Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Computer-aided argument mapping in an EFL setting: does technology precede traditional paper and pencil approach in developing critical thinking?

  • Cultural and Regional Perspectives
  • Published:
Educational Technology Research and Development Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Developing higher-order critical thinking skills as one of the central objectives of education has been recently facilitated via software packages. Whereas one such technology as computer-aided argument mapping is reported to enhance levels of critical thinking (van Gelder 2001), its application as a pedagogical tool in English as a Foreign Language (EFL) settings has been rarely explored. In addition, the literature fails to acknowledge whether having the basic skill of representing an argument diagrammatically even with paper and pencil can lead to similar results. That being the case, this study was conducted with the aim of comparing the impact of teaching argument mapping via Rationale TM software versus paper and pencil on Iranian EFL majors’ critical thinking skills development. To this end, 180 EFL participants were screened into low and high levels of reading proficiency based on their scores on a sample reading proficiency test. Next, they were randomly assigned to two experimental and one comparison groups. During 12 sessions, the experimental groups were provided with argument mapping instructions while the comparison group received a conventional reading instruction. All participants were pre- and post-tested with the California critical thinking skills test (CCTST). Results suggested that students in the software group significantly outperformed those in the paper and pencil group on overall CCTST and the sub-skills of inference and inductive reasoning. They also scored significantly higher on all tests compared to the comparison group. However, participants’ level of proficiency as well as sex did not show any significant effect on their performance on overall CCTST and its sub-skills.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Abrami, P. C., Bernard, R. M., Borokhovski, E., Wade, A., Surkes, M. A., Tamim, R., & Zhang, D. (2008). Instructional interventions affecting critical thinking skills and dispositions: A stage 1 meta-analysis. Review of Educational Research, 78(4), 1102–1134.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Aliakbari, M., & Sadeghdaghighi, A. (2011). Investigation of the Relationship between Gender, Field of Study, and Critical Thinking Skill: the Case of Iranian Students. In Proceedings of the 16th conference of Pan Pacific Association of Applied Linguistics, The Chinese University of Hong Kong.

  • Alvarez-Ortiz, C. (2007). Does philosophy improve critical thinking skills? (Unpublished master’s thesis). Australia: University of Melbourne.

    Google Scholar 

  • Anderson, L. W., & Krathwohl, D. R. (2001). A taxonomy for learning, teaching, and assessing: A revision of Bloom’s taxonomy of educational objectives. New York: Addison-Wesley.

    Google Scholar 

  • Andrade, M. S. (2012). Self regulated learning activities: Supporting success in online courses. In J. S. Moore & A. D. Benson (Eds.), International perspectives of distance learning in higher education (pp. 111-123). Rijeka, Croatia: InTech. http://dx.doi.org/10.5772/33745

  • Atai, M. R., & Mazlum, F. (2013). English language curriculum in Iran: Planning and practice. The Curriculum Journal, 24(3), 389–411.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Azizi, M. (2012). Critical thinking in General English coursebooks taught in Iranian Universities. Journal of Language, Culture, and Translation, 1(3), 15–36.

    Google Scholar 

  • Barjesteh, H., & Vaseghi, R. (2012). Critical thinking: A reading strategy in developing English reading comprehension performance. Sheikhbahaee EFL Journal, 1, 21–34.

    Google Scholar 

  • Barnawi, O. (2011). Finding a place for critical thinking and self-voice in college English as a foreign language writing classrooms. English Language Teaching, 4(2), 190–197. doi:10.5539/elt.v4n2p190.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Birjandi, P., & Bagherkazemi, M. (2010). The relationship between Iranian EFL teachers’ critical thinking ability and their professional success. English Language Teaching, 3(2), 135–145.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Blair, J. A., & Johnson, R. H. (1987). Argumentation as dialetical. Argumentation, 1, 41–56.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Butchart, S., Bigelow, J., Oppy, G., Korb, K., & Gold, I. (2009). Improving critical thinking using web-based argument mapping exercises with automated feedback. Australasian Journal of Educational Technology, 25(2), 268–291.

    Google Scholar 

  • Case, R. (2005). Moving critical thinking to the main stage. Education Canada, 45(2), 45–49.

    Google Scholar 

  • Catchings, G. (2015). A practical coaching model for critical thinking skill and leadership development (C/CTSLD). Management and Organizational Studies, 2(4), 42–53. doi:10.5430/mos.v2n4p42.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chamot, A. U. (1995). Creating a community of thinkers in the ESL/EFL classroom. TESOL Matters, 5(5), 1–16.

