English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Free Plan

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

Despite growing emphasis on learning to argue and arguing to learn as educational outcomes in the secondary curriculum, a gap remains between these curricular goals and teachers’ practices. The present study seeks to understand this gap by surveying 158 pre-service teachers about their knowledge, beliefs and predispositions related to argumentation and learning. Results reveal a strong, unanimous value for argumentation among pre-service teachers, combined with a vague understanding of what it means to learn and teach argumentation within their academic disciplines. In addition, we found a contradiction between pre-service teachers’ belief in the importance of learning to argue and their reluctance to use instructional time to teach it. Finally, we did not find differences in pre-service teachers’ perceptions across majors. We conclude with recommendations for fostering pedagogical content knowledge in argumentation to pre-service teachers, particularly in content-area methods classes.

Pre-service teachers’ knowledge, beliefs and predispositions to teach argumentation in their disciplines