整合辩证建构主义支架式论证图谱,支持学生的辩证思维、口头和对话论证复杂性

Darmawansah Darmawansah, Gwo-Jen Hwang, Chi-Jen Lin
{"title":"整合辩证建构主义支架式论证图谱,支持学生的辩证思维、口头和对话论证复杂性","authors":"Darmawansah Darmawansah, Gwo-Jen Hwang, Chi-Jen Lin","doi":"10.1007/s11423-024-10395-5","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>Dialectical thinking is a way of discussing and analyzing things from different viewpoints to reach a solution. It is often taught in language courses by conducting argumentation activities. However, without providing effective strategies or tools, learners generally encounter difficulties in structuring their viewpoints during the argumentation process. To solve this problem, this study proposed dialectical constructivist scaffolding-based argumentation mapping (DCS-AM), which integrates a structured, four-stage process to support students’ dialectical thinking and oral and dialogical argumentation complexity. The argumentation map refers to a visualized tool that enables learners to structure their viewpoints for making arguments. A quasi-experiment was conducted in an English as a Foreign Language course. A total of 26 students were in the DCS-AM group, while 22 students were in the conventional constructivist scaffolding-based argumentation mapping (CS-AM) group, which adopted a more conventional format, emphasizing direct discussion and teacher-led knowledge transmission. The experimental results found that students in the DCS-AM group exhibited significantly better dialectical thinking than those in the CS-AM group. Also, an epistemic network analysis (ENA) of oral and dialogical argumentation revealed that students in the DCS-AM group frequently developed more complex argumentation than those in the CS-AM group in terms of the structural component and discourse activity, including the process of students’ dialectical thinking that was found in both groups. This finding shows that technology-supported dialectical constructivist scaffolding can help students improve their dialectical thinking and argumentation skills.</p>","PeriodicalId":501584,"journal":{"name":"Educational Technology Research and Development","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-06-17","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Integrating dialectical constructivist scaffolding-based argumentation mapping to support students’ dialectical thinking, oral and dialogical argumentation complexity\",\"authors\":\"Darmawansah Darmawansah, Gwo-Jen Hwang, Chi-Jen Lin\",\"doi\":\"10.1007/s11423-024-10395-5\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p>Dialectical thinking is a way of discussing and analyzing things from different viewpoints to reach a solution. It is often taught in language courses by conducting argumentation activities. However, without providing effective strategies or tools, learners generally encounter difficulties in structuring their viewpoints during the argumentation process. To solve this problem, this study proposed dialectical constructivist scaffolding-based argumentation mapping (DCS-AM), which integrates a structured, four-stage process to support students’ dialectical thinking and oral and dialogical argumentation complexity. The argumentation map refers to a visualized tool that enables learners to structure their viewpoints for making arguments. A quasi-experiment was conducted in an English as a Foreign Language course. A total of 26 students were in the DCS-AM group, while 22 students were in the conventional constructivist scaffolding-based argumentation mapping (CS-AM) group, which adopted a more conventional format, emphasizing direct discussion and teacher-led knowledge transmission. The experimental results found that students in the DCS-AM group exhibited significantly better dialectical thinking than those in the CS-AM group. Also, an epistemic network analysis (ENA) of oral and dialogical argumentation revealed that students in the DCS-AM group frequently developed more complex argumentation than those in the CS-AM group in terms of the structural component and discourse activity, including the process of students’ dialectical thinking that was found in both groups. This finding shows that technology-supported dialectical constructivist scaffolding can help students improve their dialectical thinking and argumentation skills.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":501584,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Educational Technology Research and Development\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-06-17\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Educational Technology Research and Development\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1007/s11423-024-10395-5\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Educational Technology Research and Development","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s11423-024-10395-5","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

辩证思维是从不同角度对事物进行讨论和分析,从而得出解决方案的一种方法。在语言课程中,通常通过开展论证活动来教授辩证思维。然而,如果不提供有效的策略或工具,学习者在论证过程中一般会遇到观点结构化的困难。为解决这一问题,本研究提出了基于支架的辩证建构主义论证图(DCS-AM),它整合了一个结构化的四阶段过程,以支持学生的辩证思维和口头及对话论证的复杂性。论证图指的是一种可视化工具,能让学习者结构化地提出论证观点。我们在一门英语作为外语的课程中进行了一次准实验。共有 26 名学生参加了 DCS-AM 组,22 名学生参加了传统的建构主义支架式论证图(CS-AM)组,后者采用了更传统的形式,强调直接讨论和教师主导的知识传授。实验结果发现,DCS-AM 组学生的辩证思维能力明显优于 CS-AM 组。此外,对口头和对话论证的认识论网络分析(ENA)显示,DCS-AM 组的学生在结构成分和话语活动方面经常比 CS-AM 组的学生发展出更复杂的论证,包括两组学生的辩证思维过程。这一发现表明,技术支持下的辩证建构主义支架可以帮助学生提高辩证思维和论证能力。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。

Integrating dialectical constructivist scaffolding-based argumentation mapping to support students’ dialectical thinking, oral and dialogical argumentation complexity

Integrating dialectical constructivist scaffolding-based argumentation mapping to support students’ dialectical thinking, oral and dialogical argumentation complexity

Dialectical thinking is a way of discussing and analyzing things from different viewpoints to reach a solution. It is often taught in language courses by conducting argumentation activities. However, without providing effective strategies or tools, learners generally encounter difficulties in structuring their viewpoints during the argumentation process. To solve this problem, this study proposed dialectical constructivist scaffolding-based argumentation mapping (DCS-AM), which integrates a structured, four-stage process to support students’ dialectical thinking and oral and dialogical argumentation complexity. The argumentation map refers to a visualized tool that enables learners to structure their viewpoints for making arguments. A quasi-experiment was conducted in an English as a Foreign Language course. A total of 26 students were in the DCS-AM group, while 22 students were in the conventional constructivist scaffolding-based argumentation mapping (CS-AM) group, which adopted a more conventional format, emphasizing direct discussion and teacher-led knowledge transmission. The experimental results found that students in the DCS-AM group exhibited significantly better dialectical thinking than those in the CS-AM group. Also, an epistemic network analysis (ENA) of oral and dialogical argumentation revealed that students in the DCS-AM group frequently developed more complex argumentation than those in the CS-AM group in terms of the structural component and discourse activity, including the process of students’ dialectical thinking that was found in both groups. This finding shows that technology-supported dialectical constructivist scaffolding can help students improve their dialectical thinking and argumentation skills.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信