The dissertation study is a mixed method sequential explanatory study which focuses on the use of a digital tool to assess argumentation as a mediator of teacher argumentation professional vision. The study is driven by an experimental randomized control trial to determine the relationship between the professional vision components and the use of the DiALoG (Diagnosing Argumentation Levels of Groups) tool and followed with a qualitative analysis using a grounded theory approach. A measure of professional vision was created to utilize with the quantitative analysis which is reported on herein. A hierarchical multiple linear regression was utilized which showed significant results with DiALoG predicting the development of professional vision in the Management and Argument components. Out of the qualitative analysis, an initial theory was formed which asserted that the level to which teachers articulate their noticings of the elements of argumentation signal a developing professional vision. The integration of the two methods is shared to inform how each method supplemented and complemented the other. Limitations and implications for future research centered around issues that arose due to the abrupt conclusion of the study due to COVID-19 and the continuation of developing the Measure of Argumentation Professional Vision (MAPVis) under different conditions and contexts.