Investigating the impact of argument-driven inquiry and academically productive talk strategies on critical thinking and science learning motivation in post-pandemic Hong Kong schools

Abstract

In the contemporary global milieu, characterized by economic globalization, increased workforce participation, and advancements in artificial intelligence, our world is in constant flux, necessitating novel and innovative solutions to complex issues. Educational institutions are adapting to the demands and prospects of the 21st century by encouraging scientific argumentation in interactive and constructive classrooms, which helps to develop students’ critical thinking (CT) ability to face the evolving world. Nonetheless, efforts to enhance these skills among learners have thus far been limited. The objective of this research is to bridge this gap by implementing the Argument-Driven Inquiry (ADI) instructional framework and the Academically Productive Talk (APT) approach in science education with the specific goal of evaluating the impacts of these interventions on students’ 1) learning outcomes (CT skills); 2) learning attitudes (CT dispositions); and 3) learning motivation in science education.

Utilizing a quasi-experimental, mixed-methods design, this research examined 160 eighth-grade students from two schools for eight weeks in Hong Kong. Within each school, a control group experienced traditional pedagogical techniques (CON), whereas two distinct experimental groups were exposed to the ADI model (ADI), with one integrating the APT approach to encourage a dialogic classroom environment (ADIAPT). Data collection encompassed validated instruments—the Test of Critical Thinking Skills for Primary and Secondary School Students (TCTS-PS), the California Critical Thinking Disposition Inventory (CCTDI), and the Students' Motivation Towards Science Learning (SMTSL) questionnaires—supplemented by qualitative sources, including whole-class teaching and group discussion discourses, inquiry reports, and student group interviews.

Three primary findings emerged in relation to the research questions. Firstly, TCTS-PS results indicated a significant difference in pair t-tests for the experimental groups. Further analysis of inquiry reports and classroom discourses revealed that the ADIAPT group was more effective in developing CT skills to assess evidence, encouraging students to generate questions, and fostering a productive learning environment. Secondly, significant differences were observed in the CCTDI attitude questionnaires for the ADIAPT group through pair t-tests, whereas no such differences were found for the other two groups. Discourse analysis of group discussions indicated that students in the ADIAPT group exhibited a proclivity for truth-seeking, systematicity, and mature judgment, accounting for the significant differences in CCTDI subscales. Possible factors influencing students’ performance, such as the COVID-19 pandemic, intervention duration, and the predominance of Chinese culture, were explored.

Lastly, the SMTSL questionnaire results implied that the ADIAPT group significantly outperformed both the CON and ADI groups, as evidenced by a two-way mixed-model (3x2) factorial ANOVA and Bonferroni t-tests. Student interviews suggested that the ADI instructional model facilitated a positive learning motivation shift toward science and affirmed the value of science and learning science. Moreover, the ADI and APT approach heightened engagement with the learning environment (curriculum design and teacher-student interactions), fostered problem-solving proficiency, encouraged peer learning, and cultivated an appreciation for thought-provoking challenges.

This research contributes to the current body of knowledge on the effectiveness of argumentative inquiry and productive classrooms within the Hong Kong context. Practical implications and recommendations are offered for relevant stakeholders, including policymakers, teacher educators, and school teachers. (504 words)