CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 7Science Education and PedagogyLanguage, Discourse, Communication StrategiesEarly Childhood Education and Development

Embodied Argumentation in Young Children in Kindergarten

Open access
Convertini, Josephine, Arcidiacono, Francesco·2021·Education Sciences
DOI 10.3390/educsci11090514
Open this paper in CoChat — free accountOpen PDF

Abstract

In kindergarten, children are usually engaged with both verbal activities and non-verbal activities, often requiring the manipulation of physical objects. During technical tasks (e.g., problem solving), children can use argumentation as one of the languages of science that mediates how they interact with the surrounding world. In this paper, we focused on technical tasks in kindergarten in order to understand to what extent activities requiring the manipulation of physical objects also leave space for argumentation. The study involved 25 children engaged in three problem-solving activities requiring the manipulation of Lego® and some recycled materials. To analyze the non-verbal (embodied) side of the argumentative activities, we firstly identified the argumentative structure of each exchange involving the participants. Then, we focused on segments of “incomplete” argumentative dialogues (i.e., presenting only some elements typical of children’s argumentation) by appealing to multimodal representations (speech, gestures, and physical objects). The findings of the study showed that even apparently incomplete exchanges can have an argumentative function generated by non-verbal elements of the interactions. Investigating the role of embodied argumentation during technical tasks in kindergarten can allow teachers to recognize and further develop children’s argumentative resources.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.3390/educsci11090514

Cites

1 of 1 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • The short utterances registered in this study may not be a consequence of limited evidence-based reasoning skills but rather the result of a lack of oral communication development to generate well-structured arguments in a standard way at these early ages.

    “The short utterances registered in this study may not be a consequence of limited evidence-based reasoning skills but rather the result of a lack of oral communication development to generate well-structured arguments in a standard way at these early ages, as also indicated by Convertini and Arcidiacono (2021).”

    From Young Children's Epistemic Operations and Emergent Argumentation in Inquiry‐Based Discussions: The Role of Teacher Questioning and Collaborative Interactions (2025) · cites this paper as Convertini and Arcidiacono (2021)

    Section 3 explains that young children’s apparently incomplete arguments need not reflect limited argumentative ability: they may be natural features of spontaneous oral conversation or rely on implicit premises and gestures. Section 7 likewise cautions against inferring a lack of argumentative ability from non-elaborate speech. The paper does not establish that the short utterances in the citing study result from underdeveloped oral communication, rather than limited evidence-based reasoning. (LLM, conf=0.82)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 63

