Considering students’ epistemic beliefs to facilitate their argumentative discourse and attitudinal change with a digital dialogue game

Innovations in Education and Teaching International

Volumn 55, Issue 3, 2018, Pages 357-365

  Noroozi, Omid ^a,b  

^a TARBIAT MODARES UNIVERSITY   (Iran)

^b WAGENINGEN UNIVERSITY   (Netherlands)

Author keywords

Argumentation; attitudinal change; dialogue; digital game; epistemic beliefs

Indexed keywords

EID: 84978086947     PISSN: 14703297     EISSN: 14703300     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1080/14703297.2016.1208112     Document Type: Article

References (24)

1. Driver, R., Newton, P., & Osborne, J., (2000). Establishing the norms of scientific argumentation in classrooms. Science Education, 84, 287–312.10.1002/(ISSN)1098-237X
2. Fischer, F., Bruhn, J., Gräsel, C., & Mandl, H., (2002). Fostering collaborative knowledge construction with visualization tools. Learning and Instruction, 12, 213–232.10.1016/S0959-4752(01)00005-6
3. Infante, D. A., & Rancer, A. S., (1982). A conceptualization and measure of argumentativeness. Journal of Personality Assessment, 46, 72–80.10.1207/s15327752jpa4601_13
4. King, A., (1999). Discourse patterns for mediating peer learning. In A., O’Donnell & A., King (Eds.), Cognitive perspectives on peer learning (pp. 87–115). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
5. Kuhn, D., Cheney, R., & Weinstock, M., (2000). The development of epistemological understanding. Cognitive Development, 15, 309–328.10.1016/S0885-2014(00)00030-7
6. Mcalister, S., Ravenscroft, A., & Scanlon, E., (2004). Combining interaction and context design to support collaborative argumentation using a tool for synchronous CMC. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 20, 194–204.10.1111/j.1365-2729.2004.00086.x
7. McLaren, B. M., Scheuer, O., & Mikšátko, J., (2010). Supporting collaborative learning and e-Discussions using artificial intelligence techniques. International Journal of Artificial Intelligence in Education, 20, 1–46.
8. Noroozi, O., Biemans, H. J. A., Busstra, M. C., Mulder, M., & Chizari, M., (2011). Differences in learning processes between successful and less successful students in computer-supported collaborative learning in the field of human nutrition and health. Computers in Human Behavior, 27, 309–318.10.1016/j.chb.2010.08.009
9. Noroozi, O., Biemans, H. J. A., & Mulder, M., (2016). Relations between scripted online peer feedback processes and quality of written argumentative essay. The Internet and Higher Education, 31, 20–31.10.1016/j.iheduc.2016.05.002
10. Noroozi, O., Biemans, H. J. A., Weinberger, A., Mulder, M., & Chizari, M., (2013). Scripting for construction of a transactive memory system in multidisciplinary CSCL environments. Learning and Instruction, 25, 1–12.10.1016/j.learninstruc.2012.10.002
11. Noroozi, O., Busstra, M. C., Mulder, M., Biemans, H. J. A., Tobi, H., Geelen, A., … Chizari, M., (2012). Online discussion compensates for suboptimal timing of supportive information presentation in a digitally supported learning environment. Educational Technology Research and Development, 60, 193–221.10.1007/s11423-011-9217-2
12. Noroozi, O., & Mulder, M., (2016). Design and evaluation of a digital module with guided peer feedback for student learning biotechnology and molecular life sciences, attitudinal change, and satisfaction. Biochemistry and Molecular Biology Education. doi:10.1002/bmb.20981
13. Noroozi, O., Teasley, S. D., Biemans, H. J. A., Weinberger, A., & Mulder, M., (2013). Facilitating learning in multidisciplinary groups with transactive CSCL scripts. International Journal of Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning, 8, 189–223.10.1007/s11412-012-9162-z
14. Noroozi, O., Weinberger, A., Biemans, H. J. A., Mulder, M., & Chizari, M., (2012). Argumentation-based computer supported collaborative learning (ABCSCL): A synthesis of 15 years of research. Educational Research Review, 7, 79–106.10.1016/j.edurev.2011.11.006
15. Noroozi, O., Weinberger, A., Biemans, H. J. A., Mulder, M., & Chizari, M., (2013). Facilitating argumentative knowledge construction through a transactive discussion script in CSCL. Computers and Education, 61, 59–76.10.1016/j.compedu.2012.08.013
16. Nussbaum, E. M., & Bendixen, L. D., (2003). Approaching and avoiding arguments: The role of epistemological beliefs, need for cognition, and extraverted personality traits. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 28, 573–595.10.1016/S0361-476X(02)00062-0
17. Nussbaum, E. M., Sinatra, G. M., & Poliquin, A., (2008). Role of epistemic beliefs and scientific argumentation in science learning. International Journal of Science Education, 30, 1977–1999.10.1080/09500690701545919
18. Oh, S., & Jonassen, D. H., (2006). Scaffolding online argumentation during problem solving. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 23, 95–110.
19. O’Keefe, D. J., (1982). The concept of argument and arguing. In J. R., Cox & C. A., Willard (Eds.), Advances in argumentation theory and research (pp. 3–23). Carbondale: Southern Illinois University Press.
20. Ravenscroft, A., & McAlister, S., (2006). Digital games and learning in cyberspace: A dialogical approach. E-Learning and Digital Media, 3, 37–50.
21. Ravenscroft, A., McAlister, S., & Sagar, M., (2009). Digital Dialogue Games (DDGs): Cross-institutional implementation and evaluation of digital dialogue games for inclusive and personalised learning. Final Project Report to JISC. Retrieved from http://www.interloc.org.uk/deliverables/DDG_FR3.pdf
22. Ravenscroft, A., & Pilkington, R. M., (2000). Investigation by design: Developing dialogue models to support reasoning and conceptual change. International Journal of Artificial Intelligence in Education, 11, 273–298.
23. Teasley, S. D., (1997). Talking about reasoning: How important is the peer in peer collaboration? In L. B., Resnick, R., Säljö, C., Pontecorvo, & B., Burge (Eds.), Discourse, tools and reasoning (pp. 361–384). Berlin: Springer.10.1007/978-3-662-03362-3
24. Weinberger, A., & Fischer, F., (2006). A framework to analyze argumentative knowledge construction in computer-supported collaborative learning. Computers and Education, 46, 71–95.10.1016/j.compedu.2005.04.003