Will Structuring the Collaboration of Students Improve Their Argumentation?
نویسندگان
چکیده
Learning to argue in a computer-mediated and structured fashion is investigated in this research. A study was conducted to compare dyads that were scripted in their computer-mediated collaboration with dyads that were not scripted. A process analysis of the chats of the dyads showed that the scripted experimental group used significantly more words, engaged in significantly more broadening and deepening of the discussion, and appeared (in a qualitative sense) to engage in more critical and objective argumentation than the non-scripted control group.
منابع مشابه
P. Jermann & P. Dillenbourg Elaborating New Arguments through a Cscl Script
The CSCL community faces two main challenges with respect to learning and argumentation. The scientific challenge is to understand how argumentation produces learning, that is to discover which cognitive mechanisms, triggered by argumentative interactions, generate new knowledge and in which conditions. The engineering challenge is to determine how to trigger productive argumentation among stud...
متن کاملArgument Diagrams in Facebook: Facilitating the Formation of Scientifically Sound Opinions
Students use Facebook to organize their classroom experiences [1], but hardly to share and form opinions on subject matters. We explore the benefits of argument diagrams for the formation of scientific opinion on behaviorism in Facebook. We aim at raising awareness of opinion conflict and structuring the argumentation with scripts [2]. A lab study with University students (ten dyads per conditi...
متن کاملAutomated argumentation mining to the rescue? Envisioning argumentation and decision-making support for debates in open online collaboration communities
Argumentation mining, a relatively new area of discourse analysis, involves automatically identifying and structuring arguments. Following a basic introduction to argumentation, we describe a new possible domain for argumentation mining: debates in open online collaboration communities. Based on our experience with manual annotation of arguments in debates, we envision argumentation mining as t...
متن کاملArgument Elaboration during Structured and Unstructured Dyadic Chat Discussion in Secondary School
This study aims to investigate whether structuring an interaction supports students’ elaborative argumentation. The study compares the quality of secondary school students’ (N = 16) argumentation during dyadic structured and unstructured computer-based chat interaction. The results suggest that structuring an interaction increases the proportion of argumentative discussion, whereas unstructured...
متن کاملInternal and external collaboration scripts in web-based science learning at schools
Collaboration scripts can help learners to engage in argumentation and knowledge acquisition. However, they might have differential effects for learners holding differently structured knowledge (internal scripts) on argumentation. We investigated how external scripts interact with learners’ internal scripts concerning collaborative argumentation. 98 students from two secondary schools participa...
متن کامل