%0 Journal Article %1 citeulike:462197 %A van Bruggen, Jan M. %A Kirschner, Paul A. %D 2004 %J International Journal of Continuing Engineering Education and Lifelong Learning %K learning argumentation computer cscl collaborative csca supported representations graphical design external %N 1/2 %P 121--141 %T External representations of argumentation %U http://www.inderscience.com/search/index.php?action=record&rec_id=4580&prevQuery=&ps=10&m=or %V 14 %X In this paper, we consider how the emerging field of Computer Supported Collaborative Argumentation (CSCA) can build on the traditions of Computer Supported Collaborative Learning, in particular environments that offer graphical representations of scientific inquiry, and design argumentation. Collaborative scientific inquiry and design argumentation share processes such as coordination, maintaining focus and coherence and negotiating knowledge. We discuss how characteristics of the external representations used, in particular their ontology and specificity, can influence, for good or bad, these processes. There is evidence in CSCL research that the representational notation (the definition of the objects and relations that can be used) guides the dialogues between learners. This is not necessary a guidance towards better performance. Other research in CSCL as well as design rationale indicates that a misfit between the notation and the task may have deleterious effects on task performance.

@article{citeulike:462197, abstract = {In this paper, we consider how the emerging field of Computer Supported Collaborative Argumentation (CSCA) can build on the traditions of Computer Supported Collaborative Learning, in particular environments that offer graphical representations of scientific inquiry, and design argumentation. Collaborative scientific inquiry and design argumentation share processes such as coordination, maintaining focus and coherence and negotiating knowledge. We discuss how characteristics of the external representations used, in particular their ontology and specificity, can influence, for good or bad, these processes. There is evidence in CSCL research that the representational notation (the definition of the objects and relations that can be used) guides the dialogues between learners. This is not necessary a guidance towards better performance. Other research in CSCL as well as design rationale indicates that a misfit between the notation and the task may have deleterious effects on task performance.}, added-at = {2006-04-05T16:59:12.000+0200}, author = {van Bruggen, Jan M. and Kirschner, Paul A.}, biburl = {https://www.bibsonomy.org/bibtex/2d5e7be4c59a9994f67ccd0664d7f0202/yish}, citeulike-article-id = {462197}, interhash = {72fa19a51e9290d8e87654d8788a7c9e}, intrahash = {d5e7be4c59a9994f67ccd0664d7f0202}, journal = {International Journal of Continuing Engineering Education and Lifelong Learning}, keywords = {learning argumentation computer cscl collaborative csca supported representations graphical design external}, number = {1/2}, pages = {121--141}, priority = {4}, timestamp = {2006-04-05T16:59:12.000+0200}, title = {External representations of argumentation}, url = {http://www.inderscience.com/search/index.php?action=record\&rec_id=4580\&prevQuery=\&ps=10\&m=or}, volume = 14, year = 2004 }