The Effects of Argumentation-Based Teaching Approach on Students’ Critical Thinking Disposition and Argumentation Skills: “Population in Our Country Unit”

Abstract

As there are limited studies examining relationships between argumentation-based teaching approach and critical thinking and argumentation skills in social studies, the aim of this study was to examine the effects of argumentation-based teaching approach on students' critical thinking disposition and argumentation skills, and the relationship between students’ argumentation skills and critical thinking disposition. We used a quasi-experimental design with pretest-posttest equivalent control groups. The participants of this study were 94 seventh grade students from three different classrooms in a middle school in Erzurum district of Turkey. We utilized University of Florida Engagement, Maturity and Innovativeness Critical Thinking Disposition Instrument (UF/EMICTDI) to identify students’ critical thinking disposition and argumentation activities to document students’ argumentation skills. We used one-way ANOVA and multiple comparisons Tukey tests to analyze the data obtained via the UF/EMICTDI, correlation and regression analysis to investigate the relationships between students’ argumentation skills and critical thinking disposition. Argumentation Evaluation Rubric was used in order to evaluate the arguments that the students formed. Results showed that there was no statistically significant difference between students’ pre-test critical thinking disposition scores in the experimental and control groups but there was a statistically significant difference between students’ post-test critical thinking disposition scores. Additionally, we observed that students’ argumentation skills enhanced throughout the study, there was a statistically significant positive relationship between students’ argumentation skills and critical thinking disposition, and argumentation skills variable was the predictor of critical thinking disposition. We recommend future research studies to examine the effects of the argumentation-based science learning approach on different higher-order thinking skills. Additionally, in social studies classes, similar activities employed in this study on “Population in Our Country” unit can be used in teaching different topics/units in order to improve students’ argumentation skills.

Keywords

• Argumentation,
• argumentation-based teaching,
• argumentation skill,
• critical thinking disposition,

References

1. Akkoyunlu, B., Altun, A., & Yılmaz-Soylu, M. (2008). Öğretim tasarımı (1. baskı). Ankara: Maya Akademi.
2. Akkuş, R., Günel, M., & Hand, B. (2007). Comparing an inquiry-based approach known as the science writing heuristic to traditional science teaching practices: Are there differences? International Journal of Science Education, 14(5), 1745-1765. doi: 10.1080/09500690601075629
3. Anagün, Ş. S., & Atalay, N. (2016). The effect of experiments related stories in laboratory to the argumentation skills of preservice classroom teachers. Journal of Research in Education and Teaching, 5, 158-168.
4. Andrews, R. (2015). Critical thinking and/or argumentation in higher education. M. Davies & R. Barnett (Eds.), The palgrave handbook of critical thinking in higher Education (pp. 49-62). Palgrave Macmillan, US.
5. Antiliou, A. (2012). The effect of an argumentatıon diagram on the self-evaluatıon of a creatıve solution (Doctoral dissertation). Retrieved from https://search.proquest.com/docview/1627759322?pq-origsite=summon (3674379).
6. Bayram, N. (2010). Yapısal eşitlik modellemesine giriş: Amos uygulamaları. Bursa: Ezgi Kitabevi.
7. Brown, M.W., & Cudeck, J. (1993). Alternative ways of assessing model fit. K.A. Bollen & J.S. Long (Eds.), Testing structural equation models. Newbury Park, CA. Büyüköztürk, Ş. (2010). Sosyal bilimler için veri analizi el kitabı. Ankara: Pegem Akademi.
8. Can, A. (2017). SPPS ile bilimsel araştırma sürecinde nicel veri analizi (5. Baskı). Ankara: Pegem Akademi.

