ISSN: 2226-6348
Open access
Scientific Argumentation Skills (SAS) are fundamental to fostering scientific literacy and higher-order reasoning within science education and are particularly vital in Chemistry classrooms, where learners must navigate complex and abstract concepts. However, their classroom implementation often remains fragmented and content-focused, offering limited opportunities for students to construct and justify claims through authentic scientific reasoning. This concept paper investigates the potential application of the SOAR model as a strength-based strategic framework consisting of Strengths, Opportunities, Aspirations and Results that theoretical foundation for strengthening SAS in Chemistry education. Adopting a qualitative conceptual design, this paper synthesizes recent literature and theoretical perspectives to propose a SOAR-oriented framework for empowering teachers and students in scientific discourse. The framework encourages educators to capitalize on existing pedagogical strengths, identify authentic opportunities for inquiry, align aspirational goals with reasoning processes and evaluate outcomes through reflective practice. Anticipated findings suggest that integrating SOAR could cultivate a more positive learning culture, enhance students’ argumentation competence and strengthen alignment between pedagogy and assessment. However, this paper is limited by its conceptual nature, as the proposed framework has not yet been empirically validated within classroom contexts. Future research is therefore encouraged to operationalize and test the SOAR-based model in diverse educational settings, enabling deeper insights into its transformative potential for strengthening SAS across disciplines. Despite these limitations, this study advances a strategic and forward-looking vision for how the SOAR model can transform the culture of scientific argumentation in science education, using Chemistry learning as an exemplar for bridging pedagogical innovation with reflective, evidence-based practice.
Al-Ajmi, B., & Ambusaidi, A. (2022). The Level of Scientific Argumentation Skills in Chemistry. Science Education International, 33(1), 66–74.
Allchin, D., & Zemplén, G. (2020). Finding the place of argumentation in science education: Epistemics and Whole Science. Science Education, 104(5), 907–933. https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.21589
Aziz, R. C., Hamzah, S., Hashim, N. A. A. N., Rahim, M. A., Zulkifli, W. F. W., & Ahmad, G. (2019). S.O.A.R Model: An Alternative Approach for 21th Century Education to Shift from “Classroom Management” to “Classroom Leadership.” International Journal of Academic Research in Progressive Education and Development, 8(2), 485–493. https://doi.org/10.6007/ijarped/v8-i2/6142
Berlan, L. K., & McNeill, K. L. (2010). The “Results” dimension of the SOAR framework represents the culmination of aspiration and action—a reflection of how strategic intentions translate into measurable educational transformation. In the context of science education, applying SOAR to enhance. International Journal Science Education, 94(5), 765–793. Retrieved from https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.20402
Cole, M. L., Stavros, J. M., Cox, J., & Stavros, A. (2022). Measuring Strengths, Opportunities, Aspirations and Results: Psychometric Properties of the 12-Item SOAR Scale. Frontiers in Psychology, 13(April), 1–17. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2022.854406
González-Howard, M., & McNeill, K. L. (2020). Acting with epistemic agency: Characterizing student critique during argumentation discussions. Science Education, 104(6), 953–982. https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.21592
Hasnunidah, N., Susilo, H., Irawati, M., & Suwono, H. (2020). The contribution of argumentation and critical thinking skills on students’ concept understanding in different learning models. Journal of University Teaching and Learning Practice, 17(1), 1–13. https://doi.org/10.53761/1.17.1.6
Hendratmoko, A. F., Madlazim, M., Widodo, W., Suyono, S., & Supardi, Z. A. I. (2024). Inquiry and Debate in Science Learning: Potential Strategy for Improving Students’ Scientific Argumentation Skills. International Journal of Education in Mathematics, Science and Technology, 12(1), 114–138. https://doi.org/10.46328/ijemst.3152
Jamaluddin, F., Razak, A. Z. A., & Rahim, S. S. A. (2025). Exploring self-leadership strategies and the successful transition of STEM students to higher education in Malaysia: Academic anxiety as a bridge. STEM Education, 5(4), 643–685. https://doi.org/10.3934/steme.2025030
Kamran, M., Bano, A., & Sohni, K. (2025). Optimising the teaching and learning process for children with special educational needs in an inclusive school?: A SOAR analysis in Karachi , Pakistan. 52(1), 37–48. https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-8578.12569
Laliyo, L. A. R., Utina, R., Husain, R., Umar, M. K., Katili, M. R., & Panigoro, C. (2023). Evaluating students’ ability in constructing scientific explanations on chemical phenomena. Eurasia Journal of Mathematics, Science and Technology Education, 19(9). https://doi.org/10.29333/ejmste/13524
Ling Heng, L., & Surif, J. (2014). Sains Humanika Memahami Kesilapan Pelajar dalam Membentuk Penghujahan Saintifik. Sains Humanika, 2(1), 23–33. Retrieved from www.sainshumanika.utm.my
MESTECC. (2020). Sinergisme Ke Arah Kemampanan Negara dan Kesejahteraan Rakyat. Putrajaya, Malaysia: Unit Komunikasi Korporat Kementerian Tenaga, Sains, Teknologi, Alam Sekitar dan Perubahan Iklim (MESTECC).
