Re-Examining Argumentation in Science Education: Implications for the Future of Learning, Pedagogy and Research

Dear Colleagues,

Argumentation has gained a tremendous foothold in science education among researchers, pre-service teacher educators, and professional development providers. The emphasis on argumentation in science education began in the late 1990s in the wake of Deanna Kuhn's (1987, 1991) findings that both students and adults struggle to develop evidence-based arguments and that their reasoning is often driven by “my-side” or “confirmation” bias. Given the central role played by argumentation in science, this inability to logically construct and critique arguments was perceived as a threat to the goal of supporting a scientifically literate public. Formal argumentative reasoning was also seen to support communicative skills, critical thinking, enculturation into science, and elicitation of student science ideas. Throughout the 2000s, the number of articles published in the top peer-reviewed journals in science education exploded as many research groups began developing and studying targeted interventions around argumentation. This emphasis led to prominent reform documents across the globe emphasizing the importance of argumentative reasoning as a fundamental practice in science. However, some have questioned the narrowness with which argumentation has been conceptualized by the science education community and more recently the field’s emphasis on argument construction and critique to support decision-making. For example, has argument simply become another content-like standard for teachers to address? Does understanding the logic structure of a scientific argument prepare students to become better consumers of science or make better decisions regarding science? Having more than a quarter century of research on argumentation in science education and entering a new technological era with considerable influence on information flow, an evaluation of where we have been and where we are going as a field is in order. What lessons have we learned? What are the implications of these lessons learned for how we position argumentation in school science, particularly as we seek to evolve in the GenAI era?

The purpose of this Special Issue is to re-examine the role played by argumentation in science education as we enter the age of AI. We invite researchers and practitioners from diverse disciplines to contribute original research papers and theoretical perspectives that shed light on the role played by argumentation in science education and the implications for classroom environments, pedagogical decisions, professional learning, and research. The topics of interest for this Special Issue include, but are not limited to, the following:

1. The relationship between uncertainty, argumentation, and the epistemic nature of science.
2. The history of argumentation in school science and examination of the various roles of argumentation in school science.
3. Human learning and the implications for argumentation in classrooms.
4. Unpacking the mechanisms underlying both the processes and products of argumentation
5. Classroom characteristics (e.g., level of prosociality, trust, benefits to cooperation) that support or inhibit argumentation to learn in science classrooms.
6. The nature of human agency and the implications for argumentation and classroom pedagogy.
7. Challenges and opportunities related to enacting dialogic pedagogy.
8. Information flow in the era of generative artificial intelligence (GenAI).
9. Implications of argumentation in science on GenAI and/or implications of GenAI on argumentative dialogue.
10. Methodological considerations and/or approaches to studying argumentation in science classrooms.

We encourage contributors to explore theoretical frameworks, present empirical studies, and share practical insights into the nature of argumentation in science classrooms. Submissions should demonstrate a clear research methodology, present novel findings, and offer implications for both research and practice.

Accepted papers will be published in this Special Issue of Education Sciences, providing a platform for scholars to disseminate their work to a global audience. This Special Issue will contribute to the advancement of knowledge in the field of science education to evolve the field in the era of GenAI.

Dr. Andy Cavagnetto
Dr. Ying-Chih Chen
Guest Editors

Manuscript Submission Information

Manuscripts should be submitted online at www.mdpi.com by registering and logging in to this website. Once you are registered, click here to go to the submission form. Manuscripts can be submitted until the deadline. All submissions that pass pre-check are peer-reviewed. Accepted papers will be published continuously in the journal (as soon as accepted) and will be listed together on the special issue website. Research articles, review articles as well as short communications are invited. For planned papers, a title and short abstract (about 100 words) can be sent to the Editorial Office for announcement on this website.

Submitted manuscripts should not have been published previously, nor be under consideration for publication elsewhere (except conference proceedings papers). All manuscripts are thoroughly refereed through a double-blind peer-review process. A guide for authors and other relevant information for submission of manuscripts is available on the Instructions for Authors page. Education Sciences is an international peer-reviewed open access monthly journal published by MDPI.

Please visit the Instructions for Authors page before submitting a manuscript. The Article Processing Charge (APC) for publication in this open access journal is 1800 CHF (Swiss Francs). Submitted papers should be well formatted and use good English. Authors may use MDPI's English editing service prior to publication or during author revisions.

• argumentation
• pedagogy
• uncertainty
• science education
• dialogue
• agency
• research methods
• generative AI
• human learning