Software for Argumentation and Writing

1. Software for Argumentation and Writing Gellof Kanselaar, Arja Veerman, Jerry Andriessen, Tamsin Treasure-Jones info: A.Veerman@fss.uu.nl http://eduweb.fsw.ruu.nl/arja/ 1 EARLI '99

2. Context • Academic learning • Constructivist learning theory • Rhetorical perspective: • “Learning is the name we give the argumentative processes that transpires among teachers, students and their real worlds” (Petraglia, 1997) 2 EARLI '99

3. The Real World... 3 EARLI '99

4. “Meaningful” Learning Situations • Interactive learning • Collaborative problem solving • Open-ended tasks • Collaborative argumentation 4 EARLI '99

5. Collaborative Argumentation • Provoke argumentation • Critical argumentation: multiple perspective taking and elaboration 5 EARLI '99

6. Key Issue: Evaluation of Information • Is there any doubt? • Or disbelief? • Evaluate the information! 6 EARLI '99

7. “But We Don’t Want To…” • ...Be in disagreement • ...Argue with the tutor • ...Insult our friends • ...Loose an argument • …Spend so much energy! 7 EARLI '99

8. Research Questions • How to provoke argumentation? • How to support cognitive processes of • Evaluating information • Multiple perspective taking • Elaboration 8 EARLI '99

9. … In Electronic Environments? “Networked computers offer students opportunities for reflection on their performance. Unlike traditional teaching methods that tend to obscure the learning process, computers tacitly call attention to the learning events and to see their performance explicitly in a computerised environment. This both encourages them to reflect on the problem-solving process as welll as permits them to compare their performance to that of others.” (Petraglia, 1997) 9 EARLI '99

10. In Which We Can... • Structure the interaction at the interface • labelling utterances • Pictorial information on buttons • Separate task and communication window • Turn-taking control 10 EARLI '99

11. Example “Belvédère” 11 EARLI '99

12. Review 5 Systems: Criteria • Problem-solving tasks for higher education • Published results considering argumentation • Symmetrical interaction • ‘Short’ tasks • Variance in structured interaction to support interaction and/ or argumentation 12 EARLI '99

13. Electronic Environments 1. Dialab (Moore, 1993) 2. Conference MOO (Jermann & Schneider, 1997) 3. Belvédère (Suthers & Weiner, 1995) 4. CTP (Andriessen, Erkens, Overeem & jaspers, 1996) 5. CLARE(wan & Johnson, 1994) Workshop on Argumentation, June 30th & July 1st 1998, Potiers, France 13 EARLI '99

14. Type of Structured Interaction: 14 EARLI '99

15. Data-analyses on... • Questions asked • (Problem) statements posed • Arguments given • Elaborations made 15 EARLI '99

16. Results 16 EARLI '99

17. Interpretations (1) • Dialab • Mismatch rigid structure / open-ended problems • Rigid turn-taking inhibits elaboration • “Win-loss” design leads to focus shift / escapism • Clare • Double layer (nodes ‘problem’ -> template ‘question’) • Misappropriation of dialogue markers 17 EARLI '99

18. Interpretations (2) • Conference MOO: • Flexible structured interaction • Hardly argumentative dialogues --> task • Supports personal style • Provides specific support • Belvédère • Stimulates balance/ integration of arguments • Reflection 18 EARLI '99

19. Interpretations (3) • CTP • Turn-taking control in task window • Coordination of the problem solving process 19 EARLI '99

20. Conclusions (1) • Preconditions for fruitful argumentation: • Shared focus on goal • Shared focus on dialogue • Match task- and structure characteristics • Provoking argumentation • Design of the learning situation: • Task - instruction - roles students/ tutor 20 EARLI '99

21. Conclusions (2) • Support for argumentation • Combination of sentence openers and free input of text • Turn-taking in task window coordinates the collaborative problem-solving process • Turn-taking in communication window inhibits the elaboration on arguments • Use of diagrams: graphical organisation of arguments stimulates (multiple perspective taking x elaboration) 21 EARLI '99

22. How to Continue... • Research structured versus structured interaction • Graphic/ textual dialogue markers and sentence openers • Free versus restricted input of text • Combinations of educational design & structured interaction • Specific versus generic development of software 22 EARLI '99

23. Discussion: Evaluation of Information As the Key Aspect • Cognitive signals in evaluation • Interest • Consciousness • Socio-cognitive conflict • Prior knowledge • Schemata • Strength belief system 23 EARLI '99

24. (1) Quick Test: Read the Sentence • Finished files are the result of years of scientific study combined with the experience of years. • Now count aloud the F's in that sentence. Count them ONLY ONCE: do not go back and count them again. 24 EARLI '99

25. (2) Lecture “80 students are following a lecture. Behind the lecturer a very strange human being occurs, waves stupidly and disappears after a few seconds. A short while after the lecture most of the students do not remember the strange figure at all” EARLI '99