Argumentation Skills Research Articles

Cultivating Civic Competencies Through Immersive Inquiry: A Digital-age Approach to Fourth Grader’s Disciplinary Thinking and Argumentation

This mixed-methods study examined Grade 4 students’ growth in two types of civic competencies—argumentation skills and disciplinary thinking, and how civic competencies interweave and co-develop over an academic year in the context of an interdisciplinary social studies curriculum called Digital Civic Learning (DCL). A total of 106 fourth-grade students (38.7% girls) and 6 social studies teachers participated in the study. Quantitative evidence indicates that students in the DCL curriculum significantly improved in their argumentation skills (argument-counterargument integration, claim-evidence integration) and disciplinary thinking. These civic competencies became more strongly associated with each other by the end of the curriculum. Multiple case studies revealed how two students synergistically applied their evolving argumentation skills and disciplinary thinking through distinct learning pathways. These results paint a complex picture of the development of students’ disciplinary thinking and integrating of argumentation skills, and the role of the curriculum in fostering the concurrent development of these civic competencies. Findings align with our overarching assumption that, through collaborative discourse and immersive learning about complex social issues, students can leverage their disciplinary thinking during argumentative social interactions, grappling with solutions and seeking common ground; continuous discourse among peers further enhances argumentation skills while honing disciplinary thinking. This study bridges the research-practice gap by providing evidence for the co-development of argumentation and disciplinary thinking within social studies classrooms. Our findings underscore the importance of inquiry-based learning, aligning with the College, Career, and Civic Life (C3) Framework, fostering critical civic competencies, and empowering students to actively participate in democratic processes. Particularly in this digitalized society, DCL emerges as a promising approach to integrate disciplinary thinking and argumentation skills across both physical and digital environments, fostering informed and active citizenship among students.

Investigating Pre-service Science Teachers' Argumentation Skills Through Place-Based SSI Instruction in Mining Environment

The aim of this study was twofold: First, we aimed to explore the effectiveness of place-based SSI instruction on pre-service science teachers’ argumentation skills. Second, we aimed to explore how their initial ideas about constructing and operating a gold mine changed after participating in a five-week place-based SSI instruction including a gold mine field trip. The study was designed as a quasi-experimental one-group pretest-posttest design. The participants were 15 senior pre-service science teachers. The data were collected from students’ written reports about their decisions in constructing and operating a gold mine. Semi-structured interviews were conducted with five participants to get more in-depth insight into their written reports. The results revealed that the number of participants who disapproved of constructing and operating a gold mine where they live significantly increased after the instruction. Moreover, their reasoning quality including counterarguments and rebuttals was increased prominently. Place-based SSI instruction has the potential to develop participants’ argumentation skills as well as their sensitivity to environmental socioscientific issues.

Understanding student engagement in vaccination education: an interview-based multi-stakeholder study

The COVID-19 pandemic has underscored the importance of informed decision-making, especially concerning vaccination for disease prevention. This highlights the need for scientific literacy, trust, and understanding of relevant concepts such as pathogens, immune responses, and transmission pathways. Additionally, societal and ethical considerations are integral for a comprehensive approach. While collaborating with medical professionals and fostering argumentation and decision-making skills hold promise for enhancing engagement with these topics in educational settings, understanding students’ perspectives is essential for maintaining their motivation to learn and their interest in such complex subjects. Therefore, a qualitative study involving interviews with secondary school students, experienced educators, and vaccination experts familiar with school environments was conducted to identify factors fostering student engagement and interest in immunobiology and vaccines. The findings highlight focal areas of student interest in the topic and the value of involving students in lesson planning. They also underscore the importance of real-world relevance and the need for clear, student-centered communication with medical professionals. Recommendations for educators include integrating interactive learning activities, real-world examples, and case studies.

