A Review of Toulmin's Argumentation in Mathematics dan Science Learning: Implementation, Impact and the Role of the Teacher

Rafiq Badjeber, Supriyatman Supriyatman, Afadil Afadil, Winda Hadi

Abstract


Abstract: A Review of Toulmin's Argumentation in Mathematics dan Science Learning: Implementation, Impact and the Role of the Teacher. Objective: This review study aims to analyze and provide a complete study of the role of Toulmin's argumentation model in math and science learning Methods: This study uses a systematic literature review by following the PRISMA form. We found 396 documents on the Toulmin’s argumentation model published in 2020-2024, which were collected through the Scopus database. After the screening process, 19 articles were selected for analysis using thematic analysis. Findings: The review findings show that Toulmin's argumentation model is flexible enough to be used in learning, either as an argumentation analysis tool or as part of an innovative learning design. The positive impact can be seen in improving students' critical thinking skills, conceptual understanding, reasoning, and justification abilities. In addition, teachers have a vital role in supporting students' argumentation. The teacher is a facilitator, guide, and feedback provider that helps students develop and effectively deliver arguments. Conclusion: This study confirms that Toulmin's argumentation is relevant to improving students' higher-order thinking skills. It highlights the need for professional development for teachers to optimally support argumentation-based learning and select the most appropriate ways of integrating scientific argumentation into learning practice.       

 

Keywords: mathematics learning, role of teacher, science learning, student's skills, toulmin's argumentation.



DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.23960/jpmipa/v25i3.pp1199-1213

Full Text:

PDF

References


Akhdinirwanto, R. W., Agustini, R., & Jatmiko, B. (2020). Problem-based learning with argumentation as a hypothetical model to increase the critical thinking skills for junior high school students. Jurnal Pendidikan IPA Indonesia, 9(3), 340–350. https://doi.org/10.15294/jpii.v9i3.19282

Alcock, L., & Attridge, N. (2023). Refutations and reasoning in undergraduate mathematics. International Journal of Research in Undergraduate Mathematics Education. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40753-023-00220-4

Almpani, S. (2022). Argumentation and rule-based logic in mathematical proving and legal artificial intelligence applications [Εθνικό Μετσόβιο Πολυτεχνείο (ΕΜΠ), Σχολή Ηλεκτρολόγων Μηχανικών και Μηχανικών Υπολογιστών, Τομέας Συστημάτων Μετάδοσης Πληροφορίας και Τεχνολογίας Υλικών]. https://doi.org/10.12681/eadd/51572

Amiruddin, M. Z. B., Sari, E. P. D. N., Paramita, U. V., Suliyanah, S., & Admoko, S. (2023). The contribution of toulmin’s argumentation patterns in physics learning in indonesia: literature review. Jurnal Pendidikan Matematika Dan IPA, 14(1), 93. https://doi.org/10.26418/jpmipa.v14i1.55338

Archila, P. A., Molina, J., & Truscott De Mejía, A.-M. (2020). Using historical scientific controversies to promote undergraduates’ argumentation. Science & Education, 29(3), 647–671. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11191-020-00126-6

Ayalon, M., & Hershkowitz, R. (2018). Mathematics teachers’ attention to potential classroom situations of argumentation. The Journal of Mathematical Behavior, 49, 163–173. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jmathb.2017.11.010

Bathgate, M., Crowell, A., Schunn, C., Cannady, M., & Dorph, R. (2015). The learning benefits of being willing and able to engage in scientific argumentation. International Journal of Science Education, 37(10), 1590–1612. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500693.2015.1045958

Castro, W. F., Durango-Urrego, J. H., & Pino-Fan, L. R. (2021). Preservice teachers’ argumentation and some relationships to didactic-mathematical knowledge features. Eurasia Journal of Mathematics, Science and Technology Education, 17(9), em2002. https://doi.org/10.29333/ejmste/11139

Cebrián-Robles, D., Franco-Mariscal, A.-J., & Blanco-López, Á. (2018). Preservice elementary science teachers’ argumentation competence: Impact of a training programme. Instructional Science, 46(5), 789–817. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11251-018-9446-4

Cervantes-Barraza, J. A., Hernandez Moreno, A., & Rumsey, C. (2020). Promoting mathematical proof from collective argumentation in primary school. School Science and Mathematics, 120(1), 4–14. https://doi.org/10.1111/ssm.12379

