Promoting students' argument comprehension and evaluation skills: Implementation of two training interventions in higher education

被引:9
作者
Muenchow, Hannes [1 ]
Tiffin-Richards, Simon P. P. [1 ]
Fleischmann, Lorena [2 ]
Pieschl, Stephanie [3 ]
Richter, Tobias [1 ]
机构
[1] Julius Maximilians Univ Wurzburg, Dept Psychol 4, Rontgenring 10, D-97070 Wurzburg, Germany
[2] Heidelberg Univ, Dept Educ Psychol, Hauptstr 47, D-69117 Heidelberg, Germany
[3] Tech Univ Darmstadt, Padag Psychol, Alexanderstr 10, D-64283 Darmstadt, Germany
来源
ZEITSCHRIFT FUR ERZIEHUNGSWISSENSCHAFT | 2023年 / 26卷 / 03期
关键词
Argument comprehension; Argument evaluation; Training intervention; Scientific literacy; Higher education; SCIENTIFIC TEXTS; LITERACY;
D O I
10.1007/s11618-023-01147-x
中图分类号
G40 [教育学];
学科分类号
040101 ; 120403 ;
摘要
The ability to comprehend and evaluate informal arguments is important for making sense of scientific texts and scientific reasoning. However, university students often lack the skills necessary to comprehend the functional structure and evaluate the structural plausibility of informal arguments. The aim of this study was to evaluate the effectiveness of two training interventions to a) improve students' argument comprehension (identification of argument structure), and to b) improve students' argument evaluation (distinguishing good vs. bad arguments). The training interventions were implemented as a voluntary online add-on to a regular university course. The study used a crossover-experimental design with a pre-test and two training phases in which participants (N = 29) alternated between the two training interventions. Students generally improved on the measures of scientific literacy that were practiced in each training intervention. The results provide evidence that voluntary online training interventions for components of scientific literacy can be effectively integrated into higher education settings. However, results further showed an interference effect between the training interventions, indicating that students had problems integrating the different aspects of scientific literacy targeted in the two training interventions.
引用
收藏
页码:703 / 725
页数:23
相关论文
共 39 条
[1]  
[Anonymous], 2016, R LANG ENV STAT COMP
[2]  
[Anonymous], 2019, PISA 2018 Results (Volume I): What Students Know and Can Do, DOI [DOI 10.1787/5F07C754-EN, 10.1787/5f07c754-en, https://doi.org/10.1787/5f07c754-en]
[3]   PHYSICISTS READING PHYSICS - SCHEMA-LADEN PURPOSES AND PURPOSE-LADEN SCHEMA [J].
BAZERMAN, C .
WRITTEN COMMUNICATION, 1985, 2 (01) :3-23
[4]  
Berkenkotter C., 1995, GENRE KNOWLEDGE DISC
[5]  
Britt M.A., 2012, Enhancing the quality of learning, P276, DOI [DOI 10.1017/CBO9781139048224.017, 10.1017/CBO9781139048224.017]
[6]   Scientific Literacy: The Role of Goal-Directed Reading and Evaluation in Understanding Scientific Information [J].
Britt, M. Anne ;
Richter, Tobias ;
Rouet, Jean-Francois .
EDUCATIONAL PSYCHOLOGIST, 2014, 49 (02) :104-122
[7]  
Britt MA., 2003, Journal of Memory and Language, V48, P749, DOI [10.1016/S0749-596X(03)00002-0, DOI 10.1016/S0749-596X(03)00002-0]
[8]   Fourth and fifth graders representing the argument structure in written texts [J].
Chambliss, MJ ;
Murphy, PK .
DISCOURSE PROCESSES, 2002, 34 (01) :91-115
[9]   TEXT CUES AND STRATEGIES SUCCESSFUL READERS USE TO CONSTRUCT THE GIST OF LENGTHY WRITTEN ARGUMENTS [J].
CHAMBLISS, MJ .
READING RESEARCH QUARTERLY, 1995, 30 (04) :778-807
[10]   SELF-EXPLANATIONS - HOW STUDENTS STUDY AND USE EXAMPLES IN LEARNING TO SOLVE PROBLEMS [J].
CHI, MTH ;
BASSOK, M ;
LEWIS, MW ;
REIMANN, P ;
GLASER, R .
COGNITIVE SCIENCE, 1989, 13 (02) :145-182