본문 바로가기
KERD
논문KCI 등재

CSCL에서 협력적 논증 스캐폴드가 지식공유와 개인의 지식 습득에 미치는 영향

Effects of Collaborative Argumentation Scaffolds on Building Collaborative Knowledge and Learner's Domain Knowledge in Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning

김동식|방선희
한국교육공학회 (Korean Society Of Educational Technology)|2010.06|교육공학연구 (Journal of Educational Technology)|제26권 제2호|pp. 267-306

1

조회

0

다운로드

12

인용

0

참고문헌

키워드

Argumentation지식 공유CSCLKnowledge BuildingComputer-Supported Collaborative Learning지식구축협력적 논증협력적 논증 스캐폴드Computer-Supported Collaborative ArgumentationShared KnowledgeCollaborative ArgumentationScaffolds for Argumentation
주제분류교육학

초록

이 연구는 CSCL에서 학습자간 지식공유 촉진 및 개인의 지식 습득을 위한 협력적 논증 지원 시 협력적 지식구축의 인식론적 기반과 매커니즘을 고려해야 하며, 협력적 논증의 절차를 위한 지원, 논증 구조화를 위한 지원, 논증적 사고를 위한 지원이 통합적으로 이루어져야 한다는 문제의식에서 시작한다. 이 연구에서는 이를 바탕으로 CSCL에서 지식구축을 목적으로 하는 협력적 논증 스캐폴드의 원리를 도출하고 이것이 그룹의 협력된 결과물, 학습자간 지식공유, 개인의 영역지식 획득에 미치는 효과를 검증해보고자 하였다. 연구 대상자는 청주에 위치한 S대학의 교직과목 수강생 102명이었다. 연구자는 협력적 논증 활동을 위해 제시된 문제에 대하여 서로 의견이 다른 2인이 1조가 되도록 하여 총 51개 조를 구성하였다. 2인 1조로 형성된 각 그룹은 협력적 논증 스캐폴드의 제공 유형에 따라 3집단으로 분류되었으며, 약 5주의 기간 동안 웹기반 실험환경에서 협력적 논증 활동에 참여하였다. 분석 결과, 각 집단에 속한 그룹별 협력된 결과물에는 유의미한 차이가 없는 것으로 나타났다. 그러나 학습자간 공유된 지식과 개인의 영역지식 습득은 협력적 논증 스캐폴드 제공에 따른 유의미한 차이가 있었으며(공유된 지식: F2, 48=26.301, p<.001),(개인의 영역지식: F2, 99=8.353, p<.001), 강제성이 있는 구조화의 유무에 따른 차이는 유의미하지 않은 것으로 나타났다. 연구 결과, 논증의 절차와 구조화를 위한 지원, 논증적 사고를 위한 지원이 통합적으로 이루어지는 협력적 논증 스캐폴드는 그 강제성에 따른 구조화와 상관없이 학습자간 지식의 공유와 개인의 영역 지식 습득에 효과가 있음을 알 수 있었다.

Abstract

The purpose of this research is to analyze the effects of scaffolds that support collaborative argumentation activities between learners in CSCL (Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning). Collaborative argumentation in CSCL whose objective is knowledge building refines the opinions and claims at the individual level and promotes critical thinking about the subject. Also, at the group level, it provides the opportunity for the members to understand the domain knowledge from various perspectives by sharing knowledge and perspectives between them and to experience conceptual changes, which in turn contributes to building collaborative knowledge of the group. For this, learners participating in collaborative argumentation activities should experience critical argumentation and have meaningful interaction. This study considered the particularities of collaborate argumentation, the epistemological perspective, and the mechanism of building knowledge to support mutual interaction between learners in collaborative argumentation, whose purpose is knowledge building. Through this, the design principle of scaffolding that comprehensively supports sequence of collaborative argumentation, structuring of single argumentation, and skills to argumentatively think, was deduced. For a corroborative study on the effect of the developed scaffolds, this study composed and applied a CSCL environment, which is a specialized environment to support collaborative argumentation. the research question is whether the form of the scaffold offered to support meaningful interaction of collaborative argumentation between learners in a CSCA environment, influences the outcome of mutual interaction between learners. For this, the collaboration outcome of the group, the level of shared knowledge, a level of individual knowledge acquisition were measured as outcomes of collaborative argumentation activity and their differences analyzed. This study concluded the following. A comparison of the group that was provided with structuralized offering scaffolds (test group 2) to promote meaningful interaction between learners during collaborative argumentation, the group provided with scaffolds without a structure (test group 1), and the group provided with general argumentation scaffolds (compared group), showed there wasn’t meaningful differences in the quality of the outcome of collaboration between the groups. But there was significant difference in the degree of individual acquisition and sharing of knowledge depending on the offering of scaffolding for collaborative argumentation. In other words, the group provided with scaffolding had a positive effect on the degree of shared knowledge and the degree of individual acquisition of domain knowledge than the compared group provided with general argumentation scaffolding. Therefore, as in this study’s premise, supporting meaningful mutual interaction between learners during collaborative argumentation has a positive influence on the sharing of knowledge in a group and the individual acquisition of domain knowledge. The group provided with scaffolding for collaborative argumentation gained higher effect in the degree of knowledge sharing and individual acquisition of domain knowledge compared to the group provided with general argumentation scaffolding.

