Benchmarks for student learning in terms of argumentation
The benchmarks presented on this page are available in PDF format: here.
A. Synchronous written debates: what developments?
We examined the effects of a teaching sequence that combined four computer-mediated classroom debates and four reflective activities (in middle school and high school). During the reflective activities, students worked on the standards for argumentation on socio-scientific issues (SSI) (see Benchmarks for Standards for Argumentation on Socio-Scientific Issues), drawing on the arguments they had formulated during the debates.
1. In middle school: progression across several argumentation standards
In their first debate, students often tend to express themselves by simply agreeing or disagreeing (in a quarter of their interventions). As the debates progress, the results show positive developments in terms of justification standards and consideration of others' arguments (with more refutations and nuances). The three standards specific to argumentation on SSSQs (openness, complexity, and uncertainty) are also used more at the end of the intervention, although uncertainty remains a rarely addressed topic. On the other hand, only6th graders showed improvement in refutation, while only8th graders made progress in questioning and taking into account the openness of SSS.
2. In high school: high-quality argumentation from the very first debate
Our experiment reveals that, from the very first debate, students produce rich, high-quality arguments on SSTs. Each student makes numerous contributions, with diverse argumentative moves and a high rate of justification. Students address all relevant aspects of QSS, indicating that they make extensive use of generic argumentation norms, particularly those relating to justification and consideration of others. However, the norm of questioning is less frequently used, and QSS-specific norms, such as consideration of uncertainties and actors, are rarely present.
The results show positive, albeit limited, changes in the appropriation of generic and specific standards of argumentation on SSS. In the final debate, students tend to produce more justifications, ask more questions, take better account of the different aspects of SSS, and more often include in their argumentation the conditions under which their ideas are valid.
B. Profiles of students in debate situations
1. Three profiles in middle school and how they evolve
At the middle school level (6th and 8th grades), we identified three student profiles in the debates. The first profile that emerges is:
- The profile of " novice debaters " is that they are usually content to say whether they agree or disagree, without further developing their point of view; the results show that these students improve on all argumentation standards as the debates progress.
Among the students who argue best, two profiles stand out:
- The profile of " nuance-questioners ": these are students who often speak up, more frequently nuance their comments, and more frequently question the ideas put forward during the debate; as the debates progress, these students justify their comments more and take greater account of the complexity of the QSS.
- The profile of " developers-justifiers ": these students seek to explore topics in greater depth, explain their ideas, and explore the complexity of QSS; as the debates progress, these students nuance and question the ideas under discussion more and more.
2. Three high school profiles and how they have changed
After observing four successive debates at high school level (11th and 12th grades), three student profiles were identified based on their initial level of justification: low, medium, and high. Students who initially justify less progress on this justification standard as the debates progress. On the other hand, students with a high initial level tend to question the ideas expressed during the debates more, while maintaining their rate of justification.
C. How does this translate into the argumentation in individual writings?
To what extent are the argumentative skills developed in the context of debate transferable to individual argumentative production, particularly in writing?
This question allows us to extend our reflection on the effects of debates on the quality of argumentation by focusing on the impact of repeated practice on individual argumentative abilities.
1. In middle school: limited but significant progress in certain areas
The argumentative skills developed in debates are not immediately transferable to individual written argumentation. In fact, all6th and8th grade students, whether or not they participated in debates, show a slight improvement in the quality of their argumentation for most of the standards evaluated, although this improvement is generally not significant. However, in terms of justification, there is a more marked improvement amongsixth graders than amongeighth graders. Similarly, in terms of consideration for others, a significant improvement is observed among sixth graders as well as among those enrolled insixth andeighth grades in schools belonging to the Priority Education Network (REP).
2. In high school: a partial transfer of argumentative skills from debate to individual writing
The students who participated in the debates tend to provide more justifications in their individual writing, but this trend is not clear enough to be considered significant, suggesting only a very partial transfer of the justification norm. The number of QSS dimensions considered does not increase in individual writing. Uncertainties and actors are rarely taken into account in individual writing, reflecting the results observed in the debates.