Supporting interactive argumentation: Influence of representational tools on discussing a wicked problem

Computers in Human Behavior

Volumn 23, Issue 3, 2007, Pages 1072-1088

  Munneke, Lisette ^a   Andriessen, Jerry ^a   Kanselaar, Gellof ^a   Kirschner, Paul ^a  

^a UTRECHT UNIVERSITY   (Netherlands)

Author keywords

Argumentative tasks; Computer supported collaborative learning; Interactive argumentation; Representational tools

Indexed keywords

COMPUTER AIDED SOFTWARE ENGINEERING; INTERACTIVE COMPUTER SYSTEMS; LEARNING SYSTEMS; PROBLEM SOLVING;

ARGUMENTATIVE TASKS; INTERACTIVE ARGUMENTATION; REPRESENTATIONAL TOOLS;

VIRTUAL REALITY;

EID: 33846049994     PISSN: 07475632     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.chb.2006.10.003     Document Type: Article

References (40)

1. Andriessen J.E.B. Arguing to learn. In: Sawyer R.K. (Ed). The Cambridge handbook of the learning sciences (2006), Cambridge University Press, New York 443-460
2. Baker M.J. Computer-mediated argumentative interactions for the co-elaboration of scientific notions. In: Andriessen J., Baker M., and Suthers D. (Eds). Confronting cognitions: Arguing to learn (2003), Kluwer Academic Publishers, Dordrecht, The Netherlands 1-17
3. Baker M.J., Quignard M., Lund K., and Séjourné A. Computer-supported collaborative learning in the space of debate. In: Wasson B., Ludvigsen S., and Hoppe U. (Eds). Designing for change in networked learning environments: Proceedings of the international conference on computer support for collaborative learning (2003), Kluwer Academic Publishers, Dordrecht, The Netherlands 11-20
4. Bell P. Promoting students' argument construction and collaborative debate in the science classroom. In: Linn M.C., Davis E.A., and Bell P. (Eds). Internet environments for science education (2004), Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Mahwah, NJ 115-143
5. Bennet N., and Dunne E. The nature of quality of talk in co-operative classroom groups. Learning and Instruction 1 (1991) 103-118
6. Billig M. Arguing and thinking: a rhetorical approach to social psychology. 2nd ed. (1987), Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK [Original work published 1987]
7. Chan C.K.K. Peer collaboration and discourse patterns in learning from incompatible information. Instructional Science 29 (2001) 443-479
8. Chinn C.A., and Anderson R.C. The structure of discussion that promote reasoning. Teacher College Record 100 (1998) 315-368
9. Erkens G. MEPA. Multiple episode protocol analysis (Version 4.8) [computer software] (2002), Utrecht University, Utrecht, The Netherlands
10. Erkens G., Jaspers J., Prangsma M., and Kanselaar G. Coordination processes in computer supported writing. Computers in Human Behavior 21 (2005) 463-486
11. Erkens G., Prangsma M.E., Jaspers J.G.M., and Kanselaar G. Computer support for collaborative and argumentative writing (Rep. No. 02.01) (2002), Utrecht University, ICO-ISOR Onderwijsresearch, Utrecht
12. Felton M., and Kuhn D. The development of argumentative discourse skill. Discourse Processes 32 (2001) 135-153
13. Hightower R., and Sayeed L. The impact of computer-mediated communication systems on biased group discussion. Computers in Human Behavior 11 (1995) 33-44
14. Huk, T., & Steinke, M. (2006). Learning cell biology with close-up views or connecting lines: evidences for the structure mapping effect. Computers in Human Behavior, doi:10.1016/j.chb.2006.10.004.
15. Janssen, J., Erkens, G., & Kanselaar, G. (2006). Visualization of agreement and discussion processes during Computer-supported Collaborative Learning. Computers in Human Behavior, doi:10.1016/j.chb.2006.10.005.
16. Jaspers J., and Erkens G. VCRI. Virtual collaborative research institute (Version 1.0) [Computer software] (2002), Utrecht University, Utrecht, The Netherlands
17. Kirschner P.A., Martens R.L., and Strijbos J.-W. CSCL in higher education? A framework for designing multiple collaborative environments. In: Strijbos J.W., Kirschner P.A., and Martens R.L. (Eds). What we know about CSCL and implementing it in higher education (2004), Kluwer Academic Publishers, Boston, MA 3-30
