Argument, Counterargument, and Integration? Patterns of Argument Reappraisal in Controversial Classroom Discussions

Autor/in	Gronostay, Dorothee
Titel	Argument, Counterargument, and Integration? Patterns of Argument Reappraisal in Controversial Classroom Discussions
Quelle	In: Journal of Social Science Education, 15 (2016) 2, S.42-56 (15 Seiten)Infoseite zur Zeitschrift PDF als Volltext kostenfreie Datei Verfügbarkeit
Sprache	englisch
Dokumenttyp	gedruckt; online; Zeitschriftenaufsatz
ISSN	1618-5293
Schlagwörter	Persuasive Discourse; Classroom Communication; Controversial Issues (Course Content); Debate; Discourse Analysis; Civics; Middle School Students; Grade 8; Grade 9; Foreign Countries; Coding; Political Issues; Transcripts (Written Records); Video Technology; Sequential Approach; Germany + Suchen Sie Ihr Suchwort? Persuasion; Persuasive Kommunikation; Klassengespräch; Controversial issues; Kontroverse; Debating; Streitgespräch; Diskursanalyse; Staatsbürgerkunde; Middle school; Middle schools; Student; Students; Mittelschule; Mittelstufenschule; Schüler; Schülerin; School year 08; 8. Schuljahr; Schuljahr 08; School year 09; 9. Schuljahr; Schuljahr 09; Ausland; Codierung; Programmierung; Politischer Faktor; Schrittfolge; Deutschland
Abstract	Being challenged by opposing views in a controversial discussion can stimulate the production of more elaborate and sophisticated argumentations. According to the model of argument reappraisal (Leitão, 2000), such processes require transactivity, meaning that students do not only give reasons to support their own position (e.g., pro/contra argument) but also try to refute the opponent's claims (e.g., counterargument) and respond to critique (e.g., integration). However, there is little research in the field of political education that systematically examines how processes of argument reappraisal unfold in student-centered classroom discussions when students were asked to defend (randomly) assigned positions (pro/contra). In this study, four civic education classes (8th/9th grade) in Germany received the same standardized political learning unit and conducted a controversial fishbowl discussion. A total of 452 argumentative moves were coded for argumentative transactivity. The characteristics of this type of discourse will be described regarding the use of argumentative moves and the complexity of argumentations. Explorative sequential analyses revealed five patterns of argument reappraisal that will be illustrated by transcript excerpts. (As Provided).
Anmerkungen	Journal of Social Science Education. Bielefeld University Faculty of Sociology, Universitätsstraße 25, 33615 Bielefeld, Germany. Tel: +49-521-106-3985; Fax: +49-521-106-153986; e-mail: info@jsse.org; Web site: http://jsse.ub.uni-bielefeld.de/index.php/jsse
Erfasst von	ERIC (Education Resources Information Center), Washington, DC
Update	2020/1/01