    Google Scholar 

  • Chandler, P., & Sweller, J. (1991). Evidence for cognitive load theory. Cognition and Instruction, 8(4), 351–362. doi:10.1207/s1532690xci0804_2.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chapple, L., & Curtis, A. (2000). Content-based instruction in Hong Kong: Student responses to film. System, 28(3), 419–433.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Davidson, B. (1994). Critical thinking: A perspective and prescriptions for language teachers. The Language Teacher, 18(4), 20–26.

    Google Scholar 

  • Davies, M. (2009). Computer-assisted argument mapping: A Rationale approach. Higher Education, 58, 799–820.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Davies, M. (2010). Concept mapping, mind mapping, and argument mapping: What are the differences and do they matter? Higher Education, 62(3), 279–301. doi:10.1007/s10734-010-9387-6.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Davies, M. (2011). Mind mapping, concept mapping, argument mapping: What are the differences and do they matter? Higher Education, 62(3), 279–301. doi:10.1007/s10734-010-9387-6.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Davies, M. (2012). Computer-aided argument map- ping and the teaching of critical thinking: Part II. INQUIRY: Critical Thinking Across the Disciplines, 27(3), 15–28. doi:10.5840/inquiryct20122729.

    Google Scholar 

  • Donohue, A., van Gelder, T., Cumming, G., & Bissett, M. (2002). Reason! Project Studies, 1999–2002. Melbourne, Australia: University of Melbourne. http://www.philosophy.unimelb.edu.au/reason

  • Dwyer, C. P., Hogan, M. J., & Stewart, I. (2010). The evaluation of argument mapping as a learning tool: Comparing the effects of map reading versus text reading on comprehension and recall of arguments. Thinking Skills and Creativity, 5(1), 16–22.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dwyer, C. P., Hogan, M. J., & Stewart, I. (2011). The promotion of critical thinking skills through argument mapping. In C. P. Horvart & J. M. Forte (Eds.), Critical thinking (pp. 97–122). New York: Nova Science Publishers.

    Google Scholar 

  • Elder, L. (2000). Why critical thinking is essential to the community college mission and why it will be difficult to achieve. http://www.criticalthinking.org/page.cfm?PageID=529&CategoryID=73Ennis 1985.

  • Enayat, M. J., Davoudi, M., & Dabbagh, A. (2015). Critical thinking instruction in Iran’s ELT Curriculum: To be or not to be? International Journal of English Language and Translation Studies, 3(4), 29–41. http://www.eltjournal.org

  • Ennis, R. H. (1985). A logical basis for measuring critical thinking skills. Educational Leadership, 45, 44–48.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ennis, R. H. (1989). Critical thinking and subject specificity: Clarification and needed research. Educational Researcher, 18(3), 4–10. doi:10.3102/0013189X018003004.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Evers, C. W. (2007). Culture, cognitive pluralism and rationality. Educational Philosophy and Theory, 39(4), 364–382.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Facione, P. A. (1990a). The California critical thinking skills test: College level. files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED326584.pdf

  • Facione, P. A. (1990b). The California critical thinking skills test (CCTST): Forms A and B; The CCTST test manual. Millbrae, CA: California Academic Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fahim, M., & Ahmadi, H. (2012). Critical thinking, content schemata, and EFL readers’ comprehension and recall. Journal of Comparative Literature and Culture, 1(1), 23–38.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fahim, M., & Ahmadian, M. (2012). Critical thinking and Iranian EFL context. Journal of Language Teaching and Research, 3(4), 793–800. doi:10.4304/jltr.3.4.793-800.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fahim, M., Bagherkazemi, M., & Alemi, M. (2010). The Relationship between test takers’ multiple intelligences and their performance on the reading sections of TOFEL and IELTS. Broad Research in Artificial Intelligence and Neuroscience, 1(3), 1–14.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fahim, M., & Mirzaiee, M. (2013). Improving EFL argumentative writing: A dialogic critical thinking approach. International Journal of Research Studies in Language Learning, 3(1), 3–20.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fahim, M., & Saeepour, M. (2011). The impact of teaching critical thinking skills on reading comprehension of Iranian EFL learners. Journal of Language Teaching and Research, 2(4), 867–874. doi:10.4304/jltr.2.4.867-874.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fisher, A. (1988). The logic of real arguments. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Godfrey-Smith, P. (2008). Recurrent transient underdetermination and the glass half full. Philosophical Studies, 137, 141–148.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gurr, C. A. (1998). On the isomorphism, or lack of it, of representations. In K. Marriott & B. Meyer (Eds.), Visual language theory (pp. 288–310). New York, NY: Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Harrell, M. (2008). No computer program required: Even pencil-and-paper argument mapping improves critical thinking skills. Teaching Philosophy, 31, 351–374.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Harrell, M. (2011). Argument diagramming and critical thinking in introductory philosophy. Higher Education Research and Development, 30(3), 371–385. doi:10.1080/07294360.2010.502559.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Johnson, R. E. (1992). The problem of defining critical thinking. In S. Norris (Ed.), The generalizability of critical thinking (pp. 38–53). New York: Teacher’s College Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Khalili, H., & Hossein Zadeh, M. (2003). Investigation of reliability, validity and normality of the persian version of the California critical thinking skills test form B (CCTST). Journal of Medical Education, 3(1), 29–32.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hosseini, E., Khodaei, F. B., Sarfallah, S. H., & Dolatabadi, H. R. (2012). Exploring the relationship between critical thinking, reading comprehension and reading strategies of English university students. World Applied Sciences Journal, 17(10), 1356–1364.

