Trait Argumentativeness

Abstract
Scientific argumentation is considered both the process and the outcome of justifying scientific claims and
comparing competing theories, and should be an integral part of science teaching and learning. The present
study investigated factors influencing Scientific Argumentation Ability (SAA) in a computer-supported
collaborative learning environment. The factors examined were trait argumentativeness, type (individual or
collaborative) and issue of argumentation activities. 61 undergraduate primary education students were
administered the Argumentativeness Scale and were then allocated to 15 four-member, mixed-trait
argumentativeness groups. Each group was involved in one argumentation activity for a scientific issue, and
another for a socioscientific issue. Participants studied relevant material, then discussed on line, and finally
formulated their individual standpoint on the issues. SAA was measured using Sadler΄s (2006) scheme, but
slightly modified.  Α 3 x 2 x 2 mixed factorial design, with repeated measures of SAA and trait
argumentativeness as the between-subjects factor and argumentation issue (scientific or socioscientific) and
type of argumentation (individual or dialogical) as the within-subjects factors, was applied. Analyses
indicated a significant interaction between argumentation issue and type of argumentation. SAA for the
socioscientific issue was higher in its dialogic form, whereas, for the scientific issue, it was higher in its
individual form. A significant main effect of argumentation issue was also observed, indicating significantly
higher SAA for the socioscientific issue. Trait argumentativeness did not have any significant effect on SAA.
Educational implications of the results are discussed and recommendations for further research are put
forward.