Enhancing online collaborative argumentation through question elaboration and goal instructions.
Computer-supported collaborative argumentation can improve understanding and problem-solving skills. This study uses WebCT to explore the improvement of argumentation in asynchronous, web-based discussions through goal instructions, which are statements at the end of a discussion prompt indicating w...
| Publicado en: | Journal of Computer Assisted Learning Vol. 24; no. 3; pp. 167 - 181 |
|---|---|
| Autores principales: | , |
| Formato: | clinical trial research tables/charts Journal Article |
| Publicado: |
Wiley-Blackwell
Jun2008
|
| Acceso en línea: | Ver este registro en EBSCOhost |
| fields | @attributes: recordID: 1 pdfLink: plink: https://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=ccm&AN=105344562&site=ehost-live header: @attributes: shortDbName: ccm uiTerm: 105344562 longDbName: CINAHL Complete uiTag: AN controlInfo: bkinfo: dissinfo: jinfo: jid: 02664909 6M1 jtl: Journal of Computer Assisted Learning issn: 02664909 maglogo: Y pubinfo: dt: Jun2008 vid: 24 iid: 3 pid: 480 pub: Wiley-Blackwell place: Malden, Massachusetts artinfo: ui: 105344562 105344562 2010457706 10.1111/j.1365-2729.2007.00251.x 105344562 ppf: 167 ppct: 14 formats: tig: atl: Enhancing online collaborative argumentation through question elaboration and goal instructions. aug: au: Golanics JD Nussbaum EM affil: Department of Educational Psychology, University of Nevada, Las Vegas, NV, USA sug: subj: Collaboration Electronic Bulletin Boards Goals and Objectives Teaching Methods Adult Attitude Measures Colleges and Universities Descriptive Statistics Education, Baccalaureate Female Internet Male Middle Age Nevada Pretest-Posttest Design Psychology, Educational Education Questionnaires Random Assignment Single-Blind Studies Step-Wise Multiple Regression Student Attitudes Student Knowledge Students, College Summated Rating Scaling Human Adult: 19-44 years Middle Aged: 45-64 years Female Male ab: Computer-supported collaborative argumentation can improve understanding and problem-solving skills. This study uses WebCT to explore the improvement of argumentation in asynchronous, web-based discussions through goal instructions, which are statements at the end of a discussion prompt indicating what students should achieve. In a previous study ( Nussbaum 2005 ), the goal instruction 'generate as many reasons as possible' resulted in more balanced argumentation in an online environment. This study attempts to replicate this finding. It also examines the role of prior attitudes, knowledge and interest, and also the effect of elaborating on possible lines of reasoning in the question prompt. The goal instruction to generate as many reasons as possible (goal/no goal) was crossed with question elaboration (elaborated/unelaborated question) in a 2 x 2 randomized design using 131 undergraduates. Half of the participants were randomly assigned to complete the attitude survey before discussion. Results indicated that, when prior knowledge was controlled, the reason goal instruction positively affected argument development and opposing view exploration, but only for high-issue knowledge students. The sheer volume of notes created by the online environment may have caused cognitive overload for low-issue knowledge students. Question elaboration promoted balanced argumentation for all students, but especially those with low knowledge. pubtype: Academic Journal doctype: clinical trial research tables/charts Journal Article ougenre: Article language: English refInfo: holdings: @attributes: islocal: N |
|---|