On the Logical Integrity of Children's Arguments

Anderson, Richard C.; Chinn, Clark A.; Chang, Janice Y.; Waggoner, Martha; Yi, Hwajin

doi:10.1207/s1532690xci1502_1

Cited by 118 publications

(69 citation statements)

References 8 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…A possible answer emerging from our study gives weight to the influence of the age of the participants involved: when studying adolescents, the form approach seems to be the most used, instead primary school children are "tested" for their argument skills using more goal-oriented approaches. This difference possibly relates to the two-fold nature of argumentation as both an ability that emerges quite early in children (Anderson, Chinn, Chang, Waggoner, & Yi, 1997;Orsolini, 1993;Stein & Miller, 2003) and a skilled performance that potentially emerges in late adolescence and early adulthood as a result of education (Golder & Coirier, 1994;Kuhn & Udell, 2003). Having this in mind, researchers may prefer to use a more contextualized goal-oriented approach to guarantee for more skillful children´s argument behavior.…”

Section: Nature Of Argumentationmentioning

confidence: 99%

What Is Meant by Argumentative Competence? An Integrative Review of Methods of Analysis and Assessment in Education

Rapanta

García-Milà

Gilabert

2013

Review of Educational Research

160

110

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The need to enhance argument skills through education has become increasingly evident during the last 20 years. This need has resulted in an ongoing discussion that focuses on students' and teachers' argumentation, and its support. However, apart from the extended competence-based discourse, no clear and homogeneous definition exists for argumentative competence and its constituent skills. To respond to this deficiency, we conducted an integrative literature review focusing on the methods of argument analysis and assessment that have been proposed thus far in the field of education. Specifically, we constructed an interpretative framework to organize the information contained in 97 reviewed studies in a coherent and meaningful way. The main result of the framework's application is the emergence of three levels of argumentative competence, namely, metacognitive, metastrategic, and epistemological competence. We consider this result the beginning of further research on the psycho-pedagogical nature of argument skills and their manifestation as competent performance.

show abstract

Section: Nature Of Argumentationmentioning

confidence: 99%

What Is Meant by Argumentative Competence? An Integrative Review of Methods of Analysis and Assessment in Education

Rapanta

García-Milà

Gilabert

2013

Review of Educational Research

160

110

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Even though young children show some competence in producing arguments in support of a claim (Anderson, Chinn, Chang, Waggoner, & Yi, 1997;Stein & Miller, 1993), serious weaknesses have been observed in the arguments of adolescents, adults, and even college students who major in Physics. Studying high school students" usage of justification for their claims as they were engaged in an electricity-based performance assessment, Kelly, Druker and Chen (1998) found that although students produced some warrants when involved in experimentation, when they formalized their reasons in a written form they didn"t do so.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Developing pre-service teachers' evidence-based argumentation skills on socio-scientific issues

Iordanou

Constantinou

2014

Learning and Instruction

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

We report on a study of the effect of meta-level awareness on the use of evidence in discourse. The participants were 66 pre-service teachers who were engaged in a dialogic activity. Meta-level awareness regarding the use of evidence in discourse was heightened by having same-side peers collaborating in arguing on the computer against successive pairs of peers on the opposing side of an issue on the topic of Climate Change and by engaging in explicit reflective activities on the use of evidence. Participants showed significant advances both in their skill of producing evidence-based arguments and counterarguments and regarding the accuracy of the evidence used. Advances were also observed at the meta-level, reflecting at least implicit understanding that using evidence is an important goal of argumentation. Another group of pre-service teachers, who studied about the role of evidence in science in the context of regular curriculum and served as a control condition, did not exhibit comparable advances in the use of evidence in argumentation. Educational implications are discussed.

show abstract

“…Of course, children can readily develop persuasive and defensible arguments, but these arguments typically rely on untested presumptions of shared knowledge that from a disciplinary perspective, may not constitute adequate grounds of evidence (Anderson, Chinn, Chang, Waggoner, & Yi, 1997). The teacher's assistance was also essential because this argument about area extended over a prolonged period of time and required the integration of many sources of information.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Visualizing the emergent structure of children's mathematical argument

et al. 2001

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Mathematics educators suggest that students of all ages need to participate in productive forms of mathematical argument (NCTM, 2000). Accordingly, we developed two complementary frameworks for analyzing the emergence of mathematical argumentation in one second-grade classroom. Children attempted to resolve contesting claims about the "space covered" by three different-looking rectangles of equal area measure. Our first analysis renders the topology of the semantic structure of the classroom conversation as a directed graph. The graph affords clear "at a glance" visualization of how various senses of mathematics-as imagined, as performed, and as historically rooted-were interrelated. The graph represents the emergence and intercoordination between conceptual and procedural knowledge in the ebb and flow of classroom conversation. The graph has not just descriptive, but also predictive power: Interconnectedness among the nodes of the graph representing the first 40 min of conversation predicted the structure of recall in the final ten minutes by children who had played little overt role in the conversation up to that point. The second, complementary framework draws upon Goffman's expanded repertoire of roles in speech to demonstrate how the teacher orchestrated this classroom conversation to establish coherent argument. In this second analysis, we establish how the teacher mediated between the everyday talk of her students and the discourse of mathematics. Her revoicing of student talk created interstices for identity and participation in the formation of the argument. Together, the two forms of analysis illuminate the emergence of mathematical argument at two levels: as collective structure and concurrently, as individual activity.

show abstract

On the Logical Integrity of Children's Arguments

Cited by 118 publications

References 8 publications

What Is Meant by Argumentative Competence? An Integrative Review of Methods of Analysis and Assessment in Education

What Is Meant by Argumentative Competence? An Integrative Review of Methods of Analysis and Assessment in Education

Developing pre-service teachers' evidence-based argumentation skills on socio-scientific issues

Visualizing the emergent structure of children's mathematical argument

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About