Teaching Strategies to Foster Mathematical Argumentation: A Systematic Review

A systematic review is presented, aiming to identify and synthesizing the instructional strategies employed in the teaching of mathematical argumentation. Although several empirical studies have examined specific experiences, no comprehensive overview has yet been developed to articulate theoretical approaches and instructional strategies. The search was conducted in accordance with the PRISMA 2020 guidelines and covered the period from 2019 to 2025, including databases such as Scopus, Taylor & Francis, Wiley, and Springer. After screening 138 records, 12 studies that fulfilled the inclusion criteria were selected. The analysis allowed for the classification of the strategies into four main groups: (a) technology-mediated approaches (GeoGebra, Scratch); (b) dialogic and debate-oriented models (DAIM, ACODESA, peer feedback); (c) proposals rooted in historical and socio-scientific contexts; and (d) gamification and STEAM-based strategies. The most frequently used theoretical frameworks were the Toulmin model, socio-mathematical norms, and sociocultural perspectives. Taken together, the evidence suggests improvements in the quality of arguments and in critical reasoning, although limitations persist due to small sample sizes and cross-sectional studies. The review concludes by emphasizing the need for longitudinal research and by offering relevant insights for teacher education and curriculum design.