  1. Arcidiacono, F.; Bova, A. (Eds.) Interpersonal dynamics within argumentative interactions: An introduction. In Interpersonal Argumentation in Educational and Professional Contexts; Springer: New York, NY, USA, 2017; pp. xvii-xxii. [CrossRef] · DOI
  2. van Eemeren, F.; Grootendorst, R. A Systematic Theory of Argumentation: The Pragma-Dialectical Approach; Cambridge University Press: Cambridge, UK, 2004.
  3. Kreuz, J.; Luginbühl, M. From flat propositions to deep co-constructed and modalized argumentations: Oral argumentative skills among elementary school children from grades 2 to 6. Res. Child. Soc. Interact. 2020, 4, 93-114.
  4. Bagiati, A.; Evangelou, D. Practicing engineering while building with blocks: Identifying engineering thinking. Eur. Early Child. Educ. Res. J. 2016, 24, 67-85. [CrossRef] · DOI
  5. Macagno, F.; Konstantinidou, A. What students' arguments can tell us: Using argumentation schemes in science education. Argumentation 2021, 27, 225-243. [CrossRef] · DOI
  6. Migdalek, M.J.; Rosenberg, C.R.; Santibáñez Yáñez, C. La génesis de la argumentación. Un estudio con niños de 3 a 5 años en distintos contextos de juego. Íkala 2014, 19, 251-267. [CrossRef] · DOI
  7. Convertini, J. An interdisciplinary approach to investigate preschool children's implicit inferential reasoning in scientific activities. Res. Sci. Educ. 2021, 51, 171-186. [CrossRef] · DOI · Paper page
  8. Kalogiannakis, M.; Nirgianaki, G.M.; Papadakis, S. Teaching magnetism to preschool children: The effectiveness of picture story reading. Early Child. Educ. J. 2018, 46, 535-546. [CrossRef] · DOI
  9. Ravanis, K.; Kaliampos, G.; Pantidos, P. Preschool Children Science Mental Representations: The Sound in Space. Educ. Sci. 2021, 11, 242. [CrossRef] · DOI
  10. Sesto, V.; García-Rodeja, I. How Do Five-to Six-Year-Old Children Interpret a Burning Candle? Educ. Sci. 2021, 11, 213. [CrossRef] · DOI
  11. Nonnon, E. Activités argumentatives et élaboration de connaissances nouvelles: Le dialogue comme espace d'exploration. Lang. Française 1996, 112, 67-87. [CrossRef] · DOI
  12. Arcidiacono, F.; Bova, A. Argumentative strategies for conflict management and resolution in Italian and Swiss families. Procedia Soc. Behav. Sci. 2011, 30, 1385-1389. [CrossRef] · DOI
  13. Bova, A.; Arcidiacono, F. Beyond conflicts. Origin and types of issues leading to argumentative discussions during family mealtimes. J. Lang. Aggress. Confl. 2015, 3, 263-288. [CrossRef] · DOI
  14. Migdalek, M.J.; Arrue, J. Habilidades argumentativas de niños de cuatro años: Un análisis de las disputas en situaciones de juego en hogares de niños de población urbano marginada y sectores medios. In Terceras Jornadas Internacionales de Investigación y Prácticas en Didáctica de las Lenguas y las Literaturas; Riestra, D., Tapia, S.M., Goicoechea, M.V., Eds.; GEISE: Bariloche, Argentina, 2013; pp. 733-752.
  15. Arcidiacono, F.; Bova, A. Activity-bound and activity-unbound arguments in response to parental eat-directives during mealtime conversations: Differences and similarities in children of 3-5 and 6-9 years old. Learn. Cult. Soc. Interact. 2015, 6, 40-55. [CrossRef] · DOI
  16. Pontecorvo, C.; Arcidiacono, F. Development of reasoning through arguing in young children. Cult.-Hist. Psychol. 2010, 4, 19-29.
  17. Stein, N.L.; Bernas, R. The early emergence of argumentative knowledge and skill. In Studies in Writing, Vol. 5: Foundations of Argumentative Text Processing; Rijlaarsdam, G., Espéret, E., Andriessen, J., Coirier, P., Eds.; University of Amsterdam Press: Amsterdam, The Netherlands, 1999; pp. 97-116.
  18. Bova, A. The Functions of Parent-Child Argumentation; Palgrave Macmillan: Cham, Germany, 2019; pp. 1-147.
  19. Bova, A.; Arcidiacono, F. Las respuestas de los niños en discusiones argumentativas relacionadas con las reglas y normas de los padres. Rev. Signos 2020, 53, 8-30. [CrossRef] · DOI
  20. Zadunaisky Ehrlich, S. Argumentative discourse of kindergarten childrn: Features of peer talk and children-teacher talk. J. Res. Child. Educ. 2011, 25, 248-267. [CrossRef] · DOI
  21. Perret-Clermont, A.-N. Psychologie sociale de la construction de l'espace de pensée. In Constructivismes: Usages et Perspectives en éducation. Actes du Colloque; Service de la recherche en éducation: Geneva, Switzerland, 2001; Volume 1, pp. 65-82.
