❌

Normal view

There are new articles available, click to refresh the page.
Before yesterdayLatest Results for International Journal of Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning

How do new ideas come to be adopted during discourse?

Abstract

Here, we present comparative case studies of two young adolescents engaged in electronic dialogs on a social issue with a sequence of partners. We trace how an individual coordinates existing ideas with new input the interaction provides. Tracing the evolution of an individual’s ideas entails close examination of the process by means of which it occurs. The skills the individual brings to the interaction shape this evolution, as well as undergo development themselves as a consequence of practice. The two case studies revealed strikingly different patterns, and their comparison provides insights into the processes involved. Their description encompasses not simply the knowledge but also the argument skills the individual brings to the activity and, underlying them, understandings of the purposes and objectives of argumentation. Metacognitive talk about their thinking may be key in conferring the benefit the dialogic activity provides; it aides in dissociating a belief from the holder of the belief, thereby promoting claims being situated in argumentative relation to one another. Text-only communication proved a beneficial condition for this to occur.

Disagreeing softly: Supporting students in managing disagreement in peer critique

Abstract

Disagreement is often perceived negatively, yet it can be beneficial for learning and scientific inquiry. However, students tend to avoid engaging in disagreement. Peer critique activities offer a promising way to encourage students to embrace disagreement, which supports learning as students articulate their ideas, making them available for discussion, revision, and refinement. This study aims to better understand how students express disagreement during peer critique within small groups and how that affects moving their inquiry forward. It explores 5th-grade students’ management of disagreement within a computer-supported collaborative modeling environment. Using conversation analysis, we identified various forms of disagreements employed by students when engaging with different audiences. We observed a tendency for students to disagree softly; that is, disagreement was implied and/or mitigated. Students’ resolution of both direct and soft disagreements effectively promoted their collective knowledge advancement, including building shared scientific understanding and improving their models, while maintaining a positive socio-emotional climate. These findings have implications for designing CSCL environments with respect to supporting students in providing and responding to peer critiques at the group level.

❌
❌