Ministry of Finance Malaysia. (2024). Economy Outlook 2024. Creative Economy Outlook 2024.
Ministry of Finance Malaysia. (2025). Budget Speech. Ministry of Finance Malaysia. Retrieved from https://belanjawan.mof.gov.my/pdf/belanjawan2025/ucapan/ub25-en.pdf
MoE. (2016). Panduan Pelaksanaan Sains, Teknologi, Kujuruteraan dan Matematik (STEM) dalam Pengajaran dan Pembelajaran. In Bahagian Pembangunan Kurikulum (Vol. 1).
MoE. (2024). Malaysia Education Blueprint (2013-2025), Annual Report 2023.
MOSTI. (2021). National Science, Technology and Innovation Policy 2021-2030. In Ministry of Science, Technology and Innovation. Putrajaya, Malaysia: Ministry Science, Technology and Innovation (MOSTI).
National Research Council. (2013). Next Generation Science Standards: For States, By States. In Next Generation Science Standards: For States, By States (Vol. 1–2). Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. https://doi.org/10.17226/18290
Nejla, G., & K?l?ç, Z. (2021). The Effects of Scientific Argumentation on High School Students’ Critical Thinking Skills. International Journal of Progressive Education, 17(6), 183–200. https://doi.org/10.29329/ijpe.2021.382.13
OECD. (2013). Teachers for the 21st Century: Using Evaluation to Improve Teaching. OECD Publishing. Retrieved from http://dx.doi.org/10.1787/9789264193864-en
ÖZELMA, E., & Seyhan, H. G. (2022). Effect of Argumentation Based Learning on Science Achievement and Argumentation Willingness: The Topic of “Particulate Nature of Matter". Bulletin of Education & Research, 44(2), 31–50. Retrieved from https://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=ehh&AN=161124337&site=ehost-live
Ping, I. L. L., Halim, L., & Osman, K. (2020). Explicit teaching of scientific argumentation as an approach in developing argumentation skills, science process skills and biology understanding. Journal of Baltic Science Education, 19(2), 276–288. https://doi.org/10.33225/jbse/20.19.276
Putri, T. S., Suyanta, & Rohaeti, E. (2025). Scientific Argumentation in Chemistry Education: A Literature Review of Practices. Challenges And Solutions. Tarbiyah: Jurnal Ilmiah Kependidikan, 14(1), 127–142. Retrieved from https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
Rizqi Nurul Laily, T., & Rohaeti, E. (2024). Enhancing Scientific Argumentation Skills Through Electronic Worksheets Based on Research Oriented Collaborative Inquiry Learning. KnE Social Sciences, 2024, 177–187. https://doi.org/10.18502/kss.v9i8.15505
Rusmini, R., & Suyono, R. A. (2021). Profile of Argumentation Ability of Undergraduate Students In Chemistry Education Based On Non-Routine Problems. E3S Web of Conferences, 328. https://doi.org/10.1051/e3sconf/202132806007
Satriya, M. A., & Atun, S. (2024). The Effect of Argument Driven Inquiry Learning Models on Scientific Argumentation Skills and Higher Order Students on The Topics of Acid Base. Jurnal Penelitian Pendidikan IPA, 10(5), 2663–2673. https://doi.org/10.29303/jppipa.v10i5.6834
Shahali, E. H. M., Ismail, I., & Halim, L. (2020). Policy Trajectories and Initiatives in STEM Education STEM Education in Malaysia?: Policy , Trajectories and Initiatives. Educational Planning and Research Division, Ministry of Education, Malaysia, 122–133.
