Analyzing the quality of argumentation supported by personally-seeded discussions

Computer Supported Collaborative Learning 2005: The Next 10 Years - Proceedings of the International Conference on Computer Supported Collaborative Learning 2005, CSCL 2005

Volumn , Issue , 2005, Pages 76-85

  Clark, Douglas B ^a   Sampson, Victor D ^a  

^a ARIZONA STATE UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

Argumentation; Conversation Analysis; Discussions; Education; Secondary School

Indexed keywords

E-LEARNING; EDUCATION; SCAFFOLDS; SOCIAL NETWORKING (ONLINE);

ARGUMENTATION; ARGUMENTATION STRUCTURES; CONVERSATION ANALYSIS; DISCUSSIONS; ONLINE DISCUSSIONS; SCIENTIFIC COMMUNITY; SECONDARY SCHOOLS; STUDENT PARTICIPATION;

STUDENTS;

EID: 74849124889     PISSN: None     EISSN: None     Source Type: Conference Proceeding    
DOI: 10.3115/1149293.1149304     Document Type: Conference Paper

References (31)

1. Bell, P. (1997). Using argument representations to make thinking visible for individuals in groups. Paper presented at the Computer Supported Clever to Learning Conference -97, Toronto, Canada: University of Toronto.
2. Bell, P., & Linn, M. C. (2000). Scientific arguments as learning artifacts: Designing for learning from the web with KIE. International Journal of Science Education, 22(8), 797-818.
3. Clark, D. B. (2000). Scaffolding knowledge integration through curricular depth. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of California, Berkeley, CA.
4. Clark, D. B. (2001). New representations of student knowledge integration in CLP: Theories or repertoires of ideas? Paper presented at the AERA, Seattle, WA.
5. Clark, D. B. (2003). Analyzing student knowledge integration: Theories or pieces? Paper presented at the National Association of Research in Science Teaching Conference, Philadelphia, PA.
6. Collison, G., Elbaum, B., Haavind, S., & Tinker, R. (2000). Facilitating online learning: Effective strategies for moderators. Madison, WI: Atwood Publishing.
7. Driver, R., Newton, P., & Osborne, J. (2000). Establishing the norms of scientific argumentation in classrooms. Science Education, 84(3), 287-213.
8. Edelson, D. C., Pea, R. D., & Gomez, L. (1996). The collaboratory notebook: Support for collaborative inquiry. Communications of the ACM, 39, 32-33.
9. Erduran, S., Osborne, J., & Simon, S. (2004). The role of argument in developing scientific literacy. In K. Boersma, O. deJong, H. Eijkelhof & M. Goedhart (Eds.), Research and the quality of science education. Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publishers.
10. Forman, E., A., Larreamendy-Joerns, J., Stein, M., K., & Brown, C., A. (1998). "you're going to want to find out which and prove it": Collective argumentation in a mathematics classroom. Learning and Instruction, 8(6), 527-548. (Pubitemid 128340269)
11. Guzdial, M., Turns, J., Rappin, N., & Carlson, D. (1995). Collaborative support for learning in complex domains. In J. L. Schanse & E. L. Cunnius (Eds.), Proceedings of CSCL '95: Computer supported collaborative learning (pp. 157-160). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
12. Hoadley, C. M., Hsi, S., & Berman, B. P. (1995). The multimedia forum kiosk and speakeasy. In Proceedings of ACM Multimedia '95 (pp. 363-364). New York: ACM Press.
13. Hsi, S., & Hoadley, C. M. (1997). Productive discussion in science: Gender equity through electronic discourse. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 6(1), 23-36.
14. Jimenez-Aleixandre, M., Rodrigues, M., & Duschl, R. A. (2000). 'doing the lesson' or 'doing science': Argument in high school genetics. Science Education, 84(6), 757-792.
15. Kelly, G. J., Druker, S., & Chen, C. (1998). Students' reasoning about electricity: Combining performance assessments with argumentation analysis. International Journal of Science Education, 20(7), 849-871. (Pubitemid 128691682)
16. Kelly, G. J., & Takao, A. (2002). Epistemic levels in argument: An analysis of university oceanography students' use of evidence in writing. Science Education, 86, 314-342. (Pubitemid 37230322)
17. Lewis, E. L. (1996). Conceptual change among middle school students studying elementary thermodynamics. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 5(1), 3-31.
18. Lewis, E. L., Stern, J., & Linn, M. C. (1993). The effect of computer simulations on introductory thermodynamics understanding. Educational Technology, 33(1), 45-58.
19. Linn, M. C., & Hsi, S. (2000). Computers, teachers, peers: Science learning partners. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
20. Monk, M., & Osborne, J. (1997). Placing the history and philosophy of science in the curriculum: A model for the development of pedagogy. Science Education, 81(4), 405-424.
21. Osborne, J., & Clark, D., B. (2004). NSF center for learning and teaching principle investigator conference (pp. Personal Conversation). Washington, DC.
22. Resnick, L., B., Salmon, M., Zeitz, C., M., Wathen, S., H., & Holowchak, M. (1993). Reasoning in conversation. Cognition and Instruction, 11(3 & 4), 347-364.
23. Salmon, G. (2000). E-moderating: The key to teaching and learning online. London; Sterling, VA: Kogan Page.
24. Sandoval, W., A. (2003). Conceptual and epistemic aspects of students' scientific explanations. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 12(1), 5-51. (Pubitemid 36399994)
25. Scardamalia, M., Bereiter, C., & Lamon, M. (1994). The CSILE project: Trying to bring the classroom into world 3. In K. McGilly (Ed.), Classroom lessons: Integrating cognitive theory and classroom practice (pp. 201-228). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
26. Schwarz, B., B., Neuman, Y., Gil, J., & Iiya, M. (2003). Construction of collective and individual knowledge in argumentative activity. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 12(2), 219-256. (Pubitemid 36539897)
27. Simon, S., Erduran, S., & Osborne, J. (2002). Enhancing the quality of argumentation in school science. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the National Association for Research in Science Teaching, April 7-10, New Orleans, USA.
28. Simon, S., Osborne, J., & Erduran, S. (2003). Systemic teacher development to enhance the use of argumentation in school science activities. In J. Wallace & J. Loughran (Eds.), Leadership and professional development in science education: New possibilities for enhancing teacher learning (pp. 198-217). London and New York: Routledge Falmer.
29. Tabak, I., Smith, B. K., Sandoval, W. A., & Reiser, B. J. (1996). Combining general and domain-specific strategic support for biological inquiry. In C. Frasson, G. Gauthier & A. Lesgold (Eds.), Proceedings of the third international conference on intelligent tutoring systems (its '96). Montreal, New York: Springer-Verlag.
30. Toulmin, S. (1958). The uses of argument. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
31. Zohar, A., & Nemet, F. (2002). Fostering students' knowledge and argumentation skills through dilemmas in human genetics. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 39(1), 35-62.