Acceso usuarios
Antonia Larraín, Vivian Singer, Katherine Strasser Salinas, Christine Howe, Patricia López, Jorge Pinochet Iturriaga, Camila Morán Ramírez, Álvaro Sánchez, Maximiliano Silva, Constanza Villavicencio
There is compelling evidence that arguing with peers in educational contexts fosters students’ content knowledge and argumentation skills. Indeed, curricula have already been developed that, through tailored support for peer argumentation, promote both content knowledge and argumentation skills simultaneously. However, we do not yet know how to optimize the occurrence of peer argumentation, although there are suggestions in the literature that computers may have a role to play. Likewise, there are uncertainties about the mechanisms through which the benefits of peer argumentation are achieved, especially whether (and how) there is interdependence across the two types of benefit. In this paper, we report a quasi-experimental study randomized at class level, which addresses these two issues. A total of 502 fourth-grade students and 20 classes and teachers covered a module in science under three conditions: (1) using a curriculum that was already known to promote peer argumentation and content knowledge (standard support), (2) using the same curriculum but with additional computer-based support (computer-enhanced support), and (3) a routinely taught control group. Students’ argumentation skills and content knowledge were assessed. Content knowledge was assessed prior to and after the intervention, with immediate and delayed posttests. Multiple regression analyses showed that peer argumentation was indeed most frequent in the computer-enhanced condition. Moreover, on the basis of a multilevel path analysis, we found that individual contributions to peer argumentation had a direct effect on posttest argumentation skills and an indirect effect on posttest content knowledge, both immediate and delayed. The indirect effect of argumentation on delayed posttest content knowledge was mediated by immediate posttest knowledge and posttest argumentation skills. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2021 APA, all rights reserved)
