Skip to main content

Table 5 Comparison of original ADI model and rADI model argumentation sessions

From: Developing scientific argumentation strategies using revised argument-driven inquiry (rADI) in science classrooms in Thailand

ADI instructional model (2010) (rADI) instructional model
Expanding the concept using a new topic (Steps 4–6)
(Not included) Presenting socio-scientific issues (Step 4)
 Addition: We introduce socio-scientific issues (SSI), which by its nature is a controversial topic without a universal consensus, to demands students express claims, use evidence, and engage scientific reasoning skills and to also challenge their moral reasoning, decision-making, and problem-solving processes. SSI topics have a high potential for promoting lively class argumentation sessions.
Inquiry-based learning activities: Research and Data
(Not included) Data/Research activities in groups 2 (Step 5)
 Addition: Similar to Step 2, students form discussion groups to gather data and brainstorm ideas about the SSI topic. Students may use data provided by the teacher, look for new data online, or both. Students are given enough time in groups to collaborate and form basic ideas to support their arguments in the next step. Students are required to analyze information in a new dimension of argumentation in which definite conclusions may prove elusive. This is a nuanced task, which is missing, in the previous ADI model. We believe this step is important for expanding the scientific analytical capacity of students to evolve from a basic framework of the readily provided answer to one in which multiple perspectives or answers are potentially viable but whose empirical veracity have yet to be established, as is the case in much of theoretical science.
(Not Included) Make tentative claims about SSI as a group (Step 6)
 Addition: Groups take the data they gathered in previous steps and construct proper arguments involving SSI topics using all the elements of scientific argumentation. Each group writes down their own tentative claims to share with peers. Students must use evidence and reasoning to reinforce their claims. Students can change claims if they encounter conflicting data. This may promote increased student participation by alleviating the pressure to get the answer correct immediately, which also teaches the idea of science as an open, dynamic process.