First- and second-order scaffolding of argumentation competence and domain-specific knowledge acquisition: a systematic review

Abstract

Results of research on intentions and effects of firstand second-order argument scaffolding of computer-supported collaborative argumentation competence development and domain-specific knowledge acquisition are ambivalent. A systematic review of research in secondary and higher education (SE and HE) has been conducted to clarify and synthesise these intentions and effects, thereby differentiating between communication type (synchronous-asynchronous) and group size. Empirical research with pre-post-test designs was included only. Using specific search terms, 527 articles were found; 19 of these met pre-set selection criteria. Results indicate that HE studies intended to foster argumentation knowledge and domain-specific knowledge acquisition (i.e. knowledge construction), and reported significant effects for both types of knowledge. SE studies, however, intended to foster argumentation behaviour and domain specific knowledge acquisition (i.e. learning by doing), and showed significant effects regarding the latter only. HE studies predominantly used asynchronous, and SE studies synchronous communication. Choice of group size was not explicitly justified.

Currículo Nacional de Educación Básica: Incorporación de la competencia argumentativa en el Perfil de egreso.

“…(2018) y Valero et al (2019), aseveran que la argumentación es una competencia clave en la vida cotidiana, pues contribuye a comprender, aceptar e interpretar las apreciaciones de otros en relación a un asunto. Por su parte, Hoyos (2019) afirma que, enseñar el desarrollo de habilidades argumentativas contribuye a la discriminación entre hechos y opiniones, al pensamiento inductivo y deductivo, elaboración de inferencias, conclusiones, planteamiento de supuestos, identificación de razonamientos de apoyo u oposición a ciertas situaciones generadas y por último, la metacognición.…”

“…En relación a la competencia argumentativa, Valero et al (2019), afirman que es la capacidad de discusión, pensamiento crítico y de razonamiento lógico para sostener las propias opiniones en relación a los puntos de vista y opiniones de otros, así como la capacidad de manejo de tareas y aprendizaje continuo. A su vez, Rapanta et al (2013), sostienen que dicha competencia se refiere a los diferentes tipos de habilidades relacionadas con la argumentación que se manifiesta en el desempeño de las personas en contextos de carácter individual o dialógico, entre pares ya sea en forma de discurso, en la aplicación de ciertas estrategias o el logro de determinados objetivos de argumentación en contextos particulares.…”

An ISMP Approach for Promoting Design Innovation Capability and Its Interaction With Personal Characters

“…A structured design framework refers to a paradigm that helps learners implement design tasks step by step. It guides learners through the zone of proximal development, that is a critical element of innovation capability development [35]. Guided discovery instruction has been suggested as a practical strategy for delivering complex concepts in engineering education [36].…”

Argumentation-Based Computer Supported Collaborative Learning (Abcscl): The Role of Instructional Supports

“…According to many scholars in the field of learning sciences, collaborative learning provide fruitful environments to prepare learners to adjust to and cope with today's complex issues and challenges (e.g. Farrokhnia et al, 2019;Latifi et al, 2020;Noroozi et al, 2011Noroozi et al, , 2016Noroozi et al, , 2018Noroozi et al, , 2020Valero Haro et al, 2019Veldhuis-Diermanse et al, 2006). Collaborative learning environments encourage learners to discuss their ideas, concepts and problems from different viewpoints in order to reconstruct and co-construct knowledge while solving complex problems (Latifi et al, 2019;Noroozi, 2017, Noroozi & Busstra et al, 2012Noroozi & Mulder, 2017).…”

“…In this regard, Schwarz & Glassner (2007, p. 449) stated: "Plato's dialogues (or Socrates' dialogues), such as Meno or Protagoras, show how critical discussions may help participants reach eternal truths". Toulmin (1958) is one of the best-known theorists who focused on the word of argumentation in the 19th century. From his point of view, an argument consists of six interconnected parts: claim, data, warrant, backing, rebuttal, and qualifier.…”