大學生社會性科學議題小組討論及組間辯論之居位 —Toulmin論證分析取向

Abstract

本研究之目的是以居位理論為基礎，探討大學生小組討論時，從初識到結識的歷程中，如何居位自己與居位他人；並探討持對立立場之兩組成員辯論社會科學議題時的論證歷程及辯論後的組間居位和外評。 在居位自己與居位他人方面，主要是以問卷調查的方式探得小組成員居位自己與居位他人的結果，組間的居位除了以問卷調查之外，也同時分析組間論證攻防時的話語資料。至於描述組內經由討論而慢慢形成小組的論證架構及論證的攻防呈現，則是以質性資料的分析結果為主。 研究結果發現：在組內互動的居位部份，初識時，成員間的居位結果顯示與社會基模有關，而且居位者有自謙的傾向；結識後，小組成員對自己的居位會提昇，顯示社會基模的刻板被弱化，表示結識後，組內的居位有重塑的現象。在小組論證的建構部份，小組論證架構的建立歷程中，支持宣稱的依據會先確立，待取得足夠的資料時，則進一步將資料轉換成支持理由；會設立限制條件來弱化反例的衝擊；並強調多元資料來源、重視數據及對數據解讀方式的重要性；地位的提昇與完成任務的輸出與貢獻有關，且輸出與貢獻愈大，地位提昇得愈高。在組間論證攻防與居位部份，辯士面對反例攻擊時，會提出因應的實用解決方式；呈現對比的有利數據突顯己方立場，來加強說服力；在攻防中，除了理性的論點，也會出現感性的訴求。在外評組的評價部份，除了辯士的準備度會影響外評組的支持立場之外，外評組支持立場的改變與否，和辯士如何對反例提出解決之道或反駁有關聯。顯示在科學課室虛擬現實社會的辯論場中，外評組成員展現出相對的理性。 本研究從居位的角度出發，配合Toulmin論證架構的分析，以瞭解大學生相互居位及共同建構論證的歷程。依據研究發現，對課程設計及未來研究提出建議。The purpose of this study was to investigate college students’ positioning and argumentation based on the positioning theory. For one, the processes of how individuals positioned themselves and others were explored during the progression of getting acquaintance via the group discourse activities. For another, the argumentation process, the intergroup positioning, and the listeners’ evaluation toward the two groups in opposite positions were explored in the context of socio-scientific issue. The results of positioning, which presented how the individuals positioned themselves, others, and different groups, were investigated by the quantitative data, a questionnaire. Besides, protocols derived from the argumentation process were analyzed. The results of how the group members co-constructed the arguments were presented by the qualitative data. Several findings were as follows. As for the intragroup positioning, the group members had the tendency of being self-effacing, their positioning were influenced by social schema while they first met each other. After getting acquaintance, the group members’ self-positioning was improved, the influence of stereotypes relevant to social schema was reduced. This indicates that the intragroup positioning was reconstructed during the acquaintance process. As for the construction of argumentation, the results show that group members always first identified the data which corroborated the claims during debate process; the data would eventually be transferred into warrants. Furthermore, qualifiers were proposed to eliminate the efficacy of rebuttals. The importance of data diversity and data interpretation were emphasized. Moreover, the promotion of positioning was related to group members’ degree of contribution. Finally, as for the intergroup argumentation and positioning, while the group members encountered debates, they provided pragmatic resolutions to explicit the data which can be used to strengthen their argumentation. Both rational and emotional arguments were proposed during the debates. The audiences’ evaluation toward the debaters was influenced by the completeness of the debaters’ arguments and how they interpreted the counterarguments. This indicates that the audiences retained relatively rational standpoints during the virtual context of argumentation. The study was based on the positioning theory associated with Toulmin’s scheme for argumentation to explore college students’ positioning and argumentation process. Implications for research and curriculum design were discussed.