Keywords
Metacognition
Educational innovation
Debate
Teacher education Argumentación
Metacognición
Innovación educativa
Debate
Formacion de profesores
How to Cite
Abstract
This study evaluates the effectiveness of an educational strategy that uses critical debate assisted by collaborative software. The strategy was designed to improve the argumentative levels of university students in the field of education at the University of Salamanca. A within-subjects quasi-experimental design was used on a sample of 147 pairs of students. The educational strategy was implemented in three stages, Induction, Debate and Final Report. During the Debate stage, a digital adaptation of the Critical Debate model was used, which was developed synchronously in the university's computer lab. To assess the argumentative level Erduran´s coding scheme was applied, which categorizes the argumentation according to the quality of the oppositions or refutations. The results indicated a positive and sustained progression in the levels of argumentation throughout the intervention, highlighting the effectiveness of the educational strategy. These findings emphasize the importance of integrating the teaching of argumentation into initial teacher training, promoting critical and collaborative argumentative dialogue as a foundation for construction of disciplinary knowledge and enhancing argumentative reasoning.
References
Betancourth, S., Tabares, Y., y Martínez, V. (2021). Desarrollo del pensamiento crítico a través del debate crítico: una mirada cualitativa. Revista Interamericana de Investigación Educación y Pedagogía RIIEP, 14(2), 373-400. https://doi.org/10.15332/25005421.6645
Cebrián-Robles, D., Hierrezuelo-Osorio, J., Lorite, I. M. C., y Franco-Mariscal, A. J. (2022). Assessing the argumentation ability of pre-service teachers. Case study concerning the chemical dissolution process. International Journal of Educational Research and Innovation, 17, 73-83. https://doi.org/10.46661/ijeri.4968
Comisión Internacional sobre los Futuros de la Educación. (2022). Reimaginar juntos nuestro futuro: Un nuevo contrato social para la educación. UNESCO.
de Sá Ibraim, S., y Justi, R. (2016). Teachers’ knowledge in argumentation: contributions from an explicit teaching in an initial teacher education programme. International Journal of Science Education, 38(12), 1996-2025. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500693.2016.1221546
Erduran, S., Simon, S., y Osborne, J. (2004). TAPping into argumentation: Developments in the application of Toulmin’s Argument Pattern for studying science discourse. Science Education, 88(6), 915-933. https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.20012
Felton, M. (2004). The development of discourse strategies in adolescent argumentation. Cognitive Development, 19(1), 35-52. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cogdev.2003.09.001
Figueroa-Vargas, A., y Donoso, F. (2023). Argumentación y Formación inicial docente: Tensiones Curriculares y didácticas en la educación Terciaria. Chakinan, Revista de Ciencias Sociales y Humanidades, 20, 24–40. https://doi.org/10.37135/chk.002.20.01
Fuentes, C., y Santibáñez, C. (2011). Diseñando Debates: Preliminares para un enfoque dialógico y crítico. En A. Cattani (Ed.), Argomentare Le Proprie Ragioni: Organizzare, condurre e valutare un dibatiito, (pp. 111-133). Loffredo Editore University Press.
García-Mila, M., Felton, M., Miralda-Banda, A., y Castells, N. (2023). Pre-service teachers’ knowledge, beliefs and predispositions to teach argumentation in their disciplines. Journal of Education for Teaching, 49(4), 648-666. https://doi.org/10.1080/02607476.2022.2150536
Iordanou, K. (2022). Supporting strategic and meta-strategic development of argument skill: the role of reflection. Metacognition and Learning, 17(2), 399–425. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11409-021-09289-1
Kuhn, D., Hemberger, L., y Khait, V. (2016). Dialogic argumentation as a bridge to argumentative thinking and writing. Infancia y Aprendizaje, 39(1), 25-48. https://doi.org/10.1080/02103702.2015.1111608
Kuhn, D., Shaw, V., y Felton, M. (1997). Effects of dyadic interaction on argumentative reasoning. Cognition and Instruction, 15(3), 287–315. https://doi.org/10.1207/s1532690xci1503_1
Kuhn, D., y Udell, W. (2007). Coordinating own and other perspectives in argument. Thinking and Reasoning, 13(2), 90–104. https://doi.org/10.1080/13546780600625447
Kuhn, D., Zillmer, N., Crowell, A., y Zavala, J. (2013). Developing norms of argumentation: Metacognitive, epistemological, and social dimensions of developing argumentive competence. Cognition and Instruction, 31(4), 456-496. https://doi.org/10.1080/07370008.2013.830618
Leitão, S., de Chiaro, S., y Cano, M. (2016). El debate crítico. Un recurso de construcción del conocimiento en el aula. Didáctica de la Lengua y de la Literatura, 73, 26-33.
Lin, H. S., Hong, Z. R., y Lawrenz, F. (2012). Promoting and scaffolding argumentation through reflective asynchronous discussions. Computers and Education, 59(2), 378-384. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2012.01.019
Lotan-Kochan, E., Drachman, R., Schwarz, B., y Glassner, A. (2006). Moderation of students’ activities in co-located computer-supported collaborative learning using digalo. CEUR Workshop Proceedings, 213, 77-79.
