Acquiring argumentative reading and writing practices reflects a key component of recent curricular reforms in schools and universities throughout the United States and the world as well as a major challenge to teachers of reading and writing in K‐12 and college writing classrooms. In this review, we consider the contributions of two research perspectives, cognitive and social, that researchers have employed in the study of the teaching and learning of argumentative reading and writing. We address two basic questions: How do these perspectives with their own disciplinary frameworks and logics of inquiry interactively inform how researchers study argumentative reading and writing, and consequently, how have these orientations informed pedagogical knowledge that may support teachers' understanding of what argumentation is and how it may be taken up in the educational contexts? We analyze relevant conceptual and empirical studies by considering assumptions underlying the cognitive and social disciplinary perspectives, especially in terms of the warrants that those perspectives assume. We also interrogate how these perspectives' logics of inquiry reveal assumptions about the transfer of learning as supported by instruction and other practices, such as classroom discussion, computer‐supported collaborations, and other forms of instructional support. Using empirical studies of the teaching and learning of argumentative reading and writing conducted in grades K‐12 and college writing classrooms, we delineate the assumptions that drive the two perspectives and their instructional consequences, arguing that researchers and teachers need an understanding of their assumptions about knowledge and transfer in order to establish a clear and coherent relationship between theory and practice. We offer a vision for research that integrates the cognitive and social perspectives to argue that the work of literacy research is to reveal cognitive processes and instructional practices that teachers can promote and students can employ for learning how to do argumentative reading and writing.إن الحصول على ممارسات قراءة وكتابة جدلية يعكس عنصرا رئيسيا للإصلاحات الأخيرة في المناهج الدراسية في المدارس والجامعات في جميع أنحاء الولايات المتحدة الأمريكية والعالم، وكذلك تحديا كبيرا لمعلمي القراءة والكتابة في الفصول الأخيرة من المدرسة الثانوية وفصول الكتابة في الجامعة. في هذه الدراسة، ندرس مساهمات منظوريْن لأبحاث معرفية واجتماعية استخدمها الباحثون في دراسة تعليم وتعلم القراءة والكتابة الجدلية. علينا بمعالجة مسألتين أساسيتين: كيف يخبرنا هاذين المنظورين مع أطرهما التأييدية الخاصة بهما، ومنطق البحث بصورة متفاعلة كيف يدرس الباحثون القراءة والكتابة الجدلية، وبناء على ذلك، كيف عرّفتنا هذه التوجهات بالمعرفة التربوية التي بوسعها أن تدعم فهم المعلمين عن الجدلية وعن كيفية تبنيها في السياقات التعليمية؟ نحلل الدراسات المفاهيمية والتجريبية ذات الصلة بالموضوع، وذلك بدراسة الفرضيات التي تقوم عليها المنظورات التأييدية الاجتماعية والمعرفية، ولاسيما من حيث الضمانات التي تفترضها تلك المنظورات. ونتساءل كذلك كيف يكشف منطق بحث المنظورات عن الفرضيات بشأن انتقال التعلم عندما يكون مدعما بالتعليم وممارسات أخرى مثل المناقشات في الفصول الدراسية وأوجه التعاون المدعومة بالحاسوب وأشكال أخرى من الدعم التعليمي. بعدما استخدمنا الأبحاث التجريبية لتعليم وتعلم القراءة والكتابة الجدلية التي تجرى في الصفوف الأخيرة من المدرسة الثانوية وفصول الكتابة في الجامعة، استطعنا وصف وتحديد الفرضيات التي تدفع المنظوريْن ونتائجهما التعليمية، محاولين أن نبرهن أن الباحثين والمعلمين يحتاجون إلى فهم هذه الفرضيات بشأن المعرفة والانتقال من أجل إقامة علاقة واضحة ومتجانسة بين النظرية والتطبيق. نقدم رؤيا لبحث يدمج المنظوريْن المعرفي والاجتماعي لنبرهن أن وظيفة أبحاث القراءة والكتابة هو كشف العمليات المعرفية والممارسات التعليمية التي يمكن أن يعززها المعلمون ويوظفها التلاميذ من أجل تعلم كيفية القيام بالقراءة والكتابة الجدلية.