Discussions featuring reasoned argumentation among students have the potential to increase students’ motivation and to help students learn to reason well. This article analyzes the structure of the argumentative discourse produced when children discuss issues raised by stories they have read. Two complementary approaches are developed to represent the structure of the argumentation. The first approach, the argument network, represents argumentation within groups of students as an interlocking web of premises and conclusions. The second approach, the causal network, represents the argumentation primarily as events linked in a causally connected narrative sequence. We discuss implications of these two approaches for instruction and research. Argument networks and causal networks provide insights into how teachers and students can improve discussions, and they suggest instructional strategies that can promote the development of students’ reasoning.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
AndersonR. C., ChinnC. A., ChangJ., WaggonerM. A., & YiH. (1997). The logical integrity of children's arguments. Cognition and Instruction, 15, 135–167.
2.
AndersonR. C., ChinnC., WaggonerM., & NguyenK. (1998). Intellectually stimulating story discussions. In OsbornJ., & LehrF. (Eds.), Literacy for all: Issues in teaching and learning (pp. 170–196). New York: Guilford.
3.
AndersonR. C., WilkinsonI. A. G., & MasonJ. M. (1991). A microanalysis of the small-group guided reading lesson: Effects of an emphasis on global story meaning. Reading Research Quarterly, 26, 417–441.
4.
ArmbrusterB. B., & AndersonT. H. (1984). Mapping: Representing informative text diagrammatically. In HolleyC. D., & DansereauD. F. (Eds.), Spatial learning strategies: Techniques, applications, and related issues (pp. 189–209). Orlando, FL: Academic Press.
5.
ArmbrusterB. B., AndersonT. H., & OstertagJ. (1987). Does text structure/summarization instruction facilitate learning from expository text?Reading Research Quarterly, 22, 331–346.
6.
BakerM. (1990). Arguing with the tutor. In Elsom-CookM. (Ed.), Guided discovery tutoring: A framework for ICAI research (pp. 141–170). London: Paul Chapman.
7.
BrewerW. F., & LichtensteinE. H. (1982). Stories are to entertain: A structural-affect of stories. Journal of Pragmatics, 6, 473–486.
8.
BrunerJ. (1986). Actual minds, possible worlds.Cambridge: Harvard University Press.
9.
Cavalli-SforzaV., LesgoldA. M., & WeinerA. W. (1992). Strategies for contributing to collaborative arguments. In Proceedings of the fourteenth annual conference of the Cognitive Science Society (pp. 755–760). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
10.
ChinnC. A., AndersonR. C., & WaggonerM. A. (1998). Patterns of participation during literature discussions. Manuscript submitted for publication.
11.
ChinnC. A., WaggonerM. A., AndersonR. C., SchommerM., & WilkinsonI. A. (1993). Situated action in the small-group reading lesson: A microanalysis of oral reading error episodes. American Educational Research Journal, 30, 361–392.
12.
CiceroM. T. (1960). De inventione.Cambridge: Harvard University Press.
13.
CohenP. R. (1985). Heuristic reasoning about uncertainty: An artificial intelligence approach.Boston: Pitman Advanced Publishing Program.
14.
CohenR. (1987). Analyzing the structure of argumentative discourse. Computational Linguistics, 13 (1–2), 11–24.
15.
CollinsA., BrownJ. S., & NewmanS. E. (1989). Cognitive apprenticeship: Teaching the crafts of reading, writing, and mathematics. In ResnickL. B. (Ed.), Knowing, learning and instruction: Essays in honor of Robert Glaser (pp. 453–494). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
16.
CollinsA. M., & LoftusE. F. (1975). A spreading-activation theory of semantic processing. Psychological Review, 82, 407–428.
17.
CollinsA., & MichalskiR. (1989). The logic of plausible reasoning: A core theory. Cognitive Science, 13, 1–49.
18.
CollinsA., & QuillianM. R. (1969). Retrieval time from semantic memory. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 8, 240–247.
CopiI. M. (1972). Introduction to logic (4th ed.). New York: Macmillan.
21.
DansereauD. F. (1985). Learning strategy research. In SegalJ. W., ChipmanS. F., & GlaserR. (Eds.), Thinking and learning skills: Vol. 1. Relating instruction to research (pp. 209–239). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
22.
deKleerJ. (1977). Multiple representations of knowledge in a mechanics problem-solver. In Proceedings of the 1977 meeting of the International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence (pp. 299–304). San Mateo, CA: Morgan Kaufmann.