9. Cartoon Pictures. taken from addresses https://www.freepik.com/free-vector/colorful-collection-with-great-variety-of avatars_1258263.htm#term=face&page=1&position=0 ve http://osoq.com/caricatures/ teacher -caricature.htm
10. Cavlazoglu, B., & Stuessy, C. (2018). Examining science teachers’ argumentation in a teacher workshop on earthquake engineering. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 27(4), 348-361.
11. Chin, C., & Osborne, J. (2008). Students' questions: a potential resource for teaching and learning science. Studies in Science Education, 44(1), 1-39. doi: 10.1080/03057260701828101
12. Chowning, J. T., Griswold J. C., Kovarik, D. N., & Collins, L. J. (2012). Fostering critical thinking, reasoning, and argumentation skills through bioethics education. PLoS ONE,7(5). doi: 10.1371/ journal. pone. 0036791.
13. Creswell, J. W. (2012). Educational research: Planning, conducting, evaluating, quantitative and qualitative research (4th ed.). Baston: Pearson.
14. Crowell, A., & Kuhn, D. (2012). Developing dialogic argumentation skills: A three-year intervention study. Journal of Cognition and Development, 15(2), 363-381. doi: 10.1080/15248372.2012.725187
15. Çakan-Akkaş, B. N. (2017). The effect of argumentation-based inquiry (ABI) approach on based learning environment academic achievement and critical thinking skills of 5th grade students (Unpublished master’s thesis). Kastamonu University, Turkey.
16. Çetin, P. S., Kutluca, A. Y., & Kaya, E. (2013). Öğrencilerin argümantasyon kalitelerinin incelenmesi. Fen Bilimleri Öğretimi Dergisi, 2(1), 56-66.
17. Demir, F. B. (2017). The arguments of social studıes teacher candıdates workbased traınıng process, according to the determination of the level of argument (Unpublished master’s thesis). Kastamonu University, Turkey.
18. Demiral, Ü., & Çepni, S. (2018). Fen bilgisi öğretmen adaylarının sosyobilimsel bir konudaki argümantasyon becerilerinin incelenmesi. Kırşehir Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi, 19(1), 734-760.
19. Doğanay, A. (2013). Üst düzey düşünme becerilerinin öğretimi. A. Doğanay (Ed.), Öğretim ilke ve yöntemleri içinde (8. baskı, ss. 304-356). Ankara: Pegem Akademi.
20. Driver, R., Newton, P., & Osborne, J. (2000). Establishing the norms of scientific argumentation in classrooms. Science Education, 84(3), 287-312. doi: 10.1002/(SICI)1098-237X(200005)84:3%3C287::AID-SCE1%3E3.0.CO;2-A
21. Eceyurt-Türk, G. (2017). The effect of argumentatıon-supported problem based learning applications on the acid / bases and gases success of pre-service science teachers (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). Gazi University, Turkey.
22. Erduran, S., Simon, S., & 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. doi: 10.1002/sce.20012.
23. Ertaş, H. (2012). The effects of critical thinking education supported by out-of-school actıvıtıes on critical thinking disposition and attitudes toward physics course (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). Hacettepe University, Turkey
24. Facino, P. A. (1990). Critical thinking: A statement of expert consensus for purposes of educational assessment and instruction. Research findings and recommendations. Newark, Delaware: American Philosophical Association.
25. Fraenkel, J. R., Wallen, N. E., & Hyun, H. H. (2012). How to design and evaluate research in education (8th ed.). New York: McGraw-Hill.
26. Freeley, A. J., & Steinberg, D. L. (2013). Argumentation and debate, critical thinking for reasoned decision making (13th ed.). Wadsworth Cengage Learning. Available at: https://www.amazon.com/Argumentation-Debate-Austin-J-Freeley/dp/1133311601.
27. Green, S. B., & Salkind, N. J. (2005). Using Spss for windows and macintosh: Analyzing and understanding data. Upper Saddle River, New Jersey: Pearson/Prentice Hall.
28. Hsieh, J. K. (2005, August). Promoting students’ ability and disposition toward critical thinking through using a science writing heuristic in elementary science. Paper Presented at the International Conference of European Science Education Research Association, Barcelona, Spain.
29. Kana, F. (2013). A mixed-embedded experimental research on the practice of argümantation-based language teaching in pre-service Turkish teacher training (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). Çanakkale Onsekiz Mart University, Turkey.
30. Karadeniz, A. (2016). A modeling study on the skill of argumentation. The Journal of Academic Social Science, 4(36), 258-266.
31. Karamustafaoğlu, S. (2018). 21. Yüzyıl becerileri ve fen öğretimi. O. Karamustafaoğlu, Ö. Tezel & U. Sarı (Ed.), Güncel Yaklaşım ve yöntemlerle etkinlik destekli fen öğretimi içinde (ss. 22). Ankara: Pegem Akademi.
