A framework for analyzing development of argumentation through classroom discussions

This chapter presents a detailed study of patterns of verbal interaction in a classroom context. In doing so it extends an important previously developed construct for analysis of productive talk for learning originating within the collaborative learning and intelligent tutoring communities, namely that of transactivity. Specifically, our focus is on argumentation and consensus building processes, which are key processes employed through language by communities in order to define themselves, maintain themselves, and evolve. We motivate the use of this construct for analysis of classroom discussions, describe our analysis framework with examples, and discuss current directions related to automatic analysis of classroom discussions using our transactivity based framework.

[1]  J. Dewey,et al.  Knowing and the Known , 1949 .

[2]  M. Berkowitz,et al.  Measuring the developmental features of moral discussion. , 1983 .

[3]  J. Piaget,et al.  The equilibration of cognitive structures : the central problem of intellectual development , 1985 .

[4]  Michael Halliday,et al.  An Introduction to Functional Grammar , 1985 .

[5]  John R. Koza,et al.  Genetic programming: a paradigm for genetically breeding populations of computer programs to solve problems , 1990 .

[6]  L. Vygotsky.  Genesis of the higher mental functions. , 1991 .

[7]  M. Coulthard,et al.  Advances in Spoken Discourse Analysis , 1992 .

[8]  Merrilee H. Salmon,et al.  Reasoning in Conversation , 1993 .

[9]  John R. Koza,et al.  Genetic programming - on the programming of computers by means of natural selection , 1993, Complex adaptive systems.

[10]  M. Azmitia,et al.  Friendship, transactive dialogues, and the development of scientific reasoning , 1993 .

[11]  Una-May O'Reilly,et al.  Genetic Programming II: Automatic Discovery of Reusable Programs. , 1994, Artificial Life.

[12]  J. K. Kinnear,et al.  Advances in Genetic Programming , 1994 .

[13]  M. Chi.  Constructing Self-Explanations and Scaffolded Explanations in Tutoring , 1996 .

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

[15]  M. Chi.  Quantifying Qualitative Analyses of Verbal Data: A Practical Guide , 1997 .

[16]  Daniel L. Schwartz,et al.  The Productive Agency that Drives Collaborative Learning , 1998 .

[17]  Frances Christie,et al.  Pedagogy and the shaping of consciousness : linguistic and social processes , 1999 .

[18]  Richard De Lisi,et al.  Implications of Piagetian theory for peer learning. , 1999 .

[19]  Carolyn Penstein Rosé,et al.  A genetic programming approach for robust language interpretation , 1999 .

[20]  Angela M. O'Donnell,et al.  Cognitive Perspectives on Peer Learning , 1999 .

[21]  InterpretationCarolyn P. Ros.  A Framework for Robust Semantic Interpretation , 2000 .

[22]  Takashi Yamauchi,et al.  Learning from human tutoring , 2001, Cogn. Sci..

[23]  A. Atkins.  Sinclair and Coulthard's 'IRF' model in a one-to-one classroom: an analysis. , 2001 .

[24]  Johanna D. Moore,et al.  A comparative evaluation of socratic versus didactic tutoring , 2001 .

[25]  N. Webb,et al.  Short Circuits or Superconductors? Effects of Group Composition on High-Achieving Students’ Science Assessment Performance , 2002 .

[26]  Timothy Koschmann,et al.  Dewey's contribution to the foundations of CSCL research , 2002, CSCL.

[27]  Kurt VanLehn,et al.  Interactive Conceptual Tutoring in Atlas-Andes , 2002 .

[28]  Blaise Cronin,et al.  Disciplinary Discourses: Social Interactions in Academic Writing , 2002, J. Documentation.

[29]  Rod D. Roscoe,et al.  THE PROCESSES AND CHALLENGES OF CONCEPTUAL CHANGE , 2002 .

[30]  Suzanne H. Chapin.  Classroom Discussions: Using Math Talk to Help Students Learn, Grades 1-6 , 2003 .

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

[32]  Mauro Sobhie,et al.  Working with discourse: meaning beyond the clause , 2004 .

