Argument-based teaching A necessary 21st-century pedagogical practice
Article Sidebar
Main Article Content
Abstract
21st-century teachers are required to embrace new, student-centred pedagogical practices that lead to direct student benefits as critical and democratic citizens. One of these pedagogies is argument-based teaching. This theoretical paper provides an overview of argument-based teaching and its main applications and benefits. A relation with 21st-century teaching is established through the concept of critical literacy, a metaliteracy competence promoted by argument-based teaching and learning. After an overview of national and international initiatives, recommendations for teacher education are provided, considering the complexity of argument pedagogical content knowledge.
Downloads
Article Details
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.
Authors retain copyright, without restrictions, in their articles and grant the journal right of first publication with the work simultaneously licensed under Creative Commons Attribution ShareAlike Licence 4.0 International (CC BY-NC-SA). Readers are free to copy, display, distribute, and adapt an article, as long as the work is attributed to the author(s) and ESC, the changes are identified, and the same license applies to the derivative work. Only non-commercial uses of the work are permitted.
How to Cite
References
Anderson, Richard, Chinn, Clark, Waggoner, Martha, & Nguyen, Kim (1998). Intellectually stimulating story discussions. In Jean Osborn & Fran Lehr (Eds.), Literacy for all: Issues in teaching and learning (pp. 170–186). The Guilford Press.
Arthur, James, & Davison, Jon (2000). Social literacy and citizenship education in the school curriculum. The Curriculum Journal, 11(1), 9–23. https://doi.org/10.1080/095851700361366
Baker, Michael, Pallarès, Gwen, Cedar, Talli, Brandel, Noa, Bietti, Lucas, Schwarz, Baruch, & Détienne, Françoise (2023). Understanding the moral of the story: Collaborative interpretation of visual narratives. Learning, Culture and Social Interaction, 39, 100700. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lcsi.2023.100700
Barak, Matan, & Lefstein, Adam (2022). Above the law? The democratic implications of setting ground rules for dialogue. Language and Education, 36(3), 195–210. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500782.2021.1981923
Beck, Ann S. (2005). A place for critical literacy. Journal of Adolescent & Adult Literacy, 48(5), 392–400. https://doi.org/10.1598/jaal.48.5.3
Bee, Cristiano (2017). Active citizenship in Europe: Practices and demands in the EU, Italy, Turkey and the UK. Palgrave Macmillan.
Benedict-Chambers, Amanda, Kademian, Sylvie, Davis, Elizabeth, & Palincsar, Annemarie (2017). Guiding students towards sensemaking: Teacher questions focused on integrating scientific practices with science content. International Journal of Science Education, 39(15), 1977–2001. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500693.2017.1366674
Catts, Ralph, & Lau, Jesus (2008). Towards information literacy indicators. UNESCO. https://unesdoc.unesco.org/ark:/48223/pf0000158723
Chen, Ying-Chih, Hand, Brian, & Norton-Meier, Lori (2017). Teacher roles of questioning in early elementary science classrooms: A framework promoting student cognitive complexities in argumentation. Research in Science Education, 47, 373–405. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11165-015-9506-6
Chen, Ying-Chih, Hand, Brian, & Park, Soonhye (2016). Examining elementary students’ development of oral and written argumentation practices through argument-based inquiry. Science & Education, 25(3–4), 277–320. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11191-016-9811-0
Chi, Michelene (2009). Active‐constructive‐interactive: A conceptual framework for differentiating learning activities. Topics in Cognitive Science, 1(1), 73–105. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1756-8765.2008.01005.x
Chi, Michelene, Adams, Joshua, Bogusch, Emily, Bruchok, Christiana, Kang, Seokmin, Lancaster, Matthew, Levy, Roy, Li, Na, McEldoon, Katherine, Stump, Glenda, Wylie, Ruth, Xu, Dongchen, & Yaghmourian, David (2018). Translating the ICAP theory of cognitive engagement into practice. Cognitive Science, 42(6), 1777–1832. https://doi.org/10.1111/cogs.12626
Council of Europe. (2016). Competences for democratic culture: Living together as equals in culturally diverse democratic societies. Council of Europe Publishing.
