Journal archive

Abstract: In the current digital environment, the need for writing arguments and counterarguments has increased considera-bly. People interact on professional and academic forums and write emails and messages on social networks and in professional applications within their companies. This explains the importance of teaching students to conduct debate in writing at lessons of English for specific purposes (ESP). The purpose of this research is to develop argumentative and critical thinking skills of students in the sphere of ESP. The aim of the paper is to create a series of tasks that would assist students assist in becoming more compe-tent in the field of ESP and would also make the overall process of debate conduct easier by reducing stress level. The tasks are in-tended to be interactive, team-based, research-intensive, and are expected to enhance students’ linguistic competence. Based on the identified clusters of content errors in written debates, the exercises are divided into four groups: 1) theses; 2) arguments; 3) examples and proofs; 4) counterarguments. Some exercises are complex and are aimed at developing different aspects of written debates simultaneously. This research is based on the sample of 98 students’ written debates as part of an assessment task in the discipline English for International Relations and Business at the Faculty of World Economy and International Relations (HSE Univer-sity). Drawing on the theoretical approaches of social constructivism and distributed language, all these exercises encourage stu-dents’ autonomy and their active participation in the classroom to generate knowledge and skills of writing arguments. They involve dynamic interaction and cooperation, and provide knowledge through dialogue, since language is viewed upon as an activity. Inter-net and online teaching platforms are used in teaching, since cognition is distributed and extends beyond the limits of one’s mind, thus presupposing a technological expansion.

About the author(s) :

Olga A. Karamalak
HSE University (Moscow, Russia) ORCID ID: https://orcid.org/0000-0002-5502-8487

Ksenia A. Vertlib
HSE University (Moscow, Russia) ORCID ID: https://orcid.org/0009-0005-6522-8537

Publication Timeline:

Date of receipt: 25.09.2024; date of publication: 30.10.2024

References:

Archer, M. S. (2003). Structure, Agency and the Internal Conversation. Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781139087315.
Bohm, D. (1985). Unfolding Meaning. A Weekend of Dialogue with David Bohm. London, Routledge.
Bonwell, C. C., Eison, J. A. (1991). Active Learning: Creating Excitement in the Classroom. 1991 ASHE-ERIC Higher Edu-cation Reports. ERIC Clearinghouse on Higher Education, The George Washington University.
Chen, X., Zhao, H., Jin, H., Li, Y. (2024). Exploring College Students’ Depth and Processing Patterns of Critical Thinking Skills and Their Perception in Argument Map (AM)-supported Online Group Debate Activities. In Thinking Skills and Creativity. Vol. 51, p. 101467. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tsc.2024.101467.
Cowley, S. J. (2009). Distribute Language and Dynamics. In Pragmatics and Cognition. Vol. 17 (3), pp. 495–508. DOI: 10.1075/pc.17.3.01cow.
Cowley, S. J. (2011). Distributed Language. John Benjamins.
Cowley, S. J. (2024). Made in Languaging; Ecolinguistic Expertise. In Langauges. Vol. 9 (7), p. 252. DOI: 10.3390/languages9070252.
Cowley, S., Gahrn-Andersen, R. (2022). Simplexifying: Harnessing the Power of Enlanguaged Cognition. In Chi-nese Semiotic Studies. Vol. 18 (1), pp. 97–119. https://doi.org/10.1515/css-2021-2049.
Eemeren, van F. H. (2018). Argumentation Theory: A Pragma-Dialectical Perspective. Springer Cham. https://doi.org/ 10.1007/978-3-319-95381-6.
Gibson, J. (1979). The Ecological Approach to Visual Perception. Boston, Houghton-Miffin.
Gudkova, K. V. (2021). Developing Argumentative Literacy and Skills in ESP Students. In Journal of Teaching Eng-lish for Specific and Academic Purposes, pp. 229–237. https://doi.org/10.22190/JTESAP2102229G.
Harris, R. (1981). The Language Myth. London, Duckworth.
Hrastinski, S. (2008). Asynchronous and Synchronous E-learning. In Educause quarterly. Vol. 31 (4), pp. 51–55.
Hsieh, W.-M., Tsai, C.-C. (2017). Taiwanese High School Teachers’ Conceptions of Mobile Learning. In Computers & Education. Vol. 115, pp. 82–95.
Karamalak, O. A. (2010). Yazykovoi znak i prototipicheskaya semantika [Linguistic Sign and Prototypical Semantics]. Magnitogorsk, GOU VPO «Magnitogorskii gosudarstvennyi universitet». 174 p.
Karamalak, O. A. (2013). Pis'mennaya kommunikatsiya kak sreda interaktivnykh vzaimodeistvii [Written Com-munication as a Medium of Interactive Interactions]. In Filologicheskie nauki. Voprosy teorii i praktiki. No. 4 (22), in 2 parts. Part I, pp. 77–80.
Khalsi, I. (2013). Knowledge Construction and Gender in online debates. In Arab World English Journal. Vol. 4 (2).
Kravchenko, A. V. (2007). Essential Properties of Language, or, why Language is not a Code. In Language Sciences. Vol. 29, pp. 650–971.
Laurinen, L. I., Marttunen, M. J. (2007). Written Arguments and Collaborative Speech Acts in Practising the Ar-gumentative Power of Language through Chat Debates. In Computers and composition. Vol. 24 (3), pp. 230–246.
Linell, Per. (2013). Distributed Language Theory, with or Without Dialogue. In Language Sciences. Vol. 40, pp. 168–173. DOI: 10.1016/j.langsci.2013.04.001.
Love, N. (2004). Cognition and the Language Myth. In Language Sciences. Vol. 26, pp. 525–544.
Maturana, H. R. (1980). Autopoiesis and Cognition: The Realization of the Living. Boston, Reidel Publishing Co.
Maturana, H. R., Varela, F. (1992). The Tree of Knowledge: The Biological Roots of Human Understanding. USA, Random House.
Mayadas, F. (1997). Asynchronous Learning Networks: A Sloan Foundation Perspective. In Journal of Asynchronous Learning Networks. Vol. 1 (1), pp. 1–16. https://doi.org/10.24059/olj.v1i1.1941.
Mohammed, S. H., Kinyo, L. (2020). The Role of Constructivism in the Enhancement of Social Studies Educa-tion. In Journal of critical reviews. Vol. 7 (7), pp. 249–256.
Murphy, E., Coleman, E. (2004). Graduate Students’ Experiences of Challenges in Online Asynchronous Discus-sions. In Canadian Journal of Learning and Technology/La revue canadienne de l’apprentissage et de la technologie. Vol. 30 (2).

