Introduction to the Special Issue “Boundaries between dialogic pedagogy and argumentation theory”

Article Sidebar

PDF
Published: May 2, 2023
DOI: https://doi.org/10.5195/dpj.2023.576
Keywords:
dialogue argumentation dialogic pedagogy education

Main Article Content

Chrysi Rapanta
Universidade Nova de Lisboa, Portugal
Fabrizio Macagno
Universidade Nova de Lisboa, Portugal

Abstract

Dialogue and argumentation are two processes that complement and mutually influence each other. However, this essential relationship is not sufficiently acknowledged by current educational research. This neglected relation is also mirrored by the lack of sufficient dialogue between two fields that are defined by the dialogical approach to education and argumentation, namely dialogic pedagogy and educational argumentation. In this Special Issue, we argue that dialogue pedagogies and argumentation theory and practice should communicate more, bridging their somehow different perspectives for the common goal of engaging learners in productive and constructive discussions.

Article Details

How to Cite
Rapanta, C., & Macagno, F. (2023). Introduction to the Special Issue “Boundaries between dialogic pedagogy and argumentation theory”. Dialogic Pedagogy: A Journal for Studies of Dialogic Education, 11(3), A1-A6. https://doi.org/10.5195/dpj.2023.576
Issue
Vol. 11 No. 3 (2023): Boundaries between dialogic pedagogy and argumentation theory
Section
Articles
Creative Commons License

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.

Authors who publish with this journal agree to the following terms:

  1. The Author retains copyright in the Work, where the term “Work” shall include all digital objects that may result in subsequent electronic publication or distribution.
  2. Upon acceptance of the Work, the author shall grant to the Publisher the right of first publication of the Work.
  3. The Author shall grant to the Publisher and its agents the nonexclusive perpetual right and license to publish, archive, and make accessible the Work in whole or in part in all forms of media now or hereafter known under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License or its equivalent, which, for the avoidance of doubt, allows others to copy, distribute, and transmit the Work under the following conditions:
    1. Attribution—other users must attribute the Work in the manner specified by the author as indicated on the journal Web site;
    with the understanding that the above condition can be waived with permission from the Author and that where the Work or any of its elements is in the public domain under applicable law, that status is in no way affected by the license.
  4. The Author is able to enter into separate, additional contractual arrangements for the nonexclusive distribution of the journal's published version of the Work (e.g., post it to an institutional repository or publish it in a book), as long as there is provided in the document an acknowledgement of its initial publication in this journal.
  5. Authors are permitted and encouraged to post online a prepublication manuscript (but not the Publisher’s final formatted PDF version of the Work) in institutional repositories or on their Websites prior to and during the submission process, as it can lead to productive exchanges, as well as earlier and greater citation of published work. Any such posting made before acceptance and publication of the Work shall be updated upon publication to include a reference to the Publisher-assigned DOI (Digital Object Identifier) and a link to the online abstract for the final published Work in the Journal.
  6. Upon Publisher’s request, the Author agrees to furnish promptly to Publisher, at the Author’s own expense, written evidence of the permissions, licenses, and consents for use of third-party material included within the Work, except as determined by Publisher to be covered by the principles of Fair Use.
  7. The Author represents and warrants that:
    1. the Work is the Author’s original work;
    2. the Author has not transferred, and will not transfer, exclusive rights in the Work to any third party;
    3. the Work is not pending review or under consideration by another publisher;
    4. the Work has not previously been published;
    5. the Work contains no misrepresentation or infringement of the Work or property of other authors or third parties; and
    6. the Work contains no libel, invasion of privacy, or other unlawful matter.
  8. The Author agrees to indemnify and hold Publisher harmless from Author’s breach of the representations and warranties contained in Paragraph 6 above, as well as any claim or proceeding relating to Publisher’s use and publication of any content contained in the Work, including third-party content.

Revised 7/16/2018. Revision Description: Removed outdated link. 

Author Biographies

Chrysi Rapanta, Universidade Nova de Lisboa, Portugal

Chrysi Rapanta (Ph.D. in communication, 2011) works as a researcher in the field of Argumentation and Education at the Institute of Philosophy at the Universidade Nova de Lisboa. She has coordinated national and international projects on argumentation and dialogical practices in education, closely collaborating with teachers from various contexts and educational levels. She has authored several papers on argument-based teaching published on major international peer-reviewed journals such as Review of Educational Research, Educational Research Review, Educational Psychology Review, Teaching & Teacher Education, and Learning, culture & social interaction. She is also the author of “Argumentation strategies in the classroom” (2019, Vernon Press).

Fabrizio Macagno, Universidade Nova de Lisboa, Portugal

Fabrizio Macagno (Ph.D. in linguistics, 2008) works as an assistant professor in the departments of Philosophy and Communication at the Universidade Nova de Lisboa. He has coordinated national and international projects on dialogical practices in different contexts, including education and medical communication. He authored several papers on definition, informal fallacies, argumentation schemes, and dialogue theory published in major international peer-reviewed journals such as Journal of Pragmatics, Intercultural Pragmatics, Argumentation, Philosophy and Rhetoric, Informal Logic, and Pragmatics and Cognition. His most important publications include the books Argumentation Schemes (Cambridge University Press 2008), Emotive language in argumentation (CUP 2014), Interpreting straw man argumentation (Springer 2017), and Statutory interpretation: Pragmatics and argumentation (CUP 2021).