Council of Europe. (2018). Council recommendation of 22 May 2018 on key competences for lifelong learning. EUR-Lex. https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=CELEX%3A32018H0604%2801%29
Dawson, Vaille, & Venville, Grady (2010). Teaching strategies for developing students’ argumentation skills about socioscientific issues in high school genetics. Research in Science Education, 40, 133–148. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11165-008-9104-y
De La Paz, Susan, & Felton, Mark (2010). Reading and writing from multiple source documents in history: Effects of strategy instruction with low to average high school writers. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 35(3), 174–192. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cedpsych.2010.03.001
Dunning, Amy (2023). A framework for selecting strategies for whole-class discussions. Journal of Mathematics Teacher Education, 26, 433–454. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10857-022-09536-5
Duschl, Richard, & Osborne, Jonathan (2002). Supporting and promoting argumentation discourse in science education. Studies in Science Education, 38(1), 39–72. https://doi.org/10.1080/03057260208560187
Erduran, Sibel, Simon, Shirley, & Osborne, Jonathan (2004). TAPping into argumentation: Developments in the application of Toulmin’s Argument Pattern for studying science discourse. Science Education, 88(6), 915–933. https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.20012
Erstad, Ola, & Voogt, Joke (2018). The twenty-first century curriculum: Issues and challenges. In Joke Voogt, Gerald Knezek, Rhonda Christensen, & Kwok-Wing Lai (Eds.), Second handbook of information technology in primary and secondary education (pp. 19–36). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-71054-9_1
Felton, Mark, Crowell, Amanda, Garcia-Mila, Merce, & Villarroel, Constanza (2022). Capturing deliberative argument: An analytic coding scheme for studying argumentative dialogue and its benefits for learning. Learning, Culture and Social Interaction, 36, 100350. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lcsi.2019.100350
Felton, Mark, Levin, Daniel, De La Paz, Susan, & Butler, Cameron (2022). Scientific argumentation and responsive teaching: Using dialog to teach science in three middle‐school classrooms. Science Education, 106(6), 1354–1374. https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.21740
Forman, Ellice, & Ford, Michael (2014). Authority and accountability in light of disciplinary practices in science. International Journal of Educational Research, 64, 199–210. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijer.2013.07.009
Galvão, Cecília, Reis, Pedro, & Freire, Sofia (2011). A discussão de controvérsias sociocientíficas na formação de professores. Ciência & Educação, 17(3), 505–522. https://doi.org/10.1590/S1516-73132011000300001
Gasser, Luciano, Dammert, Yvonne, & Murphy, P. Karen (2022). How do children socially learn from narrative fiction: Getting the lesson, simulating social worlds, or dialogic inquiry? Educational Psychology Review, 34(3), 1445–1475. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-022-09667-4
Gillies, Robyn, & Khan, Asaduzzaman (2009). Promoting reasoned argumentation, problem‐solving and learning during small‐group work. Cambridge Journal of Education, 39(1), 7–27. https://doi.org/10.1080/03057640802701945
Gilster, Paul (1997). Digital literacy. John Wiley & Sons.
González‐Howard, María, & McNeill, Katherine (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
Graff, Gerald (2003). Clueless in academe. Yale University Press.
Henderson, J. Bryan, Zillmer, Nicole, Holton, April, Weiner, Steven, Greenwald, Eric, Goss, Megan, Lopez, M. Lisette, Morales, Christina, Pearson, P. David, & McNeill, Katherine (2021). How science teachers DiALoG classrooms: Towards a practical and responsive formative assessment of oral argumentation. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 30(6), 803–815. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10956-021-09921-4
Hennessy, Sara, Calcagni, Elisa, Leung, Alvin, & Mercer, Neil (2023). An analysis of the forms of teacher-student dialogue that are most productive for learning. Language and Education, 37(2), 186–211. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500782.2021.1956943
Hennessy, Sara, & Davies, Maree (2019). Teacher professional development to support classroom dialogue. In Neil Mercer, Rupert Wegerif, & Louis Major (Eds.), The Routledge international handbook of research on dialogic education (pp. 238–253). Routledge.
Herman, Barbara (2007). Moral literacy. Harvard University Press.
