我国2020年新修订的高中物理课程标准中明确指出论证方法在科学领域的运用是科学思维的一部分，同时建立科学论证能力等级评价标准，但是 目前科学论证能力培养与教师教学实践相结合的实证研究还相当有限。首先，本研究探索初中生科学论证能力的现状以及影响这一能力的相关 因素，对北京市某所初中发放科学思维测试和背景调查问卷，研究结果显示 大部分研究对象在科学论证方面表现偏低，且能力层次分布不均。经路径检 验发现，教师教学方式对科学论证具有的显著的正向直接作用，且影响权重 最高，其中科学学习态度、学习行为在教师教学方式与科学论证影响间起到 中介作用。 其次，为进一步探讨教师教学方式对科学论证的影响，找出提升学生科 学论证能力的有效教学策略，本研究采用认知神经实验，收集在不同教学模 式下教师和学生的神经活动数据，为有效教学策略提供一定证据。通过分析 神经数据结果，可以得到相较于讲授式课程，论证式课程下的学生脑激活程 度更高，师生同步更加明显，功能连接指标更高，更有助于培养学生的科学 论证能力。 最后，基于以上研究结果，本研究在初中进行为期两个月的教学实践， 一个班级采用传统讲授式教学，另一个班级采用论证式教学。在教学实践后 向两个班级学生发放科学论证测试问卷，经前后测数据分析后发现，讲授式 课程对学生科学论证能力的影响主要体现在将学生从中等论证能力提高至 高论证能力水平，对于提升低论证能力的学生而言其作用较小；论证式课程 能够提高处于各水平的学生的科学论证能力，其中在科学论证的观点、事实 与理论依据维度，中等水平提升至高水平的效果最为显著；在科学论证的推 理与反驳维度，低水平提升至中水平的效果最为显著。 综上所述，相较于讲授式课程，论证式课程脑激活程度更高，学生更易 接受，且对于不同等级学生对其科学论证能力的提升均很显著，是能够激发 学生学习潜力，综合提升科学论证能力的更优授课方案。

The revised high school physics curriculum standards in China in 2020 clearly indicate that the use of argumentation methods in the scientific field is a part of scientific thinking, while also establishing scientific argumentation ability level evaluation standards.However, empirical research on the integration of scientific argumentation ability training with teaching practice is still quite limited. Firstly, this study explores the current status of junior high school students’ scientific argumentation abilities and the factors that influence this ability. A science thinking test and background survey were distributed to a junior high school in Beijing, and the results showed that the majority of subjects performed poorly in scientific argumentation, with an uneven distribution of ability levels. Path testing found that teachers’ teaching methods have a significant positive direct effect on scientific argumentation, and the impact weight is the highest. Scientific learning attitudes and learning behaviors play a mediating role between teachers’ teaching methods and the impact on scientific argumentation. Secondly, to further explore the impact of teachers’ teaching methods on scientific argumentation and find effective teaching strategies to improve students’ scientific argumentation abilities, this study employed cognitive neuroscience experiments,collecting neural activity data from teachers and students under different teaching models, to provide evidence for effective teaching strategies. The analysis of neural data results shows that students have higher brain activation levels, more obvious teacher-student synchrony, and higher functional connectivity under argumentative courses than under lecture-based courses, which is more conducive to cultivating students’ scientific argumentation abilities. Finally, based on the above research findings, this study conducted a two-month teaching practice in a junior high school, with one class using traditional lecture-based teaching and another using argument-based teaching. After the teaching practice，scientific argumentation tests were distributed to students in both classes, and the pre-post test data analysis showed that lecture-based courses mainly impacted raising students from a medium to a high argumentation ability level, but had a smaller effect on improving students with low argumentation abilities; argumentative courses were able to improve the scientific argumentation abilities of students at all levels, with the most significant effect being from medium to high levels in the dimensions of argumentation views, facts, and theory basis; in the dimensions of reasoning and refutation, the most significant effect was from low to medium levels. In summary, compared to lecture-based courses, argumentative courses result in higher brain activation levels, are more readily accepted by students, and significantly improve the scientific argumentation abilities of students at different levels. Therefore, argument-based teaching is a superior educational approach that can stimulate students’ learning potential and comprehensively enhance the training of argumentation thinking skills.