23.
deKleerJ, & BrownJ. S. (1983). Assumptions and ambiguities in mechanistic mental models. In GentnerD., & StevensA. L. (Eds.), Mental models (pp. 155–190). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
24.
van EemerenF. H., & GrootendorstR. (1992). Argumentation, communication, and fallacies: A pragma-dialectical perspective.Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
25.
van EemerenF. H., GrootendoorstR., & KruigerT. (1987). Handbook of argumentation theory: A critical survey of classical backgrounds and modern studies.Dordrecht, Netherlands: Foris Publications.
26.
EichingerD. C., AndersonC. W., PalincsarA. S., & DavidY. M. (1991, April). An illustration of the roles of content knowledge, scientific argument, arid social norms in collaborative problem solving. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, Chicago.
27.
FisherA. (1988). The logic of real arguments.Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
28.
GardinerJ. R. (1980). Stone Fox.New York: Crowell Junior Books.
29.
GoldenJ. (1986). Reader-text interaction. Theory into Practice, 25, 91–96.
30.
GoldenJ. M. (1988). The construction of a literary text in a story-reading lesson. In GreenJ. L., & HarkerJ. O. (Eds.), Multiple perspective analyses of classroom discourse (pp. 71–106). Norwood, NJ: Ablex.
31.
GovierT. (1985). A practical study of argument.Belmont, CA: Wadsworth.
32.
Great Books Foundation. (1987). An introduction to shared inquiry.Chicago: Author.
33.
GreenJ. L., & WallatC. (1981). Mapping instructional conversations—A sociolinguistic ethnography. In GreenJ. L., & WallatC. (Eds.), Ethnography and language in educational settings (pp. 161–205). Norwood, NJ: Ablex.
34.
GreenJ. L., WeadeR., & GrahamK. (1988). Lesson construction and student participation: A sociolinguistic analysis. In GreenJ. L., & HarkerJ. O. (Eds.), Multiple perspective analyses of classroom discourse (pp. 11–47). Norwood, NJ: Ablex.
35.
HolleyC. D., & DansereauD. F. (Eds.) (1984). Spatial learning strategies: Techniques, applications, and related issues.Orlando, FL: Academic Press.
36.
ImaiM., AndersonR. C., WilkinsonI. A. G., & YiH. (1992). Properties of attention during reading lessons. Journal of Educational Psychology, 84, 160–173.
37.
InagakiK. (1981). Facilitation of knowledge integration through classroom discussion. The Quarterly Newsletter of the Laboratory of Comparative Human Cognition, 3, 26–28.
38.
JohnsonD. W., & JohnsonR. T. (1995). Social interdependence: Cooperative learning in education.San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
39.
JoseP. E. (1990). Just-world reasoning in children's immanent justice judgments. Child Development, 61, 1024–1033.
40.
KintschW., & van DijkT. A. (1978). Toward a model of text comprehension and production. Psychological Review, 35, 363–394.
41.
KopperschmidtJ. (1985). An analysis of argumentation. In van DijkT. A. (Ed.), Handbook of discourse analysis. Vol. 2. Dimensions of discourse (pp. 159–168). London: Academic Press.
42.
KuhnD. (1993). The skills of argument.Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
43.
LemkeJ. L. (1990). Talking science: Language learning, and values.Norwood, NJ: Ablex.
44.
LitchfieldA. B. (1987). Making room for Uncle Joe. In CullinanB. E., FarR. C., HamongW. D., RoserN. L., & StricklandD. (Eds.), Crossroads (pp. 22–33). Orlando, FL: Harcourt Brace Jovanovich.
45.
MeadG. H. (1934). Mind, self, and society.Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
46.
MeyerB.J. F. (1987). Following the author's top-level organization: An important skill for reading comprehension. In TierneyR.J., AndersP. L., & MitchellJ. N. (Eds.). Understanding readers’ understanding: Theory and practice (pp. 59–76). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
47.
MeyerB.J. F., BrandtD. M., & BluthG.J. (1980). Use of top-level structure in text: Key for reading comprehension of ninth-grade students. Reading Research Quarterly, 16, 72–103.
48.
Nguyen-JahielK., AndersonR., WaggonerM., & RowellB. (in press). From recitation to collaborative reasoning: A chronicle of one teacher and her students. In HorowitzR. (Ed.), The evolution of talk about text.Newark, DE: International Reading Assocation.
49.
OmansonR. C., BeckI. L., VossJ. F., & McKeownM. G. (1984). The effects of reading lessons on comprehension: A processing description. Cognition and Instruction, 1, 45–67.
50.