Herrenkohl, Leslie R., & Cornelius, Lindsay (2013). Investigating elementary students’ scientific and historical argumentation. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 22(3), 413–461. https://doi.org/10.1080/10508406.2013.799475
Howe, Christine (2023). Classroom interaction and student learning: Reasoned dialogue versus reasoned opposition. Dialogic Pedagogy: An International Online Journal, 11(3), A26–A41. https://doi.org/10.5195/dpj.2023.549
Howe, Christine, Ilie, Sonia, Guardia, Paula, Hofmann, Rita, Mercer, Neil, & Riga, Fran (2015). Principled improvement in science: Forces and proportional relations in early secondary-school teaching. International Journal of Science Education, 37, 162–184. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/09500693.2014.975168
International Commission on the Futures of Education. (2020). Education in a post-covid world: Nine ideas for public action. UNESCO. https://en.unesco.org/sites/default/files/education_in_a_post-covid_world-nine_ideas_for_public_action.pdf
Iordanou, Kalypso, Kuhn, Deanna, Matos, Flora, Shi, Yuchen, & Hemberger, Laura (2019). Learning by arguing. Learning and Instruction, 63, 101207. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.learninstruc.2019.05.004
Iordanou, Kalypso, & Rapanta, Chrysi (2021). Argue with me: A method for developing argument skills. Frontiers in Psychology, 12. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2021.631203
Jiménez-Aleixandre, María Pilar, Puig Mauriz, Blanca, & Gallástegui Otero, Juan R. (Coords.). (2010). Report on argumentation and teacher education in Europe. Norges teknisk‐naturvitenskapelige universitet. https://strathprints.strath.ac.uk/31905/1/Deliverable_7b_October_2010.pdf
Jin, Qingna, & Kim, Mijung (2021). Supporting elementary students’ scientific argumentation with argument-focused metacognitive scaffolds (AMS). International Journal of Science Education, 43(12), 1984–2006. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500693.2021.1947542
Kaplan, Laura D. (1994). Teaching intellectual autonomy: The failure of the critical thinking movement. In Kerry Walters (Ed.), Re-thinking reason: New perspectives in critical thinking (pp. 205–220). State University of New York Press.
Kilpelä, Jonathan, Hiltunen, Jenna, Hähkiöniemi, Maukus, Jokiranta, Kaisa, Lehesvuori, Sami, Nieminen, Pasi, & Viiri, Jouni (2023). Analyzing science teachers’ support of dialogic argumentation using teacher roles of questioning and communicative approaches. Dialogic Pedagogy: An International Online Journal, 11(3), A88–A118. https://doi.org/10.5195/dpj.2023.547
Kuhn, Deanna (2018). Building our best future: Thinking critically about ourselves and our world. Wessex Press.
Kuhn, Deanna (2019). Critical thinking as discourse. Human Development, 62(3), 146–164. https://doi.org/10.1159/000500171
Kuhn, Deanna, Feliciano, Nicole, & Kostikina, Darya (2019). Engaging contemporary issues as practice for citizenship. The Social Studies, 110(5), 207–219. https://doi.org/10.1080/00377996.2019.1625856
Kuhn, Deanna, Hemberger, Laura, & Khait, Valerie (2016). Argue with me: Developing thinking and writing through dialog. Routledge.
Kuhn, Deanna, & Udell, Wadiya (2003). The development of argument skills. Child Development, 74(5), 1245–1260. https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-8624.00605
Kuhn, Deanna, Zillmer, Nicole, Crowell, Amanda, & Zavala, Julia (2013). Developing norms of argumentation: Metacognitive, epistemological, and social dimensions of developing argumentive competence. Cognition and Instruction, 31(4), 456–496. https://doi.org/10.1080/07370008.2013.830618
Larrain, Antonia, Fortes, Gabriel, & Rojas, M. Teresa (2021). Deliberative teaching as an emergent field: The challenge of articulating diverse research agendas to promote educational experiences for citizenship. Frontiers in Psychology, 12. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2021.660825
Lee, Alice, & So, Clement (2014). Media literacy and information literacy: Similarities and differences. Comunicar, 21(42), 137–146. https://doi.org/10.3916/C42-2014-13
Littleton, Karn, & Mercer, Neil (2013). Interthinking: Putting talk to work. Routledge.