    Google Scholar 

  • King, P. M., Wood, P. K., & Mines, R. A. (1990). Critical thinking among college and graduate students. Review of Higher Education, 13, 167–186.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kuhn, D., Katz, J., & Dean, D. (2004). Developing reasoning. Thinking & Reasoning, 10(2), 197–219.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Laird, N. T. F. (2005). The California Critical Thinking Skills Test (CCTST). http://www.wabash.edu/news/displaystory.cfm?news_ID=5121

  • Liaw, M. L. (2007). Content-based reading and writing for critical thinking skills in an EFL context. English Teaching and Learning, 31, 45–87.

    Google Scholar 

  • Maftoon, P., Birjandi, P., & Pahlavani, P. (2014). The impact of using computer-aided argument mapping (CAAM) on the improvement of writing achievement of Iranian learners’ of English. Theory and Practice in Language Studies, 4(5), 982–988.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mall-Amiri, B., & Ahmadi, Z. (2014). The relationship between EFL learners’ critical thinking and metacognitive strategies. International Journal of Language Learning and Applied Linguistics World, 5(1), 488–505.

    Google Scholar 

  • Marzano, R. J. (2001). A new taxonomy of educational objectives. In A. L. Costa (Ed.), Developing minds: A resource book for teaching thinking (pp. 181–188). Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mirzaie, Z. (2008). The relationship between critical thinking and lexical inferences of Iranian EFL learners (Unpublished master’s thesis). Tehran: Islamic Azad University, Science and Research Campus.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mulhall, M. L. (2011). Quantitative measurement of critical thinking skills in novice and experienced physical therapists (Doctoral dissertation). Eric database. (ED523006)

  • Myers, B. E., & Dyer, J. E. (2006). The influence of student learning style on critical thinking skill. Journal of Agricultural Education, 74(1), 43–52. doi:10.5032/jae.2006.01043.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nisbett, R. E., Peng, K., Choi, I., & Norenzayan, A. (2001). Culture and systems of thought: Holistic versus analytic cognition. Psychological Review, 108(2), 291–310.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Paul, R. W. (1984). Critical thinking: Fundamental to education for a free society. Educational Leadership, 42, 4–14. doi:10.1177/002248718904000303.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pollock, E., Chandler, P., & Sweller, J. (2002). Assimilating complex information. Learning & Instruction, 12, 61–86. doi:10.1016/S0959-4752(01)00016-0.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pusack, J. P., & Otto, S. K. (1997). Taking control of multimedia. In M. D. Bush & R. M. Terry (Eds.), Technology-enhanced language learning (pp. 1–46). Lincolnwood, IL: National Textbook.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ramsay, P. (2009). Blooming with the pious: Critical thinking, reading and writing across the curriculum. Miami, Florida: Ian Randle.

    Google Scholar 

  • Reed, C., Walton, D., & Macagno, F. (2007). Argument diagramming in logic, law and artificial intelligence. The Knowledge Engineering Review, 22(1), 87–109.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rezaei, S., Derakhshan, A., & Bagherkazemi, M. (2011). Critical thinking in language education. Journal of Language Teaching and Research, 2(4), 769–777.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Romiszowski, A. J. (1981). Designing instructional systems: Decision making in course planning and curriculum design. London: Kogan Page.

    Google Scholar 

  • Semeric, N. (2010). The relationship between self leadership and critical thinking. African Journal of Business Management, 4(8), 1639–1643.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sheikhy Behdani, R. (2009). The relationship between autonomy, critical thinking ability, and reading comprehension ability of Iranian EFL learners (Unpublished master’s thesis). Tehran: Islamic Azad University, Science and research campus.

