Deliberation versus Dispute: The Impact of Argumentative Discourse Goals on Learning and Reasoning in the Science Classroom

Authors

  • Mark Felton
  • Merce Garcia-Mila
  • Sandra Gilabert

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.22329/il.v29i4.2907

Keywords:

argumentation, argumentative discourse, discourse goals, dialogue, scientific reasoning, science learning, deliberation

Abstract

Researchers in science education have converged on the view
that argumentation can be an effective intervention for promoting knowledge construction in science classrooms.
However, the impact of such interventions may be mediated by individuals’ task goals while arguing. In argumentative discourse, one can distinguish two overlapping but distinct kinds of activity: dispute and deliberation. In dispute the goal is to defend a conclusion by undermining alternatives, whereas in deliberation the goal is to arrive at a conclusion by contrasting alternatives. In this study, we examine the impact of these discourse goals on both content learning and argument quality in science.

Downloads

Published

2009-12-17

Issue

Vol. 29 No. 4 (2009): Special Issue on Psychology and Argumentation

Section

Articles

License

Copyright for each article published in Informal Logic belongs to its author(s). Informal Logic has the right of first publication. Permission to reprint any article that appears in Informal Logic MUST be obtained in writing from the author(s). In addition to any form of acknowledgement required by the author(s), the following notice must be added to the statement of copyright permission made in the reprint (with the appropriate numbers replacing the ellipses): [Article Title] was originally published in Informal Logic, [year], Volume ..., Number ..., pp. ...-... .