  22. Miserez-Caperos, C. Étude de L'argumentation à Visée Cognitive Dans Les Interactions Entre Adulte et Enfants: Un Regard Psychosocial Sur le Modèle Pragma-Dialectique. Ph.D. Thesis, University of Neuchâtel, Neuchâtel, Switzerland, 2017.
  23. Perret-Clermont, A.-N.; Schär, R.; Greco, S.; Convertini, J.; Iannaccone, A.; Rocci, A. Shifting from a monological to a dialogical perspective on children's argumentation. Lessons learned. In Argumentation in Actual Practice. Topical Studies about Argumentative Discourse in Context; van Eemeren, F., Garssen, B., Eds.; Benjamins: Amsterdam, The Netherlands, 2019; pp. 211-236.
  24. Breive, S. Kindergarten children's argumentation in reflection symmetry: The role of semiotic means. In Proceedings of the 10th Congress of the European Society for Research in Mathematics Education, Dublin, Ireland, 1-5 February 2017.
  25. Frejd, J. "If It Lived Here, It Would Die." Children's Use of Materials as Semiotic Resources in Group Discussions about Evolution. J. Res. Child. Educ. 2018, 32, 251-267. [CrossRef] · DOI
  26. Convertini, J. Psychosocial obstacles in young children argumentative interactions. Educ. Sci. 2021, 11, 224. [CrossRef] · DOI
  27. Rocci, A.; Greco, S.; Schär, R.; Convertini, J.; Perret-Clermont, A.N.; Iannaccone, A. The significance of the adversative connectives aber, mais, ma ('but') as indicators in young children's argumentation. J. Argum. Context 2020, 9, 69-94. [CrossRef] · DOI
  28. Houtlosser, P. Points of view. In Crucial Concepts in Argumentation Theory; van Eemeren, F.H., Ed.; Amsterdam University Press: Amsterdam, The Netherlands, 2001; pp. 27-50.
  29. Rigotti, E.; Greco, S. Inference in Argumentation: A Topical Approach to Argument Schemes; Springer: New York, NY, USA, 2019.
  30. Garvey, C. Children's Talk; Harvard University Press: Cambridge, MA, USA, 1984.
  31. Hay, D.F.; Ross, H.S. The social nature of early conflict. Child. Dev. 1982, 53, 105-113. [CrossRef] · DOI
  32. De Vasconcelos, A.N.; Leitao, S. The development of proto-argumentation in adult-baby interaction/Desenvolvimento da protoargumentacao na interacao adultobebe. Alfa Rev. Lingüística 2016, 60, 123-151.
  33. Hannken-Illjes, K.; Bose, I. Frozen: Children in Argumentation between the Agonistic and Cooperation. Informal Log. 2019, 39, 465-495. [CrossRef] · DOI
  34. Brumark, Å. "Eat your Hamburger!"-"No, I don't Want to!" argumentation and argumentative development in the context of dinner conversation in twenty Swedish families. Argumentation 2008, 22, 251-271. [CrossRef] · DOI
  35. Convertini, J.; Arcidiacono, F. Start arguing to solve a task: Preschool children already engaged when the teacher presents the activity. In ICERI2020 Proceedings;
  36. Gómez Chova, L., López Martínez, A., Candel Torres, I., Eds.; IATED Academy: Seville, Spain, 2020; pp. 1-7.
  37. Baucal, A.; Arcidiacono, F.; Bu devac, N. "Is there an equal (amount of) juice?" Exploring the repeated question effect in conservation through conversation. Eur. J. Psychol. Educ. 2013, 28, 475-495. [CrossRef] · DOI
  38. Mauritzson, U.; Säljö, R. Adult questions and children's responses: Coordination of perspectives in studies of children's theories of other minds. Scand. J. Educ. Res. 2001, 3, 213-231. [CrossRef] · DOI
  39. Köymen, B.; Rosenbaum, L.; Tomasello, M. Reasoning during joint decision-making by preschool peers. Cogn. Dev. 2014, 32, 74-85. [CrossRef] · DOI
  40. Grice, H.P. Logic and conversation. In Syntax and Semantics; Cole, P., Morgan, J.C., Eds.; Academic Press: New York, NY, USA, 1975; Volume 3, pp. 41-58.
  41. Heller, V. Meanings at hand: Coordinating semiotic resources in explaining mathematical terms in classroom discourse. Classr. Discourse 2016, 7, 253-275. [CrossRef] · DOI
  42. Tsamir, P.; Tirosh, D.; Tabach, M.; Levenson, E. Multiple solution methods and multiple outcomes-Is it a task for kindergarten children? Educ. Stud. Math. 2010, 73, 217-231. [CrossRef] · DOI
  43. Convertini, J. Contributo Allo Studio dei Tipi di Argomento in Situazioni di Problem Solving Tecnico da Parte di Bambini in Età Prescolare. Ph.D. Thesis, University of Neuchâtel, Neuchâtel, Switzerland, 2019.
  44. Lerner, G.H., Ed.; Benjamins: Amsterdam, The Netherlands, 2004; pp. 13-23.