18. Kirschner P.A., Van Bruggen J., and Duffy T. Validating a representational notation for collaborative problem solving. In: Wasson B., Ludvigsen S., and Hoppe U. (Eds). Designing for change in networked learning environment (2003), Kluwer Academic Publishers, Dordrecht 163-172
19. Kuhn D. The skills of argument (1991), University Press, Cambridge
20. Kuhn D., and Udell W. The development of argument skills. Child Development 74 (2003) 1245-1260
21. Leitão S. The potential of argument in knowledge building. Human Development 43 (2000) 332-360
22. Munneke, L. (2002). Twins project: the quality of collaborative interactions in CSCL environments. Paper presented at the summerschool meeting of the Interuniversity Centre for Educational Research, Rethymnon, Crete.
23. Nussbaum E.M. The effect of goal instructions and need for cognition on interactive argumentation. Contemporary Educational Psychology 30 (2005) 286-313
24. Paolucci M., Suthers D.D., and Weiner A. Belvédère: stimulating students' critical discussion. In: Katz I., Mack R., and Marks L. (Eds). Proceedings of the conference companion on human factors in computing systems (1995), ACM Press, New York, NY 123-124
25. Petraglia J. Reality by design: the rhetoric and technology of authenticity in education (1998), Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Mahwah, NJ
26. Pontecorvo C., and Girardet H. Arguing and reasoning in understanding historical topics. Cognition and Instruction 11 (1993) 365-395
27. Reznitkskaya A., Anderson R.C., McNurlen B., Nguyen-Jahiel K., Archodidou A., and Kim S. Influence of oral discussion on written argument. Discourse Processes 32 (2001) 155-175
28. Rittel H.W.J., and Webber M.M. Dilemmas in a general theory of planning. Policy Sciences 4 (1973) 155-169
29. Schwarz B.B., Neuman Y., Gil J., and Ilya M. Construction of collective and individual knowledge in argumentative activity. The Journal of the Learning Sciences 12 (2003) 219-256
30. Seufert, T., Jänen, I., & Brünken, R. (2006). The impact of intrinsic cognitive load on the effectiveness of graphical help for coherence formation. Computers in Human Behavior, doi:10.1016/j.chb.2006.10.002.
31. Stein N.L., and Albro E.R. The origins and nature of arguments: studies in conflict understanding, emotion, and negotiation. Discourse Processes 32 (2001) 113-133
32. Suthers D.D. Representational guidance for collaborative inquiry. In: Andriessen J., Baker M., and Suthers D. (Eds). Confronting cognitions: Arguing to learn (2003), Kluwer Academic Publishers, Dordrecht, The Netherlands 1-17
33. Suthers D.D., and Hundhausen C.D. An experimental study of the effect of representational guidance on collaborative learning processes. The Journal of The Learning Sciences 12 (2003) 183-218
34. Toulmin S. The uses of argument (1958), Cambridge University Press, New York
35. Van Amelsvoort, M., Andriessen, J., & Kanselaar, G. (2006). Representational tools in computer-supported collaborative argumentation-based learning. How dyads work with constructed and inspected argumentative diagrams. Manuscript submitted for publication.
36. Van Bruggen J.M., Boshuizen H.P., and Kirschner P.A. A cognitive framework for cooperative problem solving with argument visualization. In: Kirschner P.A., Buckingham Shum S.J., and Carr C.S. (Eds). Visualizing argumentation: Software tools for collaborative and educational sense-making (2003), Springer, London
37. Van Drie J., Van Boxtel C., Jaspers J., and Kanselaar G. Effects of representational guidance on domain specific reasoning in CSCL. Computer in Human Behavior 21 (2005) 575-602
38. Veerman, A. (2000). Computer-supported collaborative learning through argumentation. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Utrecht University, The Netherlands.
39. Veerman A., and Treasure-Jones T. Software for problem solving through collaborative argumentation. In: Rijlaarsdam G., and Espéret E. (Eds). In: Andriessen J.E.B., and Courier P. (Eds). Studies in writing 5: Foundations of argumentative text processing (1999), Amsterdam University Press, Amsterdam 203-229
40. Voss J.F., and Means M.L. Learning to reason via instruction in argumentation. Learning and Instruction 1 (1991) 337-350