Résumés
Abstract
The view that argumentation is a desired reasoning practice in the classroom is well reported in the literature. Nonetheless, it is still not clear what type of reasoning supports classroom argumentation. The paper discusses abductive reasoning as the most adequate for students’ arguments to emerge in a classroom discussion. Abductive reasoning embraces the idea of plausibility and defeasibility of both the premises and the conclusion. As such, teachers’ role becomes the one of guiding students through formulating relevant hypotheses and selecting the most plausible one according to criteria. Argumentation schemes are proposed as useful tools in this process.
Keywords:
- Abductive reasoning,
- Argumentation,
- Education,
- Teachers
Résumé
L'idée que l'argumentation est une pratique de raisonnement souhaitée en classe est bien documentée dans la littérature. Néanmoins, il n'est toujours pas clair quel type de raisonnement soutient l'argumentation en classe. Dans cet article on discute du raisonnement abductif comme étant le plus adéquat pour que les arguments des élèves émergent dans une discussion en classe. Le raisonnement abductif emploie l'idée de plausibilité et de la révocabilité des prémisses et de la conclusion. En tant que tel, le rôle des enseignants consiste à guider les élèves à formuler des hypothèses pertinentes et à sélectionner le plus plausible selon des critères. Les schèmes d'argumentation sont proposés comme des outils utiles dans ce processus.
Veuillez télécharger l’article en PDF pour le lire.
Télécharger
Parties annexes
Bibliography
- Chin Christine and Jonathan Osborne. 2010. Students’ questions and discursive interaction: Their impact on argumentation during collaborative group discussions in science. Journal of Research in Science Teaching 47(7): 883–908.
- Chinn, Clark A. 2006. Learning to argue. In Collaborative learning, reasoning, and technology, eds. Angela O’Donnell, Cindy Hmelo-Silver, and Gijsbert Erkens, 355–383. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Publishers.
- Clark Douglas B., Sampson Victor, Weinberger Armin and Gijsbert Erkens. 2007. Analytic frameworks for assessing dialogic argumentation in online learning environments. Educational Psychology Review 19(3): 343–374.
- Dawson Vaille M. and Grady Venville. 2010. Teaching strategies for developing students’ argumentation skills about socioscientific issues in high school genetics. Research in Science Education 40: 133–148.
- Driver Rosalind, Asoko Hilary, Leach John, Mortimer Eduardo and Philip Scott. 1994. Constructing scientific knowledge in the classroom. Educational Researcher 23(7): 5–12.
- Duschl Richard and Jonathan Osborne. 2002. Supporting and promoting argumentation discourse in science education. Studies in Science Education 38(1): 39–72.
- van Eemeren Frans, Grootendorst Rob and Francisca Snoeck-Henkemans. 2002. Argumentation: Analysis, evaluation, presentation. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Publishers.
- Erduran Sibel and Maria-Pillar Jimenez-Aleixandre, eds. 2008. Argumentation in science education: perspectives from classroom-based research. Dordrecht: Springer.
- Felder Richard M. and Linda Silverman. 1988. Learning and teaching styles in engineering education. Engineering Education 78(7): 674– 681.
- Felton Mark, Garcia-Mila Merce, Villarroel Costanza and Sandra Gilabert. 2015. Arguing collaboratively: Argumentative discourse types and their potential for knowledge building. British Journal of Educational Psychology 85(3): 372–386.
- Glassner Armin and Baruch Schwarz. 2007. What stands and develops between creative and critical thinking? Argumentation? Thinking Skills & Creativity 2(1): 10–18.
- Josephson John and Susan Josephson. 1996. Abductive inference. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
- Kim Heekyong and Jinwoong Song. 2006. The features of peer argumentation in middle school students’ scientific inquiry. Research in Science Education 36(3): 211–233.
- Kuhn Deanna. 1991. The skills of argument. New York: Cambridge University Press.
- Kuhn Deanna. 1992. Thinking as argument. Harvard Educational Review 62(2):155–178.
