Résumé
The acculturation of students to argumentation on socio-scientific issues (SSI) requires them to develop argumentation skills (justification, consideration of others’ arguments, questioning) while at the same time becoming familiar with the specific norms of this type of argumentation: consideration of arguments from different domains (complexity), uncertainties related to knowledge and future developments in society (uncertainty), and different stakeholders, with their viewpoints, interests and values (openness). The study presented in this paper examines the effects of an intervention involving four computer-mediated debates and four reflective activities, in which the norms of SSI argumentation are discussed on the basis of students’ productions. The aim is to assess the impact of this intervention on middle school students’ written argumentation skills and to identify any differences between grades 6 and 8. The intervention was implemented in 19 classes of three middle schools in France by teachers of biology, history-geography, literature, physics-chemistry, and technology. The effects were measured by comparing argumentation of the students (N = 282) in the first and fourth debates. The results show positive changes in the norms of justification and consideration of others’ arguments (with more rebuttals and nuances). The three specific argumentation norms related to the SSI were also found to be applied more appropriately at the end of the intervention, although uncertainties related to the SSI were less addressed. In addition, only 6th graders showed improvement in rebuttal, while only 8th graders showed progress in questioning and considering the openness of the SSI.