Establishing validity among pre-school children

Hannken-Illjes, Kati; Bose, Ines

doi:10.1075/jaic.16019.han

Cited by 7 publications

(7 citation statements)

References 9 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…In this case they also exhibit them to Juno, a girl who for some time plays along with the two boys (line 251) but never engages in a conversation with them. Interestingly, we find similar sequences in play situations and situations that involve reasoning by other children (Hannken-Illjes and Bose, 2018). Here the children will point out to each other that they are very competent together in what they are doing.…”

Section: Yessupporting

confidence: 66%

“…However, the fact that children do not exhibit elaborate argumentative abilities in disputes should not lead to the conclusion that they do not have them at their command. Our own studies have shown that preschool children are able to engage in argumentation in either fictional disputes in role play (Bose 2003;Bose and Hannken-Illjes 2016), or in cooperative interaction in play settings (Hannken-Illjes and Bose 2018). There are further studies that support these findings and that shall be referred to in the following section.…”

Section: Entry Points Into Studying Argumentation Among Childrenmentioning

confidence: 72%

“…This paper provides an analysis of oral argumentation among preschoolers. It is part of a larger study on the establishment of validity through argumentation in authentic child-child communication (see Bose andHannken-Illjes 2016, 2019;Hannken-Illjes and Bose 2018). The study aims at contributing to the description and modeling of the development of argumentation competence 1 in children.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…On a general methodological note, the concept of topos is an uneasy one for an appraoch informed by conversation analysis, as a topos needs to be reconstructed and is not abservable on the discursive surface. For further discussion see Hannken-Illjes andBose (2018), andSchwarze (2010).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

Frozen

Hannken-Illjes

Bose

2019

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In this study, we consider the ways different degrees of dissent are established in interaction, especially in interactions among children. One important aspect in the development of the ability to argue is the framing of interactions as rather cooperative or agonistic. Different framings seem to allow for different forms of argumentative activity. The focus in this paper is on the mediation of degrees of dissensus in argumentation in child-child communication. It is established, we argue, through verbal as well as non-verbal means, and the agonistic and cooperativity can be indicators for the space argumentation has in child-child interaction.

show abstract

Section: Yessupporting

confidence: 66%

Section: Entry Points Into Studying Argumentation Among Childrenmentioning

confidence: 72%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Frozen

Hannken-Illjes

Bose

2019

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…We note further that the common denominator of the sample as a whole is a view of opposition, disagreement, or a difference of opinion as a defining minimal feature of children's argumentation. We will argue that this is the case even in studies that propose to see cooperativity as representing a possible initial argumentative framing (e.g., Hannken-Illjes & Bose, 2018, since opposition is, on our reading, not denied but rather presupposed here as well. Hence, given that the structural aspect, subsuming the oppositional antecedent, is inherent in all argumentation, one can argue that, within the field of argumentation in the early years, the structural-discursive dimension of Schwarz and Baker's (2017) model represents a continuum, stretching from more to less structural specificity along, primarily, the dialogic dimension.…”

Section: Summarizing Discussionmentioning

confidence: 79%

Argumentation in Early Childhood: A Systematic Review

Bubikova-Moan¹,

Sandvik²

2022

Human Development

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

While scientific evidence on argumentation among preschool children is on the rise, it is dispersed over a number of different fields, which may obfuscate its visibility, merit and potential. The aim of this systematic review was to synthesize the existing research and, as such, shed more concerted theoretical and empirical light on the origins as well as early development of the human capacity to argue. Based on 56 included studies, we show that it has been approached from numerous theoretical perspectives, with the dialogic view of argumentation and a productive eclecticism between argumentation, developmental, learning and linguistic theories as the main theoretical denominators. The review also documents that young children’s argumentation displays a range of structural-discursive, socio-interactional and developmental features, positioning them as argumentative agents in their own right. We discuss the implications of our findings in terms of further theory-building and their practical significance.

show abstract

An Interdisciplinary Approach to Investigate Preschool children’s Implicit Inferential Reasoning in Scientific Activities

Convertini

2020

Res Sci Educ

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The implementation of Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics (STEM) at school is one of the challenges of education in the twenty-first century, especially concerning the development of critical thinking during argumentative interactions. In this paper, I refer to an interdisciplinary approach with the aim to analyze the implicit inferential reasoning emerging in argumentative discussions among children during scientific activities. The study involved 25 preschool children at a kindergarten engaged in three problem solving tasks. The first activity was to build a tunnel, the second to build a bridge—both with the use of Lego©—and the third to build an hourglass with recycled materials. The tasks were video-recorded and the discussions transcribed. The analysis implied different steps: first, I identified the argumentative structure of each exchange according to the pragma-dialectical approach; then, I found the implicit premises using the Argumentum Model of Topics; afterward, I analyzed the argumentative discussions according to a sociocultural approach. The findings show a predominance of arguments based on causal relationships and indicate how children reason regarding complex aspects of a problem, such as the negative consequences of an action, the adequacy of the available tools, and the (possible) future conditions connected to the scientific activity they are involved in. The study opens a possibility to shift from how to implement STEM activities to what children already do when engaged in scientific tasks. It also encourages the adoption of an interdisciplinary approach to investigating the complex process of argumentation in preschool children.

show abstract

Establishing validity among pre-school children

Cited by 7 publications

References 9 publications

Frozen

Frozen

Argumentation in Early Childhood: A Systematic Review

An Interdisciplinary Approach to Investigate Preschool children’s Implicit Inferential Reasoning in Scientific Activities

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About