Arguing collaboratively: Argumentative discourse types and their potential for knowledge building

British Journal of Educational Psychology

Volumn 85, Issue 3, 2015, Pages 372-386

  Felton, Mark ^a   Garcia Mila, Merce ^b   Villarroel, Constanza ^b   Gilabert, Sandra ^c  

^a SAN JOSE STATE UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^b UNIVERSITY OF BARCELONA   (Spain)

^c UNIVERSITAT ROVIRA I VIRGILI   (Spain)

Author keywords

Argumentation; Argumentative discourse; Collaborative learning; Deliberation; Dialogue; Discourse; Persuasion

Indexed keywords

ADOLESCENT; CHILD; COOPERATION; FEMALE; HUMAN; INTERPERSONAL COMMUNICATION; KNOWLEDGE; LEARNING; MALE; PHYSIOLOGY; SCHOOL; SCIENCE; SPAIN; STUDENT; THINKING;

ADOLESCENT; CHILD; COMMUNICATION; COOPERATIVE BEHAVIOR; FEMALE; HUMANS; KNOWLEDGE; LEARNING; MALE; SCHOOLS; SCIENCE; SPAIN; STUDENTS; THINKING;

EID: 84938967309     PISSN: 00070998     EISSN: 20448279     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1111/bjep.12078     Document Type: Article

References (41)

