Productive failure and learning through argumentation: Building a bridge between two research traditions to understand the process of peer learning

IF 3 1区 教育学 Q1 EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH Journal of the Learning Sciences Pub Date : 2022-09-22 DOI:10.1080/10508406.2022.2120398
Antonia Larrain, V. Grau, María José Barrera, P. Freire, Patricia López, Sebastián Verdugo, Marisol Gómez, Francisca Ramírez, Gabriel Sánchez
{"title":"Productive failure and learning through argumentation: Building a bridge between two research traditions to understand the process of peer learning","authors":"Antonia Larrain, V. Grau, María José Barrera, P. Freire, Patricia López, Sebastián Verdugo, Marisol Gómez, Francisca Ramírez, Gabriel Sánchez","doi":"10.1080/10508406.2022.2120398","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT Empirical evidence demonstrates the effect of productive failure (Kapur, 2008) on disciplinary knowledge. However, there is no clear theoretical explanation for why this is the case. Empirical evidence on argumentation and education shows the impact of curricular embedded deliberative argumentation on learning. However, these two trends of research have been mainly isolated, with insufficient synergy. Through the analysis of a group of sixth-graders collaborating around problems of natural selection, the aim of this paper is the theoretical exploration of the process of learning in productive failure designs through a focus on argumentative peer dialogue. The paper proposes an articulation of these two fields of research (productive failure and argumentation), which sheds light on both the learning dynamics in productive failure settings and the relevant insights for argumentative designs. The new possibilities for empirical research on learning through peer interaction opened up by these interconnected fields of research are proposed and discussed.","PeriodicalId":48043,"journal":{"name":"Journal of the Learning Sciences","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":3.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-09-22","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of the Learning Sciences","FirstCategoryId":"95","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/10508406.2022.2120398","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"教育学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

Abstract

ABSTRACT Empirical evidence demonstrates the effect of productive failure (Kapur, 2008) on disciplinary knowledge. However, there is no clear theoretical explanation for why this is the case. Empirical evidence on argumentation and education shows the impact of curricular embedded deliberative argumentation on learning. However, these two trends of research have been mainly isolated, with insufficient synergy. Through the analysis of a group of sixth-graders collaborating around problems of natural selection, the aim of this paper is the theoretical exploration of the process of learning in productive failure designs through a focus on argumentative peer dialogue. The paper proposes an articulation of these two fields of research (productive failure and argumentation), which sheds light on both the learning dynamics in productive failure settings and the relevant insights for argumentative designs. The new possibilities for empirical research on learning through peer interaction opened up by these interconnected fields of research are proposed and discussed.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
生产性失败和通过论证学习:在两种研究传统之间建立桥梁,以理解同伴学习的过程
经验证据证明了生产失败(Kapur, 2008)对学科知识的影响。然而,对于为什么会出现这种情况,并没有明确的理论解释。关于论证与教育的经验证据表明,课程嵌入的审慎论证对学习的影响。然而,这两种趋势的研究主要是孤立的,缺乏协同作用。通过对一组六年级学生围绕自然选择问题进行合作的分析,本文的目的是通过关注争论性同伴对话,对生产性失败设计中的学习过程进行理论探索。本文提出了这两个研究领域(生产性失败和论证)的衔接,这揭示了生产性失败设置中的学习动态和论证设计的相关见解。这些相互关联的研究领域为同伴互动学习的实证研究开辟了新的可能性。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
10.70
自引率
5.30%
发文量
17
期刊介绍: Journal of the Learning Sciences (JLS) is one of the two official journals of the International Society of the Learning Sciences ( www.isls.org). JLS provides a multidisciplinary forum for research on education and learning that informs theories of how people learn and the design of learning environments. It publishes research that elucidates processes of learning, and the ways in which technologies, instructional practices, and learning environments can be designed to support learning in different contexts. JLS articles draw on theoretical frameworks from such diverse fields as cognitive science, sociocultural theory, educational psychology, computer science, and anthropology. Submissions are not limited to any particular research method, but must be based on rigorous analyses that present new insights into how people learn and/or how learning can be supported and enhanced. Successful submissions should position their argument within extant literature in the learning sciences. They should reflect the core practices and foci that have defined the learning sciences as a field: privileging design in methodology and pedagogy; emphasizing interdisciplinarity and methodological innovation; grounding research in real-world contexts; answering questions about learning process and mechanism, alongside outcomes; pursuing technological and pedagogical innovation; and maintaining a strong connection between research and practice.
期刊最新文献
Reframing design in education: Proposing a framework to support pre-service teachers in adopting designerly stances The role of individual preparation before collaboration: An exploratory study on students’ computer-supported collaborative argumentation in a primary classroom Toward epistemic justice in socio-scientific decision-making: How youth make sense of lively COVID-19 and vaccines data Tools and materials as non-neutral actors in STEAM education Learning and constructions of us and them in teachers’ collaborative groups
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1