Argumentation-Based Computer Supported Collaborative Learning (ABCSCL): A Synthesis of 15 Years of Research.

Learning to argue is an essential objective in education; and online environments have been found to support the sharing, constructing, and representing of arguments in multiple formats for what has been termed Argumentation-Based Computer Supported Collaborative Learning (ABCSCL). The purpose of this review is to give an overview of research in the field of ABCSCL and to synthesize the findings. For this review, 108 publications (89 empirical studies and 19 conceptual papers) on ABCSCL research dating from 1995 through 2011 were studied to highlight the foci of the past 15 years. Building on Biggs’ (2003) model, the ABCSCL publications were systematically categorized with respect to student prerequisites, learning environment, processes, and outcomes. Based on the quantitative and qualitative findings, this paper concludes that ABCSCL environments should be designed in a systematic way that takes the variety of specific conditions for learning into account. It also offers suggestions for educational practice and future research.

[1]  N. Rummel,et al.  Learning to Collaborate: An Instructional Approach to Promoting Collaborative Problem Solving in Computer-Mediated Settings , 2005 .

[2]  E. Michael Nussbaum,et al.  How Introverts versus Extroverts Approach Small-Group Argumentative Discussions , 2002, The Elementary School Journal.

[3]  J. A. Blair,et al.  Fundamentals of Argumentation Theory : A Handbook of Historical Backgrounds and Contemporary Developments , 1997 .

[4]  Allan Jeong,et al.  The effects of active versus reflective learning style on the processes of critical discourse in computer-supported collaborative argumentation , 2008, Br. J. Educ. Technol..

[5]  F. Fischer,et al.  A framework to analyze argumentative knowledge construction in computer-supported collaborative learning , 2006, Comput. Educ..

[6]  Richard Beach,et al.  Learning Argument Practices Through Online Role‐Play: Toward a Rhetoric of Significance and Transformation , 2009 .

[7]  Gellof Kanselaar,et al.  Effects of representational guidance on domain specific reasoning in CSCL , 2005, Comput. Hum. Behav..

[8]  S. Toulmin.  The uses of argument , 1960 .

[9]  C. Coffin,et al.  Argument reconceived? , 2009 .

[10]  Gayle V. Davidson-Shivers,et al.  The Effects of Gender Interaction Patterns on Student Participation in Computer-Supported Collaborative Argumentation , 2006 .

[11]  Jack Lee,et al.  Pre-class Planning to Scaffold Students for Online Collaborative Learning Activities , 2000, J. Educ. Technol. Soc..

[12]  F. H. Eemeren,et al.  Handbook of Argumentation Theory: A Critical Survey of Classical Backgrounds and Modern Studies , 1987 .

[13]  Gijsbert Erkens,et al.  Technology-Enhanced Learning Environments to Support Students' Argumentation , 2007 .

[14]  Rand J. Spiro and Jihn-ChangJehng.  Cognitive Flexibility and Hypertext: Theory and Technology for the Nonlinear and Multidimensional Traversal of Complex Subject Matter , 2012 .

[15]  Jerry Andriessen,et al.  Learning through synchronous electronic discussion , 2000, Comput. Educ..

[16]  Maarten Overdijk,et al.  Appropriation of a shared workspace: Organizing principles and their application , 2008, Int. J. Comput. Support. Collab. Learn..

[17]  D. Walton.  Argumentation Schemes for Presumptive Reasoning , 1995 .

[18]  Hans Christian Arnseth,et al.  Approaching institutional contexts: systemic versus dialogic research in CSCL , 2006, Int. J. Comput. Support. Collab. Learn..

[19]  E. Michael Nussbaum,et al.  Putting the pieces together: Online argumentation vee diagrams enhance thinking during discussions , 2007, Int. J. Comput. Support. Collab. Learn..

[20]  M. Baker.  ARGUMENTATION AND CONSTRUCTIVE INTERACTION , 2009 .

[21]  Pieter J. Beers,et al.  Coercing shared knowledge in collaborative learning environments , 2006, Comput. Hum. Behav..

[22]  Heinz Mandl,et al.  Conceptual and socio-cognitive support for collaborative learning in videoconferencing environments , 2006, Comput. Educ..

[23]  A. Ahlgren,et al.  Arguing to Learn in Science: The Role of Collaborative, Critical Discourse , 2010 .

