STS framework and competence in argumentation: difficulties identified in teachers in initial training of Health Processes with a 360º evaluation

Abstract

Given the common purposes of the STS movement and the development of competence in argumentation, a previous study showed the design and application of a training proposal for the development of this scientific practice in teachers in initial training of the specialty in Health Processes. A pre/post assessment indicated an improvement, both in the selection of evidence and justifications, and in the preparation of conclusions, for the argumentation activity raised around food, as a work context. As a continuation of the study, this work shows the difficulties shown in the identification of evidence and justifications through the analysis of a 360º evaluation, using a rubric designed for the proposed argumentation activity. Thus, for both the evidence and the justifications, both elements were identified in an argument, but they were not adequately assessed by applying the evaluation instrument. Likewise, these elements were confused, both with each other and with the conclusion. In particular, they also identified inappropriate evidence, in addition to confusing it with other secondary elements of the argument. There is also the case of teachers in initial training who do not identify the justification. Despite this, an overall improvement is observed in the identification of these elements as the PFI of the sample goes through the modalities of self-assessment and different rounds of co-assessment, compared to the teacher’s hetero-assessment.