  45. Arcidiacono, F.; Baucal, A.; Bu devac, N. Doing qualitative research: The analysis of talk-in-interaction. In Studying Interaction in Different Contexts: A Qualitative View; Baucal, A., Arcidiacono, F., Bu devac, N., Eds.; Institute of Psychology: Belgrade, Serbia, 2011; pp. 17-45.
  46. Jacquin, J. La multimodalité et sa participation à l'observabilité des phénomènes langagiers: Le cas de l'argumentation. Speech Lang. 2018, 92, 91-103.
  47. Mondada, L. The local constitution of multimodal resources for social interaction. J. Pragmat. 2014, 65, 137-156. [CrossRef] · DOI · Paper page
  48. Rigotti, E. Locus a causa finali. Linguist. Lit. Anal. 2008, 16, 559-576.
  49. Trognon, A.; Batt, M.; Sorsana, C.; Saint-Dizier, V. Argumentation and Dialogue. In Logical Properties of Dialogue; Trognon, A., Batt, M., Caelen, J., Vernant, D., Eds.; PUN: Nancy, France, 2011; pp. 147-186.
  50. Polo, C.; Colletta, J.M. La médiation multimodale du savoir. Educ. Didact. 2020, 14, 9-29. [CrossRef] · DOI
  51. Vosniadou, S. The Development of Students' Understanding of Science. Front. Educ. 2019, 4, 32. [CrossRef] · DOI
  52. McCloskey, M. Naïve theories of motion. In Mental Models; Gentner, D., Stevens, A.L., Eds.; Lawrence Erlbaum Associates: Mahwah, NJ, USA, 1983; pp. 299-324.
  53. Bose, I.; Hannken-Illjes, K. On the role of voice and prosody in argumentation among pre-school children. Res. Child. Soc. Interact. 2021, 4, 51-72.
  54. Clark, H.H. Using Language; Cambridge University Press: Cambridge, UK, 1996.
  55. Nata, R.V., Ed.; Nova Science Publishers: New York, NY, USA, 2017; Volume 42, pp. 1-18.
  56. Clark, H.H.; Gerrig, R.J. Quotations as demonstrations. Language 1990, 66, 764-805. [CrossRef] · DOI
  57. Davidson, I.; Noble, W. The archaelogy of perception: Traces of depiction and language (and comments and reply). Curr. Anthropol. 1989, 30, 125-155. [CrossRef] · DOI
  58. Goodwin, C. Conversational Organization: Interaction between Speakers and Hearers; Academic Press: New York, NY, USA, 1981.
  59. Kendon, A. Gesticulation and speech: Two aspects of the process of utterance. In The Relationship of Verbal and Nonverbal Communication; Key, M.R., Ed.; Mouton: The Hague, The Netherlands, 1980; pp. 207-227.
  60. Resnick, L.B., Levine, J.M., Teasley, S.D., Eds.; American Psychological Association: Washington, DC, USA, 1991; pp. 127-149.
  61. Clark, H.H.; Schaefer, E.F. Contributing to discourse. Cogn. Sci. 1989, 13, 259-294. [CrossRef] · DOI · Paper page
  62. Danielsson, K. Modes and meaning in the classroom-the role of different semiotic resources to convey meaning in science classrooms. Linguist. Educ. 2016, 35, 88-99. [CrossRef] · DOI · Paper page
  63. Capone, R.; Adesso, M.G.; Del Regno, F.; Lombardi, L.; Tortoriello, F.S. Mathematical competencies: A case study on semiotic systems and argumentation in an Italian High School. Int. J. Math. Educ. Sci. Technol. 2021, 52, 896-911. [CrossRef] · DOI

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Convertini, J., & Arcidiacono, F.
Affiliations
  • University of Applied Sciences and Arts of Southern Switzerland (CH)
  • Research Department, University of Teacher Education BEJUNE, 2503 Biel/Bienne, Switzerland
Corresponding author
Convertini, Josephine
ORCID
Venue
Education Sciences
Publisher
MDPI AG
Published
2021-09-07
Volume
11
Issue
9
Pages
514
ISSN
2227-7102 (ISSN-L)
DOI
10.3390/educsci11090514
OpenAlex
W3196717413
Cited by
7
References
1
Citations by year
2025: 1 · 2024: 3 · 2023: 2 · 2022: 1
FWCI
2.64
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
Locations
  • Education Sciences (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion, cc-by-sa)
Funders
Swiss National Science Foundation (SNSF) (grant n. 100019_156690)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Education › Science Education and Pedagogy
  • Social Sciences › Arts and Humanities › Language and Linguistics › Language, Discourse, Communication Strategies
  • Social Sciences › Education › Early Childhood Education and Development
Keywords
kindergarten children, technical tasks, problem solving, nonverbal communication, gesture, material objects, LEGO, recycled materials, multimodal representation, argumentative dialogue, science education

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review