Chemistry flask with thought bubbles illustrating argumentation

Unlock Critical Thinking: How Argument Analysis Boosts Chemistry Education

Author's portrait.
Mira Elwood in Mind & Education August 2025 • 4 min read.

"Dive into Walton's Argumentation Schemes and transform your approach to teaching and learning chemistry."


In today's rapidly evolving world, fostering critical thinking skills is more important than ever, especially in complex fields like chemistry. Traditional teaching methods often focus on memorization and rote learning, but true understanding requires students to analyze, evaluate, and construct arguments effectively.

Argumentation, the process of reasoning and justifying claims, is a cornerstone of scientific inquiry. By engaging with arguments, students develop a deeper understanding of chemical concepts, learn to evaluate evidence, and become more effective problem-solvers. But how can educators effectively incorporate argumentation into their chemistry classrooms?

This article explores the use of Walton's Argumentation Schemes (WAS) as a powerful tool for analyzing and understanding arguments in chemistry education. By examining research on how chemistry teachers in training use and interpret these schemes, we'll uncover valuable insights for educators looking to cultivate critical thinking and argumentation skills in their students.

Walton's Argumentation Schemes: A Framework for Critical Analysis

Chemistry flask with thought bubbles illustrating argumentation

Douglas Walton's Argumentation Schemes (WAS) offer a structured approach to understanding the different types of reasoning and inferences people use when making arguments. Instead of focusing solely on the structure of an argument, WAS delve into the reasoning processes themselves.

The study we are exploring utilized 60 of Walton's Argumentation Schemes to analyze arguments from chemistry teachers in initial training. The teachers were interviewed about two problems: the melting of snowmen (SP1) and the burning of a candle (SP2). These scenarios were selected because they encourage the use of scientific concepts such as changes in physical state, light absorption/reflection (SP1), and chemical reactions (SP2).

  • Causation: Identifying cause-and-effect relationships (EAW Causa para Efeito) is vital for explaining chemical processes.
  • Evidence-Based Reasoning: Using available data to infer a hypothesis (EAW Evidência para hipótese) is important for any lab result analysis.
  • Reasoning by Sign: Interpreting observations to draw conclusions (EAW Sinal) helps in reaching scientific conclusions.
The research revealed that pre-service chemistry teachers prominently use reasoning schemes related to scientific thinking. This suggests that these teachers have started to think in ways relevant to classroom situations. Some reasoning patterns were more suitable in certain situations. For example, in the snowman scenario (SP1), it was natural to hypothesize and then look for evidence. The issue of burning candles (SP2) produced arguments linking cause to effect.

Implications for Chemistry Education

This research highlights the potential of Walton's Argumentation Schemes to enhance chemistry education. By understanding how teachers and students construct arguments, educators can design more effective learning activities that promote critical thinking and deeper conceptual understanding.

Implementing argumentation in the classroom requires a shift from traditional lecture-based approaches to more interactive and inquiry-based methods. Educators can use real-world scenarios, debates, and collaborative projects to encourage students to engage in argumentation and justify their claims with evidence.

While this study provides valuable insights, further research is needed to explore the long-term impact of argumentation-based instruction on student learning in chemistry. Additionally, investigations into how different instructional strategies and classroom environments influence the development of argumentation skills are warranted. By embracing argumentation, chemistry education can evolve to foster the next generation of critical thinkers and problem-solvers.

About this Article -

This article was crafted using a human-AI hybrid and collaborative approach. AI assisted our team with initial drafting, research insights, identifying key questions, and image generation. Our human editors guided topic selection, defined the angle, structured the content, ensured factual accuracy and relevance, refined the tone, and conducted thorough editing to deliver helpful, high-quality information.See our About page for more information.

This article is based on research published under:

DOI-LINK: 10.1590/1983-21172016180203, Alternate LINK

Title: Esquemas Argumentativos De Walton Na Análise De Argumentos De Professores De Química Em Formação Inicial

Subject: General Medicine

Journal: Ensaio Pesquisa em Educação em Ciências (Belo Horizonte)

Publisher: FapUNIFESP (SciELO)

Authors: Marina Martins, Stefannie De Sá Ibraim, Paula Cristina Cardoso Mendonça

Published: 2016-07-18

Everything You Need To Know

1

What are Walton's Argumentation Schemes and how do they enhance understanding in chemistry?

Walton's Argumentation Schemes, or WAS, provide a structured way to understand different types of reasoning used in arguments. Instead of just looking at the argument's structure, WAS focuses on the reasoning processes themselves. This is particularly helpful in a field like chemistry, where understanding the 'why' behind chemical reactions is crucial.

2

How were Walton's Argumentation Schemes applied in the study involving chemistry teachers, and what scenarios were used?

The study used 60 of Walton's Argumentation Schemes to analyze arguments from chemistry teachers. The teachers were interviewed about two problems: the melting of snowmen (SP1) and the burning of a candle (SP2). These scenarios were chosen because they encourage the use of scientific concepts such as changes in physical state, light absorption/reflection (SP1), and chemical reactions (SP2).

3

What specific types of reasoning within Walton's Argumentation Schemes are most relevant to chemistry, and how are they applied?

Causation (EAW Causa para Efeito) helps in understanding cause-and-effect relationships which is vital for explaining chemical processes. Evidence-Based Reasoning (EAW Evidência para hipótese) is key when using data to create a hypothesis from lab results. Reasoning by Sign (EAW Sinal) supports in interpreting observations to draw conclusions, which is important in science.

4

In what ways did the snowman (SP1) and candle (SP2) scenarios elicit different reasoning patterns among the pre-service chemistry teachers?

The pre-service chemistry teachers often used reasoning patterns related to scientific thinking. The snowman scenario (SP1) prompted hypothesis forming and evidence seeking, while the candle burning scenario (SP2) led to arguments linking cause and effect. This shows that different scenarios can naturally encourage different types of reasoning. It would be interesting to explore the cognitive mechanisms that lead to use one scheme over another.

5

What is the ultimate value of Walton's Argumentation Schemes in the context of chemistry education, and what impact can they have on teaching methodologies?

Walton's Argumentation Schemes are useful in chemistry education because they help teachers understand how students construct arguments. This understanding allows educators to design better learning activities that encourage critical thinking and a deeper understanding of concepts. This can move teaching beyond memorization to genuine understanding of scientific thought and reasoning.

Newsletter Subscribe

Subscribe to get the latest articles and insights directly in your inbox.