Presentation Type

Oral Presentation

Category

Social Sciences/Humanities

Abstract/Artist Statement

Collaborative Reasoning (CR) discussion, as a form of a dialogic learning, has been proven to enhance children’s reasoning skills (Clark et al., 2003; Nguyen-Jahiel, et al., 2007; Sun et al. 2015). In CR, students are presented with a story that contains controversial issues and are asked to present evidence to support their stance towards the issue. In addressing the main question in CR, children challenge their peers’ arguments and encounter cognitive conflicts, which facilitate the development of their thinking to a higher level (Kim et al., 2007). This is significant as it can lead to discussants partially accepting the counterargument (Leitao, 2000). This partial acceptance is known as integrative arguments. When proposing integrative arguments, students not only provide reasons for one side, but also accommodate and acknowledge the reasons on the other side. Learning to weigh both argument and counterargument is an effective strategy to produce stronger reasoning because it trains the students’ ability to withstand objection (Nussbaum & Edwards, 2011). While prior studies concluded that asking critical questions yielded integrative arguments, there is no prior study examining the correlation between students’ dialogic moves and the presence of integrative arguments in the discussion. As these integrative arguments could signal the development of reasoning skills during the discussion, the sole presence of these elements may not lead to the expected outcome. Another element addressed in recent research has shown that the presence of immediacy within a group or among its members seems to be a key element to productive learning process (Barron, 2003; Lin et al., 2018; Woods & Baker 2004). Immediacy typically refers to any move that an individual makes that has the intention building rapport during collaborative learning (Lin et al., 2018; Woods & Baker, 2004). In the context of collaborative discussion, verbal immediacy refers to “the extent to which selected communicative behaviors enhance physical or psychological closeness in interpersonal communication” (Woods & Baker, 2004, p. 4). Studies have shown that effective teacher immediacy contributes to more successful student discussions (Mazer & Stowe, 2016; Howe et al., 2019; Woods & Baker, 2004). Less is known about how student immediacy functions in collaborative discussions, and how such immediacy evolves over time. This study examined the relationship between cognitive verbal immediacy and integrative arguments in order to further understand the relationship between group dynamics and dialogic learning. This study used the concept of argument stratagems from Nussbaum & Edwards (2011) and Cognitive Verbal Immediacy by Lin et al. (2018) to examine twenty-four CR discussion transcripts from six different groups of students. These discussions were based in issues of morality and scientific query. Additionally, a quantitative analysis was conducted using Pearson’s Correlation Coefficient. The result indicated a medium positive correlation between the two variables. The researchers will examine these discussions further to understand the correlation between the use of the verbal immediacies and the integrative arguments in the discussion. It is expected that the result of this study could lead to a better understanding of how the dialogic moves in a discussion may lead to a more interactive discussion, wherein students learn to listen to their peers’ arguments and practice to address the issue from numerous perspectives. Keywords: collaborative reasoning, dialogic moves, integrative arguments, verbal immediacy

Mentor Name

Jingjing Sun

zoom_0.mp4 (36738 kB)

Share

COinS
 

Understanding Students’ Immediacies and Integrative Arguments in Collaborative Reasoning Discussions

Collaborative Reasoning (CR) discussion, as a form of a dialogic learning, has been proven to enhance children’s reasoning skills (Clark et al., 2003; Nguyen-Jahiel, et al., 2007; Sun et al. 2015). In CR, students are presented with a story that contains controversial issues and are asked to present evidence to support their stance towards the issue. In addressing the main question in CR, children challenge their peers’ arguments and encounter cognitive conflicts, which facilitate the development of their thinking to a higher level (Kim et al., 2007). This is significant as it can lead to discussants partially accepting the counterargument (Leitao, 2000). This partial acceptance is known as integrative arguments. When proposing integrative arguments, students not only provide reasons for one side, but also accommodate and acknowledge the reasons on the other side. Learning to weigh both argument and counterargument is an effective strategy to produce stronger reasoning because it trains the students’ ability to withstand objection (Nussbaum & Edwards, 2011). While prior studies concluded that asking critical questions yielded integrative arguments, there is no prior study examining the correlation between students’ dialogic moves and the presence of integrative arguments in the discussion. As these integrative arguments could signal the development of reasoning skills during the discussion, the sole presence of these elements may not lead to the expected outcome. Another element addressed in recent research has shown that the presence of immediacy within a group or among its members seems to be a key element to productive learning process (Barron, 2003; Lin et al., 2018; Woods & Baker 2004). Immediacy typically refers to any move that an individual makes that has the intention building rapport during collaborative learning (Lin et al., 2018; Woods & Baker, 2004). In the context of collaborative discussion, verbal immediacy refers to “the extent to which selected communicative behaviors enhance physical or psychological closeness in interpersonal communication” (Woods & Baker, 2004, p. 4). Studies have shown that effective teacher immediacy contributes to more successful student discussions (Mazer & Stowe, 2016; Howe et al., 2019; Woods & Baker, 2004). Less is known about how student immediacy functions in collaborative discussions, and how such immediacy evolves over time. This study examined the relationship between cognitive verbal immediacy and integrative arguments in order to further understand the relationship between group dynamics and dialogic learning. This study used the concept of argument stratagems from Nussbaum & Edwards (2011) and Cognitive Verbal Immediacy by Lin et al. (2018) to examine twenty-four CR discussion transcripts from six different groups of students. These discussions were based in issues of morality and scientific query. Additionally, a quantitative analysis was conducted using Pearson’s Correlation Coefficient. The result indicated a medium positive correlation between the two variables. The researchers will examine these discussions further to understand the correlation between the use of the verbal immediacies and the integrative arguments in the discussion. It is expected that the result of this study could lead to a better understanding of how the dialogic moves in a discussion may lead to a more interactive discussion, wherein students learn to listen to their peers’ arguments and practice to address the issue from numerous perspectives. Keywords: collaborative reasoning, dialogic moves, integrative arguments, verbal immediacy