A structured dialogue tool for argumentative learning

Hirsch, Laurence; Saeedi, Masoud; Cornillon, Jeanne; Litosseliti, Lia

doi:10.1111/j.1365-2729.2004.00068.x

Cited by 22 publications

(18 citation statements)

References 13 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Argumentation tools structure interactions by orienting participants with respect to subject matter by supporting greater coherence in discussions, increasing focus on topics, and consequently reducing off-task talking (Hron et al 2000). Structuring can be achieved through communication acts (Baker 2003), sentence openers (Baker and Lund 1997;Hirsch et al 2004), posting notes and making comments (Fischer et al 2002;Scardamalia and Bereiter 1996), or representing multiple opinions that scaffold students to express their own opinions and integrate the opinions of others (Hoadley and Linn 2000). Visual representations of arguments can serve as external frames for constructing knowledge and solving problems (Hron and Friedrich 2003).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Scaffolding problem-based learning with CSCL tools

Lajoie

Wiseman

2010

Computer Supported Learning

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Small-group medical problem-based learning (PBL) was a pioneering form of collaborative learning at the university level. It has traditionally been delivered in face-to-face text-based format. With the advancement of computer technology and progress in CSCL, educational researchers are now exploring how to design digitally-implemented scaffolding tools to facilitate medical PBL. The “deteriorating patient” (DP) role play was created as a medical simulation that extends traditional PBL and can be implemented digitally. We present a case study of classroom usage of the DP role play that examines teacher scaffolding of PBL under two conditions: using a traditional whiteboard (TW) and using an interactive whiteboard (IW). The introduction of the IW technology changed the way that the teacher scaffolded the learning. The IW showed the teacher all the information shared within the various subgroups of a class, broadening the basis for informed classroom scaffolding. The visual records of IW usage demonstrated what students understood and reduced the need to structure the task. This allowed more time for engaging students in challenging situations by increasing the complexity of the problem. Although appropriate scaffolding is still based on the teacher’s domain knowledge and pedagogy experience, technology can help by expanding the scaffolding choices that an instructor can make in a medical training context

show abstract

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Scaffolding problem-based learning with CSCL tools

Lajoie

Wiseman

2010

Computer Supported Learning

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Structuring can be achieved through communication acts (Baker, 2003), sentence openers (Baker & Lund, 1997;Hirsch, Saeedi, Cornillon, & Litosseliti, 2004), posting notes and making comments (Fischer, Bruhn, Grasel, & Mandl, 2002;Scardamalia & Bereiter, 1996), or representing multiple opinions that scaffold students to express their own opinions and integrate the opinions of others (Hoadley & Linn, 2000).…”

Section: Argumentation Toolsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Supporting medical decision making with argumentation tools

Lajoie

2008

Contemporary Educational Psychology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

a b s t r a c tThis study investigated the collaborative decision-making and communicative discourse of groups of learners engaged in a simulated medical emergency in two conditions. In one condition subgroups used a traditional whiteboard (TW group) to document medical arguments on how to solve a medical emergency. In the other condition subgroups used interactive whiteboards (IW group) where they could document their medical arguments by using a structured template for constructing, annotating and sharing arguments. The discourse of each group was coded with respect to decision-making and communicative activities. The research goal was to identify relationships between the decision-making and collaborative discourse under the two conditions. The IW condition differed from the TW condition in that participants engaged in more adaptive decision-making behavior early on in the intervention. This early engagement led to shared understandings and subsequently to more effective patient management. Group differences were also found in the types of collaborative discourse and the IW groups produced more productive argumentation.

show abstract

“…The structured chat tool (see Hirsch, Saeedi, Cornillon, & Litosseliti, 2004) consisted of four categorized sets of either full or partial sentences called templates (Table 3): (a) Argument (ask for and express an To motivate students to the topics they filled in a cloze test on vivisection (1st session, 10 min) and engaged in general discussion on gender equality (2nd session, 20 min).…”

Section: Chat Tools Used By the Studentsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Argumentation in Secondary School Students' Structured and Unstructured Chat Discussions

Salminen

Marttunen

Laurinen

2012

Journal of Educational Computing Research

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Joint construction of new knowledge demands that persons can express their statements in a convincing way and explore other people's arguments constructively. For this reason, more knowledge on different means to support collaborative argumentation is needed. This study clarifies whether structured interaction supports students' critical and elaborative argumentation.The study compares the quality of secondary school students' argumentation during structured and unstructured chat interaction. The data consist of 16 dyadic chat discussions: 8 discussions concerned vivisection and 8 gender equality. Half of the discussions were carried out through structured chat, and the other half through unstructured chat. The results suggest that a structured chat environment evokes counterargumentation, also in topics that do not spontaneously provoke conflicting viewpoints. Further, structured chat seems to equalize communication between females and males. Overall, the results indicate that the further investigation and design of pedagogical means to structure collaborative argumentation is a worthwhile enterprise.

show abstract

A structured dialogue tool for argumentative learning

Cited by 22 publications

References 13 publications

Scaffolding problem-based learning with CSCL tools

Scaffolding problem-based learning with CSCL tools

Supporting medical decision making with argumentation tools

Argumentation in Secondary School Students' Structured and Unstructured Chat Discussions

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About