Investigating the use of chatGPT as a tool for enhancing critical thinking and argumentation skills in international relations debates among undergraduate students

This study investigated the effectiveness of using ChatGPT, a large language model (LLM), to enhance critical thinking and argumentation skills among undergraduate students studying international relations in a developing nation context. A total of 95 participants were randomly assigned to an experimental group (n = 48) and a control group (n = 47). The experimental group engaged in debate sessions using ChatGPT, while the control group participated in traditional debate sessions. Pre-test and post-test assessments were conducted to measure the participants’ critical thinking and argumentation skills. The results revealed that the use of ChatGPT significantly improved students' understanding of complex concepts, critical thinking, and argumentation skills compared to traditional debate methods. The findings suggest that integrating LLMs into existing educational curricula may be an effective strategy for enhancing students’ critical thinking and argumentation skills in resource-constrained settings. However, the challenges and limitations associated with the use of LLMs in developing nations should be carefully considered. The study contributes to the growing body of research on the application of AI-powered tools in education and informs the development of evidence-based practices and policies for integrating LLMs into educational curricula.

Improving Argumentation Skills through AI-Driven Dialogues: A Transdisciplinary Approach

This article investigates the potential of artificial intelligence (AI) as a dynamic tool to enhance argumentation skills in education. By engaging students in real-time dialogues with AI, this study provides insights into a transdisciplinary approach that encourages critical thinking and helps students build persuasive, well-structured arguments across various subjects. Recognizing the growing need for argumentation proficiency in digital-age learning, we outline a methodological framework that leverages AI-driven dialogue tools to challenge students' assumptions, refine their thinking, and expose them to diverse perspectives. This research explores the ethical and pedagogical considerations essential to responsibly integrating AI into educational settings, focusing on balancing technological assistance with human oversight. The findings support AI's role as a valuable educational partner, offering a practical and innovative strategy for developing students' argumentation skills and preparing them for a technologically integrated future. For instance, the study highlights practical use cases where AI-driven dialogue systems in education foster critical engagement and personalized feedback, showing promise in large and resource-constrained classrooms.

Enhancing the scientific argumentation skills of prospective chemistry teacher using integrated chemical literacy strategy

Enhancing the scientific argumentation skills of prospective chemistry teacher using integrated chemical literacy strategy

Student’s scientific argumentation skills in biology: A gender-based analysis

Scientific argumentation skill is important to develop in learning because it empowers students' way of thinking in forming new knowledge, stimulates activity, learns to solve problems, build socio-cultural activities through presentations and criticism, encourages students to express their thoughts, understand concepts more easily and get used to critical thinking and logical. This research aimed to determine the significance of differences between scientific argumentation skills based on gender. Research data was obtained from sample class data, namely class XI Science at Bustanul Mubtadiin Proppo Pamekasan High School with 22 students. Measurement of scientific argumentation skills based on gender using an essay writing test with a scientific argumentation rubric using the Osborne Argument Model. Aspects measured were based on the quality of rebuttal, data, collateral, support, refutation, or presence of conflicting claims. The hypothesis test used was an independent sample T-Test using the Jamovi Statistics program. This study reported that the scientific argumentation skills of male and female students were significantly different, which scientific argumentation skills of female students were higher than males. This research provided implications for students to be skilled in scientific argumentation, especially in biology.

Debate Based on Inquiry Learning (DBOIL): An Innovative Learning Model to Improve Students’ Skills in Scientific Argumentation

In the 21st century, education places significant emphasis on developing scientific argumentation as a crucial skill. Teaching these skills requires an instructional design that allows students to construct and critique arguments actively, support claims with evidence and reasoning, and then reject opposing claims and evidence. Debate based on inquiry learning (DBOIL) is an innovative learning model that was developed and is believed to be able to facilitate these things. This research seeks to assess the influence of implementing DBOIL on enhancing students' skills in scientific argumentation. This research employed a one-group pretest-posttest design, with normalized change analysis and paired t-test. Research findings indicate that the implementation of DBOIL has demonstrably improved scientific argumentation skills, with a notable 76.67% of students exhibiting improvement in the high category. Other findings show that each phase of DBOIL significantly contributes to increasing the achievement of indicators of scientific argumentation. To maintain the reliability of DBOIL in enhancing students' skills in scientific argumentation, conducting future research on a broader scale is imperative.

