Collaborative argumentation through role-play by students on a degree programme in social services

References

• Baker, M. (2009). Intersubjective and intrasubjective rationalities in pedagogical debates: Realizing what one thinks. In B. B. Schwarz, T. Dreyfus, & R. Hershkowitz (Eds.), Guided transformation of knowledge in classrooms (pp. 145–158). New York, NY: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Bewick, V., Cheek, L., & Ball, J. (2004). Statistics review 8: Qualitative data–Tests of association. Critical Care, 8(1), 46–49. Retrieved from https://helda.helsinki.fi/bitstream/handle/10138/37493/isoherranen_vaitoskirja.pdf?sequence=1
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bland, M. (1988). An introduction to medical statistics. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Burke, M. R. (2013). Gavin Bolton’s contextual drama: The road less travelled. Bristol: Intellect.
   Google Scholar
• Cheung, W. S., & Hew, K. F. (2004). Evaluating the extent of ill-structured problem-solving process among pre-service teachers in an asynchronous online discussions and reflection log-learning environment. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 30(3), 197–227.
   Google Scholar
• Duffy, J., Das, C., & Davidson, G. (2013). Service user and carer involvement in role-plays to assess readiness for practice. Social Work Education, 32(1), 39–54.
   Google Scholar
• Erkens, G., Jaspers, J., Prangsma, M., & Kanselaar, G. (2005). Coordination processes in computer supported collaborative writing. Computers in Human Behaviour, 21(3), 463–486.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Fook, J. (2002). Social work. Critical theory and practice. London: Sage Publications.
   Google Scholar
• Fulkerson, R. (1996). Teaching the argument in writing. Urbana: National Council of Teachers of English.
   Google Scholar
• Gall, M. D., Borg, W. R., & Gall, J. P. (1996). Educational research. New York, NY: Longman.
   Google Scholar
• Gockel, A., & Burton, D. L. (2014). An evaluation of prepracticum helping skills training for graduate social work students. Journal of Social Work Education, 50(1), 101–119.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gray, M., & McDonald, C. (2006). Pursuing good practice? The limits of evidence-based practice. Journal of Social Work, 6(1), 7–20.
   Google Scholar
• Hafford-Letchfield, T. (2010). A glimpse of the truth: Evaluating ‘debate’ and ‘role play’ as pedagogical tools for learning about sexuality issues on a law and ethics module. Social Work Education, 29(3), 244–258.
   Google Scholar
• Hinds, P. J., & Weisband, S. P. (2003). Knowledge sharing and shared understanding in virtual teams. In C. B. Gibson & S. G. Cohen (Eds.), virtual teams that work. Creating conditions for virtual team effectiveness (pp. 21–31). San Fransico: Jossey-Bass A Wiley.
   Google Scholar
• Hsieh, H.-F., & Shannon, S. E. (2005). Three approaches to qualitative content analysis. Qualitative Health Research, 15(9), 1277–1288.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• International Federation of Social Workers. (2014). Global definition of social work. Retrieved from http://ifsw.org/get-involved/global-definition-of-social-work/
   Google Scholar
• Isoherranen, K. (2012). Uhka vai mahdollisuus - Moniammatillista yhteistyötä kehittämässä [Threat or opportunity – Developing multi-professional collaboration] (Doctoral dissertation). University of Helsinki, Finland. Retrieved from https://helda.helsinki.fi/bitstream/handle/10138/37493/isoherranen_vaitoskirja.pdf?sequence=1
   Google Scholar
• Jonassen, D. H., & Kim, B. (2010). Arguing to learn and learning to argue: Design justifications and guidelines. Education Technology Research Development, 58(4), 439–457.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kettula, K. (2012). Towards professional growth: Essays on learning and teaching forest economics and marketing through drama, role-play and reflective journal (Doctoral dissertation). University of Helsinki, Finland. Retrieved from https://helda.helsinki.fi/handle/10138/37251
   Google Scholar
• Knight, C., & Gitterman, A. (2014). Group work with bereaved individuals: The power of mutual aid. Social Work, 59(1), 5–12.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kokko, M., & Veistilä, M. (2016). Sosiaalityö ja sosiaalinen kuntoutus yhteistyönä [Social work and social rehabilitation in collaboration]. In M. Törrönen, K. Hänninen, P. Jouttimäki, T. Lehto-Lundén, P. Salovaara, & M. Veistilä (Eds.), Vastavuoroinen sosiaalityö [Reciprocal social work] (pp. 220–230). Helsinki: Gaudeamus.
   Google Scholar
• Koltai, J., & Thomas, W. (1977). A role-play method in social services training. Canadian Journal of Social Work Education, 3(1), 23–32. Retrieved from http://www.jstor.org/stable/41668868
   Google Scholar
• Marttunen, M., & Laurinen, L. (2002). Quality of students’ argumentation by E-mail. Learning Environments Research, 5(1), 99–123.
