Science and Religious Education Teachers’ Views of Argumentation and Its Teaching

Abstract

Argumentation, the justification of claims with reasons and/or evidence, has emerged as a significant educational goal in science education in recent years. It has also been noted as an important pedagogical approach in numerous school subjects. Yet, there is limited understanding of how teachers’ views of argumentation and its teaching compare in different school subjects. In order to ensure coherence in the implementation of the school curriculum, it is important to understand such views particularly in the context of subjects that are often positioned to be in conflict with each other, for example in the context of science versus religious education. In this paper, we present an empirical study on how science and religious education teachers view argumentation and its teaching. The data are drawn from a survey of secondary school teachers of 11–16-year-old students in England. Twenty-nine teachers were presented with an online survey in order to collect data on various aspects of their views including pedagogical strategies that support argumentation. Qualitative and quantitative results suggest that teachers of both subjects consider argumentation to be a significant aspect of their subject although particular nuances exist in how the teachers interpret argumentation. Furthermore, the data suggest that there are statistically significant differences in terms of the perceived frequency of pedagogical strategies used to support argumentation in lessons.

Using the Controversy over Human Race to Introduce Students to the Identification and the Evaluation of Arguments

“…Example 1: Jon considers that the concept of race in humans is not biologically meaningful because “sequencing the DNA of human genomes showed that two people picked from any place in the world share about 99% of their DNA sequences” (Beckwith et al, 2017 , p. 533). This argument is solid (valid) as it is accompanied by evidence (Erduran et al, 2020 ). Example 2: Tobi maintains that the concept of race in humans is biologically meaningful because “the 5 racial groups are Africans, Native Americans, Eurasians, East Asians, and Pacific Islanders.…”

“…After identifying Jon and Tobi’s arguments, undergraduate students were asked to evaluate arguments based on the question, “Are Jon and Tobi’s arguments solid?” (the third phase in Appendix 1 ). According to Erduran et al ( 2020 ), an argument is solid (sound, valid) when it is accompanied by reason and/or evidence. It is important to bear in mind that the arguments presented by Jon and Tobi are all solid (Beckwith et al, 2017 ).…”

“…In their responses to the open-ended question, “Why did you make that decision?” the initial and the final decisions of each participant were compared and coded in order to determine whether the CTCS had enriched their argumentation (Table 1 ). The coding process was guided by the premise that argumentation requires the “justification of claims with reasons and/or evidence” (Erduran et al, 2020 , p. 1). According to Erduran et al ( 2020 ), an argument is valid when it is accompanied by reason (reason-based argument) and/or evidence (evidence-based argument).…”

“…The coding process was guided by the premise that argumentation requires the “justification of claims with reasons and/or evidence” (Erduran et al, 2020 , p. 1). According to Erduran et al ( 2020 ), an argument is valid when it is accompanied by reason (reason-based argument) and/or evidence (evidence-based argument). All data were coded and analyzed by the first author.…”

“…With this in mind, it is important to clarify that argumentation about socioscientific issues (e.g., the controversy over human race) depends not only on mastery of scientific knowledge, but also on the consideration of moral and ethical values (Evagorou, 2011 ; Evagorou et al, 2012 ; Nielsen, 2012 ; Oliveira et al, 2012 , as cited in Evagorou & Osborne, 2013 ). Moreover, we define an “argument” as the articulation of a claim with a piece of reason (reason-based argument) and/or evidence (evidence-based argument) (Erduran et al, 2020 ).…”