Socio-scientific controversies to develop argumentative skills in university students

Abstract

The purpose of this research was to employ socio-scientific controversies (QSV) as a pedagogical tool to foster evidence-based argumentation and critical thinking in the teaching of climate change within a group of 19 students from the Bachelor's in Pedagogy program at the National Pedagogical University, Unit 141. To achieve this objective, a didactic sequence focused on climate change was developed, and a descriptive-explanatory analysis of the written evidence presented by the students was conducted. The results indicate that most students base their arguments on personal beliefs or ideas, generally showing weak argumentation and limited bibliographic resources. Socio-scientific controversies proved to be an effective strategy for assessing students' argumentative ability and promoting critical thinking in decision-making. Consequently, it is recommended and essential to start integrating these tools from an early age.