Integrating dialectical constructivist scaffolding-based argumentation mapping to support students’ dialectical thinking, oral and dialogical argumentation complexity

Abstract

Dialectical thinking is a way of discussing and analyzing things from different viewpoints to reach a solution. It is often taught in language courses by conducting argumentation activities. However, without providing effective strategies or tools, learners generally encounter difficulties in structuring their viewpoints during the argumentation process. To solve this problem, this study proposed dialectical constructivist scaffolding-based argumentation mapping (DCS-AM), which integrates a structured, four-stage process to support students’ dialectical thinking and oral and dialogical argumentation complexity. The argumentation map refers to a visualized tool that enables learners to structure their viewpoints for making arguments. A quasi-experiment was conducted in an English as a Foreign Language course. A total of 26 students were in the DCS-AM group, while 22 students were in the conventional constructivist scaffolding-based argumentation mapping (CS-AM) group, which adopted a more conventional format, emphasizing direct discussion and teacher-led knowledge transmission. The experimental results found that students in the DCS-AM group exhibited significantly better dialectical thinking than those in the CS-AM group. Also, an epistemic network analysis (ENA) of oral and dialogical argumentation revealed that students in the DCS-AM group frequently developed more complex argumentation than those in the CS-AM group in terms of the structural component and discourse activity, including the process of students’ dialectical thinking that was found in both groups. This finding shows that technology-supported dialectical constructivist scaffolding can help students improve their dialectical thinking and argumentation skills.