Students' types of argumentative knowledge construction process in social collaborative learning environment

With the rapid expansion of computer usage technology, working in social collaborative learning environment has been a common teaching and learning techniques to students. Working collaboratively can trigger deeper discussion which may lead into an argumentative debate and the development of knowledge construction in argumentation. This process is known as argumentative knowledge construction and essentially beneficial in understanding the level of students' thinking skills. However, experiencing the process is important before thinking skills can be related to it. In this study, we combine model of online discussion, argumentative knowledge construction process and 3A interaction model to see the types of argumentative knowledge construction process occur in the students' discussion in a social collaborative learning environment. Data are collected from Facebook group discussion and analyzed using content analysis technique. It is hoped that this model can illustrate a pathway to instructor on how to facilitate students' argumentative knowledge construction process especially in social collaborative learning environment and indirectly lead students' thinking skills towards the highest degree

collaborative problem based learning within social learning environment to enhance students’ argumentative knowledge construction process in learning English literature

The purpose of this study is to investigate the influence of Collaborative Problem Based Learning (CPBL) within Social Learning Environment (SLE) to enhance secondary school students’ knowledge construction process in learning English Literature as higher order thinking skills is seen as vital aspect in education. In this 21st century, SLE can be seen as a suitable medium to encourage knowledge sharing, analysing information and exchanging opinions among the students and thus, nurture one’s knowledge construction process. The researcher started the study by developing CPBL learning materials based on PBL and Computer Supported Collaborative Learning (CSCL) principles to be integrated within SLE. This study involved three instruments; (1) online discussions scripts, (2) final writing assignment and (3) questionnaire. Qualitative data was gathered using thematic content analyses of 20 discussion scripts and final writings as to analyse the types of interaction occurred during the knowledge construction process and their argumentative skills using Toulmin’s Model. Then, interview was used to understand its influence on students’ argumentative skills. Finally, a survey was distributed as to examine students’ level of acceptance towards this approach. The results showed that cognitive contribution (74.85%) was the highest occurrences in the discussions scripts in which high-level elaborations (32.22%) were slightly lower than low-level elaborations (42.63%). This brings to low-level of argumentation skills in most of the final writing analyses. The content analyses on final writings showed students who interacted using high-level of elaborations during the discussions tend to provide high-level of Toulmin’s argumentation level in final writings. The ones who interacted using low-level interactions, albeit in small amount, also displayed encouraging argumentation skills in their final writings. Interview data indicated that CPBL had encouraged the students to jointly construct own knowledge, analyse each other’s reasoning and thus, enhance their argumentative skills. The finding further shows high level of acceptance towards this alternative medium of learning (M=4.21). Hence, collaborative learning supported by online learning is thus, possible to encourage students’ knowledge construction process. Educators then should organize a learning environment as to prompt such interaction to further encourage the development of higher order thinking skills amongst students

Analytic frameworks for assessing dialogic argumentation in online learning environments

Over the last decade, researchers have developed sophisticated online learning environments to support students engaging in argumentation. This review first considers the range of functionalities incorporated within these online environments. The review then presents five categories of analytic frameworks focusing on (1) formal argumentation structure, (2) normative quality, (3) nature and function of contributions within the dialog, (4) epistemic nature of reasoning, and (5) patterns and trajectories of participant interaction. Example analytic frameworks from each category are presented in detail rich enough to illustrate their nature and structure. This rich detail is intended to facilitate researchers’ identification of possible frameworks to draw upon in developing or adopting analytic methods for their own work. Each framework is applied to a shared segment of student dialog to facilitate this illustration and comparison process. Synthetic discussions of each category consider the frameworks in light of the underlying theoretical perspectives on argumentation, pedagogical goals, and online environmental structures. Ultimately the review underscores the diversity of perspectives represented in this research, the importance of clearly specifying theoretical and environmental commitments throughout the process of developing or adopting an analytic framework, and the role of analytic frameworks in the future development of online learning environments for argumentation

Facilitating argumentative knowledge construction with computer-supported collaboration scripts

