Visualising knowledge from chat debates in argument diagrams

Journal of Computer Assisted Learning

Volumn 26, Issue 5, 2010, Pages 379-391

  Salminen, T ^a   Marttunen, M ^a   Laurinen, L ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF JYVÄSKYLÄ   (Finland)

Author keywords

Argument diagram; Collaborative argumentation; Computer chat; Secondary education; Visualisation of argumentation

Indexed keywords

EID: 77956775723     PISSN: 02664909     EISSN: 13652729     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1111/j.1365-2729.2010.00354.x     Document Type: Article

References (45)

1. Baker M. Computer-mediated argumentative interactions for the co-elaboration of scientific notions. Arguing to Learn. Confronting Cognitions in Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning Environments 2003, 47-78. Andriessen JBaker MSuthers D. In, eds, pp., Kluwer, Dordrecht
2. Baker M, Lund K. Promoting reflective interactions in a computer-supported collaborative learning environment. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning 1997, 13:175-193.
3. Björk L, Räisänen C. Academic Writing. A University Writing Course 1996, Studentlitteratur, Lund
4. Burnett C. Learning to chat: tutor participation in synchronous online chat. Teaching in Higher Education 2003, 8:247-261.
5. Chan CKK. Peer collaboration and discourse patterns in learning from incompatible information. Instructional Science 2001, 29:443-479.
6. Clark D, Sampson V, Stegmann K, Marttunen M, Kollar I, Janssen J, Weinberger A, Menekse M, Erkens G, Laurinen L. Online learning environments, scientific argumentation, and 21st century skills: E-Collaborative Knowledge Construction: Learning from Computer-Supported and Virtual Environments. 2010, 1-39. Ertl B, In, ed., pp., Information Science Reference, Hershey, PA
7. Condon SL, Cech CG. Functional comparison of face-to-face and computer-mediated decision making interactions. Computer Mediated Communication: Linguistic, Social and Cross-Cultural Perspectives 1996, 65-80. Herring SC, In, ed., pp., Benjamins, Amsterdam
8. Corbel A, Girardot J, Jaillon P. DREW: a dialogical reasoning web tool. Educational Technology: Vol 1. Proceedings of the International Conference on ICTs in Education (ICTE 2002) 2002, 516-521. Mendes Villas A, Mesa Gonzalez JA, Solo de Zaldivar I. In, eds, pp., Junta de Extremadura, Consejeria de education, cienca y technologia, Badajoz
9. Erkens G. Coöperatief probleem oplossen met computers in het onderwijs: het modelleren van coöperative dialogen voor de ontwikkeling van intelligente onderwijssystemen [cooperative problem solving with computers in education: modeling of cooperative dialogues for the design of intelligent educational systems]. 1997, Unpublished doctoral dissertation. Utrecht University, The Netherlands
10. Erkens G. Dynamics of coordination in collaboration. Dialogic Learning. Shifting Perspectives to Learning, Instruction and Teaching 2004, 191-216. van der Linden JRenshaw P. In, eds, pp., Kluwer, Dordrecht
11. Hirsch L, Saeedi M, Cornillon J, Litosseliti L. A structured dialogue tool for argumentative learning. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning 2004, 20:72-80.
12. Hron A, Hesse F, Cress U, Giovis C. Implicit and explicit dialogue structuring in virtual learning groups. British Journal of Educational Psychology 2000, 70:53-64.
13. Jermann P. Computer Support for Interaction Regulation in Collaborative Problem-Solving. 2004, Doctoral dissertation. University of Geneva, Switzerland
14. Keller T, Gerjets P, Scheiter K, Garsoffky B. Information visualizations for knowledge acquisition: the impact of dimensionality and colour coding. Computers in Human Behavior 2006, 22:43-65.
15. King A. Beyond literal comprehension: a strategy to promote deep understanding of text. Reading Comprehension Strategies. Theories, Interventions, and Technologies 2007, 267-290. McNamara DS. In, ed., pp., Erlbaum, New York
16. Kuhn D, Shawn V, Felton M. Effects of dyadic interaction on argumentative reasoning. Cognition and Instruction 1997, 15:287-315.
17. Kuhn D, Udell W. The development of argument skills. Child Development 2003, 74:1245-1260.
18. Larkin JH, Simon HA. Why a diagram is (sometimes) worth ten thousand words. Cognitive Science 1987, 11:65-99.
19. Lazonder AW, Wilhelm P, Ootes SAW. Using sentence openers to foster student interaction in computer-mediated learning environments. Computers and Education 2003, 41:291-308.
20. Litosseliti L, Marttunen M, Laurinen L, Salminen T. Computer-based and face-to-face collaborative argumentation in secondary schools in England and Finland. Education, Communication, and Information 2005, 5:131-146.
