The Development and Assessment of Argumentative Competence in the Chilean Educational System: Tensions and Consequences Perceived by Teachers

Abstract

This study delves into the tensions perceived by Chilean mathematics teachers between the development of argumentative competence proposed by the curriculum and the national standardized tests, as well as their consequences in the classroom. Twenty-one semi-structured interviews were conducted with primary and secondary teachers from the Valparaiso and Metropolitan regions, as well as a thematic analysis of the data to identify patterns and recurrent themes regarding the problematic. The results show a systemic lack of alignment perceived by teachers between the curriculum and the tests regarding the development of argumentative competence, and show that teachers focus their pedagogical actions on what they perceive to be measured by the tests. In a context of strong pressure to obtain good results in the tests, argumentation is marginalized in the mathematics classroom, leading to the impoverishment of the students' educational experience, marked by the repetition of tasks similar to the tests. We conclude that the design and technical validity of the tests may not suffice to promote curriculum-prescribed teaching. It is necessary to consider teachers' perceptions and to create classroom conditions that allow the teacher to develop the competences proposed by the curriculum.