培养议论文读写能力的教学实践,是近今在美国及世界各地学校及大学课程改革的一个关键组成部分,也是从幼儿园、小学到中学的阅读与写作教师,以至大学的写作教室中所面对的一项重大挑战。在本文献回顾中,作者考虑研究人员从认知与社会这两个角度研究议论文读写教学的贡献。作者讨论两个基本问题:(1)这两个角度与研究人员自己的学科框架及探究逻辑,如何以交互方式影响研究人员对研究读写议论文所采用的方法?(2)这些方向因此如何影响给予教师的教育知识内容,以帮助教师理解什么是议论文及在教学环境中怎样学习议论文?作者分析相关的概念及实证研究时,考虑到认知及社会学科观点的基本假设,特别是支持这些观点的根据。作者亦调查这两个观点的探究逻辑,如何揭示学习转移的假设,如何利用教学和其他教学实践例如课堂讨论、电脑支援的协作及其他形式的教学支援来促进学习转移。作者使用幼儿园、小学、中学的议论文读写教学及大学写作教室的实证研究,藉以说明推动这两个观点的假设及其教学后果,并建议为了建立明确和一致的理论与实践关系,研究人员及教师需要了解他们对知识和转移所持的假设。作者更提供一个结合认知及社会观点的研究设想,论证读写文化研究工作是要揭示认知过程及教学实践,让教师可以用以促进议论文读写教学,学生可以用以学习如何阅读和写作议论文。L'acquisition de pratiques argumentatives en lecture et en écriture est le reflet d'une composante clé des récentes réformes des programmes dans les écoles et les universités d'un bout à l'autre des Etats‐Unis et dans le monde, ainsi qu'un défi majeur pour ceux qui enseignent la lecture et l'écriture du jardin d'enfants au lycée et dans les classes d'écriture de premier cycle à l'université. Dans cette revue de question, nous examinons les apports des deux perspectives de recherche, cognitive et sociale, que les chercheurs ont utilisées pour étudier l'enseignement et l'apprentissage de l'argumentation en lecture et en écriture. Nous nous intéressons à deux questions de base: Comment ces perspectives avec leurs spécificités de structures disciplinaires et de logique d'enquête indiquent interactivement comment les chercheurs étudient le discours argumentatif et, par voie de conséquence, comment ces orientations ont informé les connaissances pédagogiques qui peuvent sous‐tendre la compréhension qu'ont les enseignants de la compréhension et comment elle peut être appréhendée dans les contextes pédagogiques. Nous avons analysé les études théoriques et empiriques pertinentes en considérant les présupposés sous‐jacents aux perspectives disciplinaires cognitive et sociale, en particulier en termes de garanties assumées par ces perspectives. Nous avons aussi interrogé comment les logiques d'enquête de ces disciplines révílent des présupposés en ce qui concerne le transfert d'apprentissage que suppose l'enseignement, et d'autres pratiques comme les discussions en classe, le travail en coopération avec l'aide d'un ordinateur, et d'autres formes d'apport pédagogique. En utilisant des études empiriques de l'enseignement et de l'apprentissage de l'argumentation en lecture et en écriture dans les classes du jardin d'enfants au lycée et les classes d'écriture du premier cycle universitaire, nous avons circonscrit les présupposés qui pilotent les deux perspectives et leurs conséquences pédagogiques, et soutenu que les chercheurs et les enseignants ont besoin de comprendre leurs présupposés au sujet des connaissances et du transfert de façon à établir une relation claire et cohérente entre théorie et pratique. Nous présentons une conception de la recherche qui intígre les perspectives cognitive et sociale et soutenons que le travail de recherche en littératie est de mettre en évidence les processus cognitifs et les pratiques pédagogiques que les enseignants peuvent promouvoir et que les élíves peuvent employer pour apprendre comment lire et écrire de façon argumentée.