What we can learn from analyzing the teacher’s role in collective argumentation

By Erna Yackel. 2002

193 citations recorded by the source corpus.

Abstract In this paper, I use analyses of collective argumentation in a variety of classroom settings, from elementary school to a university-level differential equations class to illustrate various roles the teacher plays. These include initiating the negotiation of classroom norms that foster argumentation as the core of students’ mathematical activity, providing support for students as they interact with each other to develop arguments, and supplying argumentative supports (data, warrants, and backing) that are either omitted or left implicit. We gain two important insights from these analyses. First, an emphasis on argumentation can be used productively to provide openings in mathematical discussions for new mathematical concepts and tools to emerge. Second, the analyses demonstrate that teachers need to have both an in-depth understanding of students’ mathematical conceptual development and a sophisticated understanding of the mathematical concepts that underlie the instructional activities being used.

Subfields: Developmental and Educational Psychology, Education

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/435481c05a246991337b393391f8fe1e7c145d77

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

In Developmental and Educational Psychology

In Education

Citations in the corpus

The relationship between patterns of classroom discourse and mathematics learning (2008, background): “In broad strokes, this research considers the interrelationships between various curricula, activity structures, tasks, teacher knowledge, classroom norms, instructional environments, discourse patterns, contexts for argumentation and their possible relationships to student learning (Goos, 2004; Ham”
Teacher support for collective argumentation: A framework for examining how teachers support students’ engagement in mathematical activities (2014, methodology): “After developing our framework, we examined episodes of collective argumentation at various grade levels and with a variety of mathematical content reported in the mathematics education research literature (in particular, we examined arguments reported in Forman et.al, 1998; Knipping, 2003, 2008; Kr”
‘Warrant’ revisited: Integrating mathematics teachers’ pedagogical and epistemological considerations into Toulmin’s model for argumentation (2012, unknown): “These studies (e.g.: Krummheuer, 1995, 2007; Yackel, 2001, 2002; Whitenack & Knipping, 2002; Stephan & Rasmussen, 2002; Evens & Houssart, 2004; Hoyles & Kuchemann, 2002; Weber & Alcock, 2005; Pedemonte, 2005, 2007) span across educational levels, focus largely on arguments produced collectively an”
Can slope be negative in 3-space? Studying concept image of slope through collective definition construction (2011, methodology): “Krummheuer (1995, 2007), Yackel (2002) , and others suggest that students learn from interacting with each other as they work together in collective argumentation, which Krummheuer (1995) describes as “a social phenomenon when cooperating individuals tried to adjust their intentions and interpretat”
Identifying Kinds of Reasoning in Collective Argumentation (2014, methodology): “Researchers in mathematics education have used the construct of collective argumentation to examine the particularly mathematical aspects of classroom conversations, often using Toulmin’s (1958/2003) model of arguments (e.g., Krummheuer, 1995; Yackel, 2002).”
From visual reasoning to logical necessity through argumentative design (2012, methodology): “The Toulmin scheme was originally developed as a tool to describe argumentation as an outcome but it is currently used as a model for tracing the development of arguments in teaching/learning processes in classrooms (Krummheuer, 1995; Lavy, 2006; Pedemonte, 2007; Rasmussen & Stephan, 2008; Yackel, 2”