Abstract
Critical reasoning has been recognized as a valuable educational goal since the end of the nineteenth century. However, the educational programs to reach this goal have changed dramatically during the twentieth century and moved to a dialogic approach. The shift to dialogism in programs to promote critical reasoning brings challenges concerning evaluation. We depict such a program here. This program is based on the use of graphic tools for argumentation in e-discussions. We focus on one history teacher who implemented the program in his class during a period of 7 months. In a design-based research cycle, we investigate the process of finding proper criteria to evaluate the program and to improve it. We show that the criteria of coherence, decisiveness and openness are appropriate for evaluating the program as they stem from pedagogical principles (autonomy, collaboration, commitment to reasoning, ethical communication, procedural mediation, etc.) that are central to a dialogic approach for critical reasoning education. We show that the history course was successful according to those criteria, but not successful according to other more traditional criteria. We discuss whether these differential performances suggest new standards for critical reasoning, actions to improve the program, or both.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Andriessen, J., Baker, M., & Suthers, D. (2003). Arguing to learn: Confronting cognitions in computer-supported collaborative learning environments. The Netherlands: Kluwer.
Bakhtin, M. (1981). The dialogic imagination: Four essays. Austin: University of Texas Press (M. Holquist, Ed.; C. Emerson & M. Holquist, Trans.).
Bereiter, C. (2002). Education and mind in the knowledge age. Hillsdale, NL: Erlbaum.
Brown, A. L. (1992). Design Experiments: Theoretical and methodological challenges in creating complex interventions in classroom settings. The Journal of the Learning Sciences, 2, 141–178.
Buber, M. (1923). Ich und Du. Frankfurt: Rütten & Loening.
Cazden, B. C. (1988). Classroom discourse: The language of teaching and learning. Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann.
Cobb, P., Stephan, M., McClain, K., & Gravemeijer, K. (2001). Participating in classroom mathematical practices. The Journal of the Learning Sciences, 10(1&2), 113–164.
Glassner, A., & Schwarz, B. B. (2005). The role of floor control and of ontology in argumentative activities with discussion-based tools. In T. Koschmann, D. D. Suthers, & T. W. Chan, (Eds.), Proceedings of CSCL 2005. Computer support for collaborative learning: The Next 10 Years! (pp. 170–179). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
Goodwin, C., & Heritage, J. (1990). Conversation Analysis. Annual Review of Anthropology, 19, 283–307.
Habermas, J. (1972). Knowledge and human interests. London: Heinemann Educational Books.
Heidegger, M. (1996). Being and time: A translation of Sein und Zeit (J. Stambaugh, Trans.). Albany, NY: SUNY Press (Original work published in 1927).
Kuhn, D. (1991). The skills of argument. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Kuhn, D., Shaw, V., & Felton, M. (1997). Effects of dyadic interaction on argumentative reasoning. Cognition and Instruction, 15, 287–315.
Lakkala, M., Lallimo, J., Hakkarainen, K. (2005). Teachers’ pedagogical designs for technology-supported collective inquiry: A national case study. Computers and Education, 45(3), 337–356.
Means, M. L., & Voss, J. F. (1996). Who reasons well? Two studies of informal reasoning among children of different grade, ability and knowledge levels. Cognition and Instruction, 14(2), 139–179.
Scardamalia, M. A., & Bereiter, C. (1994). Computer support for knowledge building communities. The Journal of the Learning Sciences, 3, 265–283.
Schwarz, B. B. (2003). Collective reading of multiple texts in argumentative activities. The International Journal of Educational Research, 39, 133–151.
Schwarz, B. B. (2005). Do EU funded projects enable collaboration between scientists? The case of R&D in web-based Collaborative Learning Environments. Computers and Education, 45, 375–382.
Schwarz, B. B., & Glassner, A. (2003). The blind and the paralytic: fostering argumentation in everyday and scientific issues. In J. Andriessen, M. Baker, & D. Suthers (Eds.), Arguing to Learn: Confronting cognitions in computer-supported collaborative learning environments (pp. 227–260). Dordrecht: Kluwer.
Schwarz, B. B., & Glassner, A. (2007). Designing CSCL argumentative environments for broadening and deepening understanding of the space of debate. In R. Säljö (Ed.), Information and communication technology and the transformation of learning practices. Dordrecht: Kluwer (in press).
Schwarz, B. B., Neuman, Y., Gil, J., & Ilya, M. (2003). Construction of collective and individual knowledge in argumentative activity: An empirical study. The Journal of the Learning Sciences, 12(2), 221–258.
Sfard, A. (1998). On two metaphors for learning and the dangers of choosing just one. Educational Researcher, 27(2), 4–13.
Suthers, D. (2003). Representational guidance for collaborative inquiry. In J. Andriessen, M. Baker, & D. Suthers (Eds.), Arguing to Learn: Confronting cognitions in computer-supported collaborative learning environments (pp. 27–46). Dordrecht: Kluwer.
Suthers, D., & Hundhausen, C. (2003). An empirical study of the effects of representational guidance on collaborative learning. The Journal of the Learning Sciences, 12(2), 183–219.
van Bruggen, J. M., & Kirshner, J. M. (2003). Designing external representations to support solving wicked problems. In J. Andriessen, M. Baker, & D. Suthers (Eds.), Arguing to learn: Confronting cognitions in computer-supported collaborative learning environments (pp. 177–204). Dordrecht: Kluwer.
van Diggelen, W., Overdijk, M., & De-Groot, R. (2005). ‘Say it out loud in writing’: A dialectical inquiry into the potentials and pitfalls of computer supported argumentative discussions. Paper presented at CSCL 2005; May 30 – June 4, 2005, Taipei, Taiwan.
Wegerif, R. (2006). A dialogic understanding of the relationship between CSCL and teaching thinking skills. The International Journal of Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning, 1, 143–157.
Wineburg, S. S. (1991). On the reading of historical texts: Notes on the breach between school and academy. American Educational Research Journal, 28, 495–519.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Additional information
To appear in the International Journal of Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning.
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Schwarz, B.B., De Groot, R. Argumentation in a changing world. Computer Supported Learning 2, 297–313 (2007). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11412-007-9020-6
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11412-007-9020-6