Construction of collective and individual knowledge in argumentative activity

Journal of the Learning Sciences

Volumn 12, Issue 2, 2003, Pages 219-256

  Schwarz, Baruch B ^a   Neuman, Yair ^b   Gil, Julia ^a   Ilya, Merav ^a  

^a HEBREW UNIVERSITY OF JERUSALEM   (Israel)

^b BEN GURION UNIVERSITY OF THE NEGEV   (Israel)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 0038672154     PISSN: 10508406     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1207/S15327809JLS1202_3     Document Type: Article

References (40)

1. Baker, M. (2000). Forms of cooperation in dyadic problem-solving (Interaction and Cognition Research Reports, No IC-1-2000). GRIC Laboratory, CNRS, and University Lyon 2, France.
2. Cavalli-Sforza, V., Lesgold, A. M., & Weiner, A. W. (1992). Strategies for contributing to collaborative arguments. In Proceedings of the Fourteenth Annual Conference of the Cognitive Science Society (pp. 755-760). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc.
3. Collins, A., & Brown, J. S. (1988). The computer as a tool for learning through reflection. In H. Mandl & A. Lesgold (Eds.), Learning issues for intelligent tutoring systems (pp. 1-18). New York: Springer Verlag.
4. Davenport, P., & Howe, C. (1999). Conceptual gain and successful problem-solving in primary school mathematics. Educational Studies, 25, 55-78.
5. Davenport, P., Howe, C., & Noble, A. (2000). Peer interaction and the coordination of knowledge. Revue Suisse des Sciences de l'Education, 22, 481-507.
6. Dreyfus, Hershkowitz, R., & Schwarz, B. B. (2001). Abstraction in context: The case of peer interaction. Cognitive Science Quarterly, 1, 307-358.
7. Duschl, R. A. (1990). Restructuring science education: The importance of theories and their development. New York: Teachers College Press.
8. Goldman, A. I. (1976). Discrimination and perceptual knowledge. Journal of Philosophy, LXXIII, 771-791.
9. Hershkowitz, R., & Schwarz, B. B. (1999). Reflective processes in a technology-based mathematics classroom. Cognition and Instruction, 17, 66-91.
10. Hershkowitz, R., Schwarz, B. B., & Dreyfus, T. (2001). Abstraction in context: Epistemic actions. The Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 32, 195-222.
11. Kuhn, D (1991). The skills of argument. Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press.
12. Kuhn, D., Shaw, V., & Felton, M. (1997). Effects of dyadic interaction on argumentative reasoning. Cognition and Instruction, 15, 287-315.
13. Latour, B., & Woolgar, S. (1979). Laboratory life: The social construction of scientific facts. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.
14. Lord, C., Ross, L., & Lepper, M. (1979). Biased assimilation and attitude polarization: The effect of prior theories on subsequently considered evidence. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 37, 2098-2109.
15. Means, M. L., & Voss, J. F. (1996). Who reasons well? Two studies of informal reasoning among children of different grade, ability, and knowledge levels. Cognition and Instruction, 14, 139-179.
16. Meyer, K., & Woodruff, E. (1997). Consensually driven explanation in science teaching. Science Education, 81, 173-92.
17. Nickerson, R. S. (1986). Reflections on reasoning. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc.
18. Ohlsson, S. (1992). The cognitive skill of theory articulation: A neglected aspect of science education. Science & Education, 1, 181-189.
19. Perkins, D. N., Farady, M., & Bushey, B. (1991). Everyday reasoning and the roots of intelligence. In J. F. Voss, D. N. Perkins, & J. W. Segal (Eds.), Informal reasoning and education (pp. 83-105). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc.
20. Pontecorvo, C. (1993). Social interaction in the acquisition of knowledge. Educational Psychology Review, 5, 293-310.
21. Pontecorvo, C., & Girardet, H. (1993). Arguing and reasoning in understanding historical topics. Cognition and Instruction, 11, 365-395.
22. Resnick, L. B., Salmon, M., Zeitz, C. M., Wathen, S. H., & Holowchak, M. (1993). Reasoning in conversation. Cognition and Instruction, 11, 347-364.
23. Roschelle, J. (1992). Learning by collaboration: Convergent conceptual change. The Journal of the Learning Sciences, 3, 235-276.
24. Roth, W. M., & Bowen, G. M. (1995). Knowing and interacting: A study of culture, practices, and resources in a Grade 8 open-inquiry science classroom guided by a cognitive apprenticeship metaphor. Cognition and Instruction, 13(1), 73-128.
25. Roth, W. M., & Roychoudhury, A. (1993). The concept map as a tool for the collaborative construction of knowledge: A microanalysis of high school physics students. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 30, 503-535.
26. Scardamalia, M., & Bereiter, C. (1994). Computer supports for knowledge-building communities. The Journal of the Learning Sciences, 3, 265-283.
27. Schwartz, D. L. (1995). The emergence of abstract representations in dyad problem solving. The Journal of the Learning Sciences, 4, 321-354.
28. Schwarz, B. B. (2000). Quelques réflexions à la suite des interactions [Some reflections following the interactions]. Revue Suisse des Sciences de l'Education, 22, 575-584.
29. Schwarz, B. B., & Glassner (in press). The blind and the paralytic: Fostering argumentation in social and scientific domains. In J. Andriessen, M. Baker, & D. Suthers (Ed.), Arguing to learn: Confronting cognitions in computer-supported collaborative learning environments. Amsterdam: Kluwer Academic.
30. Schwarz, B. B., & Hershkowitz, R. (1995). Argumentation and reasoning in a technology-based class. In J. Moore (Ed.), Proceedings of the Seventeenth Annual Meeting of the Cognitive Science Society (pp. 731-735). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc.
31. Schwarz, B. B., & Hershkowitz, R. (2001). Computer artifacts and construction of meaning in mathematics. Mind, Culture, and Activity, 8, 250-267.
32. Schwarz, B. B., Kohn, A., & Resnick, L. B. (1993). Positives about negatives: A case study of an intermediate model for signed number. The Journal of the Learning Sciences, 3, 37-92.
33. Schwarz, B. B., Neuman, Y., & Biezuner, S. (2000). Two wrongs may make a right... if they argue together! Cognition and Instruction, 18, 461-494.
34. Shaw, V. F. (1996). The cognitive processes in informal reasoning. Thinking and Reasoning, 2(1), 51-80.
35. Staudinger, U. M., & Joos, M. (2000). Interactive Minds - A paradigm for the study of the social-interactive nature of human cognition and its life-span development. Revue Suisse des Sciences de l'Education, 22, 559-574.
36. Stein, N., & Miller, C. A. (1993). The development of memory and reasoning skill in argumentative contexts: Evaluating, explaining, and generating evidence. In R. Glaser (Ed.), Advances in instructional psychology, Vol. 4 (pp. 235-285). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc.
37. Trognon, A. (1993). How does the process of interaction work when two interlocutors try to resolve a logical problem? Cognition and Instruction, 11, 325-345.
38. Vygotsky, L., (1986). Thought and language. Cambridge, MA, MIT Press. (Original work published 1934)
39. Wilson, T., & Schooler, J. (1991). Thinking too much: Introspection can reduce the quality of preferences and decisions. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 60, 181-192.
40. Woodruff, E., & Meyer, K. (1997). Explanations from intra- and inter-group discourse: Students building knowledge in the science classroom. Research in Science Education, 27(1), 25-39.