Online discussions provide opportunities for learners to engage in argumentative debate, but learners rarely formulate well-grounded arguments or benefit individually from participating in online discussions. Learners often do not explicitly warrant their arguments and fail to construct counterarguments (incomplete formal argumentation structure), which is hypothesized to impede individual knowledge acquisition. Computer-supported scripts have been found to support learners during online discussions. Such scripts can support specific discourse activities, such as the construction of single arguments, by supporting learners in explicitly warranting their claims or in constructing specific argumentation sequences, e.g., argument–counterargument sequences, during online discussions. Participation in argumentative discourse is seen to promote both knowledge on argumentation and domain-specific knowledge. However, there have been few empirical investigations regarding the extent to which computer-supported collaboration scripts can foster the formal quality of argumentation and thereby facilitate the individual acquisition of knowledge. One hundred and twenty (120) students of Educational Science participated in the study with a 2×2-factorial design (with vs. without script for the construction of single arguments and with vs. without script for the construction of argumentation sequences) and were randomly divided into groups of three. Results indicated that the collaboration scripts could improve the formal quality of single arguments and the formal quality of argumentation sequences in online discussions. Scripts also facilitated the acquisition of knowledge on argumentation, without affecting the acquisition of domainspecific knowledge

Internal and external scripts in computer-supported collaborative inquiry learning

We investigated how differently structured external scripts interact with learners’ internal scripts concerning individual knowledge acquisition in a Web-based collaborative inquiry learning environment. 90 students from two secondary schools participated. Two versions of an external collaboration script (high vs. low structured) supporting collaborative argumentation were embedded within a Web-based collaborative inquiry learning environment. Students’ internal scripts were classified as either high or low structured, establishing a 2x2-factorial design. Results suggest that the high structured external collaboration script supported the acquisition of domain-general knowledge of all learners regardless of their internal scripts. Learners’ internal scripts influenced the acquisition of domain-specific knowledge. Results are discussed concerning their theoretical relevance and practical implications for Web-based inquiry learning with collaboration scripts

Analyzing collaborative learning processes automatically

In this article we describe the emerging area of text classification research focused on the problem of collaborative learning process analysis both from a broad perspective and more specifically in terms of a publicly available tool set called TagHelper tools. Analyzing the variety of pedagogically valuable facets of learners’ interactions is a time consuming and effortful process. Improving automated analyses of such highly valued processes of collaborative learning by adapting and applying recent text classification technologies would make it a less arduous task to obtain insights from corpus data. This endeavor also holds the potential for enabling substantially improved on-line instruction both by providing teachers and facilitators with reports about the groups they are moderating and by triggering context sensitive collaborative learning support on an as-needed basis. In this article, we report on an interdisciplinary research project, which has been investigating the effectiveness of applying text classification technology to a large CSCL corpus that has been analyzed by human coders using a theory-based multidimensional coding scheme. We report promising results and include an in-depth discussion of important issues such as reliability, validity, and efficiency that should be considered when deciding on the appropriateness of adopting a new technology such as TagHelper tools. One major technical contribution of this work is a demonstration that an important piece of the work towards making text classification technology effective for this purpose is designing and building linguistic pattern detectors, otherwise known as features, that can be extracted reliably from texts and that have high predictive power for the categories of discourse actions that the CSCL community is interested in

THE "POWER" OF TEXT PRODUCTION ACTIVITY IN COLLABORATIVE MODELING : NINE RECOMMENDATIONS TO MAKE A COMPUTER SUPPORTED SITUATION WORK

Language is not a direct translation of a speaker’s or writer’s knowledge or intentions. Various complex processes and strategies are involved in serving the needs of the audience: planning the message, describing some features of a model and not others, organizing an argument, adapting to the knowledge of the reader, meeting linguistic constraints, etc. As a consequence, when communicating about a model, or about knowledge, there is a complex interaction between knowledge and language. In this contribution, we address the question of the role of language in modeling, in the specific case of collaboration over a distance, via electronic exchange of written textual information. What are the problems/dimensions a language user has to deal with when communicating a (mental) model? What is the relationship between the nature of the knowledge to be communicated and linguistic production? What is the relationship between representations and produced text? In what sense can interactive learning systems serve as mediators or as obstacles to these processes

The Collective Building of Knowledge in Collaborative Learning Environments

The intention of this chapter is to investigate how collaborative learning environments (CLEs) can be used to elicit the collective building of knowledge. This work discusses CLEs as lively cognitive systems and looks at some strategies that might contribute to the improvement of significant pedagogical practices. The study is supported by rhizome principles, whose characteristics allow us to understand the process of selecting and connecting what is relevant and meaningful for the collective building of knowledge. A brief theoretical and conceptual approach is presented and major contributions and difficulties about collaborative learning environments are discussed. New questions and future trends about the collective building of knowledge are suggested

