Using Drama to Promote Argumentation in Science Education

Promoting undergraduates’ awareness of the importance of thinking critically about false or inaccurate scientific information presented in news articles

“…Making a group decision about this question constituted a challenge that motivated undergraduates' argumentation during this deliberation stage. On the whole, the findings are consistent with the literature showing that thought-provoking questions (Andrews 2015; Archila 2018; Davies and Barnett 2015) and small-group debate (Archila 2017;Muller Mirza 2015;Mysliwiec et al 2004;Wendland et al 2015) can join forces to help to make university students better critical thinkers. Furthermore, students' comments offer an insight into how they engaged in critical thinking.…”

“…"Which excerpt is misleading?" This is a thought-provoking question, for two reasons: (1) this question may cause classroom discussion, and (2) there could be strong (rational and reasonable) student arguments for each possible answer (Archila 2017). It should be pointed out that in this TLS (Table 1), the pieces of evidence ("Why did you make that decision?")…”

“…Recently, Muller Mirza (2015) stressed that argumentative interaction can be considered as a potential means of constructing knowledge in higher education. Additionally, Archila (2017) offered evidence to support the claim that small-group debate and whole-class debate are desirable and legitimate ways to engage university science students in argumentative interaction. Rose (2016) asserts that thought-provoking questions are the basis for promoting students' awareness of the importance of critical thinking.…”

“…Rose (2016) asserts that thought-provoking questions are the basis for promoting students' awareness of the importance of critical thinking. Similarly, Archila (2017) considers that asking and addressing this type of questions is a necessary condition for creating university science classroom debates. For this author, a thought-provoking question such as: "are scientists responsible for the way their own work is used by others?"…”

“…Each small-group debate was conducted among two or three students who were used to working together during class activities. To receive useful feedback from the students about the implementation of our TLS, this study follows the suggestions by Archila (2015Archila ( , 2017 and Archila,Molina, de Mejía (2018a, b, c), which involves (1) generating a climate of confidence in the science classroom and (2) asking students (orally and/or through a written survey) for key points that help the researchers continuously improve the strategy. At the end of the TLS, the first author talked to the students for 10-15 minutes to find out their feed-back about each of the four TLS steps.…”