科学论证是进行科学探究和发现科学本质的必经之路，对学习者批判性思维、创新能力和问题解决能力等科学素养的培育具有重要意义。在当前科学教育改革背景下，高效的论证驱动式探究课堂成为培养中学生科学论证能力的主阵地。然而，与科学概念、科学探究学习相互割裂的碎片化论证教学导致中学生在进行科学论证时常常面临来自认知和元认知方面的诸多挑战。为促进学习者科学论证能力的培养，研究者将支架式教学策略嵌入科学论证课堂，但多数研究聚焦学习者的认知过程，侧重对科学概念认知的外部解释性支持，对以反思为特征的元认知过程的内部支持研究以及相关对比研究尚显不足。另外，当前科学论证评价方式倾向于总结性评价，缺乏对中学生科学论证能力变化的过程性分析，无法反映支架式教学策略对学习者科学论证能力的动态干预特征，学习者科学论证水平难以实现进阶式发展。

不同支架式教学策略对中学生科学论证能力的促进和抑制机制存在分歧，科学论证教与学模式亟待改善。本研究基于初中生物探究课堂的科学论证教学模式，设计辅助概念认知和元认知过程的支持性和反思性支架式教学策略，以初中生为研究对象，采用准实验研究方法，将学习者分为支持性支架组，反思性支架组和对照组，比较支持性支架和反思性支架策略对学习者科学论证能力的影响差异，具体分析二者对学习者科学论证要素提出和进阶过程、科学概念理解以及认知负荷水平的影响。研究关注不同支架式教学策略在支持学习者科学论证、科学概念理解和论证驱动式探究教学效果方面的作用，为促进中学生科学论证能力的培育与发展提供教学设计思路和课堂论证教学实践路径。

研究结果表明，支架式教学策略对初中生科学论证能力有显著提升作用。首先，支架式教学策略干预显著促进初中生科学论证能力的发展。其中，反思性支架干预后学习者识别和提出论证要素的数量显著增多，对证据和反驳要素的影响最为显著，学习者表现出良好的反驳和批判能力，支持性支架干预后学习者在识别和提出主张要素方面更为出色，表现出良好的解释和推理能力；支架策略干预过程中，学习者的科学论证水平均经历先下降再逐步上升后趋于稳定的进阶式发展过程，反思性支架策略干预对学习者的科学论证能力总体提升效果更为显著。第二，支架式教学策略干预有助于初中生科学概念理解水平的提升。其中，支持性支架策略干预对学习者的科学概念理解水平有显著的积极影响。第三，支架式教学策略干预并未引起初中生科学论证学习额外的外部认知负荷，反思性支架组学习者在支架干预后认知负荷水平降低。研究最后为支架式教学策略干预的论证教学提供了四个方面的设计与实施建议，以期更好地发挥支架式教学策略在培养中学生科学论证能力方面的作用。

Scientific argumentation is a necessary path for scientific exploration and discovery of the essence of science, and it is of great significance for cultivating learners’ scientific literacy such as critical thinking, innovation ability, and problem-solving ability. In the current context of science education reform, an efficient Argument-Driven Inquiry classroom has become the main battlefield for cultivating the scientific argumentation ability of middle school students. However, the fragmented argumentation teaching that is disconnected from scientific concept and scientific inquiry learning often leads to many cognitive and metacognitive challenges for middle school students when conducting scientific argumentation. To promote the cultivation of learners’ scientific argumentation ability, researchers have embedded scaffolding teaching strategies into scientific argumentation classrooms. However, most studies focus on learners' cognitive processes, emphasizing external explanatory support for scientific concept cognition, internal support for metacognitive processes characterized by reflection, and related comparative studies are still insufficient. In addition, the current scientific argumentation evaluation method tends to be a summary evaluation, lacking a process analysis of the changes in the scientific argumentation ability of middle school students, and unable to reflect the dynamic intervention characteristics of scaffolding teaching strategies on the scientific argumentation ability of learners, making it difficult for learners to achieve advanced development in their scientific argumentation level.

There are differences in the promotion and inhibition mechanisms of different scaffolding teaching strategies on the scientific argumentation ability of middle school students, and the scientific argumentation teaching and learning model urgently needs to be improved. This study is based on the scientific argumentation teaching model of junior high school biology exploration classroom, and designs supportive and reflective scaffolding teaching strategies to assist in conceptual cognition and metacognitive processes. Junior high school students are selected as the research objects, and quasi experimental research methods are used to divide learners into supportive scaffolding group, reflective scaffolding group, and control group. The differences in the impact of supportive scaffolding and reflective scaffolding strategies on learners' scientific argumentation ability are compared, and the specific impact of the two on the process of proposing and advancing scientific argumentation elements, scientific conceptual understanding and cognitive load level is analyzed. The study focuses on the role of different scaffolding teaching strategies in supporting learners in scientific argumentation, scientific conceptual understanding, and Argument-Driven Inquiry teaching effectiveness, providing teaching design ideas and classroom argumentation teaching practice paths to promote the cultivation and development of scientific argumentation ability in middle school students.

The research results indicate that the scaffolding teaching strategies have a significant improvement effect on the scientific argumentation ability of middle school students. Firstly, the intervention of scaffolding teaching strategies significantly promotes the development of learners' scientific argumentation ability. Among them, after the reflective scaffold intervention, learners significantly increased the number of identifying and presenting argumentative elements, with the most significant impact on evidence and rebuttal elements, demonstrating good rebuttal and critical abilities. After the supportive scaffold intervention, learners performed better in identifying and presenting claim elements, demonstrating good explanatory and reasoning abilities; During the intervention process of scaffold strategies, the scientific argumentation ability of learners experienced an advanced development process of first decreasing, then gradually increasing, and then stabilizing. After the reflective scaffold strategy intervention, the overall improvement effect of learners' scientific argumentation ability was more significant. Secondly, intervention with scaffolding teaching strategies can help improve learners' understanding of scientific concepts. Supportive scaffolding strategy intervention has a significant positive impact on learners' understanding of scientific concepts. Thirdly, the intervention of scaffolding teaching strategies did not cause learners to scientifically demonstrate the additional external cognitive load of learning, and the cognitive load level of reflective scaffolding group learners decreased after scaffolding intervention. Finally, the study provides four design and implementation suggestions for the demonstration teaching of scaffolding teaching strategy intervention, in order to better leverage the role of scaffolding teaching strategy in cultivating the scientific argumentation ability of middle school students.