Stavros, J. M. (2020). SOAR 2020 and Beyond: Strategy, Systems Innovation and Stakeholder Engagement. AI Practitioner, 22(2), 70–91. https://doi.org/10.12781/978-1-907549-43-4-11
Stavros, J. M., & Cole, M. (2013). SOARing Towards Positive Transformation and Change. Development Policy Review, 1(November 2013), 10–34. Retrieved from https://www.researchgate.net/publication/259975881_SOARing_towards_positive_transformation_and_change
Suyono, S., Harun, N., Bertha, Y., Anggita, I. K. D., Wardani, S., & Duhita. (2021). The Validity of the Internalized Argumentation Skills Test for Chemistry Students. E3S Web of Conferences, 328. https://doi.org/10.1051/e3sconf/202132806008
Ula, F. R., & Suyono. (2023). Development of Argumentation Skills Assessment Instruments on Buffer Solution Material. Jurnal Penelitian Pendidikan IPA, 9(12), 10792–10799. https://doi.org/10.29303/jppipa.v9i12.4760
UNICEF Malaysia. (2023). Education 2030 in Malaysia | UNICEF Malaysia. In UNICEF Malaysia. Retrieved from https://www.unicef.org/malaysia/reports/education-2030-malaysia
Wan Hussin, W. A. S., & Mohd Matore, M. E. E. (2023). Systematic Review: Factors Affecting Academic Procrastination in Mathematics among Students. International Journal of Academic Research in Business and Social Sciences, 13(1), 1474–1493. https://doi.org/10.6007/ijarbss/v13-i1/15800
Yovita, Sonia, G., Vebrianto, R., Susanti, E., & Berlian, M. (2024). Development of Scientific Argumentation Test Instruments for Students on the Classification of Living Creatures in Junior High School. Science Education and Application Journal, 6(2), 155–164. https://doi.org/10.30736/seaj.v6i2.1056
Al-Ajmi, B., & Ambusaidi, A. (2022). The Level of Scientific Argumentation Skills in Chemistry. Science Education International, 33(1), 66–74.
Allchin, D., & Zemplén, G. (2020). Finding the place of argumentation in science education: Epistemics and Whole Science. Science Education, 104(5), 907–933. https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.21589
Aziz, R. C., Hamzah, S., Hashim, N. A. A. N., Rahim, M. A., Zulkifli, W. F. W., & Ahmad, G. (2019). S.O.A.R Model: An Alternative Approach for 21th Century Education to Shift from “Classroom Management” to “Classroom Leadership.” International Journal of Academic Research in Progressive Education and Development, 8(2), 485–493. https://doi.org/10.6007/ijarped/v8-i2/6142
Berlan, L. K., & McNeill, K. L. (2010). The “Results” dimension of the SOAR framework represents the culmination of aspiration and action—a reflection of how strategic intentions translate into measurable educational transformation. In the context of science education, applying SOAR to enhance. International Journal Science Education, 94(5), 765–793. Retrieved from https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.20402
Cole, M. L., Stavros, J. M., Cox, J., & Stavros, A. (2022). Measuring Strengths, Opportunities, Aspirations and Results: Psychometric Properties of the 12-Item SOAR Scale. Frontiers in Psychology, 13(April), 1–17. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2022.854406
González-Howard, M., & McNeill, K. L. (2020). Acting with epistemic agency: Characterizing student critique during argumentation discussions. Science Education, 104(6), 953–982. https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.21592
Hasnunidah, N., Susilo, H., Irawati, M., & Suwono, H. (2020). The contribution of argumentation and critical thinking skills on students’ concept understanding in different learning models. Journal of University Teaching and Learning Practice, 17(1), 1–13. https://doi.org/10.53761/1.17.1.6
Hendratmoko, A. F., Madlazim, M., Widodo, W., Suyono, S., & Supardi, Z. A. I. (2024). Inquiry and Debate in Science Learning: Potential Strategy for Improving Students’ Scientific Argumentation Skills. International Journal of Education in Mathematics, Science and Technology, 12(1), 114–138. https://doi.org/10.46328/ijemst.3152
Jamaluddin, F., Razak, A. Z. A., & Rahim, S. S. A. (2025). Exploring self-leadership strategies and the successful transition of STEM students to higher education in Malaysia: Academic anxiety as a bridge. STEM Education, 5(4), 643–685. https://doi.org/10.3934/steme.2025030
Kamran, M., Bano, A., & Sohni, K. (2025). Optimising the teaching and learning process for children with special educational needs in an inclusive school?: A SOAR analysis in Karachi , Pakistan. 52(1), 37–48. https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-8578.12569
Laliyo, L. A. R., Utina, R., Husain, R., Umar, M. K., Katili, M. R., & Panigoro, C. (2023). Evaluating students’ ability in constructing scientific explanations on chemical phenomena. Eurasia Journal of Mathematics, Science and Technology Education, 19(9). https://doi.org/10.29333/ejmste/13524
Ling Heng, L., & Surif, J. (2014). Sains Humanika Memahami Kesilapan Pelajar dalam Membentuk Penghujahan Saintifik. Sains Humanika, 2(1), 23–33. Retrieved from www.sainshumanika.utm.my
MESTECC. (2020). Sinergisme Ke Arah Kemampanan Negara dan Kesejahteraan Rakyat. Putrajaya, Malaysia: Unit Komunikasi Korporat Kementerian Tenaga, Sains, Teknologi, Alam Sekitar dan Perubahan Iklim (MESTECC).