- Kuhn Deanna. 2010. Teaching and learning science as argument. Science Education 94(5): 810–824.
- Kuhn Deanna, Goh Wendy, Iordanou Kalypso, and David Shaenfield. 2008. Arguing on the computer: A microgenetic study of developing argument skills in a computer-supported environment. Child Development 79(5): 1310–1328.
- Kuhn Deanna, Hemberger Laura, and Valerie Khait. 2014. Argue with me: Argument as a path to developing students’ thinking and writing. New York: Wessex Press.
- Lawson Anton E. 2005. What is the role of induction and deduction in reasoning and scientific inquiry? Journal of Research in Science Teaching 42(6): 716–740.
- Macagno Fabrizio. 2012. Presumptive reasoning in interpretation. Implicatures and conflicts of presumptions. Argumentation 26(2): 233–265.
- Macagno Fabrizio and Aikaterini Konstantinidou. 2013. What students’ arguments can tell us: Using argumentation schemes in science education. Argumentation 27(3): 225–243.
- Magnani Lorenzo. 2000. Abduction, reason and science: Processes of discovery and explanation. Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publishers.
- Mayweg-Paus Elisabeth, Thiebach Monica and Regina Jucks. 2016. Let me critically question this!-Insights from a training study on the role
- of questioning in argumentative discourse. International Journal of Educational Researc 79: 195–210.
- Mercier Hugo and Dan Sperber. 2011. Why do humans reason? Arguments for an argumentative theory. Behavioral and Brain Sciences 34(2): 57–74.
- Muller-Mirza Nathalie and Anne-Nelly Perret-Clermont. 2009. Argumentation and education: Theoretical foundations and practices. Dordrecht etc.: Springer.
- Pedemonte Bettina. 2007. How can the relationship between argumentation and proof be analysed? Educational Studies in Mathematics 66(1): 23–41. Peirce Charles S. 1878. How to make our ideas clear. In The essential Peirce, eds. Nathan Houser and Christian Kloesel, Volume 1. Bloomington: Indiana University Press.
- Peirce Charles S. 1931. Collected papers of Charles Sanders Peirce (C. Hartshorne, P. Weiss, and A. Burks, eds.). Cambridge MA: Belknap Press.
- Prince Michael and Richard Felder. 2007. The many faces of inductive teaching and learning. Journal of College Science Teaching 36(5): 14– 20.
- Psillos Stathis. 2011. An explorer upon untrodden ground: Peirce on abduction. In Handbook of the History of Logic, eds. Dov Gabbay, Stephan Hartmann and John Woods, 117–151. Oxford: North-Holland.
- Rapanta Chrysi, Garcia-Mila Merce, and Sandra Gilabert. 2013. What is meant by argumentative competence? An integrative review of methods of analysis and assessment in education. Review of Educational Research 83(4): 483-520.
- Rapanta Chrysi and Fabrizio Macagno. 2016. Argumentation methods in educational contexts: Introduction to the special issue. International Journal of Educational Research 79: 142-149.
- Rapanta Chrysi and Douglas Walton. The use of argument maps as an assessment tool in higher education. International Journal of Educational Research 79: 211-221.
- Toulmin Stephen. 1958. The uses of argument. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
- Voss James and Mary Means. 1991. Learning to reason via instruction in argumentation. Learning and Instruction 1(4): 337–350.
- Walton Douglas. 2001a. Abductive, presumptive and plausible arguments. Informal Logic 21(2): 141–169.
- Walton Douglas. 2001b. Enthymemes, common knowledge, and plausible inference. Philosophy and Rhetoric 34(2): 93–112.
- Walton Douglas. 2005. Abductive reasoning. Tuscaloosa: University of Alabama Press.
- Walton Douglas and Chris Reed. 2005. Argumentation schemes and enthymemes. Synthese 145(3): 339–370.
- Walton Douglas, Reed Chris and Fabrizio Macagno. 2008. Argumentation schemes. New York: Cambridge University Press.