Macagno, Fabrizio, & Rapanta, Chrysi (2019). The dimensions of argumentative texts and their assessment. Studia Paedagogica, 24(4), 11–44. https://doi.org/10.5817/SP2019-4-1
Macagno, Fabrizio, Rapanta, Chrysi, Mayweg-Paus, Elisabeth, & Garcia-Milà, Mercè (2022). Coding empathy in dialogue. Journal of Pragmatics, 192, 116–132. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2022.02.011
Mackey, Thomas, & Jacobson, Trudi (2011). Reframing information literacy as a metaliteracy. College & Research Libraries, 72(1), 62–78. https://doi.org/10.5860/crl-76r1
Maine, Fiona, Cook, Victoria, & Lähdesmäki, Tuuli (2019). Reconceptualizing cultural literacy as a dialogic practice. London Review of Education, 17(3), 383–392. https://doi.org/10.18546/lre.17.3.12
McNeill, Katherine, González‐Howard, María, Katsh‐Singer, Rebecca, & Loper, Suzanna (2016). Pedagogical content knowledge of argumentation: Using classroom contexts to assess high‐quality PCK rather than pseudoargumentation. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 53(2), 261–290. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.21252
McNeill, Katherine, & Knight, Amanda (2013). Teachers’ pedagogical content knowledge of scientific argumentation: The impact of professional development on K–12 teachers. Science Education, 97(6), 936–972. https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.21081
Mercer, Neil (1996). The quality of talk in children’s collaborative activity in the classroom. Learning and Instruction, 6(4), 359–377. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0959-4752(96)00021-7
Mercer, Neil, Hennessy, Sara, & Warwick, Paul (2019). Dialogue, thinking together and digital technology in the classroom: Some educational implications of a continuing line of inquiry. International Journal of Educational Research, 97, 187–199. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijer.2017.08.007
Mirza, Nathalie, & Perret-Clermont, Anne-Nelly (2009). Argumentation and education: Theoretical foundations and practices. Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-0-387-98125-3
Mulnix, Jennifer (2012). Thinking critically about critical thinking. Educational Philosophy and Theory, 44(5), 464–479. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1469-5812.2010.00673.x
Nielsen, Jan A. (2013). Dialectical features of students’ argumentation: A critical review of argumentation studies in science education. Research in Science Education, 43, 371–393. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11165-011-9266-x
Nokes, Jeffery, & De La Paz, Susan (2023). Historical argumentation: Watching historians and teaching youth. Written Communication, 40(2), 333–372. https://doi.org/10.1177/07410883221148679
Nussbaum, E. Michael (2021). Critical integrative argumentation: Toward complexity in students’ thinking. Educational Psychologist, 56(1), 1–17. https://doi.org/10.1080/00461520.2020.1845173
O’Keefe, Daniel (1992). Two concepts of argument. In William Benoit, Dale Hample, & Pamela Benoit (Eds.), Readings in argumentation (pp. 79–90). Foris Publications.
Osborne, Jonathan (2010). Arguing to learn in science: The role of collaborative, critical discourse. Science, 328(5977), 463–466. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1183944
Radulović, Lidija, & Stančić, Milan (2017). What is needed to develop critical thinking in schools? Center for Educational Policy Studies Journal, 7(3), 9–25. https://doi.org/10.26529/cepsj.283
Rapanta, Chrysi (2017). Professores como facilitadores de argumentação entre estudantes: Uma necessidade emergente. Revista Portuguesa de Pedagogia, 50(2), 41–62. https://doi.org/10.14195/1647-8614_50-2_3
Rapanta, Chrysi (2018). Potentially argumentative teaching strategies: And how to empower them. Journal of Philosophy of Education, 52(3), 451–464. https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-9752.12304
Rapanta, Chrysi (2019a). Argumentation as critically oriented pedagogical dialogue. Informal Logic, 39(1), 1–31. https://doi.org/10.22329/il.v39i1.5116
Rapanta, Chrysi (2019b). Argumentation strategies in the classroom. Vernon Press.
