I am a teacher of the Kazakh language, and my research focuses on teaching Kazakh as a second language. The findings of this study are expected to be applicable beyond the Kazakh context and relevant to the teaching of other languages as second or foreign languages in international educational settings.

One of the major challenges in second-language instruction is developing higher-order analytical and reasoning skills. In particular, learners often experience difficulties in:

• identifying a problem within a text,

• analysing the causes underlying the problem,

• justifying the relevance of the problem through well-structured arguments,

• systematising possible solutions into coherent conclusions or inferences.

These skills are closely linked to contemporary educational demands, especially those related to critical thinking, argumentation culture, evidence-based reasoning, and academic communication. Therefore, this research is significant for developing students’ functional literacy and research competence.

In response to these challenges, this study employed Action Research (AR) as a methodological approach. The research presents the results of an action research project conducted in a real classroom setting. The research question was formulated based on a diagnostic entry questionnaire and structured around students' actual learning needs.

The central aim of the study was to develop students’ inference-making skills through the use of Toulmin’s Model of Argumentation. Prior to the implementation of the research, the following research question was formulated: How does analysing texts through Toulmin’s Model of Argumentation contribute to the development of students’ inference-making skills?

The study was conducted with sixth-grade students. Given the learners’ age and cognitive characteristics, it was necessary to identify the most effective argumentation model before selecting appropriate research instruments. Toulmin’s Model of Argumentation was chosen as the theoretical foundation of the study, as it provides a clear logical structure for constructing arguments based on the sequence of analysis, justification, and evaluation.

After reviewing and comparing various argumentation models, I concluded that Toulmin’s model is particularly effective in second-language learning contexts. To ensure age-appropriateness and pedagogical accessibility, the original six components of Toulmin’s model were simplified to a four-stage version and presented as a graphic-based organiser. This adaptation allowed students to engage in the argumentation process without cognitive overload, while maintaining logical coherence and analytical depth.

This research aligns with current international and European educational trends for several reasons. First, argumentation and evidence-based reasoning are core competencies in international educational frameworks, including assessment and teaching systems such as the International Baccalaureate (IB). Second, the ability to articulate well-supported arguments is essential for engaging with global issues such as global citizenship, environmental responsibility, and sustainable development. Third, the study's instructional content was linked to an environmental topic (“Environmental Pollution”), which is a globally relevant and internationally significant issue.

The results of the VARK questionnaire, which determined students' preferred learning modalities, guided the selection of instructional resources within the Action Research (AR) framework. Listening texts were chosen as the main teaching resource because 10 out of 13 students preferred auditory learning. Gardner’s Multiple Intelligences questionnaire helped form student pairs for the research lesson. Digitally active students often limited their peers’ participation, according to peer-review feedback. To balance interaction, two digitally active learners, who were kinaesthetic and interpersonal types, were paired together. In the class, four students showed strong linguistic intelligence, while seven demonstrated visual-spatial intelligence. Vocabulary practice took place through “LearningApps”, where students matched images to meanings using touch-based tasks. Since these learners responded better to visual input, listening activities included true/false questions and a post-listening task: completing a graphic-based organiser called “Model of Argumentation.” To assess students’ ability to identify a problem and support their ideas with evidence, the lesson began with a discussion of a problem-based image. Students then used 12 new vocabulary words they learned through “LearningApps” to complete a “Model of Argumentation.” They reinforced this understanding with a sentence-building task. Vocabulary work included peer assessment using a student-created answer key, allowing learners to check model answers and justify their own responses. The listening portion featured six “true/false” statements to aid comprehension and connect to later activities. Students reused the four true statements while completing the model of argumentation. Differentiation was implemented with paraphrased, more complex items for higher-proficiency students and simplified versions for those with lower proficiency. Self-assessment involved comparing answers with the key displayed on the board. After the listening exercise, students used the visual “Model of Argumentation” in paired speaking through the “Circle” method. This approach supported evidence-based conclusions. Clear criteria guided their work: identify the main issue, list three causes, provide three arguments for its importance, suggest two solutions, and justify them. Peer assessment was facilitated by an IB-aligned rubric with descriptions of achievement levels. Overall, lesson objectives focused on research goals, and feedback from peer reviews shaped the planning process. Additional assessment tools, such as “Who Is Faster?”, “Correct Answers Marathon” and a checklist were used to strengthen critical thinking and evidence-based argumentation.

Based on an evaluation of the effectiveness of Toulmin’s Model of Argumentation in developing speaking skills and a synthesis of the research findings, the following conclusions were drawn: taking students’ motivational profiles and intelligence types into account when selecting instructional resources and teaching strategies; applying Toulmin’s Model of Argumentation in the analysis of reading or listening texts; presenting the Argumentation Model as a graphic-based organiser and using it as a preparatory tool for speaking activities; providing assessment sheets with criteria and rubrics in the form of possible or model responses; offering grammar- and keyword-supported cards tailored to students’ proficiency levels. Throughout this research, I examine students’ ability to use the Model of Argumentation in speaking tasks, its effectiveness for learners across different proficiency levels, and the extent to which students can generate their own inferences by drawing on structured arguments. The findings will be used to refine classroom practice and to inform professional sharing of the approach within the school/community of practice. Using an IB-aligned rubric and framing argumentation around an environmental issue provides a transferable structure, supporting the approach's adaptation and potential applicability in international educational contexts.

1. Toulmin, S. E. (2003). The Uses of Argument. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 2. Gardner, H. (2011). Frames of Mind: The Theory of Multiple Intelligences. New York: Basic Books. 3. Black, P., & Wiliam, D. (1998). Assessment and classroom learning. Assessment in Education: Principles, Policy & Practice, 5(1), 7–74. 4. Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Mind in Society: The Development of Higher Psychological Processes. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. 5. Twig Bilim. (2025). «Environmental Pollution: Earth» (audio-visual listening resource). 6. LearningApps.org. (2025). Interactive learning activities 7. International Baccalaureate (IB). (2018). MYP: From principles into practice. International Baccalaureate Organization. 8. Creswell, J. W. (2012). Educational Research: Planning, Conducting, and Evaluating Quantitative and Qualitative Research. Boston: Pearson. 9. McNiff, J. (2013). Action Research: Principles and Practice. London: Routledge.