Argumentative Interaction as a Tool to Promote Critical Thinking in Educational Contexts
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.37843/rted.v19i1.660
Article Sidebar
Main Article Content
Abstract
Argumentative interaction is a fundamental factor in contemporary education. The objective was to analyze argumentative practices in an educational institution, understand their application in the classroom, and identify the reasons teachers integrate them into their teaching sequences. The research was framed within the interpretive paradigm, using a case study method and a qualitative approach, with a descriptive, cross-sectional design. The natural observation technique was used in a private educational institution in Cusco, Peru, with 22 high school seniors and three teachers. Through observational records, three types of practices were identified: proto-argumentative, type 1 argumentative, and type 2 argumentative. Proto-argumentative practices show points of view without a formal reasoning structure. At the same time, the dynamics promoted by the teacher distinguish type 1 and type 2 argumentative practices, the reasoning developed, and the questions asked. Within type 1 practices, subcategories were identified according to the pedagogical objective, and levels of increasing complexity in interactions were established. This analysis provided an understanding of how argumentative practices contribute to critical thinking and offer tools for designing effective pedagogical strategies.
Downloads
Metrics
Article Details
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.
Those authors who have publications in our journal accept the following terms:
- When a work is accepted for publication, the author retains rights of reproduction, distribution of his/her article for exploitation in all countries of the world in the format provided by our magazine and any other magnetic medium, optical, and digital.
- Authors will retain their copyright and guarantee the journal the right first to publish their work, which will be simultaneously subject to the Creative Commons Acknowledgment License (Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International (CC BY-NC-ND 4.0)). That allows third parties to copy and redistribute the material in any medium or format, under the following conditions: Acknowledgment - You must properly acknowledge authorship, provide a link to the license, and indicate if any changes have been made. You may do so in any reasonable way, but not in a way that suggests you have the licensor's endorsement or receive it for your use. NonCommercial - You may not use the material for a commercial purpose. NoDerivatives - If you remix, transform, or build from the material, you cannot broadcast the modified material. There are no additional restrictions - You cannot apply legal terms or technological measures that legally restrict you from doing what the license allows.
- Authors may adopt other non-exclusive license agreements to distribute the published version of the work (e.g., deposit it in an institutional archive or publish it in a monographic volume) provided that the initial publication in this journal is indicated.
- Authors are allowed and recommended to disseminate their work through the Internet (e.g., in institutional telematic archives, repositories, libraries, or their website), producing exciting exchanges and increasing the published work's citations.
- Request of withdrawal an article has to be done in writing by the author to the Editor, becoming effective after a written response from the Editor. For this purpose, the author or authors will send correspondence via e-mail: [email protected].
- The author will not receive financial compensation for the publication of his work.
- All Docentes 2.0 Journal publications are under the Open Journal System (OJS) platform at: https://ojs.docentes20.com/.