Cervantes-Barraza, J., Cabañas-Sánchez, G., & Reid, D. (2019). Complex argumentation in elementary school. PNA. Revista de Investigación En Didáctica de La Matemática, 13(4), 221–246. https://doi.org/10.30827/pna.v13i4.8279

Cetin-Dindar, A., Boz, Y., Yildiran Sonmez, D., & Demirci Celep, N. (2018). Development of pre-service chemistry teachers’ technological pedagogical content knowledge. Chemistry Education Research and Practice, 19(1), 167–183. https://doi.org/10.1039/C7RP00175D

Chen, H.-T., Wang, H.-H., Lu, Y.-Y., Lin, H., & Hong, Z.-R. (2016). Using a modified argument-driven inquiry to promote elementary school students’ engagement in learning science and argumentation. International Journal of Science Education, 38(2), 170–191. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500693.2015.1134849

Clark, D. B., Sampson, V., Weinberger, A., & Erkens, G. (2007). Analytic Frameworks for Assessing Dialogic Argumentation in Online Learning Environments. Educational Psychology Review, 19(3), 343–374. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-007-9050-7

Conner, A. (2022). Adaptive instruction that supports collective argumentation. The Journal of Mathematical Behavior, 66, 100969. https://doi.org/10.1016/ j.jmathb.2022.100969

Conner, A., Singletary, L. M., Smith, R. C., Wagner, P. A., & Francisco, R. T. (2014). Teacher support for collective argumentation: A framework for examining how teachers support students’ engagement in mathematical activities. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 86(3), 401–429. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10649-014-9532-8

Dawson, V., & Carson, K. (2020). Introducing argumentation about climate change socioscientific issues in a disadvantaged school. Research in Science Education, 50(3), 863–883. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11165-018-9715-x

Demi̇Ray, E., Işiksal-Bostan, M., & Saygi, E. (2022). Types of global argumentation structures in conjecture-generation activities regarding geometry. International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 20(4), 839–860. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10763-021-10172-3

Erduran, S. (2018). Toulmin’s argument pattern as a “horizon of possibilities” in the study of argumentation in science education. Cultural Studies of Science Education, 13(4), 1091–1099. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11422-017-9847-8

Erduran, S., Ozdem, Y., & Park, J.-Y. (2015). Research trends on argumentation in science education: A journal content analysis from 1998–2014. International Journal of STEM Education, 2(1), 5. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40594-015-0020-1

Erkek, Ö., & Işıksal Bostan, M. (2019). Prospective middle school mathematics teachers’ global argumentation structures. International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 17(3), 613–633. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10763-018-9884-0

Fakhriyah, F., & Masfuah, S. (2021). The analysis of scientific argumentation skill and computational thinking skill of the primary educational teacher department students. 030005. https://doi.org/10.1063/5.0041655

Fakhriyah, F., Rusilowati, A., Nugroho, S. E., Saptono, S., Ridlo, S., Mindyarto, B., & Susilaningsih, E. (2022). The scientific argumentative skill analysis reviewed from the science literacy aspect of pre-service teacher. International Journal of Evaluation and Research in Education (IJERE), 11(4), 2129. https://doi.org/10.11591/ijere.v11i4.22847

Giri, V., & Paily, M. U. (2020). Effect of scientific argumentation on the development of critical thinking. Science & Education, 29(3), 673–690. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11191-020-00120-y

Gomez Marchant, C. N., Park, H., Zhuang, Y., Foster, J. K., & Conner, A. (2021). Theory to practice: Prospective mathematics teachers’ recontextualizing discourses surrounding collective argumentation. Journal of Mathematics Teacher Education, 24(6), 671–699. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10857-021-09500-9

González‐Howard, M., & McNeill, K. L. (2019). Teachers’ framing of argumentation goals: Working together to develop individual versus communal understanding. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 56(6), 821–844. https://doi.org/ 10.1002/tea.21530

Grimes, P., McDonald, S., & Van Kampen, P. (2019). “We’re getting somewhere”: Development and implementation of a framework for the analysis of productive science discourse. Science Education, 103(1), 5–36. https://doi.org/10.1002/ sce.21485

Härmä, K., Kärkkäinen, S., & Jeronen, E. (2021). The dramatic arc in the development of argumentation skills of upper secondary school students in geography education. Education Sciences, 11(11), 734. https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci11110734

