ABSTRACT

The importance of developing students’ ability to argue effectively is generally recognised across the curriculum, however what this means within religious education has not been thoroughly investigated. We explore this issue first through an initial review of both wider philosophical and curriculum literature on argumentation, notably Toulmin’s work, and then a review of relevant research within religious education. We then describe our curriculum analysis, addressing three research questions focusing on the frequency, purpose and conceptualisation of argumentation, though a mixed-methods curriculum analysis of locally agreed syllabuses across England (LASs). A quantitative analysis of frequency in thirty-five LASs showed that although argumentation was never mentioned, other cognates were always present. A detailed qualitative analysis of six LASs showed that its purpose was linked to personal expression within democratic participation, and epistemic and empathetic flexibility. Using Toulmin’s model of argumentation as a frame, it is generally conceptualised around the elements of claim, evidence and rebuttal, but the precise nature of evidence, warrant and backing are not explicit, especially as the field-dependent elements are unspecified. The implications of these findings for both general conceptualisations of argumentation and curriculum development within religious education are outlined.

摘要

培养学生有效辩论能力的重要性在整个课程中得到普遍认可，但是这在宗教教育中意味着什么尚未得到彻底调查。我们首先通过对关于论证的更广泛的哲学和课程文献的初步回顾来探讨这个问题，特别是图尔敏的工作，然后是对宗教教育相关研究的回顾。然后，我们描述了我们的课程分析，解决了三个研究问题，重点是论证的频率、目的和概念化，尽管对英格兰各地同意的教学大纲 (LAS) 进行了混合方法课程分析。对 35 个 LAS 中频率的定量分析表明，尽管从未提及争论，但始终存在其他同源词。对六个 LAS 的详细定性分析表明，其目的与民主参与中的个人表达以及认知和移情的灵活性有关。使用 Toulmin 的论证模型作为框架，它通常围绕主张、证据和反驳要素进行概念化，但证据、保证和支持的确切性质并不明确，尤其是在未指定领域相关要素的情况下。概述了这些发现对宗教教育中论证和课程开发的一般概念化的影响。证据和反驳，但证据、保证和支持的确切性质并不明确，尤其是当与领域相关的要素未指定时。概述了这些发现对宗教教育中论证和课程开发的一般概念化的影响。证据和反驳，但证据、保证和支持的确切性质并不明确，尤其是当与领域相关的要素未指定时。概述了这些发现对宗教教育中论证和课程开发的一般概念化的影响。