ABSTRACT
The CERAdvocate program, which aims to improve students’ ability to argue persuasively in STEM classes, is becoming increasingly recognized as an important educational tool. This study assesses how well Nasugbu East Senior High School’s CERAdvocate program has improved the argumentation skills of its Grade 11 STEM students. The study, which employs a descriptive research design, focuses on students at Galileo and Archimedes in the second semester of the 2023–2024 school year. To choose participants, purposive sampling is used, considering variables like name, age, and gender. The findings of this study are important because they shed light on how the CERAdvocate program affects students’ academic performance and critical thinking abilities. This information is useful for future researchers, educators, and school administrators. The results highlight the CERAdvocate Program’s effectiveness in improving participants’ competitiveness, critical thinking, argument creation, and communication skills, which is consistent with previous studies on the importance of these qualities in academic performance and debate participation. The program not only develops a varied skill set necessary for debate, but it also targets specific obstacles such as quick thinking, research abilities, and overcoming mental barriers. Clear communication, systematic training, diversified learning tools, and considering other views are all recommendations for increasing program efficacy, with the goal of cultivating critical thinking and boosting overall participant performance. Furthermore, suggestions for improvement include inclusion, evidence-based arguments, argument formulation, relevance, and effective discourse, demonstrating a comprehensive effort to increase the program's impact and addressing participants' requirements.
Keywords: CERAdvocate program, argumentation, STEM education, academic achievement, critical thinking
INTRODUCTION
It is impossible to overestimate the importance of developing students’ capacity for scientific reasoning and argumentation in the classroom (Fischer et al., 2014). This ability is especially crucial in fields like engineering, law, and medicine where good thinking is required (Xiong, 2015). But systematic assistance is typically absent from instructional approaches, which leaves gaps in students’ capacity to develop and present scientific arguments (Loch, 2017). In order to tackle this, Cooper and Kouyoumdjian (2018) highlight the importance of the Claim, Evidence, and Reasoning (CER) method as a key instrument for fostering critical thinking abilities in science education.
Furthermore, studies indicate that argumentation-based learning enhances academic achievement, attitudes toward coursework, and critical thinking abilities (Özcan & Tabak, 2019; E. Ateş, 2021). Modified CER models have also demonstrated promise in improving students’ persuasive writing and science content comprehension, meeting a variety of learning demands (Samosa, 2021). In light of this, the CERAdvocate program aims to develop students’ critical thinking, analytical abilities, and scientific literacy by methodically incorporating structured argumentation techniques into the curriculum. Preparing students for success in postsecondary education and future professions in STEM domains is the aim of this effort.
METHODOLOGY
The methodology of this study, which was based on phenomenology, emphasized how crucial it was to comprehend participants’ lived experiences within a particular context. This was consistent with the definition of phenomenology provided by Leela Ramsook (2018), which emphasized the individual interpretations of research participants. According to Ramsook (2018), the study made use of a variety of data collection techniques, including semi-structured interviews, open-ended questionnaires, in-depth interviews, and document analysis. Furthermore, as discussed by Campbell (2020) and Chittaranjan Andrade (2020), the application of purposive sampling was essential in this study. The researchers selected 5 participants from Stem 11 Galileo and Archimedes of Nasugbu East Senior High School for this academic year 2024.
By using purposive sampling, participants were chosen based on traits that were consistent with the goals of the study, which improved the data’s reliability and rigor. Through the use of these methodologies, the study sought to determine how the CERAdvocate program affected students’ ability to argue effectively. Thematic and content analysis yielded insightful findings, and ethical considerations were upheld throughout the entire research process.
RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
This section presents the data collected where the researcher is given interpretation and analysis.
TABLE 1: Assessing CERAdvocate’s effects on Grade 11 STEM students’ argumentation skills at Nasugbu East Senior High School.