References

Asterhan, C., Howe, C., Lefstein, A., Matusov, E., & Reznitskaya, A. (2020). Controversies and consensus in research on dialogic teaching and learning. Dialogic Pedagogy: An International Online Journal, 8, 1–16. https://doi.org/10.5195/dpj.2020.312

Billig, M. (1987). Arguing and thinking: A rhetorical approach to social psychology. Cambridge University Press.

Duschl, R., & Osborne, J. (2002). Supporting and promoting argumentation discourse in science education. Studies in Science Education, 38(1), 39–72. https://doi.org/10.1080/03057260208560187

Felton, M., & Crowell, A. (2022). Argumentation as a Collaborative Enterprise: A Study of Dialogic Purpose and Dialectical Relevance in Novice and Experienced Arguers. Informal Logic, 42(1), 171–202.

Felton, M., & Herko, S. (2004). From dialogue to two-sided argument: Scaffolding adolescents’ persuasive writing. Journal of Adolescent & Adult Literacy, 47(8), 672–683.

Howe, C., Hennessy, S., Mercer, N., Vrikki, M., & Wheatley, L. (2019). Teacher–Student Dialogue During Classroom Teaching: Does It Really Impact on Student Outcomes? Journal of the Learning Sciences, 28(4–5), 462–512. https://doi.org/10.1080/10508406.2019.1573730

Iordanou, K., & Rapanta, C. (2021). “Argue With Me”: A Method for Developing Argument Skills. Frontiers in Psychology, 12. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2021.631203

Kuhn, D. (1991). The skills of argument. Cambridge University Press.

Kuhn, D. (2018). A Role for Reasoning in a Dialogic Approach to Critical Thinking. Topoi, 37(1), 121–128. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11245-016-9373-4

Kuhn, D., & Crowell, A. (2011). Dialogic argumentation as a vehicle for developing young adolescents’ thinking. Psychological Science, 22(4), 545–552. https://doi.org/10.1177/0956797611402512

Kuhn, D., Hemberger, L., & Khait, V. (2014). Argue with me: Argument as a path to developing students’ thinking and writing. Wessex Press.

Kuhn, D., Hemberger, L., & Khait, V. (2016a). Dialogic argumentation as a bridge to argumentative thinking and writing / La argumentación dialógica como puente para el pensamiento y la escritura argumentativa. Infancia y Aprendizaje, 39(1), 25–48. https://doi.org/10.1080/02103702.2015.1111608

Kuhn, D., Hemberger, L., & Khait, V. (2016b). Tracing the Development of Argumentive Writing in a Discourse-Rich Context. Written Communication, 33(1), 92–121. https://doi.org/10.1177/0741088315617157

Larraín, A., & Haye, A. (2012). The Role of Rhetoric in a Dialogical Approach to Thinking. Journal for the Theory of Social Behaviour, 42(2), 220–237. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-5914.2012.00487.x

Lin, C. C. (2013). Dialogic Pedagogy and its Discontent. In M. Glina (Ed.), Philosophy for, with, and of Children (pp. 111–130). Cambridge Scholars Publishing.

Macagno, F. (2016). Argument relevance and structure. Assessing and developing students’ uses of evidence. International Journal of Educational Research, 79, 180–194. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijer.2016.07.002

Macagno, F., & Rapanta, C. (2019). The logic of academic writing. Wessex Press.

Marttunen, M. J., & Laurinen, L. I. (2009). Secondary school students’ collaboration during dyadic debates face-to-face and through computer chat. Computers in Human Behavior, 25(4), 961–969. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2009.04.005

Matusov, E. (2021). The relationship between education and learning and its consequences for dialogic pedagogy. Dialogic Pedagogy: An International Online Journal, 9, E1–E19. https://doi.org/10.5195/dpj.2021.425

Muller-Mirza, N., & Perret-Clermont, A.-N. (2009). Argumentation and education: Theoretical foundations and practices. Springer.

Nussbaum, M. (2021). Critical integrative argumentation: Toward complexity in students’ thinking. Educational Psychologist, 56(1), 1–17. https://doi.org/10.1080/00461520.2020.1845173

Nussbaum, M., & Schraw, G. (2007). Promoting argument- counterargument integration in students’ writing. The Journal of Experimental Education, 76(1), 59–92. https://doi.org/10.3200/JEXE.76.1.59-92

Rapanta, C. (2019). Argumentation strategies in the classroom. Vernon press.

Rapanta, C., & Felton, M. K. (2022). Learning to Argue Through Dialogue: a Review of Instructional Approaches. Educational Psychology Review, 34(2), 477–509. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-021-09637-2

Resnick, L., Michaels, S., & O’Connor, C. (2010). How (well-structured) talk builds the mind. In D. Preiss & R. Sternberg (Eds.), Innovations in educational psychology: Perspectives on learning, teaching, and human development. (pp. 163–194). Springer Publishing Company.

Reznitskaya, A., Glina, M., Carolan, B., Michaud, O., Rogers, J., & Sequeira, L. (2012). Examining transfer effects from dialogic discussions to new tasks and contexts. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 37(4), 288–306. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cedpsych.2012.02.003

Reznitskaya, A., & Wilkinson, I. (2017). The Most Reasonable Answer: Helping Students Build Better Arguments Together. Harvard Education Press.

Schwarz, B., & Baker, M. (2016). Dialogue, argumentation and education: History, theory and practice. Cambridge University Press.

Teo, P. (2019). Teaching for the 21st century: A case for dialogic pedagogy. Learning, Culture and Social Interaction, 21, 170–178. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lcsi.2019.03.009

Vygotsky, L. S. (1962). Thought and language. MIT Press.

Wertsch, J. (1991). Voices of the mind: Sociocultural approach to mediated action. Harvard University Press.