[33]  Krzysztof Krawiec,et al.  Genetic Programming-based Construction of Features for Machine Learning and Knowledge Discovery Tasks , 2002, Genetic Programming and Evolvable Machines.

[34]  N. Mercer,et al.  Reasoning as a scientist: ways of helping children to use language to learn science , 2004 .

[35]  K. Kreijns.  Sociable CSCL environments: Social Affordances, Sociability, and Social Presence. , 2004 .

[36]  Larry Bull,et al.  Genetic Programming with a Genetic Algorithm for Feature Construction and Selection , 2005, Genetic Programming and Evolvable Machines.

[37]  Carolyn Penstein Rosé,et al.  An Evaluation of a Hybrid Language Understanding Approach for Robust Selection of Tutoring Goals , 2002, Int. J. Artif. Intell. Educ..

[38]  Fatos Xhafa,et al.  Thread-based analysis of patterns of collaborative interaction in chat , 2005, AIED.

[39]  Alejandra Martínez-Monés,et al.  From Mirroring to Guiding: A Review of State of the Art Technology for Supporting Collaborative Learning , 2005, Int. J. Artif. Intell. Educ..

[40]  Jeannett Martin,et al.  The Language of Evaluation: Appraisal in English , 2005 .

[41]  Daniel D. Suthers,et al.  Technology affordances for intersubjective meaning making: A research agenda for CSCL , 2006, Int. J. Comput. Support. Collab. Learn..

[42]  Jeroen Janssen,et al.  Automatic coding of communication in collaboration protocols , 2006 .

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

[44]  Carolyn Penstein Rosé,et al.  Tutorial Dialogue as Adaptive Collaborative Learning Support , 2007, AIED.

[45]  Alan M. Lesgold,et al.  Modeling the process of collaborative learning , 2007 .

[46]  Laurence Hirsch,et al.  Evolving Lucene search queries for text classification , 2007, GECCO '07.

[47]  Carolyn Penstein Rosé,et al.  Evaluating the effect of feedback from a CSCL problem solving environment on learning, interaction, and perceived interdependence , 2007, CSCL.

[48]  Victor Kaptelinin,et al.  Group Cognition Computer Support for Building Collaborative Knowledge , 2007 .

[49]  Carolyn Penstein Rosé,et al.  Thinking hard together: the long and short of collaborative idea generation in scientific inquiry , 2007, CSCL.

[50]  Arthur C. Graesser,et al.  Natural Language Tutoring: A comparison of human tutors, computer tutors, and text , 2007 .

[51]  Andrew Ravenscroft,et al.  Investigating and promoting educational argumentation: towards new digital practices , 2008 .

[52]  Carolyn Penstein Rosé,et al.  It's Not Easy Being Green: Supporting Collaborative "Green Design" Learning , 2008, Intelligent Tutoring Systems.

[53]  Carolyn Penstein Rosé,et al.  Supporting the Guide on the SIDE , 2008, Intelligent Tutoring Systems.

[54]  S. Michaels,et al.  Deliberative Discourse Idealized and Realized: Accountable Talk in the Classroom and in Civic Life , 2008 .

[55]  Carolyn Penstein Rosé,et al.  Towards Automatic Assessment for Project Based Learning Groups , 2009, AIED.

[56]  Carolyn Penstein Rosé,et al.  Engaging Collaborative Learners with Helping Agents , 2009, AIED.

[57]  Carolyn Penstein Rosé,et al.  GRASP: the group learning assessment platform , 2009, CSCL.

[58]  Carolyn Penstein Rosé,et al.  Generalizing Dependency Features for Opinion Mining , 2009, ACL.

[59]  The Relationship between Assessment and the Organization and Practice of Teaching , 2010 .

[60]  Carolyn Penstein Rosé,et al.  Using feature construction to avoid large feature spaces in text classification , 2010, GECCO '10.

[61]  Peg A Ertmer,et al.  Goals and Strategies of a Problem Based Learning Facilitator , 2012 .