| Question 1: | In your experience, how did the CERAdvocate Program improve your Critical thinking skills in constructing well-founded arguments? (Sa iyong karanasan, Paano nakatulong ang Programang CERAdvocate sa pagpapabuti ng iyong mga kasanayan sa mapanlikhang pag-iisip sa pagbuo ng mga may batayang argumento?) Respondent 1, 3, and 5 said that the CERAdvocate Program improved their critical thinking process for generating claims, evidence, and reasoning, while Respondent 2 and 4 said that the CERAdvocate Program improved their ability to construct well-founded and strong arguments. |
| Question 2: | Can you share an example of how the CERAdvocate Program has challenged you to critically evaluate different arguments? (Maari mo bang ibahagi ang isang halimbawa kung paano ka nilaban ng Programang CERAdvocate na kritikal na suriin ang iba’t ibang mga argumento?) Respondent 1, 5, and 3 said that the CERAdvocate Program challenged them to counterarguments and analyze the opponent points; on the other hand, Respondent 2 and 4 said that the CERAdvocate Program challenged them in evaluating and exchanging different arguments. |
INTERPRETATION FOR TABLE 1
The responses demonstrate that the CER advocacy program effectively developed participants’ competitiveness, ability to construct arguments, critical thinking, active engagement, application in real life, and writing skills, aligning with the findings of Sioco and De Vera (2018) that the program aims to strengthen students’ skills in science, persuasive writing, grammar, and reading comprehension, promoting academic success and critical thinking abilities. Additionally, the answers show that the program tested participants’ critical thinking, communication, analysis, and evidence-based skills—all of which are necessary for engaging in a constructive debate, as confirmed by the research of Xiong (2015) and Asterhan (2016) on the central role of scientific reasoning and argumentation in education and their significant impact on academic success.
(Ang mga sagot ay nagpapakita na epektibong nagpabuti ang CER advocacy program sa kakayahan ng mga kalahok sa pagbuo ng argumento, kritikal na pag-iisip, aktibong pakikilahok, aplikasyon sa tunay na buhay, at kasanayan sa pagsusulat, na naaayon sa mga natuklasan ni Sioco at De Vera (2018) na layunin ng programa na palakasin ang mga kasanayan ng mga mag-aaral sa siyensiya, persuasibong pagsulat, gramatika, at pang-unawa sa pagbasa, na nagtataguyod ng tagumpay sa akademiko at kakayahang mag-isip nang kritikal. Bukod dito, ipinapakita rin ng mga sagot na sinusubok ng programa ang kritikal na pag-iisip, komunikasyon, pagsusuri, at mga kasanayang batay sa ebidensya ng mga kalahok — lahat ng ito ay kinakailangan para sa konstruktibong debate, ayon sa pagsasaliksik nina Xiong (2015) at Asterhan (2016) sa mahalagang papel ng maka-agham na pag-iisip at argumentasyon sa edukasyon at ang kanilang malaking epekto sa tagumpay sa akademiko.)
TABLE 2: Analyzing how CERAdvocate participation shapes students’ ability to craft evidence-based arguments.
| Question 3: | How has the CERAdvocate program encouraged you to develop persuasive and logical arguments? (Paano nag-udyok sa iyo ang Programang CERAdvocate na magbuo ng mapanghikayat at lohikal na mga argumento?) Respondent 1, 2, 3,4 and 5 said that CERAdvocate Program ecouraged them by many of skills they learned such as presenting arguments accurately by organizing thought pattern and quickly structure of reasoning. |
| Question 4: | Can you provide an example of how the CERAdvocate program has taught You effective strategies for supporting your arguments with evidence and Reasoning? (Maari mo bang magbigay ng halimbawa kung paano ka tinuruan ng Programang CERAdvocate ng mga epektibong paraan para suportahan ang iyong mga argumento sa pamamagitan ng ebidensya at pangangatuwiran?) Respondents 1, 2, and 3 said that the CERAdvocate Program taught them effective strategies through providing and gathering data for proper arguments and persuading the effectiveness of evidence, while respondents 4 and 5 said that the CERAdvocate Program taught them through discussion how to organize our arguments and prevent us from cluttering things. |
INTERPRETATION FOR TABLE 2
The responses from the sources emphasize how the program effectively nurtures a diverse set of skills essential for successful debate participation, including organization, logical reasoning, persuasive reasoning, argumentation, and effective communication. These skills not only enhance participants’ abilities in debate settings but also contribute to overall improvement in their debating skills. This aligns with Samosa’s (2021) research, which indicates that the CER model can enhance students’ grasp of scientific concepts through the development of persuasive argumentation skills. Furthermore, the program is noted for teaching participants how to be competitive, think strategically, organize arguments, use evidence effectively, and communicate clearly during debates, providing them with a comprehensive skill set crucial for effective debating. Jala (2020) underscores the significance of reading comprehension in fostering academic success, further supporting the program’s emphasis on developing a well-rounded skill set among participants.
