Fostering Argumentation Skills in Mathematics with Adaptable Collaboration Scripts: Only Viable for Good Self-Regulators?

Abstract

Argumentation scripts have been proposed as an effective means to structure students’ argumentation and to support their acquisition of argumentation skills. Yet, argumentation scripts run the danger of overscripting students’ argumentation. A possible solution might be to offer adaptable argumentation scripts that allow students to adjust the script to their own needs. This study compares the effects of three argumentation scripts (high structured vs. low structured vs. adaptable) on students’ argumentation skills. Furthermore, we investigate to what extent students’ self-regulation skills influence the acquisition of argumentation skills in the three conditions. N = 109 math students were randomized to the three treatment conditions and worked in dyads on mathematical proof tasks in a CSCL environment. Students’ argumentation skills increased between pre- and post-tests with comparable gains in all three conditions. Only for students learning with the adaptable argumentation script, self-regulation skills were a significant positive predictor for argumentation skills.