Designing an Online Graph-Oriented Collaborative Argumentation Tool for Middle School Students: A Faculty Expert’s Perspective

Main Article Content

Pi-Sui Hsu
Rosarin Adulseranee
Eamon Newman
Jason Underwood
Cameron Wills
Margot Van Dyke


The objective of this design case is to describe a cross-cultural, online graph-oriented collaborative argumentation tool for middle school students from a faculty expert’s perspective, and discuss the processes that were instrumental in creating the tool. Supported by the professional staff in the Digital Convergence Lab (DCL) at Northern Illinois University, a student team was involved in the design process of such a tool. The team designed two versions of graphic icons to represent the essential elements of argumentation skills. The first version of icon designs used human figures and symbols to represent two groups, five argumentation elements, and one icon for teacher input. After middle school students, in the United States and Taiwan, experienced the icon designs, the design team refined them to be gender and culturally neutral. The design team also modified the design of the user interface throughout the project.


Download data is not yet available.

Article Details

How to Cite
Hsu, P.-S., Adulseranee, R., Newman, E., Underwood, J., Wills, C., & Van Dyke, M. (2016). Designing an Online Graph-Oriented Collaborative Argumentation Tool for Middle School Students: A Faculty Expert’s Perspective. International Journal of Designs for Learning, 7(3).


Andriessen, J. (2006). Arguing to learn. In R. K. Sawyer (Ed.), The Cambridge handbook of the learning sciences (pp. 443–460). New York: Cambridge University Press.

Chakraborty, J., Hansen, L., Denenberg, D. A., & Norcio, A. F. (2009). Preliminary findings from a cross cultural usability study on the internationalization of user interfaces. In A. A. Ozok & P. Zaphiris (Eds.), Online communities and social computing (pp. 162-171). Springer Berlin Heidelberg. Retrieved from

Fernandes, T. (1995). Global user interface design. Proceedings of the CHI ’95 Conference Companion on Human Factors in Computing Systems, USA, 363-364.

Hsu, P.-S., Van Dyke, M., Chen, Y., & Smith, T. J. (2015). The effect of a graph-oriented computer-assisted project-based learning environment on argumentation skills. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 31(1), 32-58.

Jonassen, D. H., & Kim, B. (2010). Arguing to learn and learning to argue: Design justifications and guidelines. Educational Technology Research and Development, 58, 439–457.

Kuhn, D. (1993). Science as argument: Implications for teaching and learning scientific thinking. Science Education, 77(3), 319–337.

Kuhn, D., Wang, Y., & Li, H. (2010). Why argue? Developing understanding of the purposes and values of argumentive discourse. Discourse Processes, 48(1), 26–49.

Ministry of Education in Taiwan. (2003). Science education [White paper]. Retrieved February 1, 2012, from

National Research Council. (2012). A framework for k-12 science education: Practices, crosscutting concepts, and core ideas. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press.

Russo, P., & Boor, S. (1993). How fluent is your interface?: Designing for international users. Proceedings of the INTERACT ’93 and CHI ’93 Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems, USA, 342-347.

Scheuer, O., Loll, F., Pinkwart, N., & McLaren, B. M. (2010). Computersupported argumentation: A review of the state of the art. International Journal of Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning, 5(1), 43–102.

Suthers, D. D., Vatrapu, R., Medina, R., Joseph, S., & Dwyer, N. (2008). Beyond threaded discussion: Representational guidance in asynchronous collaborative learning environments. Computers & Education, 50(4), 1103–1127.