' argumentation skills were observed; these included the difference in learning duration and the intensiveness in conducting the argumentation debate.

The Dramatic Arc in the Development of Argumentation Skills of Upper Secondary School Students in Geography Education

Geography education can facilitate learners’ critical thinking and argumentation skills to make well-reasoned decisions on social and environmental issues. This study reports on a geography course consisting of 18 lessons, each of them 75 min, designed to afford intensive practice in argumentation to upper secondary school students (n = 21) and following the dramatic arc. The study produces examples of different developmental pathways of upper secondary school students’ argumentation during the geography course. In this qualitative case study, the data were collected from learning diaries and analyzed using content analysis following ARRA-analysis (Analysis of Reasoning, Rhetorics and Argumentation), which is based on Toulmin’s argumentation model. The results indicated that most of the students developed justified arguments and composed clear claims and relevant rhetorical modes such as qualifications, rhetorical questions and rebuttals. Justification categories that were mainly used were backings, grounds and warrants. However, some students had difficulties in recognizing the main claim and arguments. The students developed their argumentation skills following the dramatic arc. They possessed the prerequisites for argumentative reasoning and writing but needed further practice in analytical and critical writing.

AI-based Argumentation Tutoring – A Novel System Class to Improve Learners’ Argumentation Skills

Argumentation is an omnipresent foundation of our daily communication and thinking. The ability to form convincing arguments is not only the fundament for persuading an audience of novel ideas but also plays a major role in strategic decision-making, negotiation, and productive civil discourse. However, students often struggle to develop argumentation skills due to a lack of individual and instant feedback in their learning journey, since providing feedback on the individual argumentation skills of learners is very time consuming and not scalable if conducted manually by educators. Following a design science research approach, we propose a new class of argumentation learning systems that provide students with individual and ongoing tutoring to support them in learning how to argue. We build our socio-technical design on a combination of user-centered design principles, a conceptualization of argumentation structures in student-written text, and Natural Language Processing and Machine Learning classifiers to provide individual feedback. To investigate if the new system class of AI-based argumentation tutoring systems helps students to improve their argumentation skills, we evaluated the novel artifact class in two empirical studies in comparison to traditional argumentation learning systems. In a laboratory experiment (study 1), as well as in a field experiment in a large-scale lecture over three months (study 2), we found that AI-based argumentation tutoring systems based on our design principles, argumentation schemes, and algorithms improve the short- and long-term argumentation skills of students significantly compared to the traditional argumentation learning approaches.