<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><xml><records><record><source-app name="Biblio" version="7.x">Drupal-Biblio</source-app><ref-type>17</ref-type><contributors><authors><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Hong-Cheng Liu</style></author></authors></contributors><titles><title><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">THE EFFECT OF AI-SUPPORTED SOCIOSCIENTIFIC TEACHING ON UNIVERSITY STUDENTS' ATTITUDES AND ARGUMENTATION SKILLS</style></title><secondary-title><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Journal of Baltic Science Education</style></secondary-title></titles><keywords><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">argumentation skills</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">artificial intelligence-supported teaching</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">attitudes toward socioscientific issues</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">higher education</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">quasi-experimental design</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">socioscientific issues</style></keyword></keywords><dates><year><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">2026</style></year><pub-dates><date><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">June 2026</style></date></pub-dates></dates><urls><web-urls><url><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">https://journals.indexcopernicus.com/search/article?articleId=4913742</style></url></web-urls></urls><volume><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">25</style></volume><pages><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Continuous</style></pages><language><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">eng</style></language><abstract><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Socioscientific issues (SSI) require students to apply scientific knowledge while taking social and ethical dimensions into account. In this process, both attitudes toward SSI and argumentation skills are important. This study examined the effects of AI-supported SSI teaching on university students’ attitudes toward SSI and their argumentation skills. Additionally, the relationships between these two variables were examined. A pre-post test quasi-experimental design was used in the study. The participants were 247 undergraduate students majoring in Public Administration at a university in southern Taiwan. The experimental group received AI-supported SSI teaching for 18 weeks, while the control group received teacher-led SSI teaching. Data were collected using the ATLSIS and the PASS. ANCOVA and correlation analysis were employed. The results showed that the experimental group scored significantly higher than the control group on all dimensions of attitudes toward SSI and on argumentation skills. The largest increase was determined in Connectedness to Scientific Endeavor dimension (in attitudes) and evaluating counterarguments (in argumentation skills). The results suggested a somewhat more focused pattern of correlation between attitudes toward SSI and argumentation skills following the intervention. The findings suggest that the AI-supported SSI teaching condition was associated with higher attitudes toward SSI and higher perceived argumentation skills.</style></abstract><issue><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">3</style></issue><work-type><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Original article</style></work-type><section><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">522-537</style></section></record><record><source-app name="Biblio" version="7.x">Drupal-Biblio</source-app><ref-type>17</ref-type><contributors><authors><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Irene Lue Leh Ping</style></author><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Lilia Halim</style></author><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Kamisah Osman</style></author></authors></contributors><titles><title><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">EXPLICIT TEACHING OF SCIENTIFIC ARGUMENTATION AS AN APPROACH IN DEVELOPING ARGUMENTATION SKILLS, SCIENCE PROCESS SKILLS AND BIOLOGY UNDERSTANDING</style></title><secondary-title><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Journal of Baltic Science Education</style></secondary-title></titles><keywords><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">argumentation skills</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">modified argument driven inquiry</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Practical work</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">science process skills</style></keyword></keywords><dates><year><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">2020</style></year><pub-dates><date><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">April/2020</style></date></pub-dates></dates><urls><web-urls><url><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">http://oaji.net/articles/2020/987-1586941698.pdf</style></url></web-urls></urls><volume><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">19</style></volume><pages><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Continuous</style></pages><language><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">eng</style></language><abstract><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Science educational standards are increasingly emphasising on argumentation skills. However, students’ argumentation skills are often not developed well as their experience of science knowledge in schools is often in the form of uncontested facts. This research asserts that argumentation skills should be developed through explicit teaching of argumentation while engaged in practical work that draws on students’ science process skills. In turn, developing argumentation skills also improves their science process skills. Thus, this research sought to examine the effect of the Modified Argument-Driven Inquiry approach (MADI), Inquiry without Argument approach (IWA), and the conventional practical work approach (CON) on the development of argumentation and science process skills of Grade 10 students in practical biology. This research employed the quasi-experimental methodology involving Pre-test Post-test Non-equivalent Control Group design. The data were collected through tests on argumentation skills, science process skills and diffusion and osmosis concepts’ understanding. The MANOVA results showed that there was a significant improvement in the argumentation skills, science process skills and biology understanding among the students who experienced the MADI approach in practical biology. In contrast, students who experienced the IWA approach in practical biology showed significant improvement only in biology understanding.</style></abstract><issue><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">2</style></issue><work-type><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Original article</style></work-type><section><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">276-288</style></section></record></records></xml>