Browse > Article
http://dx.doi.org/10.5762/KAIS.2013.14.11.5559

The Effects of Reflection Rubric on Critical Thinking and Collaboration Argumentation in CSCA environment  

Kim, Soo Hyun (Dept. of Early Childhood Education, Koje College)
Publication Information
Journal of the Korea Academia-Industrial cooperation Society / v.14, no.11, 2013 , pp. 5559-5569 More about this Journal
Abstract
The purpose of this study was to examine the effect of the reflection rubric on frequency and content of critical thinking in CSCA. The researcher carried out research during 4 weeks, on 60 students taking the course of 'educational methods and educational technology' in K collage. As the result of this study, The reflection rubric frequency could not be significant difference in critical thinking, but could be significant difference in critical thinking content and collaboration argumentation. The reflection rubric could prevent learner form giving one side reasoning, considered both side opinion and grounds. Also the reflection rubric could trigger learner to construct collaborative knowledge building more strongly. This study showed that the reflection rubric have significant impacts on the argumentation collaboration learning in CSCA.
Keywords
Reflection rubric; Critical thinking; Collaborative argumentation; CSCA;
Citations & Related Records
연도 인용수 순위
  • Reference
1 Nussbaum, E. M., Winsor, D. L., Aqui, Y. M., & Poliquin, A. M. (2007). Putting the pieces together: Online argumentation vee diagrams enhance thinking during discussions. International journal of computersupported collaborative learning, 2(4), 479-500. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11412-007-9025-1   DOI
2 Janssen, J., Erkens, G., & Kanselaar, G. (2007). Visualization of agreement and discussion processes during computer-supported collaborative learning. Computers in human behavior, 23(3), 1105-1125. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2006.10.005   DOI   ScienceOn
3 Simon, S., Erduran, S., & Osborne, J.(2006) Learning to Teach Argumentation: Research and development in the Science Classroom. International Journal of Science Education, 28(2-3), 235-260. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/09500690500336957   DOI   ScienceOn
4 Koschmann, T. (2003). CSCL, argumentation, and Deweyan inquirt: Argumentation is learning. In J. Andriessen, M. Baker, & D. Suthers (Eds.), Arguing to learn: Confronting cognitions in computer-supported collaborative learning environments(pp. 261-269). Boston: Kluwer.
5 Kuhn, D., & Udell, W. (2003). The Development of Argument Skills. Child development, 74(5), 1245-1260. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/1467-8624.00605   DOI   ScienceOn
6 Felton, M., & Kuhn, D. (2001). The development of argumentative discourse skill. Discourse Processes, 32, 135-153. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/0163853X.2001.9651595   DOI
7 Choi, I., & Land, S. M. (2006, April). Instructor modeling and online guidance for peer-questioning during online discussions. Paper presented at the same annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, SanFrancisco, CA.
8 Rummel, N., & Spada, H. (2005). Learning to collaborate: An instructional approach to promoting collaborative problem solving in computer-mediated settings. The journal of the Learning Sciences, 14, 201-224. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1207/s15327809jls1402_2   DOI   ScienceOn
9 Nussbaum, E. M. (2005). The effect of goal instructions and need for cognition on interactive argumentation. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 30, 286-313. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.cedpsych.2004.11.002   DOI   ScienceOn
10 Lee, E. Y. C., Chan, C. K. K., & van Aalst, J. (2006). Students assessing their own collaborative knowledge building. Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning. 1, 57-87. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11412-006-6844-4   DOI
11 Jermann, P., & Dillenbourg, P. (2003). Elaboration new arguments through a CSCL script. In J. Andriessen, M. Baker, & D. Suthers (Eds.), Arguing to learn: Confrontion cognitions in computer-supported collaborative learning environments (pp.205-226). Boston: Kluwer.
12 Lipman, M.(2003). Thinking in Education (2th ed.) / Jin Hwan, Park, translation(2005). Thinking in Education.
13 Finocchiaro, M. A. (2005). Arguments about arguments: Systematic, critical and historical essays in logical theory. New York: Cambridge University Press.
14 Paul, R. & Linda, E. (2006) Critical Thinking: Tools for Taking Cjarge of Your Life. 2nd ed., Prentice-Hall.
15 Leitao, S. (2000). The Potential of Argument in Knowledge Building. Human development, 43(6), 332-360. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1159/000022695   DOI   ScienceOn
16 Joiner, R., & Jones, S. (2003). The effects of communication medium on argumentation and the development of critical thinking. International journal of educational research, 39(8), 861-871. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ijer.2004.11.008   DOI   ScienceOn
17 Schwarz, B. B., Neuman, Y., Gil, J., & Ilya, M. (2003). Construction of Collective and Individual Knowledge in Argumentative Activity. The Journal of the learning sciences, 12(2), 219-256. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1207/S15327809JLS1202_3   DOI   ScienceOn
18 Kim, Young-Cheol & Gong, Jin-Suk.(2007). A Study on the effect of using rebric through students participation on speaking ability. Studies in English Education, 13(1), 66-98.
19 ll-Ho Yang, Hyo-Jeong Lee, Hyonyong Lee, Hyunjun Cho,(2009). The Development of Rubric to Assess Scientific Argumentation. Journal Korea Association Science Education, 29(2), 203-220
20 Toth, E. E., Suthers, D. D., & Lesgold, A. M. (2002). "Mapping to know": The effects of representational guidance and reflective assessment on scientific inquiry. Science Education, 86, 264-286. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/sce.10004   DOI   ScienceOn