Collaborative argumentation and justifications: A statistical discourse analysis of online discussions

Abstract

As justifications (such as evidence or explanations) are central to productive argumentation, this study examines how the discourse moves of students engaged in collaborative learning are related to their justifications during computer mediated communication (CMC). Twenty-four students posted 131 messages on Knowledge Forum, an online collaborative learning environment. These messages were coded and analyzed with a multiple outcome, multilevel logit, vector autoregression. When students disagreed or made claims, they were more likely to use evidence. After a student made an alternative claim, the next student posting a message was less likely to use evidence. When students made claims, disagreed, disagreed with other’s justifications, or read more messages, they were more likely to use explanations. Boys were more likely than girls to make new claims. Together, these results suggest that discourse moves and sequences are linked to justifications on online forums.