Abstract
AbstractOver the past 20 years, a broad and diverse research literature has emerged to address how students learn to argue through dialogue in educational contexts. However, the variety of approaches used to study this phenomenon makes it challenging to find coherence in what may otherwise seem to be disparate fields of study. In this integrative review, we propose looking at how learning to argue (LTA) has been operationalized thus far in educational research, focusing on how different scholars have framed and fostered argumentative dialogue, assessed its gains, and applied it in different learning contexts. In total, 143 studies from the broad literature on educational dialogue and argumentation were analysed, including all educational levels (from primary to university). The following patterns for studying how dialogue fosters LTA emerged: whole-class ‘low structure’ framing with a goal of dialogue, small-group ‘high structure’ framing with varied argumentative goals, and studies with one-to-one dialectic framing with a goal of persuasive deliberation. The affordances and limitations of these different instructional approaches to LTA research and practice are discussed. We conclude with a discussion of complementarity of the approaches that emerged from our analysis in terms of the pedagogical methods and conditions that promote productive and/or constructive classroom interactions.
Funder
Fundação para a Ciência e a Tecnologia
European Commission
Publisher
Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Subject
Developmental and Educational Psychology
Reference199 articles.
1. Albe, V. (2008). When scientific knowledge, daily life experience, epistemological and social considerations intersect: Students’ argumentation in group discussions on a socio-scientific issue. Research in Science Education, 38(1), 67–90. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11165-007-9040-2
2. Alexander, R. J. (2017). Towards dialogic teaching: Rethinking classroom talk (5th ed.). Dialogos.
3. Andriessen, J., & Baker, M. J. (2014). Arguing to learn. In R. K. Sawyer (Ed.), The Cambridge handbook of the learning sciences (2nd ed., pp. 439–460). Cambridge University Press.
4. Andriessen, J. E., & Schwarz, B. B. (2009). Argumentative design. In N. Muller-Mirza & A. N. Perret-Clermont (Eds.), Argumentation and education: Theoretical foundations and practices (pp. 145–174). Springer.
5. Andriessen, J., Baker, M., & van der Puil, C. (2011). Socio-cognitive tension in collaborative working relations. In S. Ludwigsen, A. Lund, I. Rasmussen, & R. Säljö (Eds.), Learning across sites: New tools, infrastructures and practices (pp. 222–242). Routledge.
Cited by
27 articles.
订阅此论文施引文献
订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献