Research on scientific argumentation in collaborative learning has recently emphasized written argumentation in a very structured context. This dissertation aims to widen the perspective by viewing spoken argumentation in a spontaneous setting supported by a virtual learning environment. The purpose of the dissertation is also to study socially shared metacognitive regulation in a virtually enhanced setting where students spontaneously argument over topics prompted by the virtual environment. There is quite a few research delving into this interconnectedness of spontaneous scientific argumentation and regulation. Participants were 120 students in six high schools and their 19 small groups (56 students). A mixed-method approach was used consisting of analyses of small group outcomes, pre- and posttest results, systematic video observations and statistical analyses and case studies.

In Study I, the aim was to prepare ground for the virtual environment developed by our own research team. At the same time this preliminary study highlighted the characteristics of spontaneous spoken argumentation in the context of virtual collaborative learning. In Study II, the aim was to establish and justify the coding category for spontaneous spoken argumentation while using the virtual learning environment developed by the research team. In study III, the main goal was to observe spontaneous argumentation in relation to socially shared metacognitive regulation both in time and in contents. Study IV continued further on reviewing the different definitions and categories used for argumentation but in relation to geography. The results showed that high performing groups managed to argue and regulate their collaborative work at a higher level than the low performing groups. The virtual learning environment and assignments were demonstrated to promote students’ awareness of their argumentation skill, metacognitive regulation and science learning.