Ministry of Finance Malaysia. (2024). Economy Outlook 2024. Creative Economy Outlook 2024.
Ministry of Finance Malaysia. (2025). Budget Speech. Ministry of Finance Malaysia. Retrieved from https://belanjawan.mof.gov.my/pdf/belanjawan2025/ucapan/ub25-en.pdf
MoE. (2016). Panduan Pelaksanaan Sains, Teknologi, Kujuruteraan dan Matematik (STEM) dalam Pengajaran dan Pembelajaran. In Bahagian Pembangunan Kurikulum (Vol. 1).
MoE. (2024). Malaysia Education Blueprint (2013-2025), Annual Report 2023.
MOSTI. (2021). National Science, Technology and Innovation Policy 2021-2030. In Ministry of Science, Technology and Innovation. Putrajaya, Malaysia: Ministry Science, Technology and Innovation (MOSTI).
Muhammad, H., & Hromada, M. (2023). Evaluating an E-Government Stage Model by Using SOAR-AHP Process. Transportation Research Procedia, 74, 1538–1545. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.trpro.2023.11.131
National Research Council. (2013). Next Generation Science Standards: For States, By States. In Next Generation Science Standards: For States, By States (Vol. 1–2). Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. https://doi.org/10.17226/18290
Nejla, G., & K?l?ç, Z. (2021). The Effects of Scientific Argumentation on High School Students’ Critical Thinking Skills. International Journal of Progressive Education, 17(6), 183–200. https://doi.org/10.29329/ijpe.2021.382.13
OECD. (2013). Teachers for the 21st Century: Using Evaluation to Improve Teaching. OECD Publishing. Retrieved from http://dx.doi.org/10.1787/9789264193864-en
Omran, F., Ahmed, K., & Al-magarbi, A. O. (2023). Strengthening Libyan Hospitality?: A SOAR Analysis of Digital Marketing Strategies and Practices in the Tourism and Hospitality Sector. Journal of Economics, Management and Trade Volume, 29(12), 144–159. https://doi.org/10.9734/JEMT/2023/v29i121181
ÖZELMA, E., & Seyhan, H. G. (2022). Effect of Argumentation Based Learning on Science Achievement and Argumentation Willingness: The Topic of “Particulate Nature of Matter". Bulletin of Education & Research, 44(2), 31–50. Retrieved from https://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=ehh&AN=161124337&site=ehost-live
Ping, I. L. L., Halim, L., & Osman, K. (2020). Explicit teaching of scientific argumentation as an approach in developing argumentation skills, science process skills and biology understanding. Journal of Baltic Science Education, 19(2), 276–288. https://doi.org/10.33225/jbse/20.19.276
Prabu, A., Id, K., Omprakash, A., Kumar, P., Mani, C., Id, M. K., Wael, D., & Sathiyasekaran, B. W. C. (2023). E-learning and E-modules in medical education — A SOAR analysis using perception of undergraduate students. PLoS ONE, 18(5), 1–14. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0284882
Putri, A. I., & Pertiwi, V. I. (2025). Analisis SOAR Terhadap Strategi Keterbukaan Informasi Publik Melalui Pejabat Pengelola Informasi Dan Dokumentasi Provinsi Jawa Timur. Jurnal Tata SejutaSTIA MATARAM, 11(1), 87–102.