32. Karışan, D. (2011). Exploration of preservice teachers’ reflective judgment and argumentation skills revealed in socioscientific issues-based inquiry laboratory course (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). Orta Doğu Teknik University, Ankara, Turkey.
33. Koçak, K. (2014). The effect of argumentatıon-based sciences learning on pre-service teachers’ achievement ın solution subject and their critical thinking dispositions (Unpublished master’s thesis). Hacettepe University, Turkey.
34. Kuhn, D., & Udell, W. (2003). The development of argument skills. Child Development,74(5), 1245–1260.
35. Kunsch, D. W., Schnarr, K., & van Tyle, R. (2014). The use of argument mapping to enhance critical thinking skills in business education. Journal Of Education For Business, 89(8), 403-410. doi:10.1080/ 08832323. 2014.925416
36. Lai, E. R. (2011). Critical thinking: A literature review. Research report. Available at: https://images. pearsonassessments.com/images/tmrs/criticalthinkingreviewfınal.pdf.
37. McMillan, J. H., & Schumacher, S. (2014). Research in education: Evidence-based inquiry (7th ed.). London: Pearson.
38. Meydan, C.H., & Şeşen, H. (2015). Yapısal eşitlik modellemesi amos uygulamaları. Ankara: Detay Yayıncılık.
39. Miles, M. B., & Huberman, A. M. (2016). Nitel veri analizi (S. Akbaba, A. A. Ersoy, çev. ed.). Ankara: Pegem Akademi.
40. Ministry of National Education (MoNE). (2005). Sosyal bilgiler dersi öğretim programı. Available at: http://ttkb.meb.gov.tr/www/ogretim-programlari/icerik/72.
41. Ministry of National Education (MoNE). (2018). Sosyal bilgiler dersi öğretim programı. Available at: http://mufredat.meb.gov.tr/Program Detay.aspx?PID=354.
42. Mirza, N. M., & A. N. Perret-Clermont (2009). Argumentation and education theoretical foundations and practices, London: Springer.
43. Newton, P., Driver, R., & Osborne, J. (1999). The place of argumentation in the pedagogy of school science. International Journal of Science Education, 21(5), 553-576. doi: 10.1080/095006999290570.
44. Nussbaum, E. M. (2002). Scaffolding argumentation in the social studies classroom. The Social Studies, 93(2) 79-83. doi: https://doi.org/10.1080/00377990209599887
45. Nussbaum, E. M. (2008). Using argumentation Vee diagrams (AVDs) for promoting argument counterargument integration in reflective writing. Journal of Educational Psychology, 100(3), 549-565. doi: 10.1037/0022-0663.100.3.549
46. Nussbaum, E. M., & Edwards, O. V. (2011). Critical questions and argument stratagems: A framework for enhancing and analyzing students' reasoning practices. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 20(3), 443-488. doi:10.1080/10508406.2011.564567
47. Nussbaum, E. M., & Sinatra, G. M. (2003). Argument and conceptual engagement. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 28(3), 384-395. doi:10.1016/S0361-476X(02)00038-3
48. Nussbaum, E. M., Winsor, D. L., Aqui, Y. M., & Poliquin, A. M. (2007). Putting the pieces together: Online argumentation Vee diagrams enhance thinking during discussions. International Journal of Computer Supported Collaborative Learning, 2, 479-500. doi: 10.1007/s11412-007-9025-1
49. Ocak, M. A. (2011). Öğretim tasarımı modelleri. M. A. Ocak (Ed.), Öğretim tasarımı: Kuramlar, modeller ve uygulamalar içinde (2. baskı, ss. 30-267). Ankara: Anı Yayıncılık.
50. Oğuz-Haçat, S., & Demir, F.B. (2016). Evaluation by toulmin argument model of social studies curriculum and textbooks. Abant İzzet Baysal University Journal of Education Faculty, 16, 1572-1602.
51. Osborne, J., Erduran, S., & Simon, S. (2004a). Enhancing the quality of argümantation in school science. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 41(10), 1020. doi 10.1002/tea.20035
52. Osborne, J., Erduran, S., & Simon, S. (2004b). Ideas, evidence and argument in science: Cpd training pack. London: King’s College.
53. Öztürk, A. (2013). An action research about argumentatıon skill on socio-scientific issues and development of attitudes toward human rights (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). Çukurova University, Turkey.
54. Pallant, J. (2005). SPSS survival manual: A step by guide to data analysis using spss for windows (2nd ed.). National Library of Australia.
55. Rigotti, E., & Morasso, S. G., (2009). Argumentation as an object of ınterest and as a social and cultural resource. Nathalie Muller Mirza ve Anne-Nelly Perret-Clermont (Eds.), Argumentation and education theoretical foundations and practices, London: Springer.
56. Sampson, V., & Clark, D.B. (2008). Assessment of the ways students generate arguments in science education: current perspectives and recommendations for future directions. Science Education, 92, 447-472. doi: 10.1002/sce.20276