[24]  E. Michael Nussbaum,et al.  Critical Questions and Argument Stratagems: A Framework for Enhancing and Analyzing Students' Reasoning Practices , 2011 .

[25]  Baruch B. Schwarz,et al.  Argumentation in a changing world , 2007, Int. J. Comput. Support. Collab. Learn..

[26]  Sunyoung Joung,et al.  Scaffolding collaborative argumentation in asynchronous discussions with message constraints and message labels , 2007, Comput. Educ..

[27]  Hanni Muukkonen,et al.  Technology-Mediation and Tutoring: How Do They Shape Progressive Inquiry Discourse? , 2005 .

[28]  Heinz Mandl,et al.  Fostering Collaborative Learning in Videoconferencing: the influence of content schemes and collaboration scripts on collaboration outcomes and individual learning outcomes , 2005 .

[29]  D. Kuhn.  Science as argument : Implications for teaching and learning scientific thinking , 1993 .

[30]  Fleur Ruth Prinsen,et al.  The influence of learner characteristics on degree and type of participation in a CSCL environment , 2007, Br. J. Educ. Technol..

[31]  Douglas B. Clark,et al.  Personally‐Seeded Discussions to Scaffold Online Argumentation , 2007 .

[32]  Jeroen Janssen,et al.  Visualization of participation: Does it contribute to successful computer-supported collaborative learning? , 2007, Comput. Educ..

[33]  M. Baker,et al.  Rainbow : A framework for analyzing computer-mediated 5 pedagogical debates 6 , 2006 .

[34]  Baruch B. Schwarz,et al.  The role of floor control and of ontology in argumentative activities with discussion-based tools , 2005, Int. J. Comput. Support. Collab. Learn..

[35]  Andrew S. Rancer,et al.  A conceptualization and measure of argumentativeness. , 1982, Journal of personality assessment.

[36]  Deanna Kuhn,et al.  Coordinating own and other perspectives in argument , 2007 .

[37]  Douglas B. Clark,et al.  Initial Structuring of Online Discussions to Improve Learning and Argumentation: Incorporating Students’ Own Explanations as Seed Comments Versus an Augmented-Preset Approach to Seeding Discussions , 2009 .

[38]  Baruch B. Schwarz,et al.  The Effects of Monological and Dialogical Argumentation on Concept Learning in Evolutionary Theory , 2007 .

[39]  F. Fischer,et al.  Fostering collaborative knowledge construction with visualization tools , 2002 .

[40]  Timothy Koschmann,et al.  CSCL, Argumentation, and Deweyan Inquiry , 2003 .

[41]  Douglas Walton,et al.  Examination dialogue: An argumentation framework for critically questioning an expert opinion , 2006 .

[42]  P. Dillenbourg,et al.  Elaborating New Arguments Through a CSCL Script , 2003 .

[43]  James F. Courtney,et al.  Decision making and knowledge management in inquiring organizations: toward a new decision-making paradigm for DSS , 2001, Decis. Support Syst..

[44]  Richard C. Anderson,et al.  Influence of Oral Discussion on Written Argument , 2001 .

[45]  Allan Jeong.  Gender Interaction Patterns and Gender Participation in Computer-Supported Collaborative Argumentation , 2006 .

[46]  Gijsbert Erkens,et al.  Using representational tools to support historical reasoning in computer-supported collaborative learning , 2005 .

[47]  W. P. Nelson.  Sometimes two wrongs may make a right! , 1980, Medical times.

[48]  M. Baker.  COMPUTER-MEDIATED ARGUMENTATIVE INTERACTIONS FOR THE CO-ELABORATION OF SCIENTIFIC NOTIONS , 2003 .

[49]  A. Veerman.  Constructive Discussions through Electronic Dialogue , 2003 .

[50]  Susanne P. Lajoie,et al.  Supporting Medical Decision Making with Argumentation Tools. , 2008 .

[51]  E. Michael Nussbaum,et al.  Using Argumentation Vee Diagrams (AVDs) for Promoting Argument-Counterargument Integration in Reflective Writing. , 2008 .

[52]  Paul A. Kirschner,et al.  Cognitive load theory: implications of cognitive load theory on the design of learning , 2002 .

[53]  Miriam J. Metzger,et al.  Argument and Decision Making in Computer‐Mediated Groups , 2004 .

