Background: Across academic disciplines, researchers have found that argumentation-based pedagogies increase learners' achievement and engagement. Engineering educational researchers and teachers of engineering may benefit from knowledge regarding how argumentation related to engineering has been practiced and studied. Purpose/Hypothesis: Drawing from terms and concepts used in national standards for K-12 education and accreditation requirements for undergraduate engineering education, this study was designed to identify how arguments and argumentation related to the engineering-designed world were operationalized in relevant literature. Methodology: Specified search terms and inclusion criteria were used to identify 117 empirical studies related to engineering argumentation and educational research. A qualitative content analysis was used to identify trends across these studies.Findings: Overall, engineering-related argumentation was associated with a variety of positive learner outcomes. Across many studies, arguments were operationalized in practice as statements regarding whether an existing technology should be adopted in a given context, usually with a limited number of supports (e.g., costs and ethics) provided for each claim. Relatively few studies mentioned empirical practices, such as tests. Most studies did not name the race/ethnicity of participants nor report engineering-specific outcomes.Conclusions: Engineering educators in K-12 and undergraduate settings can create learning environments in which learners use a range of epistemic practices, including empirical practices, to support a range of claims. Researchers can study engineering-specific outcomes while specifying relevant demographics of their research participants. K E Y W O R D S argumentation, engineering education, systematic review

No abstract

This analysis examines articles from the past 25 years of The Reading Teacher to better understand the journal's content and trends influencing literacy instruction. A research team coded and analyzed the frequency of topics and grade levels targeted, then compared results with those of a similar analysis published in 1992. The Web of Science provided current information about trends in authorship and the popularity of highly cited and frequently accessed articles. This report shares various metrics, insights, and interpretations that help profile the impact of The Reading Teacher and make predictions about the future of reading instruction.

No abstract

The ubiquity of written argument in academic contexts has underscored the importance of effective argument evaluation and writing pedagogies. Teachers can improve students’ argumentation proficiency by intentionally addressing myside bias, the propensity to support arguments with which one preemptively agrees while selectively ignoring contradictory claims and evidence. In this article, the authors identify three themes detected in a review of the literature on myside bias and offer instructional implications and strategies to address myside bias in secondary and postsecondary classrooms. Such strategies that promote critical reflection and balanced argument have implications for academic achievement and critical thinking skills beyond the classroom.