(Ang mga sagot mula sa mga pinagmulan ay nagpapalakas ng kung paano epektibong nagpapalaki ng iba’t ibang kasanayan ang programa na mahalaga para sa matagumpay na pakikilahok sa debate, kabilang ang organisasyon, lohikal na pag-iisip, persuasibong pag-iisip, argumentasyon, at epektibong komunikasyon. Ang mga kasanayang ito ay hindi lamang nagpapahusay sa kakayahan ng mga kalahok sa mga setting ng debate kundi nagbibigay din ng pangkalahatang pagpapabuti sa kanilang mga kasanayan sa pagdedebate. Ito ay naaayon sa pagsasaliksik ni Samosa (2021), na nagpapahiwatig na ang modelo ng CER ay maaaring mapabuti ang pang-unawa ng mga mag-aaral sa mga konsepto sa siyensiya sa pamamagitan ng pagpapaunlad ng kasanayan sa persuasibong argumentasyon. Bukod dito, kilala rin ang programa sa pagtuturo sa mga kalahok kung paano maging kompetitibo, mag-isip nang estratehiko, mag-organisa ng mga argumento, gamitin ang ebidensya nang epektibo, at magkomunikasyon nang malinaw sa mga debate, na nagbibigay sa kanila ng isang komprehensibong set ng kasanayan na mahalaga para sa epektibong pagdedebate. Binibigyang-diin ni Jala (2020) ang kahalagahan ng pang-unawang pagbasa sa pagpapalawak ng tagumpay sa akademiko, na mas lalo pang sumusuporta sa pagbibigay-diin ng programa sa pagpapaunlad ng isang buong-katawang set ng kasanayan sa mga kalahok.)
TABLE 3: CERAdvocate likely boosts critical thinking and argument construction skills.
| Question 5: | Have you faced any difficulties in understanding and applying logical Reasoning during your argument construction process? If yes, could you describe them? (Nakaranas ka ba ng anumang mga kahirapan sa pag-unawa at pag-aplay ng lohikal na pangangatuwiran sa proseso ng pagbuo ng iyong argumento? Kung oo, maaari mo bang ilarawan ang mga ito?) According to the search results, respondents 1 and 3 reported facing difficulty in the impromptu aspect, specifically in formulating sentences on the spot. Meanwhile, respondents 4 and 5 said they had difficulty searching for and providing evidence to support their claims. Additionally, Respondent 2 stated that they faced difficulty processing ideas to throw counterarguments and were unsure about delivering their counterarguments, which they attributed to a mental block. |
| Question 6: | Are there any specific areas or aspects of argument crafting that you find challenging or confusing? (Mayroon bang partikular na mga bahagi o aspeto ng pagbuo ng argumento na iyong natatagpuan na nakakalito o nakakabahala? All the respondents (1, 2, 3, 4, and 5) said that they find it challenging to find evidence to support their claim. |
INTERPRETATION FOR TABLE 3
The responses demonstrate the diverse challenges that participants in the debate competition had to overcome, including the need for quick thinking, flexibility, research skills, overcoming mental blocks and anxiety, and the ability to balance opposing viewpoints. This aligns with the research of Suson et al. (2020), who highlighted the significance of differentiated instruction in improving students’ reading comprehension. The answers further emphasize the difficulties participants faced related to communication, research, critical thinking, time management, adaptability, and focus, as supported by the work of Tomas et al. (2021), who emphasized the seamless integration of reading programs and activities into broader curricula for a well-rounded education. (Ang mga sagot ay nagpapakita ng iba’t ibang hamon na kinailangan harapin ng mga kalahok sa kompetisyon sa debate, kabilang ang pangangailangan para sa mabilis na pag-iisip, pagiging maliksi, kasanayan sa pananaliksik, paglalabanan ang mga bloke sa pag-iisip at pagkabalisa, at kakayahan na balansehin ang magkasalungat na pananaw. Ito ay naaayon sa pagsasaliksik ni Suson et al. (2020), na nagbigay-diin sa kahalagahan ng pagkakaiba-iba ng instruksyon sa pagpapabuti ng pang-unawang pagbasa ng mga mag-aaral. Ang mga sagot ay nagbibigay pa ng diin sa mga hamon na kinaharap ng mga kalahok kaugnay ng komunikasyon, pananaliksik, kritikal na pag-iisip, pamamahala sa oras, kakayahang mag-angkop, at pokus, tulad ng sinusuportahan ng gawa nina Tomas et al. (2021), na binigyang-diin ang walang-abalang integrasyon ng mga programa at aktibidad sa pagbasa sa mas malawak na kurikulum para sa isang buo at balanseng edukasyon.)