[54]  Allan Jeong,et al.  How day of posting affects level of critical discourse in asynchronous discussions and computer-supported collaborative argumentation , 2008, Br. J. Educ. Technol..

[55]  W. Mann,et al.  Rhetorical Structure Theory: looking back and moving ahead , 2006 .

[56]  Douglas B. Clark,et al.  Analytic Frameworks for Assessing Dialogic Argumentation in Online Learning Environments , 2007 .

[57]  María Pilar Jiménez-Aleixandre,et al.  Designing Argumentation Learning Environments , 2007 .

[58]  Tammy Schellens,et al.  Scripting by assigning roles: Does it improve knowledge construction in asynchronous discussion groups? , 2007, Int. J. Comput. Support. Collab. Learn..

[59]  Jeroen Janssen,et al.  Automatic coding of dialogue acts in collaboration protocols , 2008, Int. J. Comput. Support. Collab. Learn..

[60]  Pierre Dillenbourg,et al.  The mechanics of CSCL macro scripts , 2008, Int. J. Comput. Support. Collab. Learn..

[61]  Daniel Bodemer,et al.  Supporting controversial CSCL discussions with augmented group awareness tools , 2007, Int. J. Comput. Support. Collab. Learn..

[62]  Jerry Andriessen,et al.  Collaborative argumentation in academic education , 2002 .

[63]  Frank Fischer,et al.  Scripting Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning : cognitive, computational, and educational perspectives , 2007 .

[64]  D. Kuhn.  THE SKILLS OF ARGUMENT , 2008, Education for Thinking.

[65]  Jerry Andriessen,et al.  The role of diagrams in collaborative argumentation-based learning , 2003 .

[66]  Karsten Stegmann,et al.  Computer-supported collaborative learning in higher education: Scripts for argumentative knowledge c , 2005 .

[67]  D. Kuhn,et al.  Beyond control of variables: What needs to develop to achieve skilled scientific thinking? , 2008 .

[68]  Anne-Nelly Perret-Clermont,et al.  Using graphical tools in a phased activity for enhancing dialogical skills: An example with Digalo , 2007, Int. J. Comput. Support. Collab. Learn..

[69]  Jerry Andriessen,et al.  Representational Tools in Computer-Supported Collaborative Argumentation-Based Learning: How Dyads Work With Constructed and Inspected Argumentative Diagrams , 2007 .

[70]  Karsten Stegmann,et al.  Facilitating argumentative knowledge construction with computer-supported collaboration scripts , 2007, Int. J. Comput. Support. Collab. Learn..

[71]  J. Osborne,et al.  Establishing the norms of scientific argumentation in classrooms , 2000 .

[72]  Douglas B. Clark,et al.  Assessing Dialogic Argumentation in Online Environments to Relate Structure, Grounds, and Conceptual Quality , 2008 .

[73]  Swu-Jane Lin,et al.  An online debate series for first-year pharmacy students. , 2007, American journal of pharmaceutical education.

[74]  Pierre Tchounikine,et al.  Flexibility in macro-scripts for CSCL , 2007 .

[75]  C. Kardash,et al.  The Effects of Goal Instructions and Text on the Generation of Counterarguments During Writing. , 2005 .

[76]  G. Stasser,et al.  Pooling of Unshared Information in Group Decision Making: Biased Information Sampling During Discussion , 1985 .

[77]  Erik C. W. Krabbe,et al.  From axiom to dialogue , 1982 .

[78]  F. Fischer,et al.  Epistemic and social scripts in computer–supported collaborative learning , 2005 .

[79]  H. Biemans,et al.  Teaching and Learning in Interdisciplinary Higher Education: A Systematic Review , 2009 .

[80]  Michael J. Baker,et al.  Arguing to Learn: Confronting Cognitions in Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning Environments , 2003 .

[81]  Jeroen Janssen,et al.  Effects of representational guidance during computer-supported collaborative learning , 2008, ICLS.

[82]  Niels Pinkwart,et al.  Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning DOI 10.1007/s11412-009-9080-x Computer-supported argumentation: A review of the state of the art , 2009 .

[83]  Jan-Willem Strijbos,et al.  Designing electronic collaborative learning environments , 2004 .

[84]  M.A.A. van Amelsvoort,et al.  A Space for Debate. How diagrams support collaborative argumentation-based learning , 2006 .

