Resum
Introduction.
The aim of this study wasto analyzehoworal argumentative strategies, argumentative sequences and interaction patterns relateto argumentative content and the required learning objectives.
Method.
Two different kinds of debates were analyzed. Inthe first, the participants defended one point of view, while in the second the objective was to reach a consensus. The data was analyzed qualitatively and quantitatively. The participants were 25 first-year university students
Results:
Results showed that participants tended to use a simple argumentative structure, even though there were some differences in the types of counterarguments, rebuttals, argu-mentative sequences and interaction patterns, according to the content and type of debate. When the aim of the debate was to defend a point of view, students were most likely to engage in a partial conciliatoryinteraction pattern, but when the purpose of the debate was to reach agreements, the most significant interaction pattern was alternativediscourse, a pattern in which the participants employed strategies such as changing the argumentative focus and disparaging the opponent. However, in certain debatetopics, students altered their strategies and interaction patterns, in an attempt to adapt to the purpose of the activity.
Discussion and conclusions.
The study showed that university students employed argumen-tation typical of everyday contexts, using a series of isolated arguments based on a single point of view, placing excessive emphasison examples and individual cases, repeating the same argument numerous times, and showing difficulty with relating their arguments through the use of counterargumentation and rebuttal. This suggestsa need for university teaching plans to addresscompetencies linked to argumentation and critical thinking from an ecological, functional and meaningful perspective, for the purpose of contributing to knowledge construction.
The aim of this study wasto analyzehoworal argumentative strategies, argumentative sequences and interaction patterns relateto argumentative content and the required learning objectives.
Method.
Two different kinds of debates were analyzed. Inthe first, the participants defended one point of view, while in the second the objective was to reach a consensus. The data was analyzed qualitatively and quantitatively. The participants were 25 first-year university students
Results:
Results showed that participants tended to use a simple argumentative structure, even though there were some differences in the types of counterarguments, rebuttals, argu-mentative sequences and interaction patterns, according to the content and type of debate. When the aim of the debate was to defend a point of view, students were most likely to engage in a partial conciliatoryinteraction pattern, but when the purpose of the debate was to reach agreements, the most significant interaction pattern was alternativediscourse, a pattern in which the participants employed strategies such as changing the argumentative focus and disparaging the opponent. However, in certain debatetopics, students altered their strategies and interaction patterns, in an attempt to adapt to the purpose of the activity.
Discussion and conclusions.
The study showed that university students employed argumen-tation typical of everyday contexts, using a series of isolated arguments based on a single point of view, placing excessive emphasison examples and individual cases, repeating the same argument numerous times, and showing difficulty with relating their arguments through the use of counterargumentation and rebuttal. This suggestsa need for university teaching plans to addresscompetencies linked to argumentation and critical thinking from an ecological, functional and meaningful perspective, for the purpose of contributing to knowledge construction.
| Títol traduït de la contribució | The impact of learning objectives in argumentative discourse: strategies, sequences andinteraction patterns |
|---|---|
| Idioma original | Castellà |
| Pàgines (de-a) | 383-410 |
| Nombre de pàgines | 28 |
| Revista | Electronic Journal of Research in Educational Psychology |
| Volum | 17 |
| Número | 48 |
| DOIs | |
| Estat de la publicació | Publicada - 1 de set. 2019 |