Citaciones del Artículo
References
Abdikerimova, G. S., & Nеchаеvа, М. N. (2025). The role of rhetorical argumentation in language teaching in the context of cultural and social norms. Eurasian Journal of Current Research in Psychology and Pedagogy, 4, 48-53. https://doi.org/10.46914/2959-3999-2024-1-4-48-53
Abrami, P., Bernard, R., Borokhovski, E., Wade, A., Surkes, M., Tamim, R., & Zhang, D. (2008). Instructional interventions affecting critical thinking skills and dispositions: A stage 1 Meta-Analysis. Review of Educational Research, 78(4), 1102-1134. https://doi.org/10.3102/0034654308326084
Alase, A. (2017). The Interpretative Phenomenological Analysis (IPA): A Guide to a Good Qualitative Research Approach. International Journal of Education and Literacy Studies, 5(2), 9. https://doi.org/10.7575/aiac.ijels.v.5n.2p.9
Algouzi, S., Alzubi, A., Nazim, M., & Enhancing, E. (2023) students' critical thinking skills using a technology-mediated self-study approach: EFL graduates and labor market in perspective. PLoS One. 18(10). https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0293273Arendt
Álvarez, M., Menacho, I., Esquiagola, E., & Camarena, J. (2020). Habilidades del pensamiento crítico en estudiantes de educación secundaria de Lima, Perú. INNOVA Research Journal, 5(3.2), 97-110. https://doi.org/10.33890/innova.v5.n3.2.2020.1551
Arendt, B., & Ehrlich, S. Z. (2024). Repetitions as a participation practice in children’s argumentative peer interactions. European Journal of Psychology of Education, 39(3), 1719-1738. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10212-024-00873-y
Arias-Gómez, J., Villasís-Keever, M. Á., & Miranda-Novales, M. G. (2016). El protocolo de investigación III: La población de estudio. Revista Alergia México, 63(2), 201-206. https://doi.org/10.29262/ram.v63i2.181
Babativa Salamanca, H. A., Rubiano Cárdenas, P. A., Velásquez Pérez, T., Gaona Diaz, N. F., González Ortega, J. A., & Vega Gámez, M. I. (2024). La entrevista semiestructurada: Una herramienta pertinente en la percepción de valores sociales para la vida. Revista Lasallista de Investigación, 21(1), 92-107. https://doi.org/10.22507/rli.v21n1a5
Bingham, A. J. (2023). From Data Management to Actionable Findings: A Five-Phase Process of Qualitative Data Analysis. International Journal of Qualitative Methods, 22, 16094069231183620. https://doi.org/10.1177/16094069231183620
Boğar, Y. (2019). Synthesis Study on Argumentation in Science Education. International Education Studies, 12(9), 1. https://doi.org/10.5539/ies.v12n9p1
Caño, L., & Sanz, J. (2025). Young Children’s Epistemic Operations and Emergent Argumentation in Inquiry‐Based Discussions: The Role of Teacher Questioning and Collaborative Interactions. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 62(9), 2060-2079. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.70010
Demircioglu, T., Karakus, M., & Ucar, S. (2023). Developing Students’ Critical Thinking Skills and Argumentation Abilities Through Augmented Reality-Based Argumentation Activities in Science Classes. Science & Education, 32(4), 1165-1195. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11191-022-00369-5
Denzin, N. K. (2017). The Research Act: A Theoretical Introduction to Sociological Methods (1.a ed.). Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315134543
Dhobi, S. (2023). Philosophical Approaches in Qualitative Research. Journal of Population and Development, 4(1), 145–154. https://doi.org/10.3126/jpd.v4i1.64248
Eemeren, F., & Grootendorst, F. (2004) A Systematic Theory of Argumentation. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511616389
Goizueta, M. (2019). Epistemic issues in classroom mathematical activity: There is more to students’ conversations than meets the teacher’s ear. The Journal of Mathematical Behavior, 55, 100691. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jmathb.2019.01.007
Hernández-Sampieri, R., & Mendoza, C. (2018). Metodología de la investigación: Las rutas cuantitativa, cualitativa y mixta (7.ª ed.). McGraw-Hill Education.
Iman, J. N. (2017). Debate Instruction in EFL Classroom: Impacts on the Critical Thinking and Speaking Skill. International Journal of Instruction, 10(4), 87-108. https://doi.org/10.12973/iji.2017.1046a
Koleza, E., Metaxas, N., & Poli, K. (2017). Competencia argumentativa de estudiantes de primaria y secundaria: Un estudio de caso. Proceedings of CERME 10, 1-9. https://n9.cl/4e1dmj
Kuhn, D. (2010). Teaching and learning science as argument. Science Education, 94(5), 810-824. https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.20395
Leal, F. (2017). ¿Qué función cumple la argumentación en la metodología de la investigación en ciencias sociales?. Espiral (Guadalajara), 24(70), 9-49, de https://n9.cl/zehw8
Ma, F., & Li, Y. (2022). Critical Thinking Ability and Performance in Argumentative Essays of the Education Major Students. Theory and Practice in Language Studies, 12(1), 143-149. https://doi.org/10.17507/tpls.1201.17
Ministerio de Educación del Perú - Minedu. (2020). Proyecto Educativo Nacional - PEN 2036: El reto de la ciudadanía plena. Ministerio de Educación del Perú. https://n9.cl/v23rz
Monaro, S., Gullick, J., & West, S. (2022). Qualitative Data Analysis for Health Research: A Step-by-Step Example of Phenomenological Interpretation. The Qualitative Report. https://doi.org/10.46743/2160-3715/2022.5249
Nóblega, M., Vera, A., Gutiérrez, G., & Otiniano, F. (2020). Criterios Homologados de Investigación en Psicología (CHIP). Investigaciones Cualitativas. Pontificia Universidad Católica del Perú.