Rapanta, Chrysi (2021). Can teachers implement a student-centered dialogical argumentation method across the curriculum? Teaching and Teacher Education, 105, 103404. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2021.103404
Rapanta, Chrysi (2023). Defining openness in teachers’ ‘open’ questions: A pragmatic approach. Pragmatics & Society. https://doi.org/10.1075/ps.20015.rap
Rapanta, Chrysi, Botturi, Luca, Goodyear, Peter, Guàrdia, Lourdes, & Koole, Marguerite (2020). Online university teaching during and after the Covid-19 crisis: Refocusing teacher presence and learning activity. Postdigital Science and Education, 2, 923–945. https://doi.org/10.1007/s42438-020-00155-y
Rapanta, Chrysi, & Christodoulou, Andri (2022). Walton’s types of argumentation dialogues as classroom discourse sequences. Learning, Culture & Social Interaction, 36, 100352. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lcsi.2019.100352
Rapanta, Chrysi, & Felton, Mark (2022). Learning to argue through dialogue: A review of instructional approaches. Educational Psychology Review, 34(2), 477–509. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-021-09637-2
Rapanta, Chrysi, Garcia-Mila, Merce, & Gilabert, Sandra (2013). What is meant by argumentative competence? An integrative review of methods of analysis and assessment in education. Review of Educational Research, 83(4), 483–520. https://doi.org/10.3102/0034654313487606
Rapanta, Chrysi, Vrikki, Maria, & Evagorou, Maria (2021). Preparing culturally literate citizens through dialogue and argumentation: Rethinking citizenship education. Curriculum Journal, 32(3), 475–494. https://doi.org/10.1002/curj.95
Reis, Pedro (2014). Promoting students’ collective socio-scientific activism: Teachers’ perspectives. In Larry Bencze & Steve Alsop (Eds.), Activist science and technology education (pp. 547–574). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-007-4360-1_31
Reis, Pedro (2020). Environmental citizenship and youth activism. In Andreas Ch. Hadjichambis, Pedro Reis, Demetra Paraskeva-Hadjichambi, Jan Činčera, Jelle Boeve-de Pauw, Niklas Gericke, & Marie-Christine Knippels (Eds.), Conceptualizing environmental citizenship for 21st century education (pp. 139–148). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-20249-1_9
Reis, Pedro, & Galvão, Cecília (2004). The impact of socio-scientific controversies in Portuguese natural science teachers’ conceptions and practices. Research in Science Education, 34, 153–171. https://doi.org/10.1023/B:RISE.0000033760.04656.a1
Reznitskaya, Alina, Anderson, Richard, McNurlen, Brian, Nguyen-Jahiel, Kim, Archodidou, Anthi, & Kim, So-Young (2001). Influence of oral discussion on written argument. Discourse Processes, 32(2–3), 155–175. https://doi.org/10.1080/0163853X.2001.9651596
Reznitskaya, Alina, Kuo, Li-Jen, Clark, Ann-Marie, Miller, Brian, Jadallah, May, Anderson, Richard, & Nguyen‐Jahiel, Kim (2009). Collaborative reasoning: A dialogic approach to group discussions. Cambridge Journal of Education, 39(1), 29–48. https://doi.org/10.1080/03057640802701952
Reznitskaya, Alina, & Wilkinson, Ian (2017). The most reasonable answer: Helping students build better arguments together. Harvard University Press.
Reznitskaya, Alina, & Wilkinson, Ian (2021). The argumentation rating tool: Assessing and supporting teacher facilitation and student argumentation during text-based discussions. Teaching and Teacher Education, 106, 103464. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2021.103464
Richards, Jennifer, & Robertson, Amy (2016). A review of the research on responsive teaching in science and mathematics. In Amy Robertson, Rachel Scherr, & David Hammer (Eds.), Responsive teaching in science and mathematics (pp. 36–55). Routledge
Rodríguez-Triana, María Jesús, Prieto, Luis, Ley, Tobias, de Jong, Ton, & Gillet, Denis (2020). Social practices in teacher knowledge creation and innovation adoption: A large-scale study in an online instructional design community for inquiry learning. International Journal of Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning, 15, 445–467. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11412-020-09331-5
Schuitema, Jaap, Radstake, Hester, Van de Pol, Janneke, & Veugelers, Wiel (2018). Guiding classroom discussions for democratic citizenship education. Educational Studies, 44(4), 377–407. https://doi.org/10.1080/03055698.2017.1373629
Schwarz, Baruch (2009). Argumentation and learning. In Nathalie M. Mirza & Anne-Nelly Perret-Clermont (Eds.), Argumentation and education: Theoretical foundations and practices (pp. 91–126). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-0-387-98125-3_4
Scott, Philip, Mortimer, Eduardo, & Aguiar, Orlando (2006). The tension between authoritative and dialogic discourse: A fundamental characteristic of meaning making interactions in high school science lessons. Science Education, 90(4), 605–631. https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.20131
Sedova, Klara, Sedlacek, Martin, & Svaricek, Roman (2016). Teacher professional development as a means of transforming student classroom talk. Teaching and Teacher Education, 57, 14–25. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2016.03.005
Serafini, Frank (2012). Reading multimodal texts in the 21st century. Research in the Schools, 19(1), 26–32.