Promoting secondary school students scientific argumentation skills through dialogic practical work

ABSTRACT Background Recipe-based practical work had a negligible effect on developing students’ scientific argumentation skills. Studies suggest that applying dialogic teaching in practical investigations may help students develop meaningful explanations based on evidence. Purpose This study examined how dialogic practical work can enhance students’ scientific argumentation skills. Design and Method This study used a quantitative research design. The study participants were 46 secondary school students in Bahir Dar, Ethiopia. The sources of data were the video recordings of the dialogic practical work sessions. The students’ change in scientific argumentation skills was scored using the Assessment of Scientific Argumentation in the Classroom observation protocol. This data was analyzed using a repeated measures Friedman test. Results The result showed that dialogic practical work in physics laboratories significantly improved secondary school students’ scientific argumentation skills over eight weeks. However, these students who participated in dialogic-practical work still faced difficulties in providing quality evidence to challenge each other’s ideas. Discussion The finding concluded that dialogic practical work is useful in improving students’ ability for scientific argumentation. Given the growing significance of more social and student-centered strategies, this study might develop secondary school teachers’ awareness of dialogic practical work in laboratories to enhance students’ scientific argumentation skills.

Nurturing Argumentation Skills to Solve Complex Problems through Structured Scaffolding-Guided Inquiry (SSGI)

This study aims to develop a structured scaffolding-guided inquiry (SSGI) learning model that is oriented toward nurturing argumentation skills to solve complex problems. Test the effectiveness of the SSGI model in improving students' argumentation skills to solve complex problems. This research is development research that refers to Dick and Carey. Test the effectiveness of the SSGI learning model in a quasi-experimental pre-test and post-test group design. Argumentation skills to solve complex problems data were collected using an essay test. The research sample used Physics Education students in the 4th semester (N = 30). The significance of the difference in pre-test and post-test scores was analyzed using the t-test. The impact of the SSGI is analyzed using effect size. The result of this study indicates that the SSGI enhances students' argumentation skills to solve complex problems. The increase in students' argumentation skills to solve complex problems was 7% in the high category, 57% in the medium category, and 36% in the low category. The effect size coefficient of the SSGI is 0.78 in the medium category. The SSGI syntax that contributes the most to growing argumentation skills to solve complex problems is the reasoning syntax. Then the next sequence is syntax exploration, closure, and orientation.

Analysing the evolution of argumentation quality among pre-service biology teachers amidst the COVID-19 pandemic

ABSTRACT The COVID-19 pandemic has become one of the most controversial issues in recent years. The pandemic’s impact on argumentation skills, crucial for science teachers, needs exploration to understand its effects on how they evaluate evidence and engage in discussions. This study investigated how biology pre-service teachers’ (PSTs) argumentation quality changed over the pandemic’s first two months of social distancing and quarantine. Using qualitative and quantitative methodologies, data were collected through semi-structured interviews, and Toulmin’s Argument Pattern (TAP) was employed to evaluate the arguments. Initially, nearly half of the participants demonstrated low-level arguments. However, during the second round of interviews, a decrease in Level 1 and 2 arguments and an increase in Level 3 arguments were observed. The observed improvements in argumentation quality, particularly in the use of counterclaims, warrants, and rebuttals, underscore the role of increased familiarity with the issue and exposure to diverse information sources. These findings suggest that real-life contexts, such as the pandemic, offer opportunities for PSTs to develop more sophisticated argumentation skills when exposed to multiple perspectives and ongoing engagement with the topic. Understanding these changes can inform teaching strategies and teacher training programmes, especially during global crises. Future research could examine argumentation quality related to issues such as vaccination and COVID-19 variants.