Organización para la Cooperación y el Desarrollo Económicos (OECD). (2019). OECD Future of Education and Skills 2030: OECD Learning Compass 2030. OECD Publishing. https://www.oecd.org/education/2030-project/
Özelçi, S., & Çalışkan, G. (2019). What is critical thinking? A longitudinal study with teacher candidates. International Journal of Evaluation and Research in Education, 8(3), 495-509. https://doi.org/10.11591/ijere.v8i3.20254
Peltzer, K., Lira Lorca, A., Krause, U.-M., & Busse, V. (2024). Effects of formative feedback on argumentative writing in English and cross-linguistic transfer to German. Learning and Instruction, 92, 101935. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.learninstruc.2024.101935
Pérez-Morán, G., Bazalar-Palacios, J., & Arhuis-Inca, W. (2021). Diagnóstico del pensamiento crítico de estudiantes de educación primaria de Chimbote, Perú. Revista Electrónica Educare, 25(1), 1-11. https://doi.org/10.15359/ree.25-1.15
Popa, E. O. (2022). Revisiting the Relationship between Arguing and Convincing: Towards a New Pragmatic Account. Languages, 7(3), 227. https://doi.org/10.3390/languages7030227
Ramli, M., Rakhmawati, E., Hendarto, P., & Winarni. (2017). Process of Argumentation in High School Biology Class: A Qualitative Analysis. Journal of Physics: Conference Series, 812, 012007. https://doi.org/10.1088/1742-6596/812/1/012007
Paul, R., & Elder, L. (2003). La mini-guía para el pensamiento crítico, conceptos y herramientas. Fundación para el Pensamiento Crítico. https://n9.cl/ukcot
Puig, B., Blanco-Anaya, P., & Bargiela, I. M. (2023). Integrar el Pensamiento Crítico en la Educación Científica en la Era de la Post-verdad. Revista Eureka sobre enseñanza y divulgación de las ciencias, 20(3), 330101-330117. https://doi.org/10.25267/Rev_Eureka_ensen_divulg_cienc.2023.v20.i3.3301
Ridder, H.-G. (2017). The theory contribution of case study research designs. Business Research, 10(2), 281-305. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40685-017-0045-z
Rigotti, E., & Greco Morasso, S. (2009). Comparing the Argumentum Model of Topics to other contemporary approaches to argument schemes: The Procedural and Material Components. (Springer, Ed.) Argumentum, 24, 489-515. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10503-010-9190-7
Rapanta, C., & Felton, M. K. (2022). Learning to Argue Through Dialogue: A Review of Instructional Approaches. Educational Psychology Review, 34(2), 477-509. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-021-09637-2
Rapanta, C., & Macagno, F. (2016). Argumentation methods in educational contexts: Introduction to the special issue. International Journal of Educational Research, 79, 142-149. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijer.2016.03.006
Thorndahl, K. L., & Stentoft, D. (2020). Thinking critically about critical thinking and prob-lem-based learning in higher education: A scoping review. Interdisciplinary Journal of Problem-Based Learning, 14(1), 1-21. https://doi.org/10.14434/ijpbl.v14i1.28773