1. Andriessen, J. (2007). Arguing to learn. In K. Sawyer (Ed.), The Cambridge handbook of the learning sciences (pp. 443-460). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
2. Asterhan, C. S., & Schwarz, B. B. (2007). The effects of monological and dialogical argumentation on concept learning in evolutionary theory. Journal of Educational Psychology, 99, 626-639. doi:10.1037/0022-0663.99.3.626
3. Billig, M. (1996). Arguing and thinking: A rhetorical approach to social psychology. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
4. Brown, R., & Renshaw, P. (2000). Collective argumentation: A sociocultural approach to reframing classroom teaching and learning. In H. Cowie & G. Van der Aalsvoort (Eds.), Social interaction in learning and instruction: The meaning of discourse for the construction of knowledge (pp. 52-66). New York, NY: Pergamon.
5. Cazden, C. B. (2001). Classroom discourse: The language of teaching and learning. (2nd ed.) Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann.
6. Crowell, A., Felton, M., & Liu, T. (2014). Arguing to agree: Mitigating the effects of my-side bias through consensus-seeking dialogue. Manuscript submitted for publication.
7. Damsa, C., Ludvigsen, S., & Andriessen, J. (2013). Knowledge co-construction: Epistemic consensus or relational assent? In M. Baker, S. Jarvela & J. Andriessen (Eds.), Affective learning together: Social and emotional dimensions of collaborative learning (pp. 97-119). London, UK: Routledge.
8. Driver, R., Asoko, H., Leach, J., Scott, P., & Mortimer, E. (1994). Constructing scientific knowledge in the classroom. Educational Researcher, 23, 5-12. doi:10.3102/0013189X023007005
9. Driver, R., Newton, P., & Osborne, J. (2000). Establishing the norms of scientific argumentation in classrooms. Science Education, 84, 287-312. doi:10.1002/(SICI)1098-237X(200005)84:3<287:AID-SCE1>3.0.CO;2-A
10. Dole, J. A., & Sinatra, G. M. (1998). Reconceptualizing change in the cognitive construction of knowledge. Educational Psychologist, 33, 109-128. doi:10.1080/00461520.1998.96.53294
11. Felton, M. K. (2004). The development of discourse strategies in adolescent argumentation. Cognitive Development, 19, 35-52. doi:10.1016/j.cogdev.2003.09.001
12. Felton, M., Garcia-Mila, M., & Gilabert, S. (2009). Deliberation versus dispute: The impact of argumentative discourse goals on learning and reasoning in the science classroom. Informal Logic, 29(4), 417-446.
13. Felton, M., & Kuhn, D. (2001). The development of argumentive discourse skill. Discourse Processes, 32, 135-153. doi:10.1080/0163853X.2001.9651595
14. Ferretti, R. P., MacArthur, C. A., & Dowdy, N. S. (2000). The effects of an elaborated goal on the persuasive writing of students with learning disabilities and their normally achieving peers. Journal of Educational Psychology, 92, 694. doi:10.1037/0022-0663.92.4.694
15. 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, 527-548. doi:10.1016/S0959-4752(98)00033-4
16. Garcia-Mila, M., & Andersen, C. (2007). Cognitive foundations of learning argumentation. In S. Erduran & M. P. Jiménez-Aleixandre (Eds.), Argumentation in science education: Perspectives from classroom-based research (Vol. 35, pp. 29-45). Dordecht, the Netherlands: Springer.
17. Garcia-Mila, M., Gilabert, S., Erduran, S., & Felton, M. (2013). The effect of argumentative task goal on the quality of argumentative discourse. Science Education, 97(4), 497-523. doi:10.1002/sce.21057
18. Golanics, J. D., & Nussbaum, E. M. (2008). Enhancing online collaborative argumentation through question elaboration and goal instructions. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 24, 167-180. doi:10.1111/j.1365-2729.2007.00251.x
19. Hess, D. E. (2009). Controversy in the classroom: The democratic power of discussion. London, UK: Routledge.
20. Howe, C. (2014). Optimizing small group discourse in classrooms: Effective practices and theoretical constraints. International Journal of Educational Research, 63, 107-115. doi:10.1016/j.ijer.2013.03.011
21. Keefer, M. W., Zeitz, C. M., & Resnick, L. B. (2000). Judging the quality of peer-led student dialogues. Cognition and Instruction, 18, 53-81. doi:10.1207/S1532690XCI1801_03
22. Kuhn, D. (2005). Education for thinking. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
23. Kuhn, D., Wang, Y., & Li, H. (2010). Why argue? Developing understanding of the purposes and values of argumentive discourse. Discourse Processes, 48, 26-49. doi:10.1080/01638531003653344
24. Leitão, S. (2000). The potential of argument in knowledge building. Human Development, 43, 332-360. doi:10.1159/000022695
25. Lemke, J. L. (1990). Talking science: Language, learning, and values. Norwood, NJ: Ablex Publishing Corporation.
26. Mercer, N. (2000). Words and minds: How we use language to think together. London, UK: Routledge.
27. Mercer, N., & Littleton, K. (2007). Dialogue and the development of children's thinking: A sociocultural approach. London, UK: Routledge.
28. Mercier, H., & Sperber, D. (2011). Why do humans reason? Arguments for an argumentative theory. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 34, 57-74. doi:10.1017/S0140525X10000968
29. Michaels, S., O'Connor, C., & Resnick, L. B. (2008). Deliberative discourse idealized and realized: Accountable talk in the classroom and in civic life. Studies in Philosophy and Education, 27, 283-297. doi:10.1007/s11217-007-9071-1
30. Nussbaum, E. M. (2008). Collaborative discourse, argumentation, and learning: Preface and literature review. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 33, 345-359. doi:10.1016/j.cedpsych.2008.06.001
31. Nussbaum, E. M., & Kardash, C. M. (2005). The effects of goal Instructions and text on the generation of counterarguments during writing. Journal of Educational Psychology, 97, 157. doi:10.1037/0022-0663.97.2.157
32. Nussbaum, E. M., & Sinatra, G. M. (2003). Argument and conceptual engagement. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 28, 384-395. doi:10.1016/S0361-476X(02)00038-3
33. Osborne, J. (2010). Arguing to learn in science: The role of collaborative, critical discourse. Science, 328, 463-466. doi:10.1126/science.1183944
34. Resnick, L. B., Salmon, M., Zeitz, C. M., Wathen, S. H., & Holowchak, M. (1993). Reasoning in conversation. Cognition and Instruction, 11, 347-364. doi:10.1080/07370008.1993.9649029
35. Walton, D. (2010). Burden of proof in deliberation dialogs. In P. McBurney, I. Rahwan, S. Parsons & N. Maudet (Eds.), Argumentation in multi-agent systems (pp. 1-22). Berlin, Germany: Springer.
36. Walton, D. N., & Krabbe, E. C. (1995). Commitment in dialogue: Basic concepts of Interpersonal reasoning. Albany, NY: State University of New York Press.
37. Wells, G. (1999). Dialogic inquiry: Towards a sociocultural practice and theory of education. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
38. Wertsch, J. V. (1991). Voices of the mind: A sociocultural approach to mediated action. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
39. Wolfe, C. R., & Britt, M. A. (2008). The locus of the myside bias in written argumentation. Thinking & Reasoning, 14, 1-27. doi:10.1080/13546780701527674
40. Yackel, E. (2002). What we can learn from analyzing the teacher's role in collective argumentation. The Journal of Mathematical Behavior, 21, 423-440. doi:10.1016/S0732-3123(02)00143-8
41. Yackel, E., & Cobb, P. (1996). Sociomathematical norms, argumentation, and autonomy in mathematics. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 27(4), 458-477. doi:10.2307/749877