TABLE 4: Pinpointing key barriers to students’ argument development to improve the CERAdvocate Program.
| Question 7: | How do you think the CERAdvocate program can better address the specific needs and challenges of its audience? (Paano mo tingin na mas maaaring tugunan ng Programang CERAdvocate ang mga espesipikong pangangailangan at hamon ng kanyang tagapakinig?) Respondents 1 and 3 said that the CERAdvocate Program can better address the specific needs and challenges of its audience by using more varied studies about claims, evidence, and reasoning to better meet audience needs. Additionally, respondents 2 and 4 said that the CERAdvocate Program can better address the specific needs and challenges of its audience by improving student performance through assessment or post-evaluation. Furthermore, Respondent 5 said that the CERAdvocate Program can better address the specific needs and challenges of its audience by empowering students through structured debate training. |
| Question 8: | Do you have any suggestions for additional resources or materials that could enhance the effectiveness of the CERAdvocate program? (Mayroon ka bang mga mungkahi para sa karagdagang mga sanggunian o materyales na maaaring magpabuti sa epektibidad ng Programang CERAdvocate?) Respondent 1 suggests a proper room for CERAdvocate to enhance the effectiveness of the program, while respondents 2 and 3 suggest adding more equipment, like a resource speaker for the sound system, and Respondent 4 suggests having a speaker who can provide more activities to enhance the effectiveness of the CERAdvocate program. Additionally, Respondent 5 suggests providing additional training to the staff of CERAdvocate to enhance the presentation of the effectiveness of the CERAdvocate program. |
INTERPRETATION FOR TABLE 4
The responses suggest a comprehensive plan to enhance the effectiveness of the CERAdvocate Program, addressing the specific needs and challenges encountered by participants. This strategy includes elements such as clear communication, structured training, diverse learning resources, performance assessment, relevant content, and the consideration of different perspectives. Guevarra et al. (2017) emphasize the pivotal role of teachers in nurturing students’ critical thinking through varied instructional approaches. Furthermore, the insights provided offer a range of perspectives on improving the program’s efficacy, encompassing staff training, interactive elements, technological enhancements, and innovative engagement strategies. These combined efforts form a holistic approach to expanding the program’s influence and effectiveness. E. Salles (2016) underscores the correlation between critical thinking skills and students’ ability to produce coherent written content, reinforcing the importance of enhancing critical thinking abilities within the program.
(Ang mga sagot ay nagmumungkahi ng isang komprehensibong plano upang mapalakas ang epektibidad ng Programang CERAdvocate, na sumasalamin sa mga partikular na pangangailangan at hamon na naranasan ng mga kalahok. Ang estratehiyang ito ay kinabibilangan ng mga elemento tulad ng malinaw na komunikasyon, istrakturadong pagsasanay, iba’t ibang sanggunian sa pag-aaral, pagsusuri ng pagganap, kaugnay na nilalaman, at pag-iisip sa iba’t ibang pananaw. Binibigyang-diin ni Guevarra et al. (2017) ang mahalagang papel ng mga guro sa pagpapalago ng kritikal na pag-iisip ng mga mag-aaral sa pamamagitan ng iba’t ibang mga pamamaraan ng pagtuturo. Bukod dito, ang mga pananaw na ibinigay ay nag-aalok ng iba’t ibang mga perspektiba sa pagpapabuti ng pagiging epektibo ng programa, na kinabibilangan ang pagsasanay ng mga tauhan, mga interaktibong elemento, mga pagpapabuti sa teknolohiya, at mga inobatibong pamamaraan ng pakikilahok. Ang mga pinagsamang pagsisikap na ito ay bumubuo ng isang buong-katawang pamamaraan sa pagpapalawak ng impluwensiya at epektibidad ng programa. Binibigyang-diin ni E. Salles (2016) ang kaugnayan sa pagitan ng kasanayan sa kritikal na pag-iisip at kakayahan ng mga mag-aaral na mag-produce ng may coherence na nilalaman sa pagsusulat, na nagpapalakas ng kahalagahan ng pagpapalakas ng mga kasanayang kritikal na pag-iisip sa loob ng programa.)
TABLE 5: Proposing initiatives to boost engagement in argumentation and debate within CERAdvocate.
