Miriam Babichenko - Academia.edu (original) (raw)

Miriam Babichenko

Related Authors

Noel B. Salazar

Audra Skukauskaite

Judith L Green

Yuksel Goktas

Sonja Eisenbeiss

Scott Kiesling

Ramesh Chander Sharma

Hakan Tüzün

Li Wei

Li Wei

University College London

Ben Rampton

Uploads

Papers by Miriam Babichenko

Research paper thumbnail of Are There Differences in Quality of Teacher Team Conversations When Analyzing Peer Versus Other Videos?

Proceedings of the 2023 AERA Annual Meeting

Research paper thumbnail of Teacher Collaborative Inquiry into Practice in School-Based Learning Communities: The Role of Activity Type

Research paper thumbnail of Social Presence Survey

Research paper thumbnail of The social dimension of learning through argumentation: Effects of human presence and discourse style

Journal of Educational Psychology, 2015

In spite of its potential for learning, and in particular knowledge revision, productive argument... more In spite of its potential for learning, and in particular knowledge revision, productive argumentation on science concepts is neither easily elicited, nor sustained. Students may feel uneasy critiquing and being critiqued, especially on complex science topics. We report on a controlled study that tested the role of two potential factors that may either relieve or aggravate some of these concerns: the partner's argumentive discourse style (disputative or deliberative) and belief in interaction with a human or a computer agent. Learners interacted in scripted, computer-mediated interactions with a confederate on their understanding of a scientific concept they had just studied (i.e., diffusion). They were led to believe they were either interacting with a human peer or with a conversational peer agent. The peer confederate's verbal behavior was scripted to evoke argumentative discourse, while controlling for exposure to conceptual content and the type of dialogue moves, but differing in argumentive discourse style (disputative or deliberative). Results show that conceptual understanding of participants in the deliberative discourse style condition was higher than that in the disputative condition. Furthermore, even though previous studies have reported that the belief in human interaction benefits learning in consensual interactions, the opposite was found to be true in a setting of disagreement and critique: Higher conceptual learning gains were found for belief in interaction with a computer agent, compared to with a human peer. Implications for theory as well as instructional design are discussed.

Research paper thumbnail of Inquiry Into Practice in School-Based Teacher Team Activities: Comparing Video Analysis, Peer Consultation and Pedagogical Planning

Research paper thumbnail of Conceptual and Factual Knowledge of Diffusion Measure

Research paper thumbnail of Learning Complex Scientific Concepts through Peer Argumentation: The Effect of Belief in Human Presence and Partner's Discourse Style

Cognitive Science, 2013

This study aims to further our understanding of the processes underlying the learning of complex ... more This study aims to further our understanding of the processes underlying the learning of complex science content through argumentative discourse. We report on findings from a controlled study that tested the effect of the role of human presence on learning by manipulating the belief of interaction with a human or a computerized peer agent. The effect of competitive vs. collaborative argumentative discourse style on learning from computermediated interaction with a disagreeing peer is also explored. Peer confederate's verbal behavior was tightly controlled and scripted to evoke argumentative discourse, holding content exposure constant but differing in rhetoric style according to condition. Even though previous studies have reported that the belief of interaction with a human peer benefits learning in consensual settings, we found the opposite for a settings in which the partner disagrees with and critiques the learner's own solutions: Students showed higher learning gains when they believed they interacted with a computer agent as opposed to with a human peer. Moreover, results from this study show the importance of collaborative discourse goals in learning from argumentation.

Research paper thumbnail of Associations between problem framing and teacher agency in school-based workgroup discussions of problems of practice

Teaching and Teacher Education

Research paper thumbnail of Are There Differences in Quality of Teacher Team Conversations When Analyzing Peer Versus Other Videos?

Proceedings of the 2023 AERA Annual Meeting

Research paper thumbnail of Teacher Collaborative Inquiry into Practice in School-Based Learning Communities: The Role of Activity Type

Research paper thumbnail of Social Presence Survey

Research paper thumbnail of The social dimension of learning through argumentation: Effects of human presence and discourse style

Journal of Educational Psychology, 2015

In spite of its potential for learning, and in particular knowledge revision, productive argument... more In spite of its potential for learning, and in particular knowledge revision, productive argumentation on science concepts is neither easily elicited, nor sustained. Students may feel uneasy critiquing and being critiqued, especially on complex science topics. We report on a controlled study that tested the role of two potential factors that may either relieve or aggravate some of these concerns: the partner's argumentive discourse style (disputative or deliberative) and belief in interaction with a human or a computer agent. Learners interacted in scripted, computer-mediated interactions with a confederate on their understanding of a scientific concept they had just studied (i.e., diffusion). They were led to believe they were either interacting with a human peer or with a conversational peer agent. The peer confederate's verbal behavior was scripted to evoke argumentative discourse, while controlling for exposure to conceptual content and the type of dialogue moves, but differing in argumentive discourse style (disputative or deliberative). Results show that conceptual understanding of participants in the deliberative discourse style condition was higher than that in the disputative condition. Furthermore, even though previous studies have reported that the belief in human interaction benefits learning in consensual interactions, the opposite was found to be true in a setting of disagreement and critique: Higher conceptual learning gains were found for belief in interaction with a computer agent, compared to with a human peer. Implications for theory as well as instructional design are discussed.

Research paper thumbnail of Inquiry Into Practice in School-Based Teacher Team Activities: Comparing Video Analysis, Peer Consultation and Pedagogical Planning

Research paper thumbnail of Conceptual and Factual Knowledge of Diffusion Measure

Research paper thumbnail of Learning Complex Scientific Concepts through Peer Argumentation: The Effect of Belief in Human Presence and Partner's Discourse Style

Cognitive Science, 2013

This study aims to further our understanding of the processes underlying the learning of complex ... more This study aims to further our understanding of the processes underlying the learning of complex science content through argumentative discourse. We report on findings from a controlled study that tested the effect of the role of human presence on learning by manipulating the belief of interaction with a human or a computerized peer agent. The effect of competitive vs. collaborative argumentative discourse style on learning from computermediated interaction with a disagreeing peer is also explored. Peer confederate's verbal behavior was tightly controlled and scripted to evoke argumentative discourse, holding content exposure constant but differing in rhetoric style according to condition. Even though previous studies have reported that the belief of interaction with a human peer benefits learning in consensual settings, we found the opposite for a settings in which the partner disagrees with and critiques the learner's own solutions: Students showed higher learning gains when they believed they interacted with a computer agent as opposed to with a human peer. Moreover, results from this study show the importance of collaborative discourse goals in learning from argumentation.

Research paper thumbnail of Associations between problem framing and teacher agency in school-based workgroup discussions of problems of practice

Teaching and Teacher Education

Log In