Avaliação da qualidade da escrita científica em alunos ingressantes de Ciências Biológicas: uma análise de relatórios científicos

Abstract

This study evaluates the scientific writing quality of first-year Biological Sciences students using the Argumentation Model of Kelly and Takao to analyze reports produced in an introductory course. Scientific writing is essential for knowledge communication, but students face difficulties, especially at the beginning of their undergraduate studies, due to a lack of familiarity with the rigorous structure required. The study applied the model to classify the propositions in the reports into six epistemic levels, assessing the distribution and articulation of arguments. The results indicated that students tend to prioritize theoretical propositions (level V) over data-based propositions (level I) and make few comparisons between data and literature (level III). The correlation between argument strength and final grades was significant in one of the semesters evaluated but not in the second, suggesting limitations of the model or variations in assessment. The study concludes that pedagogical interventions focused on evidence-based argumentation can improve students' scientific writing. Future research is recommended to track the evolution of argumentation throughout the undergraduate program and to simultaneously assess both written and oral argumentation.