Argumentation has been a prominent concern in science education research and a common goal in science curriculum in many countries over the past decade. With reference to this goal, policy documents burden responsibilities on science teachers, such as involving students in dialogues and being guides in students' spoken or written argumentation. Consequently, teachers' pedagogical practices regarding argumentation gain importance due to their impact on how they incorporate this practice into their classrooms. In this study, therefore, we investigated the instructional strategies adopted by science teachers for their argumentation-based science teaching. Participants were one elementary science teacher, two chemistry teachers, and four graduate students, who have a background in science education. The study took place during a graduate course, which was aimed at developing science teachers' theory and pedagogy of argumentation. Data sources included the participants' video-recorded classroom practices, audio-recorded reflections, post-interviews, and participants' written materials. The findings revealed three typologies of instructional strategies towards argumentation. They are named as Basic Instructional Strategies for Argumentation, Meta-level Instructional Strategies for Argumentation, and Meta-strategic Instructional Strategies for Argumentation. In conclusion, the study provided a detailed coding framework for the exploration of science teachers' instructional practices while they are implementing argumentation-based lessons.