The purpose of the study is to determine the effectiveness of the “Fact-Analysis-Comparison” method in improving students’ argumentation skills and to analyze the results of its application in educational practice. This study contributes to a wide-ranging international discussion on argumentation-based teaching in educational methodology. The study is designed to investigate the possibilities of using the “Fact-Analysis-Comparison” method in teaching mathematics, history, and economics in order to improve students’ argumentation skills. The action research (AR) study examines the theoretical foundations of the method, the features of its interdisciplinary use, and also analyzes the results of its implementation in the educational process. The study selected an activity-based approach that allows for a learning process that prioritizes student independence to develop argumentation skills. The study used theoretical analysis, observation, diagnostic tasks, practical work, and comparative analysis of results. A systematic study was conducted within the framework of the AR study, jointly conducted by teachers of mathematics, history, and economics. At the beginning of the year, this study was conducted to identify the most effective types of activities of 10-11th grade students that contribute to the development of argumentation skills. In the next stage, students were offered tasks specifically designed for the fact-analysis-comparison method. This work stimulated creativity, increased interest in the topic, and facilitated the search and synthesis of various information. During the study, several surveys were conducted among students and teachers, and student progress was analyzed quarterly over the course of one academic year. The results of the experiment showed that the systematic use of the fact-analysis-comparison method has a positive effect on the development of students' argumentation skills. Research questions: -How does the fact-analysis-comparison method affect students' argument-building skills? -What difficulties arise in developing argumentation skills and how to solve them? -What effective methods can be used to develop students' argumentation skills? Research objectives: -Analyze scientific and methodological literature on argumentation skills; -Determine the content and structure of the fact-analysis-comparison method; -Diagnose the initial level of students' argumentation skills; -Verify the effectiveness of the method in developing argumentation skills through practice; -Develop a system of tasks based on the use of the fact-analysis-comparison method; -Analyze the results of the study and draw conclusions. Research hypothesis: If the fact-analysis-comparison method is used systematically and purposefully in the learning process, then students' argumentation skills (argumentation, justification of thought, comparison) will develop to a significant level.

Literature review:

Argumentation is a key component of higher-order thinking and academic learning across disciplines. It allows students to construct, justify, and critically evaluate knowledge claims using evidence and reasoning (Toulmin, 1958). In educational research, argumentation has been linked to the development of critical thinking, metacognitive awareness, and epistemic knowledge (Kuhn, 1991; Osborne, 2010). Despite its importance, many studies report persistent difficulties among students in constructing high-quality arguments. These difficulties include poor use of evidence, limited justification of claims, and insufficient engagement with alternative perspectives (Kuhn & Udell, 2003; McNeill & Krajicek, 2012). Such findings highlight the need for specific pedagogical approaches that support the processes underlying argumentative reasoning. Identifying and evaluating facts represent key components of effective argumentation. Kuhn (1999) noted that epistemic development depends on students’ ability to distinguish between facts, explanations, and opinions. In classroom settings, students often rely on intuitive reasoning or authority-based inferences when factual support is lacking. Instructional frameworks such as the Claim-Evidence-Reasoning (CER) model specifically address this issue by guiding students to connect factual evidence to conceptual inferences through logical reasoning (McNeill & Krajcik, 2012).

In the study of the culture of argumentation in the teaching process, the “Fact-Analysis-Comparison” formula will be comprehensively studied. The research methodology used primary (surveys from students and teachers, interviews with teachers, observation) and secondary (theoretical information from reliable sources related to the issue of argumentation, i.e., research by researchers) data. In the course of the study, it was important to use primary data, in particular, the results of research obtained through the methods of questionnaires and interviews. It complements quantitative data with qualitative data. It shows with a specific example how the fact-analysis-comparison method affected the student. If the survey shows a general trend, the interview explains the deep reasons, the results complement and clarify each other. The conclusion is more scientifically based and substantiated. Using the data collected in the questionnaires and interviews, it was revealed that there is a contradiction between the students' answers given in the first series of focus group lessons and the fulfillment of the criteria set for argumentation. During the study, it became clear that the incomplete implementation of the steps of the argumentation strategy by students leads to the underdevelopment of their critical thinking potential. Although the research problem is known, the ways and methods for solving it are unknown, so the quantitative and qualitative methods of collecting primary data were analyzed. During the study, quantitative research methods were used - a survey (from a teacher), content analysis (analysis of research on argumentation), observation (observation of argumentation methods in a series of lessons given in the first round of the focus group). As a result of the content analysis method used to systematize the "intricacies" of the argumentation method, the components of the argumentation method were identified as the categories of "fact", "analysis" and "comparison". In addition, the focus group conducted a study of the identified problem ("case study") and in-depth interviews with 3 experienced teachers, discussing how the argumentation method is implemented, what should be paid attention to, and effective argumentation strategies. A qualitative, in-depth study was conducted, looking at this problem through a "prism". Then, data processing methods were used: statistical processing, modeling, classification.

Interviews were conducted with teachers of the Nazarbayev Intellectual School, who teach grades 9-12 and have 15-27 years of work experience, who are "teacher-experts". This interview was a professional-level dialogue aimed at studying the culture of argumentation in education. In-depth interviews with 3 teachers with many years of experience allowed them to "dig deep" into the teacher's experience and identify specific methodological values. In addition, the study found that “Comparison is the engine of analysis.” The teacher’s “Comparison of Levels A and C” method is the most effective tool for improving the quality of a student’s argument. For teachers, this is a real tool for developing the “Self-assessment” skill. The respondent’s suggestion to “divide the analysis into specific actions” is the main conclusion of our study. That is, it was determined that in the assignment for the argumentation task, the assessment criteria should not simply say “give an argument”, but should include step-by-step criteria such as “explain the reason, give an example, and write the result.” The novelty of our research is that argumentation methods should be adapted to each subject and their own “standards” should be developed in accordance with the specifics of each subject. We, as a research group, as researchers, came to the strategic conclusion that there should be a single glossary and algorithm for the terms “Analysis” and “Argumentation” at the entire school level. The research results showed that this method contributes to the systematization of students’ thinking, the formation of a culture of reasoning, and the deepening of subject knowledge. In conclusion, the use of the fact-analysis-comparison method allows for the systematic development of students' argumentation skills, and this research topic is important, relevant, and of high practical value for all participants in the educational process.

Kuhn, D. (1991). The skills of argument. Cambridge University Press. Kuhn, D. (1999). A developmental model of critical thinking. Educational Researcher, 28(2), 16–25. Kuhn, D., & Udell, W. (2003). The development of argument skills. Child Development, 74(5), 1245–1260. McNeill, K. L., & Krajcik, J. (2012). Supporting grade 5–8 students in constructing explanations in science. Pearson. Osborne, J. (2010). Arguing to learn in science: The role of collaborative, critical discourse. Science, 328(5977), 463–466. Toulmin, S. (1958). The uses of argument. Cambridge University Press.