Scaffolding student argumentation through evidence construction in an STS course
Clicks: 1
ID: 287558
2025
Article Quality & Performance Metrics
Overall Quality
Not rated
Combines reader engagement with the AI quality analysis. This
article has not been analysed, so there is no overall score —
reader engagement is measured and shown alongside.
Reader Engagement
0.0
/100
1 views
0 readers
AI Quality Assessment
Not analyzed
Readership in this journal
Ranked #3,692 of 3,757 articles by views in Malay Journal
Most read
Least read
Bar heights use a square-root scale. Only the 120 most-read articles are drawn; the journal has 3,757 in total.
Mint this article as an NFT
Not yet mintedCreate a permanent, verifiable on-chain record of this article on the Scimatic Network. The NFT is held in your Journament account, and you can withdraw it to your own wallet at any time.
5
SUSD
one-off · no wallet required
Abstract
Argumentation plays a crucial role in effectively communicating ideas and structuring reasoning. While existing models provide guidelines for constructing arguments, less attention has been given to scaffolding evidence construction and counterargumentation. To address this gap, a modified Claim-Evidence-Reasoning (mCER) framework was developed and then integrated into learning modules of a Science, Technology, and Society (STS) course. The modules, redesigned to enhance students’ argumentation practices, were validated by three experienced teachers who themselves created the original STS course. Following an action research methodology, the modules were implemented in one blended-learning class of 16 undergraduate students aged 18 to 24. Qualitative data analysis was performed to explore how the mCER module shaped students’ learning about argumentation and their participation in argumentation practices. Results indicate that students, over time, demonstrated more consistency in using accurate claims, steady improvement in mobilizing evidence, and gradual enhancement in framing of arguments. Counterargumentation slowly emerged, but its use was not sustained. Students shifted from relying on historical and factual evidence to support their claims in the earlier modules to triangulation of expert-logical and empirical evidence in the later modules. Four key themes describe students’ engagement with the mCER-based modules: development of evidence-based reasoning is gradual, crafting counterarguments is challenging, argumentation is recognized as a valuable tool for addressing real-world problems, and confidence in participating in scientific discourse is gained. Future research could further strengthen students’ crafting and mobilizing of counterarguments and encourage them to use verified scientific knowledge to support claims.
Keywords: Argumentation, Claim-Evidence-Reasoning, Socio-Scientific Issues, Counterarguments
| Reference Key |
persistent_1760661967_68f191cf923cc
Use this key to autocite in the manuscript while using
SciMatic Manuscript Manager or Thesis Manager
|
|---|---|
| Authors | Razalan, Allan Sam S. |
| Journal | Malay Journal |
| Year | 2025 |
| DOI |
DOI not found
|
| URL | |
| Keywords | Keywords not found |
Citations
No citations found. To add a citation, contact the admin at info@scimatic.org
Comments
No comments yet. Be the first to comment on this article.