Hsu, C.-C., Chiu, C.-H., Lin, C.-H., & Wang, T.-I. (2015). Enhancing skill in constructing scientific explanations using a structured argumentation scaffold in scientific inquiry. Computers & Education, 91, 46–59. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu. 2015.09.009

Kalogiannakis, M., Papadakis, S., & Zourmpakis, A.-I. (2021). Gamification in science education. a systematic review of the literature. Education Sciences, 11(1), 22. https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci11010022

Kaplan, H. A., Gulkilik, H., & Emul, N. (2021). Role of formal constraints in reasoning: An approach through 2D Euclidean geometry in undergraduate mathematics. International Journal of Mathematical Education in Science and Technology, 52(6), 815–832. https://doi.org/10.1080/0020739X.2020.1738578

Kartika, H., Warmi, A., Urayama, D., & Suprihatiningsih, S. (2024). Mathematical argumentation in higher education: a systematic literature review. Journal of University Teaching and Learning Practice.

Kazemi, E., Ghousseini, H., Cordero-Siy, E., Prough, S., McVicar, E., & Resnick, A. F. (2021). Supporting teacher learning about argumentation through adaptive, school-based professional development. ZDM – Mathematics Education, 53(2), 435–448. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11858-021-01242-5

Khambete, P. (2019). Adaptation of toulmin’s model of argumentation for establishing rigour and relevance in design research. In A. Chakrabarti (Ed.), Research into Design for a Connected World (Vol. 134, pp. 3–13). Springer Singapore. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-13-5974-3_1

Komatsu, K., & Jones, K. (2022). Generating mathematical knowledge in the classroom through proof, refutation, and abductive reasoning. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 109(3), 567–591. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10649-021-10086-5

Koomen, M. H., Rodriguez, E., Hoffman, A., Petersen, C., & Oberhauser, K. (2018). Authentic science with citizen science and student‐driven science fair projects. Science Education, 102(3), 593–644. https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.21335

Krummheuer, G. (2015). Methods for reconstructing processes of argumentation and participation in primary mathematics classroom interaction. In A. Bikner-Ahsbahs, C. Knipping, & N. Presmeg (Eds.), Approaches to Qualitative Research in Mathematics Education (pp. 51–74). Springer Netherlands. https://doi.org/10.1007/ 978-94-017-9181-6_3

Kuhn, D., & Moore, W. (2015). Argumentation as core curriculum. Learning: Research and Practice, 1(1), 66–78. https://doi.org/10.1080/23735082.2015.994254

Larrain, A., Freire, P., Grau, V., López, P., & Moran, C. (2019). The intertwined effect of collaborative argumentation and whole-class talk on the process of scientific concept learning: A case study. Learning, Culture and Social Interaction, 22, 100249. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lcsi.2018.07.005

Lazarou, D., & Erduran, S. (2021). Evaluate what i was taught, not what you expected me to know”: evaluating students’ arguments based on science teachers’ adaptations to toulmin’s argument pattern. Journal of Science Teacher Education, 32(3), 306–324. https://doi.org/10.1080/1046560X.2020.1820663

Lee, S.-H. (2014). Digital literacy education for the development of digital literacy: International Journal of Digital Literacy and Digital Competence, 5(3), 29–43. https://doi.org/10.4018/ijdldc.2014070103

Lin, Y. (2018). The influences of contextualized media on students’ science attitudes, knowledge, and argumentation learning through online game‐based activities. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 34(6), 884–898. https://doi.org/10.1111/jcal.12297

Liu, Q.-T., Liu, B.-W., & Lin, Y.-R. (2019). The influence of prior knowledge and collaborative online learning environment on students’ argumentation in descriptive and theoretical scientific concept. International Journal of Science Education, 41(2), 165–187. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500693.2018.1545100

Luesia, J. F., Benítez, I., Company-Córdoba, R., Gómez-Gómez, I., & Sánchez-Martín, M. (2023). Assessing the relevance of academic competencies in college admission tests from a higher-order thinking perspective: A systematic review. Thinking Skills and Creativity, 48, 101251. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tsc.2023.101251

Margot, K. C., & Kettler, T. (2019). Teachers’ perception of STEM integration and education: A systematic literature review. International Journal of STEM Education, 6(1), 2. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40594-018-0151-2

