José Antonio García Pérez

The design and preliminary results of a two-year training program implemented on high school students (16-18 years old) in the subject of Biology are presented. The main objective is to analyse the impact of the training program for the development of competence in argumentation as a methodology for solving reasoning exercises typical of this subject. The structure of the training program has had as a reference the progression in learning for scientific argumentation proposed by Osborne et al. (2016). The effectiveness of the implemented training program is being evaluated through a quasi-experimental design (pretest-postest), carrying out an exhaustive analysis of the results obtained in written tests, for each of the main elements of a complete argument following the TAP model (Toulmin, 1958). In each of the two years of the training program, a debate has been held at the end of it, using this activity as a methodological tool to observe the impact, especially in the oral and dialectical part, of said program on students. For the qualitative analysis of these debates, the result of which can be used as one more criterion to validate the training program, the proposal of Leitão (2000) is being used, taking into account the types of statements that question the position of a speaker and the different levels at which the contents of a counterargument are integrated into the rebuttal. The current preliminary results allow us to propose argumentation as a didactic strategy that allows optimising the resolution of reasoning exercises by Biology students in High School.

To join the session on Zoom, use this link.

The session will take place within the scope of the activities of the research group Philosophy and argumentation in society (PAIS), coordinated by Dina Mendonça (ArgLab/IFILNOVA).