Primary school students´ decision-making argumentation in cyber-ethics dilemmas

This study involved 38 primary school students in a detective game about cyber-ethics dilemmas and explored students´ skills at making a reasoned decision and presenting a convincing argument. This game continued for five weeks and was supported by a computer system. It started with a given speculation/hypothesis. Then each student collected at least a piece of supporting evidence and wrote it up on the computer system for each week. During the evidence collection period, the researchers, playing a witness of the opposing side, actively provided refuting evidence each week. For the last week, the students were required to draw respective conclusions/decisions based on their collected evidence and given refuting evidence. All the students´ constructed arguments for describing evidences and conclusions were analyzed. It was found that most of the students (about 92%) developed arguments consisting of either claims only or claims and data. They would not be able to construct complicated arguments with backings, warrants and rebuttals.