How students structure and relate argumentative knowledge when learning together with diagrams
Introduction
The goal of our research is to investigate how students structure and relate argumentative knowledge in a computer-based environment. There are different ways to represent and support argumentation with computers. Van Bruggen and Kirschner (2003) distinguish discussion-based tools and knowledge representation tools. In discussion-based tools the environment offers students the opportunity to exchange arguments, but the structure of argumentation is not explicitly represented. Knowledge representation tools, on the other hand, also offer an overview of the structure of argumentation.
Argumentation-based learning, described as an activity in which two or more people construct knowledge by discussing a topic together, could benefit from both. Chat-based discussion can be complemented with argumentative diagrams for example. Argumentative diagrams are diagrams that show arguments in boxes and relations between them in arrows. They are said to be beneficial for argumentation-based learning, because they display the structure of argumentation, and show relations between arguments (Schwarz et al., 2000, Suthers, 2003). For example, Suthers (2003) found that students focused more on evidential relations when they discussed a scientific topic while also constructing a diagram.
Earlier studies (e.g., Munneke, Van Amelsvoort, & Andriessen, 2003) found that students do not benefit much from the construction of an argumentative diagram to learn from argumentation. They find out how to use the diagram fairly quickly, but do not make use of it for relating knowledge. Relations put between boxes are often arbitrary and never discussed. Diagrams are used to display bits and pieces of information, without considering their structure. This finding could be explained in several ways. First, students are not used to constructing diagrams for argumentation, let alone in collaboration. Second, the construction of an argumentative structure might be too hard for students who are used to narrative structures (Chinn & Anderson, 1998). Students might therefore need more guidance in organizing diagrams.
In this article, we highlight the structural and relational benefits of argumentative diagrams. We investigate whether labeling either the boxes or the arrows in a diagram will help secondary school students to structure their knowledge in such a way that they learn together.
Section snippets
Argumentation and learning
An argument is “a collected series of statements to establish a definite proposition”, to quote from Monty Python’s famous argument sketch. Kuhn (1991) distinguishes between two kinds of argument. The rhetorical argument consists of an assertion with accompanying justification. The dialogic argument consists of a dialogue between two people who hold opposing views. Each person justifies his or her own opinion, rebuts the other person’s view, and relates evidence to his or her assertion.
Dialogic
Learning with argumentative diagrams
In the previous section, we related structure to individual argumentation, but our research is focused on dialogic argument and collaborative knowledge construction. Learners are asked to discuss in dyads via the computer, using chat and diagram. According to social constructivists, learning can only occur in dialogue. Learners structure and relate knowledge in collaboration, and incorporate both their ideas into the structure. Knowledge is also co-elaborated (Baker, 2004), by jointly molding
Participants
Participants were 46 students (13 boys and 33 girls in 23 pairs) aged 15–17 from two upper secondary schools in the Netherlands. The teachers of the two participating classes agreed to participate after receiving a letter and phone call explaining the general aim of our research into computer-supported collaborative argumentation-based learning. Since the innovation Dutch secondary education went through since 1999, actively acquiring and collaboratively constructing knowledge in project-based
Results
Results are based on chats and diagrams from 18 dyads in the first case, and 20 dyads in the second case. Due to absenteeism, the other dyads were incomplete.
Discussion
Diagrams are often used in collaborative argumentation-based learning, because they can display the structure and relations of the argument. This can help learners broaden and deepen the space of debate, and see how arguments in such a space are connected.
The results of our study are mixed. On a positive note, collaborative argumentation while labeling diagrams seems to be beneficial for the learning process. All students broaden and deepen the space of debate together. Moreover, they used
References (42)
- et al.
The role of diagrams in collaborative argumentation-based learning
International Journal of Educational Research
(2003) - et al.
Reasoning in explanation-based decision making
Cognition
(1993) Some reflections on the acquisition of knowledge
Educational Researcher
(1984)- et al.
Argumentation, computer support, and the educational context of confronting cognitions
- et al.
Argumentation in collaborative writing: negotiating concepts in a collective landscape
A model for negotiation in teaching–learning dialogues
Journal of Artificial Intelligence in Education
(1994)- Baker, M. (2004). Recherches sur lélaboration de connaissances dans le dialogue [research into knowledge elaboration in...
- Baker, M., Andriessen, J., Lund, K., Van Amelsvoort, M., & Quignard, M. (in press). Rainbow: A framework for analysing...
- et al.
The psychology of written composition
(1987) Peer collaboration and discourse patterns in learning from incompatible information
Instructional Science
(2001)
The structure of discussions that promote reasoning
Teachers College Record
Grounding in communication
Restructuring the classroom: Conditions for productive small groups
Review of Educational Research
The evolution of research on collaborative learning
The development of argumentative discourse skill
Discourse Processes
Argumentative text writing: Developmental trends
Discourse Processes
Psychology
Studies in the way of words
Epistemology of inquiry and computer-supported collaborative learning
Cited by (17)
How number and size of text boxes in argument diagrams affect opinions
2018, Learning and InstructionCitation Excerpt :In a diagram, text and visual elements are integrated by nature (e.g., Kauffman & Kiewra, 2010). Argument diagrams are often used in education settings, for individual analysis of argumentation (Walton, Reed, & Macagno, 2008), writing an argumentative text (e.g., Harell & Wetzel, 2013), or collaboratively constructing a space of debate (e.g., Lund, Molinari, Séjourné, & Baker, 2007; Van Amelsvoort, Andriessen, & Kanselaar, 2008). One of the assumptions behind presenting argumentative discourse in diagrams, is that it gives a clear overview, and that more arguments can be represented with less detail (Van Amelsvoort, Andriessen, & Kanselaar, 2007).
Argumentation-Based Computer Supported Collaborative Learning (ABCSCL): A synthesis of 15 years of research
2012, Educational Research ReviewCitation Excerpt :Well-designed graphical tools for argumentation include evaluating and integrating both sides of an issue resulting in more elaboration of the possible arguments for and against a topic at stake. In summary, knowledge representation tools help learners clarify their arguments (Van Bruggen et al., 2002), keep their arguments on track (Veerman et al., 2002), argue more effectively while considering all aspects and perspectives of a topic (Suthers & Hundhausen, 2003), illustrate the structure of argumentation by giving a general overview (Schwarz, Neuman, Gil, & Ilya, 2000), broaden and deepen the space of the debate (Van Amelsvoort, Andriessen, & Kanselaar, 2008; Van Amelsvoort et al., 2007) in order to argue in a more thorough way (Munneke et al., 2007), and discover new relationships and find patterns of evidence (Suthers, 2001). Scripts are complex instructions that stipulate the type and sequence of learning activities to help group members collaborate and accomplish tasks.
Performance evaluation of an online argumentation learning assistance agent
2011, Computers and EducationCitation Excerpt :Joiner and Jones’ (2003) research on computer-mediated communication (CMC) could make it an ideal communication medium for developing argumentative reasoning skills over the advantages of face-to-face communication. Marije, Jerry, and Gellof (2008) offered the structured argumentation diagram to strengthen the level of students’ arguments. The above-mentioned online environments emphasized either exchanging information or constructing an argument for presentation.
Getting looped in to the web: characterizing learning processes and educational responses
2017, Interactive Learning EnvironmentsSoftware tools for scaffolding argumentation competence development
2017, Technical and Vocational Education and TrainingEnhancing quality of argumentation in a co-located collaborative environment through a tabletop system
2016, 2016 IEEE Ecuador Technical Chapters Meeting, ETCM 2016
- 1
Tel.: +31 30 2534940; fax: +31 30 2532352.