Examining students' use of online annotation tools in support of argumentative reading

This study examined how students in a Hong Kong high school used Diigo, an online annotation tool, to support their argumentative reading activities. Two year 10 classes, a high-performance class (HPC) and an ordinary-performance class (OPC), highlighted passages of text and wrote and attached sticky notes to them to clarify argumentation structures and to represent and share argumentation processes. Analysis of annotations revealed that highlighting was the most frequently used online annotation feature. The HPC made significantly more sticky notes and used them more to annotate terms, claims and judgments than the OPC. The study suggests that Diigo is a promising tool for supporting reading-to-argue. The findings may be of value to teachers and researchers in designing online annotation tools that more effectively foster the process of reading-to-argue.

[1]  E. Nussbaum.  Scaffolding Argumentation in the Social Studies Classroom , 2002 .

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

[3]  Ruth E. Knudson.  The Development of Written Argumentation: An Analysis and Comparison of Argumentative Writing at Four Grade Levels. , 1992 .

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

[5]  Christine Greenhow.  Social Scholarship: Applying Social Networking Technologies to Research Practices. , 2009 .

[6]  Baruch B. Schwarz,et al.  Argumentation and Explanation in Conceptual Change: Indications From Protocol Analyses of Peer-to-Peer Dialog , 2009, Cogn. Sci..

[7]  Lance J. Rips,et al.  Explanation and evidence in informal argument , 2000, Cogn. Sci..

[8]  Catherine C. Marshall,et al.  Annotation: from paper books to the digital library , 1997, DL '97.

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

[10]  Michele L. Simpson,et al.  Textbook Annotation: An Effective and Efficient Study Strategy for College Students. , 1990 .

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

[12]  Joanna Wolfe,et al.  Annotations and the collaborative digital library: Effects of an aligned annotation interface on student argumentation and reading strategies , 2008, Int. J. Comput. Support. Collab. Learn..

[13]  S. Erduran,et al.  TAPping into argumentation: Developments in the application of Toulmin's Argument Pattern for studying science discourse , 2004 .

[14]  Christine M. Neuwirth,et al.  From the Margins to the Center , 2001 .

[15]  Mark Felton,et al.  The development of discourse strategies in adolescent argumentation , 2004 .

[16]  Wu-Yuin Hwang,et al.  A study of a multimedia web annotation system and its effect on the EFL writing and speaking performance of junior high school students , 2011, ReCALL.

[17]  Michael A. Arbib,et al.  Annotation technology , 1999, Int. J. Hum. Comput. Stud..

[18]  Kenton O'Hara,et al.  A comparison of reading paper and on-line documents , 1997, CHI.

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

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

[21]  Mei-Hung Chiu,et al.  Lakatos’ Scientific Research Programmes as a Framework for Analysing Informal Argumentation about Socio‐scientific Issues , 2008 .

[22]  Shirley Simon,et al.  Enhancing the quality of argumentation in school science , 2004 .

[23]  Petri Nokelainen,et al.  A shared document-based annotation tool to support learner-centred collaborative learning , 2005, Br. J. Educ. Technol..

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

[25]  Bonnie B. Armbruster,et al.  Reader and text-studying strategies , 1982 .

[26]  Zhijie Xu,et al.  Online annotation - Research and practices , 2007, Comput. Educ..

[27]  Yair Neuman,et al.  Pupils' evaluation and generation of evidence and explanation in argumentation. , 2005, The British journal of educational psychology.

[28]  D. Kuhn.  How do People Know? , 2001, Psychological science.

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

[30]  Human reasoning and argumentation: the probabilistic approach , 2008 .

[31]  Joanna Wolfe.  Annotation Technologies: A Software and Research Review. , 2002 .

[32]  Tristan E. Johnson,et al.  Individual and team annotation effects on students' reading comprehension, critical thinking, and meta-cognitive skills , 2010, Comput. Hum. Behav..

[33]  Pei-Luen Patrick Rau,et al.  Developing web annotation tools for learners and instructors , 2004, Interact. Comput..