참고문헌 (56)

  1. 김동식, "CSCL에서 스캐폴딩의 유형이 공유 정신 모형에 미치는 영향", 교육공학연구, 22(1), pp.1~34 (2006), 한국교육공학회
  2. Andriessen, J., "Arguing to Learn. in: The Cambridge Handbook of the Learning Science", pp.443~459 (2006), cambridge university press
  3. Andriessen, J., "Argumentation, Computer support, and the educational context of confronting cognitions. in: Arguing to learn: Confronting cognitions in computer-supported collaborative learning environments", pp.27~46 (2003), Kluwer Academic
  4. Baker, M., "Designing a computer-supported collaborative learning situation for broadening and deepening understanding of the space of debate", the Fifth International Conference of the International Society for the Study of Argumentation (ISSA 2002), (2002)
  5. Baker, M. J., "Computer-mediated argumentative interactions for the co-elaboration of scientific notion. in: Arguing to learn: Confronting cognitions in computer-supported collaborative learning environments", pp.47~78 (2003), Kluwer Academic
  6. Baker, M., "Designing a computer-supported collaborative learning situation for broadening and deepening understanding of the space of debate", the Fifth International Conference of the International Society for the Study of Argumentation (ISSA 2002) (2002)
  7. Beers, P. J., "Computer Support for knowledge construction in collaborative learning environment", Computer in Human Behavior, 21, pp.623~643 (2005)
  8. Bell, P., "Using argument representations to make thinking visible for indivisualsand groups", Proceeding of CSCL '97: The Second International Conference on Computer Support for Collaborative Learning, pp.10~19 (1997), University of Toronto press
  9. Bell,PBell, P., "Promotng student's argument construction and collaborative debate in the science classroom. in: Internet environments for science education", pp.115~143 (2004), Lawrence Erlbaum Associates
  10. Bereiter, B., "Education and mind in the knowledge age" (2002), Lawrence Erlbaum Associates
  11. Breton, P., "논증의 역사" (2006), 커뮤니케이션북스
  12. Chinn, C. A., "Learning to Argue. in: Collaborative learning, resoning and technology", pp.355~383 (2006), Lawrence Erlbaum Associates
  13. Chinn, C. A., "The structure of discussion that promote reasoning", Teacher College Record, 100, pp.315~368 (1998)
  14. Clark, D. B., "Analytic Frameworks for Assessing Dialogic Argumentation in Online Lear ning Environments", Educational PsychologyReview, 19(3), pp.343~374 (2007)
  15. de Vries, E., "Computer-mediated epistemic dialogue: explanation and argumentation as vehicle for understanding scientific notions", Journal of learning sciences, 11(1), pp.63~103 (2002)
  16. Dick, W., "체제적 교수 설계" (2003), 아카데미프레스
  17. Dillenbourg, P., "Over-scripting CSCL. in: Three worlds of CSCL: Can we support CSCL", pp.61~91 (2002), Open University of the Netherlands
  18. Dillenbourg, P., "Designing biases that augment socio-cognitive interactions. in: Barriers and Biases in Computer-Mediated Knowledge Communication", pp.243~264 (2005), Springer
  19. Dillenbourg, P., "The mechanics of CSCL macro scripts", Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning, 3, pp.5~23 (2008)
  20. Dillenbourg, P., "Designing integrative scrips. in: Scripting Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning", pp.275~301 (2007), Springer
  21. Dillenbourg, P., "Flexibility in macro-scripts for computer-supported collaborative learning", Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 23, pp.1~13 (2007)
  22. Fischer, F., "Perspectives on Collaboration Scripts. in: Scripting Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning: Cognitive, Computational and Educational Perspectives", pp.1~10 (2007), Springer
  23. Gagné, R. M., "Principles of Instructional Design" (2005), Wadsworth Publishing
  24. Jarvela, S., "Instructional support in CSCL. in: What we know about CSCL", pp.115~139 (2004), Kluwer Academic Publishers
  25. Jermann, P., "Elaborating new arguments through a CSCL script. in: Arguing to learn: Confronting cognitions in computer-supported collaborativ e learning environments", pp.205~226 (2003), Kluwer Academic
  26. King, A., "Scripting Collaborative Learning Processes: A Cognitive Perspective. in: Scripting Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning: Cognitive, Computational and Educational Perspectives", pp.13~37 (2007), Springer
  27. Koschmann, T., "CSCL, argumentation, and Deweyan inquiry: argumentation is learning. in: Arguing to Learn: Confronting cognitions in computer-supported collaborative cognitions in computer-supported collaborative learning environments", pp.259~265 (2003), Kluwer
  28. Kuhn, D., "The skill of argument" (1991), Cambridge University Press
  29. Kuhn, D., "Effect of dyadic interation on argumentative reasoning", Cognition and Instruction, 15, pp.287~315 (1997)
