Why Argue? Developing Understanding of the Purposes and Values of Argumentive Discourse

被引:61
作者
Kuhn, Deanna [1 ]
Wang, Yanan [2 ]
Li, Huamei [3 ]
机构
[1] Columbia Univ, Teachers Coll, New York, NY 10027 USA
[2] Nanjing Univ Posts & Telecommun, Nanjing, Jiangsu, Peoples R China
[3] Nanjing Ninghai Middle Sch, Nanjing, Jiangsu, Peoples R China
关键词
SKILLS; BELIEFS; SCIENCE;
D O I
10.1080/01638531003653344
中图分类号
G44 [教育心理学];
学科分类号
0402 ; 040202 ;
摘要
In a pedagogical method increasing in popularity, students of all levelsfrom elementary to post graduateare likely to be asked to engage in debate with peers. How they understand the purposes and values of argumentive discourse is likely to affect its effectiveness. The 3 studies presented here involve junior high school, senior high school, and university students in the United States and China, and are based on their responses to scenarios involving either the opportunity for or necessity of argumentive discourse in cases where a difference of viewpoints exists. The results reveal that many, and in some cases most, students do not appreciate the value of such discourse as having the potential to enhance individual or collective understanding. Comparisons of participants from different populations, however, indicate cultural, as well as developmental, differences, although evidence appeared of individual malleability in relation to cultural patterns.
引用
收藏
页码:26 / 49
页数:24
相关论文
共 50 条
[1]  
[Anonymous], 2005, DISCUSSION WAY TEACH
[2]  
[Anonymous], 1991, The skills of argument
[3]  
[Anonymous], 2002, Studies in Science Education, DOI [DOI 10.1080/03057260208560187, 10.1080/03057260208560187]
[4]  
Bereiter C., 2002, Education and mind in the knowledge age
[5]   Making Sense of Argumentation and Explanation [J].
Berland, Leema Kuhn ;
Reiser, Brian J. .
SCIENCE EDUCATION, 2009, 93 (01) :26-55
[6]  
Bond MichaelHarris., 2008, The psychology of the Chinese people
[7]  
Botstein L., 1997, JEFFERSONS CHILDREN
[8]   On the distinction between false belief understanding and subscribing to an interpretive theory of mind [J].
Carpendale, JI ;
Chandler, MJ .
CHILD DEVELOPMENT, 1996, 67 (04) :1686-1706
[9]   Analytic frameworks for assessing dialogic argumentation in online learning environments [J].
Clark, Douglas B. ;
Sampson, Victor ;
Weinberger, Armin ;
Erkens, Gijsbert .
EDUCATIONAL PSYCHOLOGY REVIEW, 2007, 19 (03) :343-374
[10]  
Damon W., 1984, J APPL DEV PSYCHOL, V5, P331, DOI 10.1016/0193-3973(84)90006-6