Недавние реформы учебных планов в школах и университетах США и других стран мира были связаны с введением аргументированного чтения и письма. Однако подобная практика по‐прежнему вызывает сложности у преподавателей в старшей школе и колледжах. В данном обзоре рассматриваются два подхода – когнитивный и социальный – к исследованию чтения и письма. Первый вопрос: как эти подходы с присущими им дисциплинарными рамками и логикой исследовательского поиска интерактивно информируют о том, как происходит освоение аргументированного чтения и письма? Второй вопрос производный от первого: как эти подходы формируют знание учителей о том, что такое аргументация и как она может использоваться в образовательном контексте? В статье анализируются значимые концептуальные и эмпирические исследования, лежащие в основе когнитивного и социального подходов к изучению различных дисциплин, особенно в плане их потенциальных возможностей. Мы также рассматриваем, каким образом поисковая логика каждого из этих подходов обнажает различные представления об обучении как о различных формах сотрудничества учеников и поддерживающего их педагога, а именно: прямая передача знаний на уроке, учебная дискуссия, общение через компьютер и т.д. Используя эмпирическое исследование процессов обучения чтению и письму в старших классах и колледже, авторы рассматривают внутренние посылки обоих подходов и их возможные академические последствия и доказывают, что и исследователям и преподавателям необходимо определиться с собственными установками о знании и способах его передачи, чтобы установить ясные и последовательные отношения между теорией и практикой. Авторы предлагают объединить познавательный и социальный подходы к исследованию грамотности и утверждают, что цель подобных исследований состоит в сочетании осознанных когнитивных процессов с учебными методами, которые могут использовать преподаватели и учащиеся для аргументированного чтения и письма.Adquirir prácticas argumentativas en la lectura y la escritura refleja un componente importante de las recientes reformas hechas en escuelas y universidades en los Estados Unidos y el mundo además de un reto importante para los maestros de lectura y escritura en ambos centros docentes. En esta evaluación veremos las contribuciones de dos perspectivas de investigación, cognitivo y social, que han sido usadas por los investigadores al estudiar la enseñanza y el aprendizaje de la lectura y la escritura argumentativa. Nos enfocamos en dos preguntas básicas: Qué información se saca de cada una de estas perspectivas con sus propios marcos disciplinarios y lógica de cuestionar sobre como los investigadores estudian la lectura y la escritura argumentativa, y, de ahí, cómo estas orientaciones informan el conocimiento pedagógico que podría apoyar lo que los maestros entienden por argumentación y cómo se podría presentar la argumentación en un contexto docente. Analizamos estudios conceptuales y empíricos relevantes tomando en cuenta las suposiciones que informan estas perspectivas cognitivas y sociales, especialmente en cuanto a las justificaciones que dichas perspectivas toman por sentadas. También nos preguntamos cómo la lógica de cuestionamiento de estas perspectivas sobre la transferencia del conocimiento es apoyada por la instrucción y otras prácticas como la discusión en clase, la colaboración apoyada por ordenadores, y otras formas de apoyo a la instrucción. Usando estudios empíricos de la enseñanza de la lectura y la escritura argumentativa en K‐12 y las universidades, describimos las suposiciones que informan ambas perspectivas y sus consecuencias para la instrucción, argumentando que los investigadores y los maestros necesitan entender sus suposiciones sobre el conocimiento y su transferencia para establecer una relación clara y coherente entre la teoría y la práctica. Ofrecemos una visión para la investigación que integra las perspectivas cognitivas y sociales para proponer que el propósito de la investigación sobre la alfabetización es sacar a luz los procesos cognitivos y las prácticas de instrucción que los maestros pueden fomentar y los estudiantes pueden usar para aprender a escribir y a leer argumentativamente.