  30. Leitão, S., "The Potential of Argument in Knowledge Building", Human Development, 43, pp.332~360 (2000)
  31. Lipponen, L., "Practices and orientations of CSCL. in: What We Know About CSCL and Implementing It In Higher Education", pp.31~50 (2004), Kluwer Academic Publishers
  32. Mäkitalo, K., "Online collaborative learning: Will collaboration scripts reduce uncertaincy?", Educational Technology, 45(5), pp.25~29 (2005)
  33. Munneke, L., "Arguing to learn;Supporting interactive argumentation through Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning", 박사, pp.2007
  34. Munneke, L., "Supporting interactive argumentation: Influence of representational tools on discussing a wicked problem", Computers in Human Behavior, 23, pp.1072~1088 (2007)
  35. Nussbaum, E. M., "Using Argumentation Vee Diagrams(AVDs) for Promoting Argument- Counterargument integration in Reflective Writing", Journal of Educational Psychology, 100(3), pp.549~565 (2008)
  36. Oh, S., "The effects of constraint based argumentation scaffolding and epistemological beliefs on ill structured diagnosis-solution problem solvin", 박사, pp.2004
  37. Oh, S., "Scaffolding online argumentation during problem solving", Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 23, pp.95~110 (2007)
  38. Paavola, S., "Epistemological foundations for CSCL: A comparison of three models of innovative knowledge communities. in: Computer support for collaborative learning: Foundation for a CSCL community", pp.24~32 (2002), Lawrence Erlbaum Associates
  39. Rummel, N., "Can People Learn Computer-Mediated Collaboration by Following A Script?. in: Scripting Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning: Cognitive, Computational and Educational Perspectives", pp.39~55 (2007), Springer
  40. Sfard, A., "On two metaphors for learning and the dangers of choosing just one", Educational Researcher, 27, pp.4~13 (1998)
  41. Simon, S., "Learning to Teach Argumentation: Research and development in the science classroom", International Journal of Science Education, 28(2), pp.235~260 (2006)
  42. Stahl, G., "Building collaborative knowing. in: Group cognition: Computer support for building collaborative knowledge", pp.303~330 (2006), MIT
  43. Stegmann, K., "Collaborative Argumentation and Cognitive Processing - An Empirical Study in a Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning Environment", Proceeding of CSCL '07: Mice, minds, and society, pp.661~670 (2007), ISLS
  44. Stegmann, K., "Facilitating argumentative knowledge construction with computer-supported collaboration scripts", Journal of Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning, 2, pp.421~447 (2007)
  45. Toulmin, S., "The uses of argument" (1958), Cambridge University Press
  46. Toulmin, S., "The uses of argument" (2003), Cambridge University Press
  47. van Arnelsvoort, M., "Representational tools in computer- supported collaborative argumentation-based learning: How dyads work with constructed and inspected argumentative diagrams", Journal of the Learning Sciences, 16(4), pp.485~521 (2007)
  48. van Bruggen, J., "Designing external representations to support solving wicked problems. in: Arguing to learn: Confronting cognitions in computer-supported collaborative learning environments", pp.177~204 (2003), Kluwer Academic
  49. van Bruggen, J. M., "A cognitive framwork for cooperative problem solving with argument visualization. in: Visualizing Argumentation", pp.25~47 (2003), Springer
  50. van Bruggen, J. M., "External representation ofargumentation in CSCL and the management of cognitive load", Learning and Instruction, 12, pp.121~138 (2002)
  51. van Eemeren, F., "Foundations of argumentative text processing. in: Developments in argumenttion theory", pp.43~57 (1999), Amsterdam University Press
  52. van Eemeren, F. H., "Fundamentals of argumentatio n theory: A handbook of historical backgrounds and contemp orary developments" (1996), Lawrence Erlbaum Associates
  53. Weinberger, A., "Scripts for Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning Effects of social and epistemic cooperation scripts on collaborative knowledge construction", 박사, pp.2003
  54. Weinberger, A., "CSCL scripts: Effects of social and epistemic scripts on computer-supported collaborative learning" (2008), VDM Verlag
  55. Weinberger, a., "Knowledge convergence in collaborative learning: Concepts and assessment", Learning and Instruction, 17, pp.416~426 (2007)
  56. Weinberger, A., "Scripting Argumentative Knowledge Construction in Computer-Supported Learning Environments. in: Scripting Computer-Supported communication of knowledge-congnitive, computational and educational perspectives", pp.191~211 (2007), Springer

