Abstracts - Earli

activities have been conducted: a debate supported or not by a computer tool called Digalo whichallows the construction of argumentative maps and an inquiry-based activity (as for example theconstruction of a model of the system "Earth and Sun" in order to simulate their movements toexplain why there are seasons). We expect these two kinds of activities to offer an opportunity toenhance the pupils’ scientific reasoning. The unit of analysis is the level of explanation used by thepupils through the different phases of the activity (pre-test; small groups activity, collective debateactivity, modelling activity or working on the argumentative maps constructed by other pupils) andits development in the course of the phased activities. The analysis focuses firstly on the differentkinds of hypotheses co-constructed by the children, secondly on the formulation they used in orderto expose their hypothesis to the others, and thirdly, on its evolution through the debate and afterthe modelling activity. The discussion will explore the role of the different dynamics at stake inthe collective activities which could sometimes open opportunities to learn.How improving scientific learning through argumentation? The example of an argumentativedesign mediated by DigaloNathalie Muller Mirza, University of Neuchatel, SwitzerlandThis paper presents a pedagogical scenario where argumentation and a technological environmentare used as learning tools (Digalo). It takes a socio-cultural perspective, giving thus a central roleto interaction and symbolic and social mediation in development and learning processes. Inscientific domain, it is now recognized that argumentation, under certain conditions, helps pupilsto elaborate scientific concepts from everyday representations. By justifying and negotiating theirpoint of view on a phenomenon, through the confrontation with other positions, they are lead toidentify epistemological obstacles and construct new knowledge. But setting up argumentativeactivities that allow cognitive gains in classroom is not an easy matter. In this perspectivetechnological environment can be useful in order to sustain argumentation and to "keep track" ofthe discursive processes. The pedagogical scenario mediated by "Digalo" that will be presented inthis paper has been set up in an education framework. The scenario topic concerns the cell andmore specifically the Euglena cell. The learners are asked to take part in a phased argumentativeactivity involving readings and analysis of textual resources, discussions into small groups anddebating through Digalo. In this paper we shall analyze and present the results of this test. Inparticular we’ll show that pupils knowledge in biology concepts evolves. But more interesting, itseems that cognitive and argumentative processes are interconnected. It means that in articulatingand making reference to arguments that other participants have formulated learners develop newunderstanding about the scientific content. The limits of the scenario and of this kind ofpedagogical activities will also be discussed. A grid of analysis focusing both on products(argument) and on processes (argumentation) will be presented. The final discussion will raisetheoretical and methodological issues in education that the results tackle.Using computer supported enquiry within sequences in physics (Marbles Moves): which learners’representations and problems solving strategies changes are fostered?Alaric Kohler, University of Neuchatel, SwitzerlandPascale Marro, University of Neuchatel & Uni of Teacher Education, SwitzerlandStephane Sugnaux, University of Teacher Education, Fribourg, SwitzerlandThis presentation aims at analysing cognitive, interactive and pedagogical consequences of usingvirtual simulative (microworld) and argumentative (Digalo) tools in science classroom. It takespart of ESCALATE European project. Our approach takes place in psychosocial stream, whichpuzzle about relationships between individuals, knowledge objects, situation and mediation tool.– 299 –