The Concept of Evidence Along With Evidence Generation to Justify Arguments Across Fourth- to Sixth-Grade Students

• In Event: Learning to Argue From Evidence

Abstract

A great consensus is being reached towards the benefits of dialogic pedagogies, although in formal educational settings the teacher’s voice is still dominant in the classroom. Argumentation becomes essential in this new teaching approach. Engaging in argumentation helps students co-construct new ideas by integrating and weighing evidence from multiple perspectives to develop knowledge. In the present paper, we emphasize the importance of evidence to build a solid argument. Although Mercier and Sperber (2011) claim that we are naturally skilled to argue, we agree with Kuhn’s view (2005), that argumentation skills develop as a result of engaging in argumentation. The main assumption of this paper is that they develop along with the concept of evidence (CE).
Although several studies have explored children’s and adolescent’s use of evidence to argue, these studies reported discordant results, mainly related to evidence evaluation, and the distinction between theory and evidence. Studies that analyze the generation of evidence developmentally are quite scarce, and mostly related with self-guided experimentation (Zimmerman, 2001). The lack of use of evidence to justify an argument might be due to problems with understanding the concept, and especially, with recognizing valid evidence (Kuhn, 1991).
The aim of the present study is to explore how the CE develops along with children’s ability to justify their ideas based on evidence, in two groups of 4th and 6th grade students. Data were gathered through an individual semi-structured interview adapted from Kuhn (1991). A five-point ordinal rubric was designed to operationalize students’ evidence definition and on how they used this concept to justify their ideas.
Preliminary results showed significant differences between groups regarding the CE (4th grade ẋ=0.64(0.78), 6th grade ẋ=1.42(1.06), p=.001). This may suggest a developmental trend. Also, a strong positive correlation was found between the CE and the level of Justification (Spearman’s R= .311 p=.011 Spearman’s R = .516 p=.001). Three significant performance profiles after CE definition (decrease, increase, and maintain) were observed when grade was excluded as a factor (Chi2= .008). These results showed that students who have a basic CE, perform better in Justification after defining CE. A qualitative analysis of evidence types is provided.
The significant correlation between a good use of evidence and the quality of the concept, with differences across primary school grades suggests that the elicitation of the concept of evidence could improve students’ metacognitive skills associated with the argumentation process, which, in turn, would help them develop their critical thinking. Results also provide insights for the design and the implementation of interventions based on developing a good concept of evidence and learning to weigh good from bad evidence to develop argumentative competence.

Authors

• Andrea Miralda-Banda, University of Barcelona

• Merce Garcia-Mila, University of Barcelona