Toward a script theory of guidance in computer-supported collaborative learning

This article presents an outline of a script theory of guidance for computer-supported collaborative learning (CSCL). With its four types of components of internal and external scripts (play, scene, role, and scriptlet) and seven principles, this theory addresses the question how CSCL practices are shaped by dynamically re-configured internal collaboration scripts of the participating learners. Furthermore, it explains how internal collaboration scripts develop through participation in CSCL practices. It emphasizes the importance of active application of subject matter knowledge in CSCL practices, and it prioritizes transactive over non-transactive forms of knowledge application in order to facilitate learning. Further, the theory explains how external collaboration scripts modify CSCL practices and how they influence the development of internal collaboration scripts. The principles specify an optimal scaffolding level for external collaboration scripts and allow for the formulation of hypotheses about the fading of external collaboration scripts. Finally, the article points towards conceptual challenges and future research questions

Supporting undergraduate students’ acquisition of academic argumentation strategies through computer conferencing

Executive Summary Background This research grows out of work on the importance of argumentation in developingstudents’ critical abilities. It focuses attention on how students argue in computer mediated conferences as opposed to traditionalwritten assignments, investigating the way in which argumentation is realised within the relatively new context of computer conferencing which allows extended written discussions to take place overa period of weeks. Such text-based asynchronous conferencing is typically characterised by features of both spoken and written modes. Aims The main aims of the project were: • to investigate the argumentation strategies used in asynchronous text-based computer conferences; • to compare the argumentation strategies developed through conferencing with those used in the writing of academic assignments; • to examine the strategies used by tutors to encourage and facilitate argumentation in text-based computer conferences. Methods Data was collected over two years for the distance undergraduate course ‘Perspectives on Complementary and Alternative Medicine’ at the Open University.Qualitative data was obtained through interviews with the course chair, tutors and students, and through a student questionnaire. Assignments and computer-mediated tutorials were collected for textual analysis, although the timing of the assignments meant that analysis has only just begun on the essay data. To analyse the argumentation in the computer conferences and assignments a method of categorising, coding and tracking argumentative discourse was developed building on earlier work by the authors. In addition, computational searches were carried out to compare linguistic features across conference and assignment data. Results In tutorial conferences, student discussion tended to take the form of collaborative co-construction of an argument through exchanging information and experience to substantiate a position. However, students were also prepared to challenge other viewpoints. In both cases, they frequently drew on personal and professional experience to support argument claims. The use of these strategies suggests that text-based conferencing lends itself to the collective combining of diverse sources of information, experiences and ideas. Conference discussions were often personalised with fewer explicit logical links marking argument structure. They were also marked by complexity of argument strands, many of which reached no conclusion. Preliminary analysis of argumentation in assignments suggests that this did not, however, adversely affect students’ ability to create a more traditional, linear argument in their essays. Further analysis will be undertaken to compare argumentation strategies across the two sets of data. Tutors expressed concern about levels of participation in the tutorial conferences, which varied quite considerably. They also felt uncertain about their own knowledge of appropriate pedagogic strategies which would encourage students to participate in a collaborative yet critical way, and tended to rely on strategies from face-to-face teaching. Analysis of the conference discussion showed that tutors made fewer claims than students and were also less likely to provide information in support of their claims. There was, therefore, little modelling by tutors of the basic type of argumentation that would be expected in formal written assignments.Despite these concerns, student responses indicated that having a tutor and a group of peers to interact with, or just to observe, was valued as a supportive feature of this form of distance learning. No clear picture arose of how to make conferencing more interactive for more students, and this reinforces the sense gained from the tutor interviews of the difficulty of proposing a model of tutoring in computer conferences that will necessarily engage all students or raise the level of discussion and debate. Conclusions Our study suggests that text-based conferencing has an important role to play in developing students’ argumentation strategies and understanding of academic discourse and conventions. In view of its hybrid nature, somewhere between spontaneous speech and formal academic writing, course designers and tutors should aim to take advantage of both aspects – on the one hand, the informal dialogic exchange of opinions and co-construction of knowledge, and on the other,the opportunity for consolidation, reflection and re-positioning. Our findings reinforce the view that students’ willingness to exchange ideas freely and openly is partly a consequence of how personally engaged, at ease and confident students feel with one another and their tutor. In particular, it seems that there is a role for the interpersonal and, to some extent, the chat and the frivolity, which in some other studies discussed in the literature review have been regarded as negative influences. Recommendations To facilitate students’ development of argumentation and learning more generally,tutors need greater awareness of the ways in which academic argumentation operates in computer conferencing as compared to written assignments. Since pedagogic strategies developed in other contexts may not transfer well to computer conferencing, there is a need for targeted professional development, focussing in particular on: • Choosing topics for discussion and designing effective task prompts; • Supporting weaker students; • Encouraging challenging of ideas; • Finding the right tone to facilitate peer discussions. Some specific suggestions are made within the report, but our recommendations at this stage remain tentative as we still have to complete the analysis of the assignment data and draw conclusions about the impact of the computer conferencing on the quality of written argumentation within this more formal context