Representational tools in computer-supported collaborative argumentation-based learning: How dyads work with constructed and inspected argumentative diagrams

被引:66
|
作者
Van Arnelsvoort, Marije [1 ]
Andriessen, Jerry [1 ]
Kanselaar, Gellof [1 ]
机构
[1] Univ Utrecht, Res Ctr Learning Interact, NL-3508 TC Utrecht, Netherlands
关键词
D O I
10.1080/10508400701524785
中图分类号
G40 [教育学];
学科分类号
040101 ; 120403 ;
摘要
This article investigates the conditions under which diagrammatic representations support collaborative argumentation-based learning in a computer environment. Thirty dyads of 15- to 18-year-old students participated in a writing task consisting of 3 phases. Students prepared by constructing a representation (text or diagram) individually. Then they discussed the topic and wrote a text in dyads. They consolidated their knowledge by revising their individual representation. There were 3 conditions: Students could use either (a) the individual texts they wrote, (b) the individual diagrams they constructed, or (c) a diagram that was constructed for them based on the text they wrote. Results showed that students who constructed a diagram themselves explored the topic more than students in the other conditions. We also found differences in the way collaborating dyads used their representations. Dyads who engaged in deep discussion used their representations as a basis for knowledge construction. In contrast, dyads who engaged in only shallow discussion used their representations solely to copy information to their collaborative text. We conclude that diagrammatic representations can improve collaborative learning, but only when they are used in a co-constructive way.
引用
收藏
页码:485 / 521
页数:37
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [1] Perspectives on Tools for Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning
    Bratitsis, Tharrenos
    Demetriadis, Stavros
    [J]. INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF E-COLLABORATION, 2012, 8 (04) : 1 - 7
  • [2] Developing a computer-supported, collaborative learning environment for argumentative writing
    Schijf, HJM
    Erkens, G
    Jaspers, J
    Kanselaar, G
    [J]. CLINICAL ASSESSMENT, COMPUTERIZED METHODS, AND INSTRUMENTATION, 2003, 7 : 28 - 43
  • [3] Collaborative argumentation and cognitive elaboration in a computer-supported collaborative learning environment
    Stegmann, Karsten
    Wecker, Christof
    Weinberger, Armin
    Fischer, Frank
    [J]. INSTRUCTIONAL SCIENCE, 2012, 40 (02) : 297 - 323
  • [4] Effects of representational guidance during computer-supported collaborative learning
    Janssen, Jeroen
    Erkens, Gijsbert
    Kirschner, Paul A.
    Kanselaar, Gellof
    [J]. INSTRUCTIONAL SCIENCE, 2010, 38 (01) : 59 - 88
  • [5] Collaborative argumentation and cognitive elaboration in a computer-supported collaborative learning environment
    Karsten Stegmann
    Christof Wecker
    Armin Weinberger
    Frank Fischer
    [J]. Instructional Science, 2012, 40 : 297 - 323
  • [6] Effects of representational guidance during computer-supported collaborative learning
    Jeroen Janssen
    Gijsbert Erkens
    Paul A. Kirschner
    Gellof Kanselaar
    [J]. Instructional Science, 2010, 38 : 59 - 88
  • [7] Developing argumentation processing agents for computer-supported collaborative learning
    Huang, Chenn-Jung
    Chen, Hong-Xin
    Chen, Chun-Hua
    [J]. EXPERT SYSTEMS WITH APPLICATIONS, 2009, 36 (02) : 2615 - 2624
  • [8] Probability Learning in Computer-Supported Collaborative Argumentation (CSCA) Environment
    Gurbuz, Ramazan
    Erdem, Emrullah
    Firat, Selcuk
    [J]. HACETTEPE UNIVERSITESI EGITIM FAKULTESI DERGISI-HACETTEPE UNIVERSITY JOURNAL OF EDUCATION, 2016, 31 (01): : 195 - 211
  • [9] A framework to analyze argumentative knowledge construction in computer-supported collaborative learning
    Weinberger, A
    Fischer, F
    [J]. COMPUTERS & EDUCATION, 2006, 46 (01) : 71 - 95
  • [10] Argumentation-Based Computer Supported Collaborative Learning (ABCSCL): A synthesis of 15 years of research
    Noroozi, Omid
    Weinberger, Armin
    Biemans, Harm J. A.
    Mulder, Martin
    Chizari, Mohammad
    [J]. EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH REVIEW, 2012, 7 (02) : 79 - 106