Viat-Map vs Open-Ended Toulmin Arguments: Effects in Low- vs High-Ability EFL Learners

Abstract

Comparing closed-ended and open-ended learning in understanding argumentation using the Toulmin method for second-year students at the State Polytechnic of Malang, this study evaluated how free-form learning and constructivism influenced student engagement, and the extent to which low and high pre-test proficiency moderated the impact of both platforms on learning improvement. High-ability students were grouped based on high pre-test scores, while low-ability students were grouped differently. Pre-test and post-test data from each learning group were classified and analyzed using ANOVA. The results showed that the parametric ANOVA interaction was marginal (p = 0.06), but Aligned-Rank ANOVA confirmed that the interaction between device and proficiency yielded significant results (p = 0.045). These findings suggest that constructivism improved more than free-form learning alone among low-ability students. Meanwhile, high-ability students showed minimal improvement in both conditions, with no significant differences between the two learning conditions. This study provides theoretical and practical information, which guides the design of more effective and adaptive educational technology.