The Impact of collaboration on the outcomes of scientific argumentation

  • Sampson V
  • Clark D
  • 168

    Readers

    Mendeley users who have this article in their library.
  • 85

    Citations

    Citations of this article.

Abstract

This study examines three questions about the impact of collaboration during scientific argumentation. First, do groups craft better arguments than individuals? Second, to what degree do individuals adopt and internalize the arguments crafted by their group? Third, do individuals who work in groups learn more from their experiences than indi- viduals who work on their own? To examine these questions, 168 high school chemistry students were randomly assigned, using a matched pair design to collaborative or individual argumentation conditions. Students in both treatment conditions first completed a task that required them to produce an argument articulating and justifying an explanation for a dis- crepant event.The students then completed mastery and transfer problems on their own. The results of this study indicate that (a) groups of students did not produce better arguments than studentswhoworked alone, (b) a substantial proportion of the students adopted at least some elements of their group’s argument, and (c) students from the collaborative condition demonstrated superior performance on the mastery and transfer problems. These observa- tions indicate that collaboration was beneficial for individual learning but not for initial performance on the task. The study concludes with a discussion of these observations and C recommendations for future research.

Get free article suggestions today

Mendeley saves you time finding and organizing research

Sign up here
Already have an account ?Sign in

Find this document

Authors

Cite this document

Choose a citation style from the tabs below

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free