Modelling domain-specific and domain-general aspects of argumentation competence and their development by contrasting scientific and non-scientific disciplines


Argumentation is an element of everyday communication as much as a part of scientific inquiry processes. The relevance of argumentation for science education is derived from its central importance in the inquiry process in the reference disciplines, as well as its contribution to scientific literacy. So far, research concentrated on students’ argumentation skills either with regard to scientific or socio-scientific issues.

The aim of this project is to identify domain-specific and domain-general argumentation schemes and to build upon these results a model of argumentation competence. We want to identify similarities and differences between argumentation in scientific and non-scientific contexts (e. g. religion). Furthermore, we want to identify influencing factors on students’ argumentation competence (e. g. teacher, content knowledge).

Thereby, we want to show starting points to foster teachers’ skills in diagnosing and scaffolding students’ argumentation competences. Furthermore, we want to explain under which conditions students’ domain-specific skills can be transferred across domains and contexts.