[85]  Jerry Andriessen,et al.  How students structure and relate argumentative knowledge when learning together with diagrams , 2008, Comput. Hum. Behav..

[86]  Patrick Jermann,et al.  Designing Integrative Scripts , 2007 .

[87]  Tammy Schellens,et al.  Fostering knowledge construction in university students through asynchronous discussion groups , 2006, Comput. Educ..

[88]  Lisa D. Bendixen,et al.  Personality Interactions and Scaffolding in On-Line Discussions , 2004 .

[89]  Brigid Barron.  When Smart Groups Fail , 2003 .

[90]  F. Fischer,et al.  Collaboration Scripts – A Conceptual Analysis , 2006 .

[91]  Pierre Dillenbourg,et al.  Over-scripting CSCL: The risks of blending collaborative learning with instructional design , 2002 .

[92]  R. Reardon,et al.  The Self-Concept and Reality Judgments: Memory, Memory Monitoring, and Internal-External Correspondence , 1995 .

[93]  Sangchul Oh,et al.  Scaffolding online argumentation during problem solving , 2007, J. Comput. Assist. Learn..

[94]  Deanna Kuhn,et al.  The development of argument skills. , 2003, Child development.

[95]  Miika Marttunen,et al.  Collaborative Learning Through Chat Discussions and Argument Diagrams in Secondary School , 2007 .

[96]  Wim H. Gijselaers,et al.  ICT-support for grounding in the classroom , 2007 .

[97]  F. H. Eemeren,et al.  Argumentation, Communication, and Fallacies: A Pragma-dialectical Perspective , 1992 .

[98]  M. Baker,et al.  Computer-Mediated Epistemic Dialogue: Explanation and Argumentation as Vehicles for Understanding Scientific Notions , 2002 .

[99]  Miika Marttunen,et al.  Electronic Mail as a Pedagogical Delivery System: An Analysis of the Learning of Argumentation , 1997 .

[100]  Jan-Willem Strijbos,et al.  The effect of functional roles on perceived group efficiency during computer-supported collaborative learning: a matter of triangulation , 2007, Comput. Hum. Behav..

[101]  Baruch B. Schwarz,et al.  Transformation of robust misconceptions through peer argumentation , 2009 .

[102]  Heinz Mandl,et al.  Scripting Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning , 2007 .

[103]  E. Michael Nussbaum,et al.  The effect of goal instructions and need for cognition on interactive argumentation , 2005 .

[104]  Deborah McCutchen,et al.  Children's discourse skill: Form and modality requirements of schooled writing , 1987 .

[105]  Frank Fischer,et al.  Internal and external scripts in computer-supported collaborative inquiry learning , 2007, Learning and Instruction.

[106]  Yair Neuman,et al.  Two Wrongs May Make a Right ... If They Argue Together! , 2000 .

[107]  Omid Noroozi,et al.  Online discussion compensates for suboptimal timing of supportive information presentation in a digitally supported learning environment , 2012 .

[108]  E. Michael Nussbaum,et al.  Enhancing online collaborative argumentation through question elaboration and goal instructions , 2008, J. Comput. Assist. Learn..

[109]  Selma Leitão,et al.  Evaluating and Selecting Counterarguments , 2003 .

[110]  Baruch B. Schwarz,et al.  The Role of Task Design and Argumentation in Cognitive Development during Peer Interaction: The Case of Proportional Reasoning. , 2007 .

[111]  Anne M. Poliquin,et al.  Role of Epistemic Beliefs and Scientific Argumentation in Science Learning , 2008 .

[112]  Michael J. Baker,et al.  How do argumentation diagrams compare when student pairs use them as a means for debate or as a tool for representing debate? , 2007, Int. J. Comput. Support. Collab. Learn..

[113]  M. Baker,et al.  INTERSUBJECTIVE AND INTRASUBJECTIVE RATIONALITIES IN PEDAGOGICAL DEBATES : REALISING WHAT ONE THINKS , 2009 .

[114]  Allan Jeong.  The Effects of Linguistic Qualifiers and Intensifiers on Group Interaction and Performance in Computer-Supported Collaborative Argumentation. , 2006 .

[115]  Deanna Kuhn,et al.  Arguing on the computer , 2005, CSCL.

