The paper reports a study that focussed on investigating the effectiveness of Toulmin’s argument pattern (TAP) within Think-Read-Group-Share-Reflect (TRGSR) scientific argumentation strategy on higher secondary students’ critical thinking. A quasi-experimental, pretest-posttest-control group design was deployed. The subjects were 50 twelfth grade students. The experimental group was taught with TAP within TRGSR scientific argumentation strategy, and on the other hand, the control group was taught with the traditional teaching approach (regular way of teaching that happens in the school otherwise). To measure the critical thinking ability, Watson-Glaser critical thinking appraisal Form–S was administered to both groups as a pre- and a posttest. The test contained 40 items with 5 elements (inference, recognition of assumptions, deduction, interpretation, and evaluation of arguments). After a 9-week-long intervention, analysis of covariance findings showed that there was a significant difference on the students’ critical thinking ability between experimental and control groups. The students who were exposed to TAP within TRGSR scientific argumentation strategy proved to improve the ability of critical thinking. TAP coupled with TRGSR scientific argumentation strategy is relatively more effective in developing critical thinking ability than the traditional teaching approach.

中文翻译：

---

科学论证对批判性思维发展的影响

该论文报告了一项研究，该研究侧重于调查 Toulmin 的论证模式 (TAP) 在 Think-Read-Group-Share-Reflect (TRGSR) 科学论证策略中对高中生批判性思维的有效性。部署了准实验、前测-后测-控制组设计。受试者是 50 名十二年级学生。实验组采用TRGSR科学论证策略中的TAP进行教学，另一方面，对照组采用传统的教学方法（否则在学校发生的常规教学方式）进行教学。为了衡量批判性思维能力，Watson-Glaser 批判性思维评估表-S 作为前测和后测对两组进行管理。该测试包含 40 个项目，包含 5 个要素（推理、假设确认、演绎、解释和论证评估）。经过 9 周的干预，协方差分析结果表明，实验组和对照组学生的批判性思维能力存在显着差异。事实证明，在TRGSR科学论证策略中接触TAP的学生提高了批判性思维能力。TAP与TRGSR科学论证策略相结合，在培养批判性思维能力方面比传统教学方法更有效。事实证明，在TRGSR科学论证策略中接触TAP的学生提高了批判性思维能力。TAP与TRGSR科学论证策略相结合，在培养批判性思维能力方面比传统教学方法更有效。事实证明，在TRGSR科学论证策略中接触TAP的学生提高了批判性思维能力。TAP与TRGSR科学论证策略相结合，在培养批判性思维能力方面比传统教学方法更有效。