Shi, Yuchen, Zhang, Zihong, Cao, Shu, & Liu, Qunying (2023). Dialogic teaching of controversial issues: Discursive moves to enact two-sided discussions. Language and Education, 38(2), 303–319. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500782.2023.2240292
Shor, Ira (1999). What is critical literacy? Journal of Pedagogy, Pluralism, and Practice, 1(4), Article 2. https://digitalcommons.lesley.edu/jppp/vol1/iss4/2
Shulman, Lee (1986). Those who understand: Knowledge growth in teaching. Educational Researcher, 15(2), 4–14. https://doi.org/10.3102/0013189X015002004
Simon, Shirley, Erduran, Sibel, & Osborne, Jonathan (2006). Learning to teach argumentation: Research and development in the science classroom. International Journal of Science Education, 28(2–3), 235–260. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500690500336957
Sternberg, Robert J. (1987). Teaching critical thinking: Eight easy ways to fail before you begin. The Phi Delta Kappan, 68(6), 456–459.
Toulmin, Stephen E. (1958). The uses of argument. Cambridge University Press.
Toulmin, Stephen E., Rieke, Richard, & Janik, Allan. S. (1984). Introduction to reasoning (2nd ed.). Pearson.
Universidade Nova de Lisboa, & University of Nicosia – Cyprus. (2023). ACT-DI-V Transnational report. Active Citizenship Through Dialogue in Virtual teacher communities (ACT-DI-V). https://actdiv.weebly.com/transnational-report.html
VanDerHeide, Jennifer, & Juzwik, Mary (2018). Argument as conversation: Students responding through writing to significant conversations across time and place. Journal of Adolescent & Adult Literacy, 62(1), 67–77. https://doi.org/10.1002/jaal.754
VanDerHeide, Jennifer, Newell, George, & Olsen, Allison (2023). Conceptualizing dialogic literary argumentation: Inviting students to take a turn in important conversations. Written Communication, 40(2), 417–447. https://doi.org/10.1177/07410883221148680
Voogt, Joke, & Pareja Roblin, Natalie (2012). A comparative analysis of international frameworks for 21st century competences: Implications for national curriculum policies. Journal of Curriculum Studies, 44(3), 299–321. https://doi.org/10.1080/00220272.2012.668938
Walker, Joi, & Sampson, Victor (2013). Learning to argue and arguing to learn: Argument‐driven inquiry as a way to help undergraduate chemistry students learn how to construct arguments and engage in argumentation during a laboratory course. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 50(5), 561–596. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.21082
Walton, Douglas (1990). What is reasoning? What is an argument? The Journal of Philosophy, 87(8), 399–419. https://doi.org/10.2307/2026735
Walton, Douglas (2022). Formal dialogue models for argumentation in education and linguistics. Learning, Culture and Social Interaction, 36, 100388. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lcsi.2020.100388
Wilkinson, Ian, Murphy, P. Karen, & Binici, Sevda (2015). Dialogue-intensive pedagogies for promoting reading comprehension: What we know, what we need to know. In Lauren Resnick, Christa Asterhan, & Sherice Clarke (Eds.), Socializing intelligence through academic talk and dialogue (pp. 37–50). AERA. http://dx.doi.org/10.3102/978-0-935302-43-1_3
Wilkinson, Ian, Reznitskaya, Alina, Bourdage, Kristin, Oyler, Joseph, Glina, Monica, Drewry, Robert, & Nelson, Kathryn (2017). Toward a more dialogic pedagogy: Changing teachers’ beliefs and practices through professional development in language arts classrooms. Language and Education, 31(1), 65–82. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500782.2016.1230129
Zohar, Anat (2008). Science teacher education and professional development in argumentation. In Sibel Erduran & María Pilar Jiménez‐Aleixandre (Eds.), Argumentation in science education: Perspectives from classroom‐based research (pp. 245–268). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4020-6670-2_12
Zohar, Anat, & Nemet, Flora (2002). Fostering students’ knowledge and argumentation skills through dilemmas in human genetics. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 39(1), 35–62. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.10008