관련 논문AI추천

CSCL 환경에서 협력학습 지원 도구의 유형이 협력적 지식 구축에 미치는 영향김동식, 한정선한국교육정보미디어학회 · 교육정보미디어연구2009 · 제15권 제4호CSCL에서 내재적 논증 수준과 외현적 스크립트 제시전략이 논증 능력에 미치는 영향권성호, 김동식, 김효숙한국교육공학회 · 교육공학연구2009 · 제25권 제2호블렌디드 협력학습에서 스캐폴딩, 메타인지 및 협력성향이 협력부하와 지식공유에 미치는 효과김회수, 이순덕한국교육정보미디어학회 · 교육정보미디어연구2016 · 제22권 제4호CSCL에서 스캐폴딩의 유형이 공유 정신 모형에 미치는 영향권숙진, 김동식한국교육공학회 · 교육공학연구2006 · 제22권 제1호CSCL에서 개념도 유형이 협력적 지식 구축에 미치는 영향 : 인지적 정보 처리 중심으로김진희한국교육방법학회 · 교육방법연구2020 · 제32권 제3호웹기반 토론학습에서 스캐폴딩의 유형에 따른 학습자 간 상호작용과 토론 글의 질의 차이이광재, 이영주한국교육정보미디어학회 · 교육정보미디어연구2015 · 제21권 제3호

이 간행물의 다른 논문 (10건)

과제유형과 화면설계방식이 인지부하요인의 과제난이도 지각과 정신적 노력에 미치는 영향류지헌pp. 1-23교수역량 증진을 위한 변화필요도분석양은하, 정재삼pp. 25-52사이버교육에서 학습동기, 프로그램, 조직의 지원과 상호작용, 몰입 및 학습성과의 구조적 관계 규명김나영, 주영주pp. 53-82수업설계자의 관계론적 역량모델 개발유영만, 최수진pp. 83-123웹기반 학습환경설계를 위한 ‘학습자주도설계(Learner Initiated Design)’에 대한 이론적 탐색임완철, 박성익pp. 125-147
원문 보기