Students’ scientific argumentation skills through PjBL–STEAM model assisted by web-based interactive PowerPoint on static fluid

Students’ scientific argumentation skills through PjBL–STEAM model assisted by web-based interactive PowerPoint on static fluid

Investigating students’ arguments with real-life functional situations throughout a sequence of collaborative activities

Recent years have seen increasing interest in providing students with opportunities for developing important argumentation skills in the mathematics classroom. Social interactions with peers to critique alternative ideas, justify arguments, and build consensus, have been found to promote deep thinking and meaningful development of concepts. In this study we explored 9<sup>th</sup>-grade students’ interactions during a sequence of specifically designed argumentation tasks on real-life functional situations to investigate the appropriateness of their arguments. Data were collected from the students’ written task responses, student reflections, small-group observations, individual interviews with the group members, and teacher interviews. Analysis of the level of appropriateness of the students’ individual and group written responses in each activity focused on three aspects: identifying variables, forming relations between them, and noticing contextual features of the real-life situation. We found evidence of students grappling with selecting two suitable variables and with conceptualizing the nature of their relation. It also appeared that aspects of the students’ social interactions played a role in students ignoring correct arguments and accepting incorrect arguments. We discuss implications for small-group argumentation and suggest avenues for future research.

Empowering minds: An e-book blending contextual teaching learning with plant tissue exploration to boost argumentation and cognitive skills

This research was motivated by obstacles in implementing biology learning which resulted in the lack of training in argumentation skills and low cognitive learning outcomes. The current teaching materials does not yet support these skills optimally. The aim of this research is to develop an e-book blending contextual teaching learning that is feasible, practical and effective to boost high school student’s argumentation and cognitive skills. A research and development method was used using the ADDIE (Analyze, Design, Development, Implementation, Evaluation) development model. The subjects of this research were 34 high school students in Sleman, Yogyakarta in limited trials and 62 students in field trials. The type of research used in the field test was quasi-experimental with a pretest-post-test control group design. Class XI MIPA 1 was used as the control class and class XII MIPA 2 as the experimental class. Data collection instruments used included product assessment questionnaires by experts, biology teachers and students, argumentation skills and cognitive learning outcomes test instruments. Data analysis used the paired sample t-test, independent sample t-test and n-gain score test. The research results show that e-books is suitable for use in learning according to material experts and media experts, e-books is practical for use in learning according to teacher and student assessments, and e-books is effective for improving students' argumentation skills and learning outcomes. The conclusion in this research is that e-books blending contextual teaching and learning are feasible, practical and effective to use to boost students' argumentation and cognitive skills.

Development of Socioscientific-Issue-Based Electronic Modules on Virus Material to Increase Interest and Argumentation Skills

This study aims to produce an electronic module based on socioscientific issues that is feasible to improve students' interest and argumentation skills. This research is development research with the ADDIE method (Analysis, Design, Development, Implementation, and Evaluation). The product to be developed is an electronic module based on Socioscientific Issues on virus material. Data collection techniques used are interviews, observations, learning interest questionnaires. The resulting product is then validated by material experts and media experts, and a limited trial is carried out. Based on the results of the development of an electronic module based on socioscientific issues, it is concluded that the electronic module is feasible to be used for biology learning in terms of the assessment of material experts with an average value of 3.11 (very feasible) and the assessment of media experts with an average value of 3.77 (very feasible). And it is effective for increasing students' interest in learning as seen from the n-gains value of 0.55 with a moderate category and to improve students' argumentation skills with an n-gains value of 0.4 with a moderate category.