    Google Scholar 

  • Simon, S. (2008). Using Toulmin’s argument pattern in the evaluation of argumentation in school science. International Journal of Research & Method in Education, 31(3), 277–289.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Solon, T. (2007). Generic critical thinking infusion and course content learning in introductory psychology. Journal of Instructional Psychology, 34, 95–109.

    Google Scholar 

  • Stroupe, R. R. (2006). Integrating critical thinking throughout ESL curricula. TESL Reporter, 39(2), 42–61.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sweller, J. (1999). Instructional design in technical areas. Camberwell, Australia: ACER Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Synder, L. G., & Synder, M. J. (2008). Teaching critical thinking and problem solving skills. The Delta Pi Epsilon Journal, 1(2), 90–99.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tarvin, W., & Al-Arishi, A. (1991). Rethinking communicative language teaching: Reflection and the EFL classroom. TESOL Quarterly, 25(1), 9–27.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Terry, N., & Ervin, B. (2012). Student performance on the California critical thinking skills test. Academy of. Educational Leadership Journal, 16, 25–34.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tung, C. A., & Chang, S. Y. (2009). Developing critical thinking through literature reading. Feng Chia Journal of Humanities and Social Sciences, 19, 287–317.

    Google Scholar 

  • Twardy, C. R. (2004). Argument maps improve critical thinking. Teaching Philosophy, 27(2), 95–116. doi:10.5840/teachphil200427213.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Utah, C., & Waters, A. (2014). Confronting critical thinking challenges in the college classroom. In L. J. Shedletsky & J. S. Beaurdy (Eds.), Cases on teachning critical thinking through visual representation strategies (pp. 140–156). Harshey, PA: IGI Global.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • van Erp, N. L. (2008). Critical thinking in online graduate courses: A phenomenological study (Doctoral dissertation). South Dakota State University. (UMI No. 3316338).

  • van Gelder, T. J. (2000). Learning to reason: A Reason!Able approach. In C. Davis, T. J. van Gelder, & R. Wales (Eds.), Cognitive Science in Australia, 2000: Proceedings of the Fifth Australasian Cognitive Science Society Conference, Adelaide

  • van Gelder, T. J. (2001). How to improve critical thinking using educational technology. In G. Kennedy, M. Keppell, C. McNaught, & T. Petrovic (Eds.), Meeting at the crossroads. Proceedings of the 18th Annual Conference of the Australasia Society for Computers in Learning in Tertiary Education (pp. 539–548). Melbourne, Australia: Biomedical Multimedia Unit, The University of Melbourne

  • van Gelder, T. J. (2002). Argument mapping with Reason!Able. The American Philosophical Association Newsletter on Philosophy and Computers, pp. 85–90. http://www.philosophy.unimelb.edu.au/reason

  • van Gelder, T. J. (2003). Enhancing deliberation through computer-supported argument mapping. In P. A. Kirschner, S. Buckingham-Shum, & C. Carr (Eds.), Visualizing argumentation: Software tools for collaborative and educational sense-making (pp. 97–114). London: Springer.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Van Gelder, T. J. (2005). Teaching critical thinking: Some lessons from cognitive science. College Teaching, 53(1), 41–48.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • van Gelder, T. J. (2007). The rationale for Rationale™. Law, Probability & Risk, 6, 23–42.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • van Gelder, T. J., Bissett, M., & Cumming, G. (2004). Enhancing expertise in informal reasoning. Canadian Journal of Experimental Psychology, 58, 142–152.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Waters, A. (2006). Thinking and language learning. ELT Journal, 60(4), 319–327. doi:10.1093/elt/ccl022.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wu, S. M. (2006). Creating a rhetorical stance: Investigating the strategy of problematization students’ argumentation. RELC Journal, 37(3), 329–353.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. English Language Department, Alzahra University, Tehran, Iran

    Maryam Eftekhari, Elaheh Sotoudehnama & S. Susan Marandi

Authors
  1. Maryam Eftekhari
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Elaheh Sotoudehnama
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. S. Susan Marandi
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Maryam Eftekhari.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Eftekhari, M., Sotoudehnama, E. & Marandi, S.S. Computer-aided argument mapping in an EFL setting: does technology precede traditional paper and pencil approach in developing critical thinking?. Education Tech Research Dev 64, 339–357 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11423-016-9431-z

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11423-016-9431-z

Keywords

Search

Navigation