You are here:

Promoting and scaffolding argumentation through reflective asynchronous discussions

, ,

Computers & Education Volume 59, Number 2, ISSN 0360-1315 Publisher: Elsevier Ltd


The purpose of this quasi-experimental study was to explore the impact of asynchronous discussion on the quality and complexity of college students’ arguments. Three different cohorts of students registered in a physical science course in 2009 Fall, 2010 Spring, and 2010 Fall semesters were briefly supported with scaffolding in class and then involved in argumentation about socio-scientific issues as take-home assignments. Each cohort was divided into an asynchronous online communication group and a paper–pencil group. The findings showed that very few students’ arguments from either group were rated low in quality levels of 1 or 2 on a five-scale level. Additional comparisons revealed that the asynchronous online communication group students slightly outperformed their counterparts in terms of mean quality level of arguments (effect sizes ranged from 0.25 to 0.35) and the frequency of rebuttals. The major finding is that after only one hour of scaffolding followed by the opportunity to practice argumentation at home, students’ argumentation skills were slightly better developed through reflective asynchronous online discussions about socio-scientific issues than through paper-pencil practice.


Lin, H.s., Hong, Z.R. & Lawrenz, F. (2012). Promoting and scaffolding argumentation through reflective asynchronous discussions. Computers & Education, 59(2), 378-384. Elsevier Ltd. Retrieved January 29, 2020 from .

This record was imported from Computers & Education on January 29, 2019. Computers & Education is a publication of Elsevier.

Full text is availabe on Science Direct:


Cited By

View References & Citations Map

These links are based on references which have been extracted automatically and may have some errors. If you see a mistake, please contact