Mengist, W., Soromessa, T., & Legese, G. (2020). Method for conducting systematic literature review and meta-analysis for environmental science research. MethodsX, 7, 100777. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.mex.2019.100777

Murdani, E., Suhandi, A., Muslim, M., Setiawan, A., Samsudin, A., & Costu, B. (2023). Physics argumentation-based computer-supported collaborative hybrid learning to increase concept mastery and argumentation skills. Jurnal Pendidikan IPA Indonesia, 12(2), 232–240. https://doi.org/10.15294/jpii.v12i2.42457

Nursupiamin, N., & Badjeber, R. (2022). Systematic Literature Review: Kemampuan Komunikasi Matematis Peserta Didik Ditinjau Dari Berbagai Aspek. Koordinat Jurnal MIPA, 2(2), 21–32. https://doi.org/10.24239/koordinat.v2i2.29

O’Hallaron, C. L. (2014). Supporting fifth-grade ells’ argumentative writing development. Written Communication, 31(3), 304–331. https://doi.org/10.1177/ 0741088314536524

Osborne, J. F., Borko, H., Fishman, E., Gomez Zaccarelli, F., Berson, E., Busch, K. C., Reigh, E., & Tseng, A. (2019). Impacts of a practice-based professional development program on elementary teachers’ facilitation of and student engagement with scientific argumentation. American Educational Research Journal, 56(4), 1067–1112. https://doi.org/10.3102/0002831218812059

Pabuccu, A., & Erduran, S. (2017). Beyond rote learning in organic chemistry: The infusion and impact of argumentation in tertiary education. International Journal of Science Education, 39(9), 1154–1172. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500693. 2017.1319988

Parra Zeltzer, V., Huincahue Arcos, J., & Abril Milan, D. (2024). How Do You Argue in Physics Class? A Systematic Review from 2018-2023. 263–268. https://doi.org/10.54808/WMSCI2024.01.263

Probosari, R. M., Sajidan, S., Suranto, S., & Prayitno, B. A. (2022). Integrating reading as evidence to enhance argumentation in scientific reading-based inquiry: a design-based research in biology classroom. Jurnal Pendidikan IPA Indonesia, 11(1), 171–184. https://doi.org/10.15294/jpii.v11i1.29350

Probosari, R. M., Sajidan, Suranto, Prayitno, B. A., & Widyastuti, F. (2017). Modelling scientific argumentation in the classroom: teachers perception and practice. Journal of Physics: Conference Series, 812, 012111. https://doi.org/10.1088/1742-6596/812/1/012111

Putri, P. A. W., Rahayu, S., Widarti, H. R., & Yahmin, Y. (2022). Chemistry students’ digital literacy skills on thermochemistry context “hydrogen fuel issue.” Eurasia Journal of Mathematics, Science and Technology Education, 18(12), em2198. https://doi.org/10.29333/ejmste/12699

Ramadhani, D. G., Yamtinah, S., Saputro, S., & Widoretno, S. (2023). Analysis of the relationship between students’ argumentation and chemical representational ability: A case study of hybrid learning oriented in the environmental chemistry course. Chemistry Teacher International, 5(4), 397–411. https://doi.org/10.1515/cti-2023-0047

Ramandani, M. R., Hartono, Y., Hiltrimartin, C., & Aisyah, N. (2024). Investigating lower secondary school students’ geometric argumentation structure using Toulmin model. Jurnal Elemen, 10(2), 260–273. https://doi.org/10.29408/jel.v10i2.24116

Reisoğlu, İ., Eryılmaz Toksoy, S., & Erenler, S. (2020). An analysis of the online information searching strategies and metacognitive skills exhibited by university students during argumentation activities. Library & Information Science Research, 42(3), 101019. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lisr.2020.101019

Rodríguez-Nieto, C. A., Cervantes-Barraza, J. A., & Font Moll, V. (2023). Exploring mathematical connections in the context of proof and mathematical argumentation: A new proposal of networking of theories. Eurasia Journal of Mathematics, Science and Technology Education, 19(5), em2264. https://doi.org/10.29333/ejmste/13157

Samani, M., Sunwinarti, S., Putra, B. A. W., Rahmadian, R., & Rohman, J. N. (2019). Learning strategy to develop critical thinking, creativity, and problem-solving skills for vocational school students. Jurnal Pendidikan Teknologi Dan Kejuruan, 25(1), 36–42. https://doi.org/10.21831/jptk.v25i1.22574

