Arguing to Learn in Science: The Role of Collaborative, Critical Discourse

not applicable (narrative review in Science)

School science, general.

A four-page narrative review in Science advocating argumentation as a route to conceptual understanding and scientific reasoning. No systematic search, no inclusion criteria, no pooled estimate, no effect sizes, and written by the leading proponent. Recorded because it is the citation most often used to assert that "research shows" argumentation builds reasoning, and a founder needs to know that the citation is an advocacy review rather than an evidence synthesis. Its own author's subsequent empirical scale-up (Osborne et al. 2013) found few significant changes on standard instruments.

Argues that argument and debate are central to science yet nearly absent from science education, and that recent research shows collaborative discourse and argumentation can enhance conceptual understanding and scientific reasoning skills. Contributes no quantitative estimate and no test of transfer. Set aside as evidence for that reason, not because the argument is wrong.

not applicable

not applicable — no original estimate to replicate.