DIRECTING RETRIEVAL PRACTICE: AUGMENTING ARGUMENTATION INTEGRATION WITH THE 3R STRATEGY AND JOIS

Abstract

Argumentation is a key facet of any form of information exchange, and an important educational outcome. Our study sought to improve the use of argument-counterargument integration in written argumentation, or the ability to critically evaluate and integrate opposing viewpoints to form conclusive statements.The Read-Recite-Review (3R) technique, a retrieval strategy, was identified as one potential method to improve argument-counterargument integration. However, Nguyen and McDaniel (2016) found that for problem-solving tasks, 3R only led to superior performance when coupled with judgments of inferencing (JOIs), which provide accurate metacomprehension monitoring, directing learners towards gaps in their inferential knowledge. We hence hypothesized that retrieval practice can similarly enhance argument-counterargument integration when coupled with JOIs. Participants were tasked to argue about Daylight Savings Time (DST) in Japan under 1 of 3 conditions: a) 3R with JOIs, b) 3R plus a control monitoring measure, judgments of learning (JOLs), or c) a control notetaking condition with JOIs. We measured two aspects of argument-counterargument integration—refutational stratagems and integrative argument stratagems—and found that 3R with JOIs produced superior performance than the other two conditions in the use of integrative argument stratagems, but not refutational stratagems. Implications and future directions are discussed.