[116]  Deanna Kuhn,et al.  The Development of Argumentive Discourse Skill , 2001 .

[117]  Gijsbert Erkens,et al.  Coordination processes in computer supported collaborative writing , 2005, Comput. Hum. Behav..

[118]  Susan M. Land,et al.  A conceptual framework for scaffolding III-structured problem-solving processes using question prompts and peer interactions , 2004 .

[119]  Maite Taboada,et al.  Applications of Rhetorical Structure Theory , 2006 .

[120]  D. Wegner.  Transactive Memory: A Contemporary Analysis of the Group Mind , 1987 .

[121]  Yair Neuman,et al.  Construction of Collective and Individual Knowledge in Argumentative Activity , 2003 .

[122]  Allan Jeong,et al.  The Effects of Conversational Language on Group Interaction and Group Performance in Computer-Supported Collaborative Argumentation , 2006 .

[123]  Allan Jeong,et al.  Effects of Pre‐structuring Discussion Threads on Group Interaction and Group Performance in Computer‐supported Collaborative Argumentation , 2006 .

[124]  Jan-Willem Strijbos,et al.  Designing for interaction: Six steps to designing computer-supported group-based learning , 2004, Comput. Educ..

[125]  Krista Glazewski,et al.  A scaffolding framework to support the construction of evidence-based arguments among middle school students , 2008 .

[126]  D. Wegner.  A Computer Network Model of Human Transactive Memory , 1995 .

[127]  Selma Leitão,et al.  The Potential of Argument in Knowledge Building , 2000, Human Development.

[128]  D. Jonassen,et al.  Arguing to learn and learning to argue: design justifications and guidelines , 2010 .

[129]  Daniel D. Suthers,et al.  An Experimental Study of the Effects of Representational Guidance on Collaborative Learning Processes , 2003 .

[130]  Daniel T. Hickey,et al.  Argumentation: A strategy for improving achievement and revealing scientific identities , 2008 .

[131]  Daniel D. Suthers,et al.  An Empirical Study of the Effects of Representational Guidance on Collaborative Learning. , 2003 .

[132]  Ramon Prudencio S. Toledo.  Visualizing Argumentation: Software Tools for Collaborative and Educational Sense-Making , 2005, Inf. Vis..

[133]  David H. Jonassen,et al.  The effects of argumentation scaffolds on argumentation and problem solving , 2002 .

[134]  Deanna Kuhn,et al.  Do Students Need to Be Taught How to Reason , 2009 .

[135]  D. Clements,et al.  Instructor influence on reasoned argument in discussion boards , 2005 .

[136]  Analía Amandi,et al.  Assisting students with argumentation plans when solving problems in CSCL , 2010, Comput. Educ..

[137]  Tammy Schellens,et al.  Collaborative learning in asynchronous discussion groups: What about the impact on cognitive processing? , 2005, Comput. Hum. Behav..

[138]  Daniel T. Hickey,et al.  Promoting Argumentative Discourse: A Design-Based Implementation and Refinement of an Astronomy Multimedia Curriculum, Assessment Model, and Learning Environment , 2005 .

[139]  Pierre Tchounikine,et al.  Flexibility in macro-scripts for computer-supported collaborative learning , 2007, J. Comput. Assist. Learn..

[140]  Heinz Mandl,et al.  Scripting Argumentative Knowledge Construction in Computer-Supported Learning Environments , 2007 .

[141]  E. Nussbaum.  Collaborative Discourse, Argumentation, and Learning: Preface and Literature Review. , 2008 .

[142]  Robert E. Slavin,et al.  Best-Evidence Synthesis: An Alternative to Meta-Analytic and Traditional Reviews , 1986 .

[143]  Karsten Stegmann,et al.  Computer-supported collaborative learning in higher education: scripts for argumentative knowledge construction in distributed groups , 2005, CSCL.

[144]  Päivi Häkkinen,et al.  Specifying computer-supported collaboration scripts , 2007, Int. J. Comput. Support. Collab. Learn..

[145]  Pierre Tchounikine,et al.  Operationalizing macro-scripts in CSCL technological settings , 2008, Int. J. Comput. Support. Collab. Learn..

[146]  Miika Marttunen,et al.  Electronic Mail as a Forum for Argumentative Interaction in Higher Education Studies , 1998 .