Lytzerinou, E., y Iordanou, K. (2020). Teachers’ ability to construct arguments, but not their perceived self-efficacy of teaching, predicts their ability to evaluate arguments. International Journal of Science Education, 42(4), 617-634. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500693.2020.1722864
MacCann-Alfaro, N., García-Valcárcel, A., y Morales-Morgado, E. M. (2020). Critical Debate in the Classroom using ICT. En F. J. García-Peñalvo, y A. García-Holgado (Eds.), TEEM'20: Eighth International Conference on Technological Ecosystems for Enhancing Multiculturality (pp. 377–385). Association for Computing Machinery. https://doi.org/10.1145/3434780.3436655
Majidi, A. el, Janssen, D., y de Graaff, R. (2021). The effects of in-class debates on argumentation skills in second language education. System, 101, 102576. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.system.2021.102576
Martín-Gámez, C., y Erduran, S. (2018). Understanding argumentation about socio-scientific issues on energy: a quantitative study with primary pre-service teachers in Spain. Research in Science and Technological Education, 36(4), 463-483. https://doi.org/10.1080/02635143.2018.1427568
Muller Mirza, N., Tartas, V., Perret-Clermont, A.-N., y De Pietro, J.-F. (2007). Using graphical tools in a phased activity for enhancing dialogical skills: An example with Digalo. International Journal of Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning, 2, 247–272. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11412-007-9021-5
Muller Mirza, N., Perret-Clermont, A. N., Tartas, V., y Iannaccone, A. (2009). Psychosocial processes in argumentation. En N. Muller Mirza, y A. N. Perret-Clermont (Eds.), Argumentation and Education: Theoretical Foundations and Practices (pp. 67-90). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-0-387-98125-3_3
Nieto, L., y Ruiz, F. (2020). Estudio de caso como estrategia para el desarrollo de la argumentación en docentes en formación. Educação e Pesquisa, 46, e216221. https://doi.org/10.1590/s1678-4634202046216221
Noroozi, O. (2020). Argumentation-Based Computer Supported Collaborative Learning (ABCSCL): The Role of Instructional supported. European Journal of Open Education and E-learning Studies, 5(2), 16-32. https://doi.org/10.46827/ejoe.v5i2.3279
Rapanta, C., García-Mila, M., y Gilabert, S. (2013). What Is Meant by Argumentative Competence? An Integrative Review of Methods of Analysis and Assessment in Education. Review of Educational Research, 83(4), 483–520. https://doi.org/10.3102/0034654313487606
Rapanta, C., y Felton, M. K. (2022). Learning to Argue Through Dialogue: a Review of Instructional Approaches. Educational Psychology Review, 34(2), 477-509. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-021-09637-2
Ruiz-Ortega, F. J., y Dussan, C. (2021). Competencia argumentativa: un factor clave en la formación de docentes. Educación y Educadores, 24(1), 30-50. https://doi.org/10.5294/educ.2021.24.1.2
Şahin, K. D., y Özdem, Y. Y. (2023). The Development of Pre-service Primary Teachers’ Understanding and Skills of Argumentation through Argument Driven Inquiry. Science and Education, 34, 557-584. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11191-023-00474-z
Tabares, Y. A., Betancourth, S. M., y Martínez, V. A. (2019). Programa de intervención en debate crítico sobre el pensamiento crítico en universitarios. Educación y Humanismo, 22(38), 1-17. https://doi.org/10.17081/eduhum.22.38.3577
Tarekegn, G., Osborne, J., y Tadesse, M. (2022). Impact of Dialogic Argumentation Pedagogy on Grade 8 Students’ Epistemic Knowledge of Science. En M. Kalogiannakis, y M. Ampartzaki (Eds.), Advances in Research in STEM Education. IntechOpen. https://doi.org/10.5772/intechopen.104536
Toulmin, S. (1958). The Uses of Argument (3ª ed.). Cambridge University Press.
Ucar-Longford, B., Hosein, A., y Heron, M. (2024). Improving pre-service teachers’ argumentation skills: A holistic online scaffolding design approach. Journal of Digital Learning in Teacher Education, 40(2), 76-96. https://doi.org/10.1080/21532974.2024.2320440
Van Eemeren, F. H., y Grootendorst, R. (2006). Argumentación, Comunicación y Falacias, Una perspectiva pragma-dialéctica. Universidad Católica de Chile.
Voss, J. F., y Van Dyke, J. A. (2001). Argumentation in Psychology: Background Comments. Discourse Processes, 32(2-3), 89-111. https://doi.org/10.1207/S15326950DP3202&3_01
Wess, R., Priemer, B., y Parchmann, I. (2023). Professional development programs to improve science teachers’ skills in the facilitation of argumentation in science classroom—a systematic review. Disciplinary and Interdisciplinary Science Education Research, 5(9), 1-22. https://doi.org/10.1186/s43031-023-00076-3
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.
Copyright (c) 2025 Aula Abierta