Research has shown that the construction of visual representations may have a positive effect on cognitive skills, including argumentation. In this paper we present a study on learning argumentation through computer-supported argument diagramming. We specifically focus on whether students, when provided with an argument-diagramming tool, create better diagrams, are more motivated, and learn more when working with other students or on their own. We use learning analytics to evaluate a variety of student activities: pre and post questionnaires to explore motivational changes; the argument diagrams created by students to evaluate richness, complexity and completion; and pre and post knowledge tests to evaluate learning gains.

1. Building Arguments Together or Alone?
Using Learning Analytics to Study the
Collaborative Construction of Argument
Diagrams
Irene-Angelica Chounta, Bruce M. McLaren, Maralee Harrell
Carnegie Mellon University

2. Motivation of Research
• The construction of visual representations
may have a positive effect on cognitive skills
Computer-supported argument
diagramming is important for
philosophy courses (Harrell, 2016)

3. Motivation
• The construction of visual representations
may have a positive effect on cognitive skills
• Collaboration can scaffold learning
The benefits of collaboration are
also observed in collaborative
argumentation (Weinberger,
Stegmann, & Fischer, 2010).

4. Objective
• Does collaborative, computer-supported
argument diagramming lead to more
motivation, better understanding of
arguments, and better argumentation skills
than individual, computer-supported
argument diagramming?

5. Methodology
• We compare the practice of groups building
together argument diagrams to students who
worked alone.
• A collaborative web-based tool (LASAD)
mediated the activity.
• We analyze the activity on three levels:
1. pre and post questionnaires to explore motivation;
2. logfile analysis to assess the richness and complexity of
diagrams;
3. pre and post knowledge tests to evaluate learning gains.

6. Study setup
• 19 students following an course on argument
diagramming
• Two conditions:
– Collaborative condition (11 students, 4 groups, 2-4
members)
– Individual condition (8 students)
• Task: Build argument diagrams for three different
theses (e.g. the “Of Miracles” by D. Hume)
• 32 argument diagrams (21 from the individual
and 11 from the collaborative condition)

7. Results (motivation)

8. Results (logfile analysis)
Diagram-related metricsGroups create larger
diagrams
And got
better grades!
…more detailed and
complex diagrams

9. Results (logfile analysis)
User-specific metrics
Individuals perform
more actions
…but spend less
time on task

10. Results (learning gain)

11. Discussion
• Motivation dropped after study’s completion
– The drop in motivation might reflect expectations
not met
– Groups rated higher on satisfaction from personal
performance
• Collaboratively-created diagrams tend to be
larger, more complex and get better grades
• Groups attained higher learning gains

12. Limitations
• However, these results are only suggestive
• Furthermore we focused only on the activity
that took place within the shared workspace
• Preliminary research that focused on the
activity of students and did not study the role
of the teacher.

13. Future work
• Introducing gaming elements and gamification
features to foster motivation
• Extending LASAD’s application to other fields

14. “Be a thinker… (not a stinker)”
-Rocky (1976)
Thank you 

15. Thank you 

16. Study setup
• 32 argument diagrams
Individual condition Collaborative condition
A
B C
A
B C
- 3 absences - 1 absence
x 8
= 21 diagrams
x 4
= 11 diagrams