Peldszus, A., Stede, M. (2013). From Argument Diagrams to Argumentation Mining in Texts. In International Journal of Cognitive Informatics and Natural Intelligence. Vol. 7 (1), pp. 1–31. http://doi.org/10.4018/jcini.2013010101.
Rinekso, A. B., Muslim, A. B. (2020). Synchronous Online Discussion: Teaching English in Higher Education Amidst the Covid-19 Pandemic. In JEES (Journal of English Educators Society). Vol. 5 (2), pp. 155–162. https://doi.org/10.21070/jees.v5i2.646.
Rocci, A. (2020). Diagramming Counterarguments: At the Interface Between Discourse Structure and Argumen-tation Structure. In Boogaart, R., Jansen, H., van Leeuwen, M. (Eds.). The language of argumentation. Cham, Springer. https://www.springer.com/gp/book/9783030529062.
Saleem, A., Kausa, H., Deeba, F. (2021). Social Constructivism: A New Paradigm in Teaching and Learning Envi-ronment. In Perennial Journal of History. Vol. 2 (2), pp. 403–421. DOI: 10.52700/pjh.v2i2.86.
Sumekto, D. R., Setyawati, H. (2018). Students’ Descriptive Writing Performance: The Analytic Scoring Assess-ment. In Cakrawala Pendidikan. Vol. 37 (3), pp. 413–425.
Sung, Y. T., Chang, K. E., Liu, T. C. (2016). The Effects of Integrating Mobile Devices with Teaching and Learning on Students’ Learning Performance: A Meta-analysis and Research Synthesis. In Computers & Education. Vol. 94, pp. 252–275.
Tannen, D. (1998). The Argument Culture: Moving from Debate to Dialogue. New York, Random House Trade.
Taylor, S. P. (2018). Critical Realism vs Social Constructionism & Social Constructivism: Application to a Social Housing Research Study. In International Journal of Sciences: Basic and Applied Research. Vol. 37 (2), pp. 216–222.
Teasley, S. D., Roschelle, J. (2013). Constructing a Joint Problem Space: The Computer as a Tool for Sharing Knowledge. In Computers as cognitive tools, pp. 229–258.
Thibault, P. J. (2011). First-order Languaging Dynamics and Second-order Language: The Distributed Language View. In Ecological Psychology. Vol. 23, pp. 210–245. DOI: 10.1080/10407413.2011.591274.
Tu, C. H. (2004). Online Collaborative Learning Communities: Twenty-one Designs to Building an Online Collaborative Learning Community. Bloomsbury Publishing USA. http://doi.org/10.5040/9798400693342.
Vinagre, M., Corral Esteban, A. (2018). Evaluative Language for Rapport Building in Virtual Collaboration: An Analysis of Appraisal in Computer-mediated Interaction. In Language and Intercultural Communication. Vol. 18 (3), pp. 335–350. https://doi.org/10.1080/14708477.2017.1378227.
Von Bertalanffy, L. (1968). General System Theory: Foundations, Development, Applications. New York, George Braziller.
Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Mind in Society. Cambridge, MA, MIT Press.
Wach, A. (2012). Computer-mediated Communication as an Autonomy-enhancement Tool for Advanced Learners of English. In Studies in Second Language Learning and Teaching. Vol. 2 (3), pp. 367–389.
Williams, C. H., Mostert, M. (2005). Online Debating to Encourage Student Participation in Online Learning En-vironments: A Qualitative Case Study at a South African University. In International Journal of Education and Development using Information and Communication Technology (IJEDICT). Vol. 1 (2), pp. 94–104.
Zheng, D., Cowley, S., Nuesser, M. (2024). The New Ecolinguistics: Learning as Languaging with Digital Tech-nologies. In Frontiers of Digital Education. Vol. 1 (1), pp. 109‒119. https://doi.org/10.3868/s110-009-024-0011-5.