[147]  Miika Marttunen,et al.  Learning of argumentation skills in networked and face-to-face environments , 2001 .

[148]  Yam San Chee,et al.  Designing and implementing virtual enactive role-play and structured argumentation: promises and pitfalls , 2009 .

[149]  Eileen Scanlon,et al.  Combining interaction and context design to support collaborative argumentation using a tool for synchronous CMC , 2004, J. Comput. Assist. Learn..

[150]  Stephanie D. Teasley.  Talking about reasoning : How important is the peer in peer collaboration? , 1997 .

[151]  Tammy Schellens,et al.  Applying multilevel modelling to content analysis data: Methodological issues in the study of role assignment in asynchronous discussion groups , 2007 .

[152]  Douglas B. Clark,et al.  Online Learning Environments, Scientific Argumentation, and 21st Century Skills , 2010 .

[153]  Heinz Mandl,et al.  Fostering Collaborative Knowledge Construction in Case-Based Learning Scenarios in Videoconferencing , 2006 .

[154]  Richard C. Anderson,et al.  Influence of Oral Discussion on Written Argument , 2001 .

[155]  F. Fischer,et al.  The Interplay of Internal and External Scripts , 2007 .

[156]  Heinz Mandl,et al.  Supporting learning using external representations , 2008, Comput. Educ..

[157]  D. Kuhn.  Thinking as Argument , 1992 .

[158]  Richard C. Anderson,et al.  The Structure of Discussions that Promote Reasoning , 1998, Teachers College Record: The Voice of Scholarship in Education.

[159]  Alun Morgan.  Argumentation, Geography Education and ICT , 2006 .

[160]  E. Nussbaum,et al.  Promoting Argument-Counterargument Integration in Students' Writing , 2007 .

[161]  Heather Kanuka,et al.  Barriers to online critical discourse , 2007, Int. J. Comput. Support. Collab. Learn..

[162]  W. Jochems,et al.  The Effect of Functional Roles on Group Efficiency , 2004 .

[163]  D. Kuhn,et al.  Effects of Dyadic Interaction on Argumentive Reasoning , 1997 .

[164]  Fleur Ruth Prinsen,et al.  Effects on participation of an experimental CSCL-programme to support elaboration: Do all students benefit? , 2009, Comput. Educ..

[165]  Chen-Chung Liu,et al.  An analysis of peer interaction patterns as discoursed by on-line small group problem-solving activity , 2008, Comput. Educ..

[166]  Jan Van Bruggen,et al.  A Cognitive Framework for Cooperative Problem Solving with Argument Visualization , 2003, Visualizing Argumentation.

[167]  Karsten Stegmann,et al.  Collaborative argumentation and cognitive processing: an empirical study in a computer-supported collaborative learning environment , 2007, CSCL.

[168]  Allyson F. Hadwin,et al.  Designing roles, scripts, and prompts to support CSCL in gStudy , 2010, Comput. Hum. Behav..

[169]  Richard C. Anderson,et al.  Discourse Patterns During Children's Collaborative Online Discussions , 2007 .

[170]  Allan Jeong,et al.  The Effects of Intellectual Openness and Gender on Critical Thinking Processes in Computer-Supported Collaborative Argumentation. , 2007 .

[171]  Michael J. Baker,et al.  Promoting reflective interactions in a CSCL environment , 1997, J. Comput. Assist. Learn..

[172]  Pieter J. Beers,et al.  Computer support for knowledge construction in collaborative learning environments , 2005, Comput. Hum. Behav..

[173]  Alexandru Spatariu,et al.  A Review of Research on Factors that Impact Aspects of Online Discussions Quality , 2007 .

[174]  James F. Voss,et al.  Argumentation in Psychology: Background Comments , 2001 .

[175]  Jerry Andriessen,et al.  Supporting interactive argumentation: Influence of representational tools on discussing a wicked problem , 2007, Comput. Hum. Behav..

[176]  Jonathan Osborne,et al.  Arguing to Learn in Science: The Role of Collaborative, Critical Discourse , 2010, Science.

[177]  N. Ding,et al.  Visualizing the sequential process of knowledge elaboration in computer-supported collaborative problem solving , 2009, Comput. Educ..

[178]  Omid Noroozi,et al.  Effects on the Drewlite CSCL platform on students' learning outcomes , 2011 .

