Arguing on-line with SCALE

1. Arguing on-line with SCALE M.José Loureiro António A. Moreira Luísa Álvares Pereira Portugal

2. Summary context research theoretical framework goals argumentation data collection learning on-line results on-line argumentation conclusions SCALE environment

3. context research project developed at the University of Aveiro about arguing on-line in the context of high education I C E M AVEIRO LISBOA NICOSIA

4. theoretical framework • Arguing • - ǾƠΣ • - θψ,  • - Φρ!!! • - #  • -    • - $$&!!###!!!, ##&&! • - @@§§£§&, &###!!!##, !

5. theoreticalframework argumentation • An active, intervening citizen must be able to express his/her opinions clearly, explain, justify, argue and have critical points of view. • Argumentation is a fundamental tool for learning. Students exchange opinions while they develop skills for building and structuring arguments. At the same time, their knowledge of the discussion contents becomes deeper. Quino, (1987), “Ça va les affaires”, ed. Glénat

6. learning on-line • «ICTs may be and may become better cognitive partners for advanced problem solving functions if compared to the note book and the pencil». • This function is as important as “encouraging participants to discover knowledge virtualisation and its actualisation dynamics […] • (Lima, 2004:107)

7. on-line argumentation in the SCALE platform • The study is grounded on work developed on the learning platform SCALE designed under the scope of an European project. • SCALE intends to specifically develop argumentative written skills. • The eLearning platform BlackBoard was also used to complement work with SCALE, for functions not present in this platform (discussion forum, file sharing, etc).

8. SCALE platform • SCALE (Support Collaborative Argumentation-based Learning), combines diverse forms of systematizing discussion: Chat, structured Chat – Alex, automatic or manual argumentative graphs generator – Grapher, Text editor… • Communication tools and tools for analysing results • Contexts and pedagogical orientation on how to learn to argue and on arguing to learn. • It is an Internet-based tool to guide and support collaborative learning of argumentative discourse.

9. research on-line tools CHAT ALEX GRAPHER FORUM

10. aims of the project • To analyse the mechanisms of dialogic collaboration in activities of planning and producing written argumentative texts. • To understand how these mechanisms become apparent in argumentative textuality. • To determine the contribution of SCALE and Blackboard in the development of the argumentative skill in written text production. • To outline didactic proposals aimed at the construction of academic writing.

11. data gathering SCALE GRAPHER ALEX • Test on “reading, note taking and written production”. • Questionnaire on “Knowledge and attitudes towards ICT”; on “reading and writing”; on platform use. • Students’ participation logs on the dialogic discussions on SCALE, through the Chat, Alex e Grapher tools. • Logs on the evolution of the dialogic discussion in the teacher’s tool Replay. • BlackBoard logs on the questionnaires, on students’ versions of note-taking and on students’ participation in the forum.

12. discussion subject “Os OGM são a solução para acabar com a fome no mundo?” Are GMO’ the solution to stop starvation in the world? • Receitas Contra a Fome – Histórias de sucesso para o futuro da agricultura - Um relatório do Greenpeace • Recipes against hunger – success stories for the future of agriculture

13. examples GRAPHER

14. examples CHAT <a9 a9d5> no / I think this a little bit difficult <a10 a10d5> think with me.. / how do you begin a text? / you don’t begin it with arguments at once / isn’t it? <a9 a9d5> you think the first one is 1? <a10 a10d5> You must begin with an introduction… / :s ALEX <a1 a1d1> what is your opinion about sentence 2 3 <a2 a2d1> I criticize sentence 2 because nowadays science becomes very expensive!! Is it (medication) really cheap?? <a1 a1d1> I agree with sentence 3 4 <a1 a1d1> I support sentence 3 because even to heal children they need lots of money……(D1) FORUM “I think the construction of the graphic was very helpful because it allowed to construct a map of ideas, full of meaning and this way of constructing a map is most interesting because we become able to better organize the ideas we would like to transmit, and then others will also understand them better. Kisses” (A16).

15. results • SCALE platform helps students to develop more solid opinions, to structure their own points of view and to deconstruct arguments that facilitate understanding. • The graphic representation in argumentative maps, GRAPHER, shows evidence of learning in the argumentative structure. • The structured chat ALEX is confusing for students. Nevertheless models are important in the guidance of negotiable interaction. • The free CHAT leads to challenge and explanation cycles that characterize positive interchanges guiding students towards the strategies of learning from peers.

16. conclusions On-line activities positively influence students’ attitudes as to their written argumentative skills. They had the effect of making the students aware of the complexity and skills demanded by ICT. B U T Good performances on-line do not correspond to good performance off-line. I N F A C T Students with well-schematized argumentative diagrams, students with great initiative in CHAT, ALEX and in FORUM, display average-like performance off-line (much lower than their performance on-line). A decisive factor for on-line success is the degree of adhesion to the tools and the degree of students’ familiarity with computers.

17. limitations • Difficulties of technological nature. • Disadvantages of the coding of interactions. • Time constraints: • Short duration of the study that didn’t allow for the verification of the permanence of learning that rendered impossible a more consistent dexterity in the manipulation of the tools. • Work overload felt by the students at the time of the academic year the study was concluded, which had a negative impact on their performance. • Negative impact of the last off-line test, after work on-line.

18. outcomes • Studies of this nature: • Constitute a contribution towards validating on-line collaboration and learning strategies; • Increase knowledge about the development of argumentative skills in web based environments and its contribution for the construction of knowledge; • Constitute a starting point for future research in this area: • the importance of argumentative maps created on-line for the development of argumentative skills; • the contribution of guided on-line interaction with advanced chat tools like ALEX; • the influence of the on-line development of argumentative skills on academic writing

19. epilogue • With the present study we reached • a narrative on the narratives of students • about their resources and paths, • interactive and argumentative, • on-line and off-line, • individually and collaboratively. • We now expect that novel readings render new insights possible about these same narratives.

20. Maria José Loureiro António Moreira Luísa Alvares Pereira zeloureiro@ua.pt moreira@ua.pt lpereira@ua.pt Departamento de Didáctica e Tecnologia Educativa Universidade de Aveiro Campus de Santiago 3800-193 AVEIRO PORTUGAL