Putri, T. S., Suyanta, & Rohaeti, E. (2025). Scientific Argumentation in Chemistry Education: A Literature Review of Practices. Challenges And Solutions. Tarbiyah: Jurnal Ilmiah Kependidikan, 14(1), 127–142. Retrieved from https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
Rizqi Nurul Laily, T., & Rohaeti, E. (2024). Enhancing Scientific Argumentation Skills Through Electronic Worksheets Based on Research Oriented Collaborative Inquiry Learning. KnE Social Sciences, 2024, 177–187. https://doi.org/10.18502/kss.v9i8.15505
Rusmini, R., & Suyono, R. A. (2021). Profile of Argumentation Ability of Undergraduate Students In Chemistry Education Based On Non-Routine Problems. E3S Web of Conferences, 328. https://doi.org/10.1051/e3sconf/202132806007
Satriya, M. A., & Atun, S. (2024). The Effect of Argument Driven Inquiry Learning Models on Scientific Argumentation Skills and Higher Order Students on The Topics of Acid Base. Jurnal Penelitian Pendidikan IPA, 10(5), 2663–2673. https://doi.org/10.29303/jppipa.v10i5.6834
Shahali, E. H. M., Ismail, I., & Halim, L. (2020). Policy Trajectories and Initiatives in STEM Education STEM Education in Malaysia?: Policy , Trajectories and Initiatives. Educational Planning and Research Division, Ministry of Education, Malaysia, 122–133.
Stavros, J. M. (2020). SOAR 2020 and Beyond: Strategy, Systems Innovation and Stakeholder Engagement. AI Practitioner, 22(2), 70–91. https://doi.org/10.12781/978-1-907549-43-4-11
Stavros, J. M., & Cole, M. (2013). SOARing Towards Positive Transformation and Change. Development Policy Review, 1(November 2013), 10–34. Retrieved from https://www.researchgate.net/publication/259975881_SOARing_towards_positive_transformation_and_change
Sugiarti, W. S., Pujangkoro, S. A., & Sembiring, M. T. (2023). Analisis SOAR (Strength, Opportunity, Aspiration & Result) Sebagai Upaya Peningkatan Penjualan Melalui Digital Market. Jurnal Ilmiah Manajemen Dan Kewirausahaan, 2(2), 25–34.
Suyono, S., Harun, N., Bertha, Y., Anggita, I. K. D., Wardani, S., & Duhita. (2021). The Validity of the Internalized Argumentation Skills Test for Chemistry Students. E3S Web of Conferences, 328. https://doi.org/10.1051/e3sconf/202132806008
Ula, F. R., & Suyono. (2023). Development of Argumentation Skills Assessment Instruments on Buffer Solution Material. Jurnal Penelitian Pendidikan IPA, 9(12), 10792–10799. https://doi.org/10.29303/jppipa.v9i12.4760
UNICEF Malaysia. (2023). Education 2030 in Malaysia | UNICEF Malaysia. In UNICEF Malaysia. Retrieved from https://www.unicef.org/malaysia/reports/education-2030-malaysia
Wan Hussin, W. A. S., & Mohd Matore, M. E. E. (2023). Systematic Review: Factors Affecting Academic Procrastination in Mathematics among Students. International Journal of Academic Research in Business and Social Sciences, 13(1), 1474–1493. https://doi.org/10.6007/ijarbss/v13-i1/15800
Yovita, Sonia, G., Vebrianto, R., Susanti, E., & Berlian, M. (2024). Development of Scientific Argumentation Test Instruments for Students on the Classification of Living Creatures in Junior High School. Science Education and Application Journal, 6(2), 155–164. https://doi.org/10.30736/seaj.v6i2.1056
Karim, H. A., & Matore, M. E. @ E. M. (2025). The SOAR Model for Transforming Students’ Scientific Argumentation Skills Using Strength-Based Science Education Conceptualisation. International Journal of Academic Research in Progressive Education and Development, 14(4), 1822–1839.
Copyright: © 2025 The Author(s)
Published by HRMARS (www.hrmars.com)
This article is published under the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY 4.0) license. Anyone may reproduce, distribute, translate and create derivative works of this article (for both commercial and non-commercial purposes), subject to full attribution to the original publication and authors. The full terms of this license may be seen at: http://creativecommons.org/licences/by/4.0/legalcode