   Google Scholar
• Marttunen, M., & Laurinen, L. (2009). Secondary school students’ collaboration during dyadic debates face-to-face and through computer chat. Computers in Human Behavior, 25(4), 961–969.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Niemelä, P. (2016). Hyvinvoinnin edistäminen sosiaalityön eetoksena [Promotion of welfare as an ethos of social work]. In M. Törrönen, K. Hänninen, P. Jouttimäki, T. Lehto-Lndén, P. Salovaara, & M. Veistilä (Eds.), Vastavuoroinen sosiaalityö [Reciprocal social work] (pp. 97–108). Helsinki: Gaudeamus.
   Google Scholar
• Noroozi, O., Weinberger, A., Biemans, H. J. A., Mulder, M., & Chizari, M. (2012). Argumentation-based computer supported collaborative learning (ABCSCL): A synthesis of 15 years of research. Educational Research Review, 7(2), 79–106.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Nussbaum, E. M. (2011). Argumentation, dialogue theory, and probability modelling: Alternative frameworks for argumentation research in education. Educational Psychologist, 46(2), 84–106.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Osmo, R., & Landau, R. (2006). The role of ethical theories in decision making by social workers. Social Work Education, 25(8), 863–876.
   Google Scholar
• Payne, M. (1997). Modern social work theory. London: Macmillan Press.
   Google Scholar
• Proctor, E. K. (2007). Implementing evidence-based practice in social work education: Principles, strategies, and partnerships. Research on Social Work Practice, 17(5), 583–592.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Pullen-Sansfacon, A. (2010). Virtue ethics for social work: A new pedagogy for practical reasoning. Social Work Education, 29(4), 402–415.
   Google Scholar
• Quinn-Lee, L. (2014). School social work with grieving children. Children & Schools, 36(2), 93–103.
   Google Scholar
• Raunio, K. (2010). Olennainen sosiaalityössä [Essential in social work]. Helsinki: Gaudeamus.
   Google Scholar
• Scheuer, O., Loll, F., Pinkwart, N., & McLaren, B. M. (2010). Computer-supported argumentation: A review of the state of the art. Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning, 5(1), 43–102.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Simon, S., Johnson, S., Cavell, S., & Parsons, T. (2012). Promoting argumentation in primary science contexts: An analysis of students’ interactions in formal and informal learning environments. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 28(5), 440–453.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Simonen, J., Kataja, K., Pirskanen, H., Holmila, M., & Tigerstedt, C. (2016). Nuorten näkemykset vanhempien ja lasten alkoholin käyttöä koskevasta vuorovaikutuksesta [Young people’s views of the interaction between parents and children regarding alcohol consumption]. In M. Holmila, K. Raitasalo, & C. Tigerstedt (Eds.), Sukupolvien sillat ja kasvamisen karikot − vanhemmat, lapset ja alkoholi [Bridges between the generations and pitfalls in childrearing – Parents, children and alcohol] (pp. 32–47). Helsinki: Terveyden ja hyvinvoinnin laitos [National Institute for Health and Welfare.
   Google Scholar
• Teasley, S. D., & Roschelle, J. (1993). Constructing a joint problem space: The computer as a tool for sharing knowledge. In S. Lajoie & S. J. Derry (Eds.), Computer as cognitive tools (pp. 229–258). New Jersey, Hillsdale: Lawrence Erlbaum.
   Google Scholar
• Tew, J., Holley, T., & Caplen, P. (2012). Dialogue and challenge: Involving service users and carers in small group learning with social work and nursing students. Social Work Education, 31(3), 316–330.
   Google Scholar
• Törrönen, M., Borodkina, O., Samoylova, V., & Heino, E. (2013). Introduction. In M. Törrönen, O. Borodkina, V. Samoylova, & E. Heino (Eds.), Empowering social work: Research and practice (pp. 1–3). Kotka, Finland: Palmenia Centre for Continuing Education and University of Helsinki.
   Google Scholar
• Väisänen, R. (2010). Social pedagogical approach in youth social work. European Journal of Social Education, 18(19). Retrieved from http://www.feset.org/feset/wp-content/uploads/2013/04/feset_issue_18-19_2010_1_1.pdf#page=24
   Google Scholar
• van Amelsvoort, M., Andriessen, J., & Kanselaar, G. (2007). Representational tools in computer-supported collaborative argumentation-based learning: How dyads work with constructed and inspected argumentative diagrams. The Journal of the Learning Sciences, 16(4), 485–521.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Villadsen, A., Allain, L., Bell, L., & Hingley-Jones, H. (2012). The use of role-play and drama in interprofessional education: An evaluation of a workshop with students of social work, midwifery, early years and medicine. Social Work Education, 31(1), 75–89.
   Google Scholar
• Weinberger, A., & Fischer, F. (2006). A framework to analyse argumentative knowledge construction in computer-supported collaborative learning. Computers & Education, 46(1), 71–95.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Youth Law 285/2016. Retrieved from https://www.finlex.fi/fi/laki/alkup/2016/20161285
   Google Scholar