21. Lund K, Molinari G, Séjourné A, Baker M. How do argumentation diagrams compare when student pairs use them as a means for debate or as a tool for representing debate? International Journal of Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning 2007, 2:273-295.
22. McAlister S. Dialectics and design for online peer discussion. 2004, Unpublished PhD thesis, Institute of Educational Technology, Open University, UK
23. McManus MM, Aiken RM. Teaching collaborative skills with a group leader tutor. Education and Information Technologies 1996, 1:75-96.
24. Marttunen M. Studying argumentation in higher education by electronic mail. 1997, Jyväskylä Studies in Education, Psychology and Social Research 127. University of Jyväskylä, Jyväskylä
25. Marttunen M, Laurinen L. Collaborative learning through chat discussions and argument diagrams in secondary school. Journal of Research on Technology in Education 2007, 40:109-126.
26. Marttunen M, Laurinen L, Litosseliti L, Lund K. Argumentation skills as prerequisites for collaborative learning among Finnish, French, and English secondary school students. Educational Research and Evaluation 2005, 11:365-384.
27. Mayer RE. Multimedia Learning 2001, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, MA
28. Mercer N. The quality of talk in children's collaborative activity in the classroom. Learning and Instruction 1996, 6:359-377.
29. Morgan W, Beaumont G. A dialogic approach to argumentation: using a chat room to develop early adolescent students' argumentative writing. Journal of Adolescent & Adult Literacy 2003, 47:146-157.
30. Munneke L, van Amelsvoort M, Andriessen J. The role of diagrams in collaborative argumentation-based learning. International Journal of Educational Research 2003, 39:113-131.
31. Reznitskaya A, Anderson A, McNurlen B, Nguyen-Jahiel K, Archodidou A, Kim S. Influence of oral discussion on written argument. Discourse Processes 2001, 32:155-175.
32. Robertson J, Good J, Pain H. BetterBlether: the design and evaluation of a discussion tool for education. International Journal of Artificial Intelligence in Education 1998, 9:219-236.
33. Schwarz B, Neuman Y, Gil J, Ilia M. Construction of collective and individual knowledge in argumentative activity: an experimental study. The Journal of the Learning Sciences 2000, 12:219-256.
34. Stahl SA, Hynd CR, Britton BK, McNish MM, Bosquet D. What happens when students read multiple source documents in history? Reading Research Quarterly 1996, 31:430-456.
35. Suthers D. Representational guidance for collaborative inquiry. Arguing to Learn. Confronting Cognitions in Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning Environments 2003, 27-46. Andriessen JBaker MSuthers D. In, eds, pp., Kluwer, Dordrecht
36. Sweller J, van Merriënboer J, Paas F. Cognitive architecture and instructional design. Educational Psychology Review 1998, 10:251-296.
37. Twardy CR. Argument maps improve critical thinking. Teaching Philosophy 2004, 27:95-116.
38. Van Amelsvoort M. A space for debate. How diagrams support collaborative argumentation-based learning. 2006, Doctoral dissertation. ICO, Dutch Interuniversity Center for Educational Research. PrintPartners Ipskamp, Enschede
39. Van Amelsvoort M, Andriessen J, Kanselaar G. Representational tools in computer-supported collaborative argumentation-based learning: how dyads work with constructed and inspected argumentative diagrams. The Journal of the Learning Sciences 2007, 16:485-521.
40. Van Amelsvoort M, Andriessen J, Kanselaar G. How students structure and relate argumentative knowledge when learning together with diagrams. Computers in Human Behavior 2008, 24:1293-1313.
41. Van Boxtel C, Veerman A. Diagram-mediated collaborative learning. Diagrams as tools to provoke and support elaboration and argumentation. European Perspectives on Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning. Proceedings of the First European Conference on Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning 2001, 131-138. Dillenbourg P, Eurelings AHakkarainen K. In, eds, pp., Universiteit Maastricht, Maastricht
42. Van Drie J, van Boxtel C, Jaspers J, Kanselaar G. Effects of representational guidance on domain specific reasoning in CSCL. Computers in Human Behavior 2005, 21:575-602.
43. Van Gelder T. Enhancing deliberation through computer supported argument visualization. Visualizing Argumentation. Software Tools for Collaborative Educational Sense-Making 2003, 97-115. Kirschner PABuckingham Shum SJCarr CS. In, eds, pp., Springer, London
44. Veerman A. Computer-supported collaborative learning through argumentation. 2000, Unpublished doctoral dissertation. Utrecht University, The Netherlands
45. Weger H, Aakhus M. Arguing in internet chat rooms: argumentative adaptations to chat room design and some consequences for public deliberation at a distance. Argumentation and Advocacy 2003, 40:23-38.