This study examined how personal versus formal writing tasks affect what students take from literary text. The writing samples produced by sixty-five 10th-grade students in response to two short stories were analyzed for quality of response, audience, function, syntactic complexity, fluency, and types of response statements. Findings indicated that the reader-based or personal writing tasks enabled the students to produce qualitatively more effective responses that tended to be more fluent and constructed with a wider range of response statements. A shift in audience from teacher-as-examiner to teacher-student dialogue in the personal writing indicated a tentativeness that permitted the students to invite their reader into their explorations of the short stories.Although a large portion of the writing students do in school is about literature (Applebee, 1978), we know little about what these writing experiences contribute to literary understanding. From recent studies of instruction, however, we do know that school reading and writing tasks tend to be limited and limiting largely because of an academic tradition that tends to stress knowing "the facts" rather than exploring personal meaning (Langer, 1984). Applebee's (1981Applebee's ( , 1984) studies of secondary school writing indicate that typically teachers assign writing to assess rather than to encourage various responses to text, and that, for the most part, when writing is assigned students must work within preset forms that may short-circuit rather than extend learning.From another perspective, large scale studies of reading and responding to 37 38 Journal of Reading Behaviorliterature (Purves, 1981) suggest that students learn "academic" responses that are primarily concerned with content rather than personal point of view. Consequently, as the National Assessment of Educational Progress (1981) has pointed out, students of all ages can comprehend literary text and evaluate their responses to it, but they have difficulty explaining and elaborating those responses. "Students in all age groups might not be getting opportunities to engage in the extended discourse . . . that teaches them to explain and substantiate their inferences in the most basic ways" (p. 24). Taken together, these studies present a rather disturbing picture of the contexts in which students are asked to write about content-area information as well as literary text. To a large extent, research has been remarkably slow to examine the ways writing might foster reasoning and learning. Such a research agenda would seem valuable if we are to understand what students take from the writing tasks we assign as part of their literary education.Writing about literature can be either an endpoint that tests for a specific form of response or a point of departure for exploring and elaborating on students' responses to literature. Since both approaches can be appropriate given the purposes of instruction, the question at issue here is what kinds of reasoning and thinking about literary texts ...
We propose “instructional chaining” as an analytic method for capturing and describing key instructional episodes enacted by expert writing teachers to foster the recontextualization over time of the social practices of argumentative writing through process-oriented instructional approaches. The article locates instructional chaining within a sociocultural framework and argues for conceptualizing learning to write as the recontextualization of social practices of writing in classroom settings. To illustrate the use of instructional chaining to study the effects of teaching on learning argumentative writing, we describe the processes employed to construct an instructional chain for a unit of literary argumentation in a 12th grade English language arts classroom. We conclude with a discussion of two potential uses of instructional chains as units of analysis for both quantitative and qualitative analyses to study patterns of teaching and learning across many classrooms.
This study describes how and what 2 classes of middle-
While writing researchers and theorists have claimed that composing fosters learning, we need a more rigorous conceptualization of the effects of various writing tasks on learning. This study attempted to refine and extend present knowledge of the interrelationship of writing and learning by examining the effects of various writing tasks (notetaking, answering study questions, and essay writing) on learning using recall of specific text elements and recall of the theme or gist of expository writing. The results indicate that the relationship of writing and learning is indeed complex, and that factors such as students' topic-knowledge prior to writing, the content structure of the passage, and the nature of the task all assert some influence on what students learn from expository text.
The theoretical and empirical work of James Britton has been influential in promoting a view of writing as a means of learning and reflecting about subject matter. In detailing the heuristic potential of writing and the wide range of possible uses of writing, Britton’s work has played a significant role in countering the traditional view of writing instruction emphasizing mechanical correctness and the teaching of a rigid set of discourse forms. In particular, Britton’s theory of written discourse function has been used widely in research on writing and has made an important contribution to writing theory and pedagogy. Employed as a key variable in a host of empirical studies on writing, the function system has also been examined and critiqued in a number of theoretical studies. Yet the body of research in which the function system appears has never been analyzed systematically to determine what the theory has contributed to our understanding of how writing is learned and taught. In this review, we examine research employing or critiquing Britton’s theory. Studies are divided into four categories, centering on (a) the nature of school writing; (b) writing processes and written text structures; (c) connections between writing and learning; and (d) critiques of the function system. We also discuss ways in which the function theory could be improved and extended, and examine the theory’s relevance in light of critical issues in American education.
Although studies of writing and literary understanding have demonstrated the value of analytic essay writing for enhancing story understanding, these studies have focused on student's initial interpretations without considering the effects of a teacher's support and direction. The purpose of this study was to explore how 9th- (n = 6) and 11th- (n = 6) grade students reformulated and extended their initial written analyses of two short stories through revisions fostered by two different kinds of between-draft written comments. After revising initial drafts in two response modes (directive and dialogue), the students wrote paragraph-length responses to posttest questions of story understanding. Results indicated significant (p < .05) main effects for response condition and grade level, with the dialogue condition enhancing story understanding more than the directive condition, and the 11th graders attaining higher posttest scores than the 9th graders. Data from composing-aloud protocols revealed that the dialogue condition supported the students' reformulation of their own interpretations constructed in the initial drafts, while the directive condition seemed to shift the students away from their own initial interpretations of the stories.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.