Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item: https://repository.isls.org//handle/1/2680
Title: Arguing with Peers: Examining Two Kinds of Discourse and Their Cognitive Benefits
Authors: Shaenfield, David
Issue Date: Jun-2010
Publisher: International Society of the Learning Sciences (ISLS)
Citation: Shaenfield, D. (2010). Arguing with Peers: Examining Two Kinds of Discourse and Their Cognitive Benefits. In Gomez, K., Lyons, L., & Radinsky, J. (Eds.), Learning in the Disciplines: Proceedings of the 9th International Conference of the Learning Sciences (ICLS 2010) - Volume 1, Full Papers (pp. 254-260). Chicago IL: International Society of the Learning Sciences.
Abstract: This study examines the extent to which meta-level regulation of argumentive discourse goals and strategies relates to improvement in argumentive discourse skill. A 7- month intervention was designed to provide dense experience in argumentive discourse and to promote meta-level regulation of discourse. Pairs of academically disadvantaged eighth graders conducted electronic dialogs with opposing pairs on a series of social topics. Analysis of intra-dyad discussion over the course of the intervention showed that participants producing a high proportion of meta-level u tterances were more likely to show improvement in argumentive skill. This finding suggests that enhanced meta-level awareness of the strategies and goals of argument, along with rich engagement in argumentation, promote skill development.
URI: https://doi.dx.org/10.22318/icls2010.1.254
https://repository.isls.org//handle/1/2680
Appears in Collections:ICLS 2010

Files in This Item:
File SizeFormat 
254-260.pdf218.05 kBAdobe PDFView/Open


Items in DSpace are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.