[179]  Daniel D. Suthers,et al.  Representational Guidance for Collaborative Learning. , 2003 .

[180]  Paul A. Kirschner,et al.  Designing External Representations to Support Solving Wicked Problems , 2003 .

[181]  John B. Biggs,et al.  Teaching for Quality Learning at University: What the Student Does , 1999 .

[182]  Omid Noroozi,et al.  Differences in learning processes between successful and less successful students in computer-supported collaborative learning in the field of human nutrition and health , 2011, Comput. Hum. Behav..

[183]  R. Joiner,et al.  The effects of communication medium on argumentation and the development of critical thinking , 2003 .

[184]  Jan Van Bruggen.  Explorations in graphical argumentation The use of external representations of argumentation in collaborative problem solving. , 2003 .

[185]  Douglas Walton,et al.  Plausible argument in everyday conversation , 1992 .

[186]  Cher Ping Lim,et al.  Scaffolding online historical inquiry tasks: A case study of two secondary school classrooms , 2008, Comput. Educ..

[187]  Tammy Schellens,et al.  Applying multilevel modelling on content analysis data : Methodological issues in the study of the impact of role assignment in asynchronous discussion groups , 2007 .

[188]  D. Kuhn.  Education for Thinking , 1986, Teachers College Record: The Voice of Scholarship in Education.

[189]  P. Kirschner,et al.  External representation of argumentation in CSCL and the management of cognitive load , 2002 .

[190]  M. Segers,et al.  Factors affecting students' self-efficacy in higher education , 2011 .

[191]  Douglas Walton,et al.  The Place of Dialogue Theory in Logic, Computer Science and Communication Studies , 2000, Synthese.

[192]  Nikol Rummel,et al.  Learning to collaborate while being scripted or by observing a model , 2009, Int. J. Comput. Support. Collab. Learn..

[193]  Lisa D. Bendixen,et al.  Approaching and avoiding arguments: The role of epistemological beliefs, need for cognition, and extraverted personality traits , 2003 .

[194]  Fred Paas,et al.  Instructional interventions to enhance collaboration in powerful learning environments , 2005, Comput. Hum. Behav..

[195]  D. Clements,et al.  Social-cognitive behaviors and higher-order thinking in educational computer environments , 1992 .

[196]  P. Houtlosser,et al.  Strategic manoeuvring in argumentative discourse: Maintaining a delicate balance , 2007 .

[197]  Roy D. Pea,et al.  The Social and Technological Dimensions of Scaffolding and Related Theoretical Concepts for Learning, Education, and Human Activity , 2004, The Journal of the Learning Sciences.

[198]  Karsten Stegmann,et al.  Learning to argue online: Scripted groups surpass individuals (unscripted groups do not) , 2010, Comput. Hum. Behav..

[199]  C. Raehl,et al.  INSTRUCTIONAL DESIGN AND ASSESSMENT Evaluation of Pharmacy Students' Blood Pressure and Heart Rate Measurement Skills After Completion of a Patient Assessment Course , 2007 .

[200]  Judith B. Pena-Shaff,et al.  An Epistemological Framework for Analyzing Student Interactions in Computer-Mediated Communication Environments , 2001 .

[201]  Paul Kirchner,et al.  Arguing to learn , 2005, Br. J. Educ. Technol..

[202]  Allyson Hadwin,et al.  Measurement and assessment in computer-supported collaborative learning , 2010, Comput. Hum. Behav..

[203]  Miika Marttunen,et al.  Secondary school students' collaboration during dyadic debates face-to-face and through computer chat , 2009, Comput. Hum. Behav..

[204]  Heinz Mandl,et al.  Knowledge Convergence in Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning: The Role of External Representation Tools , 2005 .

[205]  Daniel Churchill,et al.  Using Sentence Openers to Support Students’ Argumentation in an Online Learning Environment , 2007 .

[206]  Laurence Hirsch,et al.  A structured dialogue tool for argumentative learning , 2004, J. Comput. Assist. Learn..

[207]  L. McMullen,et al.  Interpersonal Scripts in the Anger Narratives Told by Clients in Psychotherapy , 2000 .

[208]  P. Coirier,et al.  Foundations of argumentative text processing , 2000 .

[209]  Simon Buckingham Shum,et al.  The Roots of Computer Supported Argument Visualization , 2003, Visualizing Argumentation.