Supporting Argumentative Knowledge Construction in Face-to- Face Settings: From ArgueTable to ArgueWall

Research on computer-supported collaboration scripts has so far widely neglected human-computer-interaction (HCI) aspects. This paper presents a set of case studies on the user interface of a computer application that smoothly fits into the practice of argumentative knowledge construction in co-located collaborative learning. During an iterative design process different user interface designs were evaluated regarding their effects on the knowledge construction process. Starting from a tabletop application (‘ArgueTable’) the design process led to an alternative display environment (‘ArgueWall’), which uses laptops together with a shared wall display. The results show that HCI aspects can have strong effects on the scripted learning processes. Due to the inherent interaction of humans and computers, HCI should be an integral part of research on computer-supported collaborative learning (CSCL). The Need for Computer Support in Argumentative Knowledge Construction While high quality of argumentation has shown to be beneficial for learning, it is rarely found in unsupported collaboration (cf. Kollar, Fischer & Slotta, 2007). Learners usually do not provide grounds and qualifications for their claims. In addition, learners rarely raise socio-cognitive conflicts through counter argumentations. A possible solution is to provide instructional means that focus on the quality of argumentation to enhance collaborative learning. Computer-supported collaboration scripts have been successfully implemented to facilitate collaborative knowledge construction by increasing the quality of argumentation during discussions (e.g. Stegmann et al., 2007). However, research on collaboration scripts has widely neglected an important aspect that plays a role in computer-supported collaborative learning: variations of the user interface as studied in HCI. Collaboration scripts are often implemented using typical desktop user interface elements, such as textboxes, buttons and drop-down menus. Such interfaces often do not reach the goal of providing an intuitive interface, which guides learners naturally through the process. Instead, text-based instructions are commonly used, leading to a waste of time and a misplaced emphasis on the task of operating the computer. This paper presents studies on the user interface design of a computer application for argumentative knowledge construction in face-to-face collaborative learning. The user interfaces was developed using an iterative design process as proposed by Nielson (1993). The studies show that the design of the user interface in particular the choice of displays can have strong effects on script-based learning processes. HCI in the Design of Applications for Collaborative Learning In the field of HCI a number of studies have shown that the type of display environment can affect co-located collaborative processes. Some of the display characteristics that play a role are the number, orientation, size and privacy of a display as well as the seating arrangement and the users’ proximity to the display (Mandryk, Scott & Inkpen, 2002). Several of these aspects also play an important role in collaborative learning scenarios. First, depending on the number, size and orientation of displays, they can offer private workspaces or be visible to the whole group, which increases the awareness of the learning partner’s activities (Mandryk, Scott & Inkpen, 2002). An increased awareness could have positive effects (e.g. efficient task coordination) as well as negative effects (e.g. distraction from the primary task). Second, the balance of participation and role distribution within the team can be affected. For instance, Rogers and Lindley (2004) found collaboration to be more balanced on horizontal displays compared to vertical ones. Furthermore, empirical studies indicate that combinations of shared and private workspaces can support a more equal participation in face-to-face collaborations (Looi et al., 2008). Third, there are ergonomic aspects such as arm fatigue or limited elbowroom (Inkpen et al. 2005). The result of such factors combined is that different types of displays are used for different purposes (cf. Everitt et al., 2006) and thus have different affordances. CSCL 2011 Proceedings Volume II: Short Papers & Posters