57. Seçer, İ. (2015). Spss ve lisrel ile pratik veri analizi: Analiz ve raporlaştırma (2. baskı). Ankara: Anı Yayıncılık.
58. Seferoğlu, S.S., & Akbıyık, C. (2006). Teaching critical thinking. Hacettepe University Journal of Education, 30, 193-200.
59. Sevgi, Y., & Şahin, F. (2017). The effects of discussion the socio-scientific subject in the newspaper based on argumentation 7th grades students’ critical thinking. Journal of Human Sciences, 14(1), 156-170. doi:10.14687/ jhs.v14i1.4289
60. Sipahi, B., Yurtkoru, E. S., & Çinko, M. (2010). Sosyal bilimlerde SPSS’le veri analizi. İstanbul: Beta Basım Yayım Dağıtım.
61. Şahin, E. (2016). The effect of argumentatıon based sciences learning approach on academic success, metacognition and critical thinking skills of gifted students (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). Gazi University, Ankara.
62. Şimşek, A. (2009). Öğretim tasarımı (1. baskı). Ankara: Nobel Yayıncılık.
63. Şimşek, Ö.F. (2007). Yapısal eşitlik modellemesine giriş: temel ilkeler ve lisrel uygulamaları. Ankara: Ekinoks Yayıncılık.
64. Tezbaşaran, A. (1997). Likert tipi ölçek hazırlama kılavuzu (1. baskı). Ankara: Türk Psikologlar Derneği Yayınları.
65. Tishman, S., & Perkins, D. (1997). The language of thinking. Phi Delta Kappan, 78, 368–74. Retrieved from https://www.jstor.org/stable/20405798.
66. Tonus, F. (2012). Effect of the argumantation-based teaching to critical thinking and decision making skills on primary students, (Unpublished master’s thesis). Hacettepe University, Turkey.
67. Topcu, M. S., & Atabey, N. (2017). The effect of socio-scientific issues based field trips on elementary school students’ argumentation quality. Bartın University Journal of Faculty of Education, 6(1), 68-84. doi: 10.14686/buefad.263541
68. Torun, F. (2015). The relationship level between argumentation based teaching and decision-making skills ın social studıes course (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). Gazi University, Turkey.
69. Torun, F. (2017). Sosyal bilgiler öğretiminde argümantasyon yönteminin kullanımı. R. Turan & H. Akdağ (Ed.), Sosyal bilgiler öğretiminde yeni yaklaşımlar III içinde (1. baskı, ss. 150-166). Ankara: Pegem Akademi.
70. Torun, F., & Şahin, S. (2016). Determination of students' argument levels in argumentation-based social studies course. Education and Science, 41(186), 233-251. doi: 10.15390/EB.2016.6322
71. Toulmin, S. E. (2003). The uses of argument. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, New York.
72. Tüzün, Ü. N. (2016). Enhancing high school students’ critical thinking skills via enhancing their argumentatıon skills in sciences education (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). Gazi University, Turkey.
73. Urbina, S. (2004). Essentials of psychological testing. New Jersey: John Wiley & Sons. Inc.
74. Van Eemeren, F. H., Grootendorst, R., & Henkemans, A. F. S. (2002). Argumentation: Analysis, evaluation, presentation. London: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Publishers.
75. Von Aufschnaiter, C., Erduran, S., Osborne, J., & Simon, S. (2008). Arguing to learn and learning to argue: Case studies of how students argumentation relates to their scientific knowledge. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 45(1), 101-131. doi: https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.20213.
76. Walton, D. (2006). Fundamentals of critical argumentation. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
77. Weinstock, M. P., Neuman, Y., & Glassner, A. (2006). Identification of informal reasoning fallacies as a function of epistemological level, grade level, and cognitive ability. Journal of Educational Psychology, 98, 327-341. doi:10.1037/0022-0663.89.2.327
78. Wissinger, D. R. (2012). Using argumentative discussions to enhance the written arguments of middle school students in social studies classrooms (Unpublished doctoral dissertion). Retrieved from https://search.proquest.com/docview/1175951070?pq-origsite=summon (3543618).
79. Yapıcıoğlu, A.V., &Kaptan, F. (2018). Contribution of socio-scientific issue based ınstruction approach to development of argumentation skills: A mixed research method. Ondokuz Mayıs University Journal of Education Faculty, 37(1), 39-61.
80. Zhang, L. F. (2003). Contributions of thinking styles to critical thinking dispositions. The Journal of Psychology, 137(6), 517-544. doi: 10.1080/00223980309600633
81. Zohar, A., & Nemet, F. (2002). Fostering students’ knowledge and argumentation skills through dilemmas in human genetics. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 39(1), 35–62. doi: 10.1002/tea.10008