The effect of argument-driven inquiry to pre-service biology teachers’ argumentation skills and metacognitive awareness in Mendelian genetics

In recent years, pre-service teacher education programs have recognized the importance of equipping future educators with the necessary skills such as argumentation skills and metacognitive awareness. However, the extent to these skills in ore-service biology teachers remains relatively unexplored. This study aimed to explore the effect of argument-driven inquiry on pre-service biology teachers’ argumentation skills and metacognitive awareness. This study also investigated the correlation between argumentation skills and metacognitive awareness in pre-service biology teachers. This research was conducted as quasi experiment using nonrandomized control group pretest–post-test design with two classes. One class as experiment group (N=44) which participated in series of activities in laboratory work using argument-driven inquiry, and control group (N=44) which participated in the regular laboratory activities. The laboratory work focused on the topic of mendelian genetic. This research was conducted on the second year of pre-service biology teachers in the Department of Biology Education. Data were generated by administrating pre-test and post-test on argumentation skill using open-ended question and metacognitive awareness using Metacognitive Awareness Inventory (MAI). Result showed a significant difference between experimental group and control group in argumentation skills (p value= .016) as well as in metacognitive awareness (p value = .005). However, the correlation between argumentation skills and metacognitive awareness were relatively low (r= -.119). This research findings can be used as suggestions for policy makers and educational institute to integrate argumentation skills and metacognitive awareness in designed for professional development program in teacher training program.

Does the Creative Problem-Solving Model Improve Students' Argumentation Skills?

Argumentation skills are one of the skills of the 21st century. The research aims to analyze students' achievement of argumentation skills using the Creative Problem Solving (CPS) model on biodiversity material. Qualitative research with descriptive methods. The research subjects were class X students in one of the Bandung City schools. The purposive sampling technique used 30 students. The argumentation skills question instrument is based on Toulmin's Argumentation Pattern which has level 1-5 criteria containing 12 essay questions. The research results showed that the students' strongest argumentation skills were at level 3 at 63.3 Percent with sufficient criteria and the weakest at level 1 and level 5 with very weak criteria. The criteria for level 1 are very weak, level 2 is weak, level 3 is sufficient, level 4 is strong, and level 5 is very strong. It is important for other education experts to acquire argumentation skills in the learning process.

ASSEMBLER EDU E-MODULES: IMPROVING ARGUMENTATION SKILLS, PERSEVERANCE, AND CURIOSITY IN PHYSICS LEARNING

This study examined the impact of Assembler Edu-based e-modules on enhancing students' argumentation skills, perseverance, and curiosity in high school physics learning. Employing a quantitative ex-post facto design, the research utilized a 4-point Likert scale questionnaire to gather data. Descriptive and inferential statistical methods, including simple linear regression, were used for analysis. The findings reveal that using Assembler Edu-based e-modules significantly positively affected students' argumentation skills, with a 42.2% influence. Moreover, student responses indicated a 47.6% improvement in perseverance, while curiosity in learning renewable energy topics increased by 47.4%. These results highlight the considerable potential of integrating digital tools like Assembler Edu into the learning environment. This study introduces an innovative approach to physics education by incorporating interactive e-modules based on the Assembler Edu platform. Unlike traditional learning materials, these e-modules foster a more dynamic and engaging learning experience, enhancing students' critical thinking, perseverance, and curiosity. The research adds a fresh dimension to the existing literature by demonstrating how digital technology in science education can significantly improve core skills necessary for 21st-century learners. The study's implications suggest that integrating Assembler Edu-based e-modules into the school curriculum can enrich students' learning experiences, promote a deeper understanding of complex topics like renewable energy, and cultivate essential skills such as argumentation and perseverance, which are vital for success in both academic and real-world contexts.

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

What Socrates Learned From Parmenides. Part 2. Hypothesis, Antilogy, and Philosophical Self-Defense in the Phaedo

My first study identified the cognitive abilities and argumentative skills developed by the gymnasia presented in Plato’s Parmenides. Since the correspondence with the intellectual virtues Socrates displays in other dialogues is too remarkable to be a coincidence, I concluded that Socrates must have trained with Parmenides’ eightfold routine in his youth. My second study supports this conclusion by drawing attention to textual evidence found in the Phaedo. The autobiographical account Socrates shares in that dialogue indicates how the gymnasia impacted his intellectual development, mostly through the action of hypothesizing. This strategic move used by the Eleatics transformed the originally sectarian way So- crates related to Forms and enabled him to protect his theory from attacks in a secure yet non-dogmatic way.