Exploring students’ dialogic patterns and argumentation skills in a computer-supported critical discussion activity

Abstract

Computer-supported collaborative argumentation (CSCA) creates valuable learning opportunities for students to explore multiple perspectives, co-construct knowledge, and develop argumentation skills. Grounded in collaborative learning and argumentation theories, we designed a CSCA activity to engage students in critical discussions of a controversial issue, with the goal of fostering perspective-taking, evidence-based reasoning, and critical evaluation of arguments. This activity included a series of structured tasks targeting key argumentation skills and gave student opportunities to explore both sides of the issue. We conducted a study with 64 middle school students to examine their dialogic patterns and argumentation skills in this activity. Results revealed a wide range of participation in the critical discussion across groups and individual students. Most collaborative efforts involved coordinating task responsibilities and processes among team members. Students’ argumentative discourse focused on developing and refining reasons and inviting teammates to provide ideas and elaboration. Interestingly, we found a negative correlation between the number of student dialogic turns and their scores on the collaborative argument task. This relationship can be explained by the differences across grade levels: older students performed better on the task despite engaging in fewer dialogic turns compared to younger students. By the end of their critical discussion, most groups proposed a team solution that integrated both sides of the issue. We conclude with implications for designing CSCA activities and support to promote middle school students’ argumentation skills.

Publication Title

Educational Technology Research and Development

Link to Full Text

Share

COinS