Tension and relaxation in CSCL argumentation dialogue

1
Tension and relaxation in CSCL argumentation
dialogue

• Michael Baker Jerry Andriessen
• UMR LTCI, CNRS - Telecom ParisTech Wise Monroe
  Learning Research

2
Types of situations studied

• Video 1
• Video 2

3
Main objectives
Collaborative learning?
?
Computer-mediation
Interactions between students
The cognitive dimension processes of
co-elaboration of understanding and knowledge
The social dimension of dynamics of
interpersonal relations
Argumentation dialogue
Tool-appropriation
4
Plan

• Research background
• A case study
• Questions and perspectives

5
1. Research background
6
The cognitive and the social in collaborative
learning research
1- Research background

• The social as a leftover of the cognitive
• The social as a variable socio-cognitive
  conflict
• Peer interaction leads to stable cognitive
  progress not attributable to repetition of
  correct responses
• Sociocognition two sides of the same coin
• research paradigms built on supposedly clear
  distinctions between what is social and what is
  cognitive will have an inherent weakness, because
  the causality of social and cognitive processes
  is, at the very least circular and is perhaps
  even more complex
• it is no longer possible to decide a priori if
  a competence is purely cognitive or also involves
  the social competence of displaying that
  behaviour. Intelligence, then can be considered
  as intrinsically a sociability. (Perret-Clermont
  et al. 1991, p. 50)

7
The collaborative working relation (van de Puil
Andriessen)
1- Research background

• Motivation
• Groups struggle to find balance between the need
  to accomplish their work, and desire to achieve
  harmonious interpersonal climate
• Efficient group eobjectives gt egroup maintenance
• Dimensions
• Ontological perception of knowledge as a
  dynamically developing, subjective, and
  preliminary construct
• Procedural belief, motivation, and ability to
  take responsibility for the process of learning
  and shaping learning interaction
• Relational appreciation of peer(s) and the self
  as valued contributors to the collaborative
  process and to knowledge
• Criteria (Allwood)
• cognitive consideration, joint purpose, ethical
  consideration, trust

8
Our approach to the CWR
1- Research background

• Apprehending the collaborative working relation
  in terms of tension-relaxation
• In conjunction with cognitive, structural and
  logical features of dialogue

9
Bales (1950) Interaction process analysis
1- Research background
10
Facework in arguing (Muntig Turnbull)
1- Research background

• T1 - A CLAIM
• T2 - B DISPUTES T1-A CLAIM
• 1. Irrelevancy claim most aggressive
• 2. Challenge
• 3. Contradiction
• 4. Counterclaim least aggressive
• T3 - A
• Either, DISAGREES T2-B DISPUTE
• 1. Irrelevancy claim, 2. Challenge, 3.
  Contradiction, 4. Counterclaim
• Or, SUPPORTS T1-ACLAIM
• The more T2 damages As face, the more likely A,
  in T3, will SUPPORT own T1 CLAIM
• Facework is a major determinant of regularities
  (cf Barth Krabbe, choice of argumentative
  strategy, counteractive or direct defense)

11
Tension-relaxation in Western tonal music
1- Research background
12
Appropriation of CSCL technologies
1- Research background

• Distance modifies the social relation
• Interactive, (a)synchronous, tool-mediated,
  multisemiotic communication transforms the
  intercognitive
• In many CSCL situations, students must
  appropriate the tools whilst, as a means to,
  learning
• Appropriation as an inherently open, not totally
  predictable process, of détournement of the tool,
  instrumentalisation (hybrid cognitive-technical
  action schemas Rabardel)
• How does tool appropriation transform the
  articulation between the social and the cognitive?

13
2. Case study

• SCALE project
• Computer-mediated interaction (CHAT)
• Debate in school on GMOs

14
SCALE and CABLE
2- Case study
Arguing to learn argumentative knowledge
15
Question
2- Case study
T/R
??
Deepening debate
16
Main analysis categories
2- Case study
17
Corpus extract (1)
2- Case study
18
Corpus extract (2)
2- Case study
19
Corpus extract (3)
2- Case study
20
Corpus extract (4)
2- Case study
21
T-R/B-D relations in the extract (1)
2- Case study
22
T-R/B-D relations in the extract (2)
2- Case study
23
(No Transcript)
24
Interrelations
T/R
Deepening debate
25
3. Questions, perspectives
26
Questions
3- Questions, perspectives

• What is a good T-R management process, for
  collaborative learning?
• How can tension-relaxation be measured?
• How can analysis of tension-relaxation be
  validated?
• Contextuality of analysis of tension-relaxation
• If, a priori, a light-hearted remark reduces
  tension, in high-tension contexts it can also
  throw oil onto the fire !
• The effect will depend on the T-R history,
  amplitude of change
• Conflict on the level of the interaction genre
• Refusal to fight, intentional blocking of
  empathy

27
What next?
3- Questions, perspectives

• Try to answer the questions
• Refine analysis categories
• Combining researcher and first-person
  perspectives?
• Physiology? (!)
• Much broader corpus analysis to try to identify
  regularities in the relations between T-R and
  argumentative depth, between social and cognitive
  conflict
• A new collaborative research project

28
Reference

• Andriessen, J., Baker, M. van der Puil., C. (à
  paraître). Socio-cognitive tension in
  collaborative working relations. In Ludvigsen,
  S., Lund, A., Rasmussen, I. Saljo, R. Learning
  across sites new tools, infrastructures and
  practices. London Routledge.
• michael.baker_at_telecom-paristech.fr