Patterns of debate in tertiary level asynchronous text-based conferencing

Abstract

Argumentation can be defined at different levels and serve different purposes but its role in knowledge understanding and construction has given it a central place in education, particularly at tertiary level. The advent of computer-supported text based conferences has created new sites where such educational dialogues can take place, but the quality of the interaction and whether it is serving its educational purpose is still uncertain. This paper reports on a framework of analysis that has been developed to illuminate the arguing process within an asynchronous electronic conferencing environment, showing how it is both similar to, and different from, argumentation in the more traditional forums of multi-party, face-to-face discussion and traditional written essays. The framework develops earlier work by the authors and is applied to two electronic conferences within the same postgraduate course, comparing overall patterns of argumentation. Findings are presented on the extent to which the technology of electronic conferencing shapes and supports students' participation in academic literacy practices relating to argumentation, proposing, at the same time, that the teaching strategy adopted by the lecturer is also an important variable.

Using systemic functional linguistics to explore digital technologies in educational contexts

“…As reported in greater detail elsewhere (e.g., Coffin and Hewings 2005;Coffin et al 2005aCoffin et al , 2005bCoffin et al , 2009bCoffin et al , and 2012Coffin and O'Halloran 2009;Hewings and Coffin 2004;Hewings et al 2009;Painter et al 2003), SFL analysis provided a number of insights into how meanings are made and exchanged in virtual discussion sites and where and how this is done more effectively as well as less so. Synthesizing the findings from across the four projects, this section puts forward claims relating to four broad areas which I take to be the most significant.…”

“…Within the forums, which lasted two to four weeks, the students (between 10 and 20 in each group) were asked to discuss factors affecting language learning (see Coffin and Hewings 2005;Coffin et al 2005aCoffin et al , 2005b for reports on this study).…”

“…That is, in order to capture the co-constructed nature of the genre, data were analyzed in terms of initiation and response stages (Coffin et al 2005a). However, this did not sufficiently account for the dynamic, interactive/ dialogic build-up of the arguing genres over time.…”

“…It may also be an effect of a smaller number of participants who as a result engaged in a more focused (linear) discussion with fewer claims unfolding in parallel. In relation to tutor/teachers' use of argument prompts, the possible effect on the quality and quantity of arguing stages made by students has been discussed in some depth in Coffin et al (2005a). An argument prompt such as But was this the most important cause?…”

Stance and Voice in Academic Discourse across Channels

“…c) Interactivity in terms of argumentation and authorial voice Analysis of argumentation and authorial voice in forums has been undertaken by Coffin, Hewings and associates (e.g. ;, Coffin, Painter, and Hewings 2005, Hewings, Coffin and North 2006. Argumentation requires taking a stance, the putting forward of views together with supporting evidence and being prepared to interact with others to defend them.…”