In this study, we investigate peer talk in consensus-oriented first-grade classrooms. Earlier research has shown that the quality of argumentation improves when students argue to agree, because it steers the students toward patterns of argumentation that support the exploration and elaboration of perspectives that is typical of deliberative argumentation. Using multi-modal argumentation analysis, we identify four patterns in the peer talk. First, the students invoked consensus when the conversation developed in a direction that was not in accordance with their understanding of the task instructions. Second, the students tended to delegate the authority to decide what the group will answer. Third, the students searched for the lowest common denominator, looking for a common element in their individual answers. Fourth, the students put the decision to a vote, going with the majority and ignoring the perspectives of the minority. We argue that these patterns illustrate a general tendency for the students to rush toward a conclusion. Accordingly, we argue that younger students need a more explicit instructional design by the teacher to support exploration and elaboration of different perspectives.

在这项研究中，我们调查了以共识为导向的一年级课堂中的同伴谈话。早期的研究表明，当学生争论同意时，争论的质量会提高，因为它引导学生采用支持探索和阐述观点的争论模式，这是典型的审议性争论。使用多模态论证分析，我们确定了同伴谈话中的四种模式。首先，当对话的发展方向与他们对任务说明的理解不一致时，学生们会援引共识。其次，学生倾向于授权决定小组将回答什么。第三，学生们寻找最小的公分母，寻找他们个人答案中的共同点。第四，学生们将决定付诸表决，支持多数人而忽略少数人的观点。我们认为，这些模式说明了学生急于得出结论的普遍趋势。因此，我们认为年轻的学生需要教师进行更明确的教学设计，以支持对不同观点的探索和阐述。