Silva Carneiro, J., Sales Teixeira, E., & Pereira De Oliveira, A. M. (2023). Uses of argumentation in mathematics education: A systematic literature review in higher education. Educação Matemática Pesquisa Revista Do Programa de Estudos Pós-Graduados Em Educação Matemática, 25(3), 111–141. https://doi.org/10.23925/ 1983-3156.2023v25i3p111-141

Siswanto, Yusiran, Asriyadin, Gumilar, S., & Subali, B. (2018). Scientific method by argumentation design: Learning process for maintaining student’s retention. Journal of Physics: Conference Series, 983, 012021. https://doi.org/10.1088/1742-6596/983/1/012021

Slater, W. H., & Groff, J. A. (2017). Tutoring in critical thinking: using the stases to scaffold high school students’ reading and writing of persuasive text. Reading & Writing Quarterly, 33(4), 380–393. https://doi.org/10.1080/10573569.2017. 1294516

Thomas, D. P. (2022). Structuring written arguments in primary and secondary school: A systemic functional linguistics perspective. Linguistics and Education, 72, 101120. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.linged.2022.101120

Toro Uribe, J. A., & Castro, W. F. (2020). Condiciones que activan la argumentación del profesor de matemáticas en clase. Revista Chilena de Educación Matemática, 12(1), 35–44. https://doi.org/10.46219/rechiem.v12i1.11

Uygun, T. (2020). An inquiry-based design research for teaching geometric transformations by developing mathematical practices in dynamic geometry environment. Mathematics Education Research Journal, 32(3), 523–549. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13394-020-00314-1

Wagner, P. A., Smith, R. C., Conner, A., Singletary, L. M., & Francisco, R. T. (2014). Using toulmin’s model to develop prospective secondary mathematics teachers’ conceptions of collective argumentation. Mathematics Teacher Educator, 3(1), 8–26. https://doi.org/10.5951/mathteaceduc.3.1.0008

Yamtinah, S., Saputro, S., Mulyani, S., Ulfa, M., Lutviana, E., & Shidiq, A. S. (2019). Do students have enough scientific literacy? A computerized testlet instrument for measuring students’ scientific literacy. 020143. https://doi.org/10.1063/1.5139875

Yang, R. (2022). An empirical study on the scaffolding Chinese university students’ English argumentative writing based on toulmin model. Heliyon, 8(12), e12199. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.heliyon.2022.e12199

Yang, R., & Pan, H. (2023). Whole-to-part argumentation instruction: an action research study aimed at improving chinese college students’ english argumentative writing based on the toulmin model. Sage Open, 13(4), 21582440231207738. https://doi.org/10.1177/21582440231207738

Zambak, V. S., & Magiera, M. T. (2020). Supporting grades 1–8 pre-service teachers’ argumentation skills: Constructing mathematical arguments in situations that facilitate analyzing cases. International Journal of Mathematical Education in Science and Technology, 51(8), 1196–1223. https://doi.org/10.1080/ 0020739X.2020.1762938

Zengin, Y. (2022). Construction of proof of the fundamental theorem of calculus using dynamic mathematics software in the calculus classroom. Education and Information Technologies, 27(2), 2331–2366. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-021-10666-1

Zhang, J., & Browne, W. J. (2023). Exploring Chinese high school students’ performance and perceptions of scientific argumentation by understanding it as a three‐component progression of competencies. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 60(4), 847–884. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.21819

Zhao, G., Zhao, R., Li, X., Duan, Y., & Long, T. (2023). Are preservice science teachers (PSTs) prepared for teaching argumentation? Evidence from a university teacher preparation program in China. Research in Science & Technological Education, 41(1), 170–189. https://doi.org/10.1080/02635143.2021.1872518

Zhu, J., & Liu, W. (2020). A tale of two databases: the use of web of science and scopus in academic papers. Scientometrics, 123(1), 321–335. https://doi.org/10.1007/ s11192-020-03387-8


Refbacks

  • There are currently no refbacks.


Copyright (c) 2024 Jurnal Pendidikan MIPA

Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.

View My Stats

Creative Commons License
The copyright is reserved to The Jurnal Pendidikan MIPA that is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.