OnoskoJ. J. (1990). Comparing teachers’ instruction to promote students’ thinking. Journal of Curriculum Studies, 22, 443–461.
51.
PenningtonN., & HastieR. (1986). Evidence evaluation in complex decision making. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 51, 242–258.
52.
PenningtonN., & HastieR. (1988). Explanation-based decision making: Effects of memory structure on judgment. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 14, 521–533.
53.
PenningtonN., & HastieR. (1992). Explaining the evidence: Tests of the story model for juror decision making. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 62, 189–206.
PerelmanC., & Olbrechts-TytecaL. (1969). The new rhetoric: A treatise on argumentation (2nd ed.). Notre Dame, IN: University of Notre Dame Press.
56.
PerkinsD. N., AllenR., & HafnerJ. (1983). Difficulties in everyday reasoning. In MaxwellW. (Ed.), Thinking: The frontier expands (pp. 177–189). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
57.
PontecorvoC., & GirardetH. (1993). Arguing and reasoning in understanding historical topics. Cognition and Instruction, 11, 365–395.
58.
PutnamR. T., LampertM., & PetersonP. L. (1990). Alternative perspectives on knowing mathematics in elementary schools. Review of Research in Education, 16, 57–150.
59.
QuintilianusM. F. (1959). The institutio oratoria of Quintilian.Cambridge: Harvard University Press.
60.
ResnickL. B., SalmonM., ZeitzC. M., WathenS. H., & HolowchakM. (1993). Reasoning in conversation. Cognition and Instruction, 11, 347–364.
61.
RussellT. L. (1988). Questions and arguments. In DillonJ. T. (Ed.), Questioning and discussion: A multidisciplinary study (pp. 240–258). Norwood, NJ: Ablex.
SmithK., JohnsonD. W., & JohnsonR. T. (1981). Can conflict be constructive? Controversy versus concurrence seeking in learning groups. Journal of Educational Psychology, 73, 651–663.
65.
StevensonR. B. (1990). Engagement and cognitive challenge in thoughtful social studies classes: A study of student perspectives. Journal of Curriculum Studies, 22, 329–341.
66.
SwartzR.J. (1987). Teaching for thinking: A developmental model for the infusion of thinking skills into mainstream instruction. In BaronJ. B., & SternbergR. J. (Eds.), Teaching thinking skills: Theory and practice (pp. 106–126). New York: W. H. Freeman.
67.
ToulminS. E. (1958). The uses of argument.Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
68.
ToulminS., RiekeR., & JanikA. (1984). An introduction to reasoning (2nd ed.). New York: Macmillan.
69.
TrabassoT., SeccoT., & van den BroekP. (1984). Causal cohesion and story coherence. In MandlH., SteinN. L., & TrabassoT. (Eds.), Learning and comprehension of text (pp. 83–111). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
70.
TrabassoT., & SperryL. L. (1985). Causal relatedness and importance of story events. Journal of Memory and Language, 24, 595–611.
71.
TrabassoT., & van den BroekP. (1985). Causal thinking and the representation of narrative events. Journal of Memory and Cognition, 24, 612–630.
72.
van den BroekP. (1990). Causal inferences and the comprehension of narrative texts. The Psychology of Learning and Motivation, 25, 175–198.
73.
VossJ. F., BlaisJ., MeansM. L., GreeneT. R., & AhweshE. (1986). Informal reasoning and subject matter knowledge in the solving of economics problems by naive and novice individuals. Cognition and Instruction, 3, 269–3312.
74.
VossJ. F., & MeansM. L. (1991). Learning to reason via instruction in argumentation. Learning and Instruction, 1, 337–350.
75.
VygotskyL. S. (1978). Mind in society: The development of higher psychological processes.Cambridge: Harvard University Press.
76.
WaggonerM. A., ChinnC. A., AndersonR. C., & YiH. (1995). Collaborative reasoning about stories. Language Arts, 72, 582–589.
77.
WigmoreJ. H. (1937). The science of judicial proof.Boston: Little, Brown.
78.
WilkinsonI. A. G., & AndersonR. C. (1995). Sociocognitive processes in guided silent reading: A microanalysis of small-group lessons. Reading Research Quarterly, 30, 710–740.
79.
WisniewskiE. J., & MedinD. L. (1991). Harpoons and Long sticks: The interaction of theory and similarity in rule induction. In FisherD. H., PazzaniM. J., & LangleyP. (Eds.), Concept formation: Knowledge and experience in unsupervised learning (pp. 237–278). San Mateo, CA: Morgan Kaufmann.
