
This study illustrates different practices of knowledge co-construction by exploring argumentation processes from its (1) cognitive, (2) affective, and (3) moral dimensions (respect), and by clarifying the meaning of cooperation and collaboration, terms that are commonly used as synonyms. The authors adopted a critical constructivist approach consistent with the cognitive and moral works of Habermas (1987) and Piaget (1977, 1932/2000), and refined a method of online argumentation analysis (Campos, 2004) to better understand knowledge co-construction in the context of electronic conferencing in university courses. Their data analysis focused on the form as well as on the content of online argumentation. Results concerning the cognitive dimension of online discourse confirmed previous studies. However, regarding the affective and moral (respect) dimensions of online discourse, results were less clear. The authors highlight that the technology, the course design, and the instructor’s actions are equally important to successfully achieve set goals in online learning communities.
| selected citations These citations are derived from selected sources. This is an alternative to the "Influence" indicator, which also reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically). | 1 | |
| popularity This indicator reflects the "current" impact/attention (the "hype") of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network. | Average | |
| influence This indicator reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically). | Average | |
| impulse This indicator reflects the initial momentum of an article directly after its publication, based on the underlying citation network. | Average |
