Argumentation scheme and shared online diagramming in case-based collaborative learning

Computer Supported Collaborative Learning Practices, CSCL 2009 Conference Proceedings - 9th International Conference

Volumn , Issue , 2009, Pages 567-575

  Dowell, J ^a   Tscholl, M ^b   Gladisch, T ^c   Asgari Targhi, M ^d  

^a UNIVERSITY COLLEGE LONDON   (United Kingdom)

^b UNIVERSITY OF CAMBRIDGE   (United Kingdom)

^c DRESDEN UNIVERSITY OF TECHNOLOGY   (Germany)

^d UNIVERSITY OF MANCHESTER   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

COMPUTER AIDED INSTRUCTION;

ARGUMENTATION SCHEMES; CASE BASED; CASE BASED LEARNING; COLLABORATIVE LEARNING; LEGAL CASE; ONLINE LEARNING ENVIRONMENT;

E-LEARNING;

EID: 84858403857     PISSN: None     EISSN: None     Source Type: Conference Proceeding    
DOI: 10.3115/1600053.1600135     Document Type: Conference Paper

References (28)

1. Baker, M. (2003) Computer-mediated argumentative interactions for the co-elaboration of scientific notions. In Andriessen J., Baker M. and Suthers D. (ed.s) Arguing to learn. Kluwer Academic: Netherlands.
2. Baker, M.J., Quignard, M., Lund, K. & Séjourné, A. (2003). Computer-supported collaborative learning in the space of debate. In Proceedings of the International Conference on Computer Support for Collaborative Learning 2003. Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publishers.
3. Brem, S. K. & Rips, L. J. (2000). Explanation and evidence in informal argument. Cognitive Science, 24(4), 573-604.
4. Carlson, K.A., & Russo, J.E. (2001). Biased interpretation of evidence by mock jurors. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Applied, 7(2), 91-103. (Pubitemid 33595851)
5. Dowell, J. & Asgari-Targhi, M. (2008) Learning by arguing about evidence and explanations. Argumentation, 22, 2, pp. 217-233.
6. Dowell, J. & Gladisch, T. (2007) Design of argument diagramming tools for case-based group learning. In Wong W. (ed) Proceedings of the 14th European Conference on Cognitive Ergonomics. ACM Press.
7. Goldberg, R., 2000. The contraceptive pill, negligence and causation: views on Vadera v. Shaw, The Medical Law Review, volume 8, pages 316-338 (Pubitemid 33244645)
8. Josephson, J. R. & Josephson, S. G. (1996) Abductive Inference, Computation, Philosophy, Technology, Cambridge University Press.
9. Kirschner, P., Buckingham Shum, S. & Carr C. (Eds.), (2003) Visualizing Argumentation: Software Tools for Collaborative and Educational Sense-Making. Springer-Verlag: London.
10. Kuhn, D. (1991). The skills of argument. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
11. Kuhn, D., Shaw, V., & Felton, M. (1997). Effects of dyadic interaction on argumentive reasoning. Cognition and Instruction 15(3), 287-315. (Pubitemid 127341610)
12. Munneke, L., Andriessen, J., Kanselaar, G. & Kirschner, P. (2007) Supporting interactive argumentation: Influence of representational tools on discussing a wicked problem Computers in Human Behaviour, 23, 3, 1072-1088 (Pubitemid 46073599)
13. Peirce, C. S. (1997) Pragmatism as a principle and method of right thinking. In Patricia Ann Turrisi (Ed.), The 1903 Harvard Lectures on Pragmatism, State University of New York Press, Albany.
14. Reed, C. & Walton D. (2005) Towards a formal and implemented model of argumentation schemes in agent communication, Autonomous Agents and Multi-Agent Systems, 11, 173-188 (Pubitemid 41240136)
15. Reed, C. & Rowe G. (2004). Araucaria: Software for Argument Analysis, Diagramming and Representation. International Journal on Artificial Intelligence Tools 13( 4): 961-979.
16. 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.
17. Scardamalia M. & Bereiter C. (1994), Computer support for knowledge-building communities. The Journal of the Learning Sciences 3(3), 265-283.
18. Schwarz B. and Glassner A., (2003) The blind and the paralytic: supporting argumentation in everyday and scientific issues. In Andriessen J., Baker M and Suthers D. (ed.s) Arguing to learn. Kluwer Academic: Netherlands.
19. Stahl, G., Koschmann T. & Suthers, D. (2006) CSCL: An historical perspective, in R. K. Sawyer (Ed.). (2006). Cambridge Handbook of the Learning Sciences. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press
20. Suthers, D. (2003) Representational guidance for collaborative inquiry In Andriessen, J., Baker, M. and Suthers, D. (ed.s) Arguing to Learn Academic Publishers
21. Suthers, D. (2005). Technology affordances for intersubjective learning: A thematic agenda for CSCL. In Proceedings of the Computer Supported Collaborative Learning (CSCL) Conference 2005. New Bunswick: ISLS
22. Suthers, D., Medina, R., Vatrapu, R. & Dwyer, N., (2007) Information sharing is incongruous with collaborative convergence: the case for interaction. In Proceedings of the Computer Supported Collaborative Learning (CSCL) Conference 2007. New Bunswick: ISLS
23. Tscholl M. & Dowell J., (2008a) Characterising knowledge construction through a process analysis of dialogues. In Proceedings of the Eighth International Conference for the Learning Sciences - ICLS 2008. New Bunswick: ISLS
24. Tscholl M. & Dowell J., (2008b) Analysing problem structuring in a collaborative explanation dialogue to capture conceptual change. In Proceedings of the 30th Annual Conference of the Cognitive Science Society. Austin, TX: Cognitive Science Society
25. Veerman, R., Andriessen, J. & Kanselaar, G (1999). Collaborative learning through computer-mediated argumentation. In Proceedings of the 1999 conference on Computer support for collaborative learning.
26. Walton, D. (1996). Argumentation Schemes for Presumptive Reasoning, Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
27. Walton D., (2005) Abductive Reasoning. Alabama University Press.
28. Weinberger, A., Clark, D., Erkens, G., Sampson, V., Stegmann, K., Janssen, J., Jaspers, J., Kanselaar, G. and Fischer, F. (2006) Argumentative Knowledge Construction in CSCL. In Proceedings of the International Conference of the Learning Sciences 2006. New Bunswick: ISLS