| Question 9: | How can the CERAdvocate program give more personalized support and guidance to students in their journey crafting convincing arguments? ( Paano maaaring magbigay ng mas personalisadong suporta at gabay ang Programang CERAdvocate sa mga mag-aaral sa kanilang paglalakbay ng pagbuo ng kapani-paniwalang mga argumento?) Respondents 1 and 3 said that the CERAdvocate Program can give more personalized support and guidance to students in their journey of crafting convincing arguments through enhancing persuasive communication skills, structured arguments, and personal development, while Respondents 2, 4, and 5 said that the CERAdvocate Program can give more personalized support and guidance to students in their journey of crafting convincing arguments through gaining knowledge about the use of the CER approach. |
| Question 10: | Are there any particular areas or topic that you believe should receive more emphasise or focus in CERAdvocate program to better aligned with the objectives and interest of its audience? (Mayroon bang partikular na mga bahagi o paksa na sa palagay mo ay dapat bigyan ng higit na diin o pokus sa Programang CERAdvocate upang mas maayon sa mga layunin at interes ng kanyang tagapakinig?) Respondents 1 and 4 said that addressing relevant topics, which are timely issues and areas of struggle about students’ concerns, should receive more emphasis or focus in the CERAdvocate Program, while Respondent 2 said that exploring LGBTQ issues could be a topic that should receive more emphasis or focus in the CERAdvocate Program to better align with the objectives and interests of its audience, However Respondents 3 and 5 said that evidence-based arguments should receive more emphasis or focus in the CERAdvocate Program. |
INTERPRETATION FOR TABLE 5
The search results demonstrate the various ways the CERAdvocate Program can provide specialized support to students, including knowledge acquisition, feedback, real-world application, personalized guidance, skill development, and clear communication. These elements are intended to improve students’ capacity to develop convincing arguments, as described by Ryan Diyanni (2020) in his work on the essential nature of critical thinking for students entering higher education or the workforce. Additionally, the answers offer an in-depth understanding of potential areas for improvement in the program, such as inclusivity, evidence-based arguments, argument construction, relevance, timeliness, and effective discourse. Addressing these areas is crucial for increasing the program’s effectiveness and meeting the needs of its intended participants, as highlighted by the research of Arellano et al. (2018), who emphasize the interconnected nature of critical thinking skills and how improvement in one area can enhance others.
(Ang mga resulta ng paghahanap ay nagpapakita ng iba’t ibang paraan kung paano maaaring magbigay ng espesyalisadong suporta ang Programang CERAdvocate sa mga mag-aaral, kabilang ang pagkamit ng kaalaman, feedback, aplikasyon sa totoong buhay, personal na gabay, pagpapaunlad ng kasanayan, at malinaw na komunikasyon. Ang mga elemento na ito ay layunin na mapabuti ang kakayahan ng mga mag-aaral na magbuo ng nakakumbinsing mga argumento, tulad ng inilarawan ni Ryan Diyanni (2020) sa kanyang gawa sa mahalagang kalikasan ng kritikal na pag-iisip para sa mga mag-aaral na pumapasok sa mas mataas na edukasyon o puwersa ng trabaho. Bukod dito, nag-aalok din ang mga sagot ng isang malalim na pag-unawa sa mga potensyal na lugar para sa pagpapabuti sa programa, tulad ng pagiging kasama, argumentong batay sa ebidensya, pagpapalakas ng argumento, kahalagahan, kapanahunan, at epektibong diskurso. Ang pag-address sa mga lugar na ito ay mahalaga para sa pagtaas ng epektibidad ng programa at pagtugon sa mga pangangailangan ng mga layunin nitong mga kalahok, tulad ng binibigyang-diin ng pagsasaliksik ni Arellano et al. (2018), na nagpapakita ng ugnayan ng mga kasanayang kritikal na pag-iisip at kung paano ang pagpapabuti sa isa’t isa ay maaaring mapalakas ang iba pa.)
CONCLUSIONS
The following statements are conclusions drawn from the finding:
1. The CERAdvocate Program improves Grade 11 STEM students’ argumentation skills, which are recognized by all.
2. Participation challenges students to evaluate arguments, boosting evidence-based reasoning.
3. All praised the program for enhancing persuasive skills and critical thinking.
4. Most found the program effective in teaching argument-supporting strategies.
5. Some students struggle with logical reasoning, suggesting a need for more debate-related activities.
RECOMMENDATIONS
From the result of the study which was to assess the effectiveness of CERAdvocate Program in Improving students’ sense of argumentation in Science, Technology, Engineering and Mathematics at Nasugbu East Senior High school, these are the recommendations of the researcher to the beneficiary of this study:
1. Teachers should be given continual training in the use of the CER approach so they can lead by example in the classroom.
2. Teachers in STEM and other subjects for Grade 12 students should be included in the CERAdvocate initiative to improve student outcomes.
3. Teachers should implement critical thinking programs using everyday situations, collaborating with school administrators and colleagues.
4. Teachers should add guided debate workshops to the curriculum to help enhance students’ logical reasoning skills.
5. Teachers and students should jointly monitor a peer-mentoring program for group tasks, ensuring its effectiveness in supporting student learning.