Repository logo
  • Log In
Repository logo
  • Log In
  1. Home
  2. NIE Publications & Research Output
  3. Electronic Academic Papers
  4. Conference Papers
  5. Analyzing CSCL-mediated science argumentation: how different methods matter
 
  • Details
Options

Analyzing CSCL-mediated science argumentation: how different methods matter

URI
https://hdl.handle.net/10497/13836
Loading...
Thumbnail Image
Type
Conference Paper
Files
 CSCL-2009-113_a.pdf (368.97 KB)
Citation
Yeo, J., Lee, Y.-J., Tan, A.-L., Tan S.-C., & Lum, S. (2009). Analyzing CSCLmediated science argumentation: How different methods matter. In A. Dimitracopoulou, C. O'Malley, D. Suthers, P. Reimann (Eds.), Proceedings of the 8h International Computer Supported Collaborative Learning (CSCL) 2009 (Part 1, pp. 113-117). International Society of the Learning Sciences.
Author
Yeo, Jennifer Ai Choo
•
Lee, Yew-Jin 
•
Tan, Aik-Ling 
•
Tan, Seng Chee 
•
Lum, Shawn K. Y.
Abstract
Research on argumentation has increased our understanding of knowledge construction, group learning, and scaffolding structures in CSCL although analyses of argumentation pose many difficulties. This could be due to the many theoretical positions that can be taken when approaching discourse data. In this paper, we use three popular analytic methods (interactional, content-specific, and linguistic) to compare the same fragment of scientific argumentation by Grade 4 children in Singapore. We show the complementary emphases and strengths of each disciplinary position as well as their weaknesses. The results imply that analytic methods arising from different disciplinary positions can potentially broaden our overall understanding of using argumentation in CSCL.
Date Issued
2009
  • Contact US
  • Terms of Use
  • Privacy Policy

NTU Reg No: 200604393R. Copyright National Institute of Education, Nanyang Technological University (NIE NTU), Singapore

Built with DSpace-CRIS software - Extension maintained and optimized by 4Science