Addressing an Unfulfilled Expectation: Teaching Students With Disabilities to Write Scientific Arguments

Abstract

Students with disabilities (SWD) in general education science classes are expected to engage in the scientific practices and potentially in the writing of arguments drawn from evidence. Currently, however, there are few research-based instructional approaches for teaching argument writing for these students. The present article responds to this need through the application of an instructional model that promises to improve the ability of SWDs to write scientific arguments. We approach this work in multiple ways. First, we clarify our target group, students with high incidence disabilities (learning disability, ADHD, and students with speech and language impairments), and discuss common cognitive challenges they experience. We then explore the role of argumentation in science, review research on both experts’ (scientists’) and novices’ (students’) argument writing and highlight successful cognitive strategies for teaching argument writing with neurotypical learners. We further discuss SWDs’ general writing challenges and how researchers have improved their abilities to comprehend and evaluate scientific information and improve their domain-general writing. Cognitive apprenticeships appear advantageous for teaching SWDs science content and how to write scientific arguments, as this form of instruction begins with problem solving tasks that connect literacy (e.g., reading, writing, argumentation discourse) with epistemic reasoning in a given domain. We illustrate the potential of such apprenticeships by analyzing the conceptual quality of arguments written by three SWDs who participated in a larger quantitative study in which they and others showed improvement in the structure of their arguments. We end with suggestions for further research to expand the use of cognitive apprenticeships.

Perspectives about Disciplinary Argumentation in the Era of Post-truth: Introduction to the Special Issue

“…Only 27% of 12th- and 8th-grade students were at or above proficient levels of writing performance, and only 1% of English Language Learners (ELL) and 5% of students with disabilities (SWD) were at or above proficient in writing. These limitations are also seen in the argumentative writing of college students (Alexander et al, 2023), students with disabilities (De La Paz et al, 2023), and students with limited English proficiency (Booth Olson et al, 2023).…”

“…Students are expected to develop the advanced literacy skills needed to read, write, and make and evaluate interpretative claims by using disciplinary strategies and standards when reading and writing. These factors have given impetus to interventions that improve students’ written disciplinary arguments (Alexander et al, 2023; Booth Olson et al, 2023; De La Paz et al, 2023; Nokes & De La Paz, 2023; VanDerHeide, et al, 2023).…”

“…Long before children have the capacity to write argumentative essays, they demonstrate surprisingly deft argumentative capacities when engaged in cooperative problem solving with their peers (Köymen & Tomasello, 2020; Köymen et al, 2020). Well-designed instruction that supports collaborative dialogic interactions about controversial issues has been shown to improve students’ argumentative writing (Alexander et al, 2023; De La Paz et al, 2023; Newell et al, 2011; Nokes & De La Paz, 2023; VanDerHeide et al, 2023). However, many novice writers, including students with disabilities (De La Paz, et al, 2023) and students with limited English proficiency (Booth Olson et al, 2023), are challenged to regulate the demands of goal setting, planning, writing, and revising their essays (Graham et al, 2013).…”

“…Well-designed instruction that supports collaborative dialogic interactions about controversial issues has been shown to improve students’ argumentative writing (Alexander et al, 2023; De La Paz et al, 2023; Newell et al, 2011; Nokes & De La Paz, 2023; VanDerHeide et al, 2023). However, many novice writers, including students with disabilities (De La Paz, et al, 2023) and students with limited English proficiency (Booth Olson et al, 2023), are challenged to regulate the demands of goal setting, planning, writing, and revising their essays (Graham et al, 2013). Explicit strategy instruction that supports students’ self-regulated problem solving during the writing process is demonstrably effective in improving their argumentative writing (Booth Olson et al, 2023; Harris, 2021; Harris & Graham, 2016).…”

“…Explicit strategy instruction that supports students’ self-regulated problem solving during the writing process is demonstrably effective in improving their argumentative writing (Booth Olson et al, 2023; Harris, 2021; Harris & Graham, 2016). Other forms of instruction that may include dialogic or self-regulatory supports have been successful in teaching students the epistemic skills needed to write disciplinary arguments (De La Paz et al, 2023; Nokes & De La Paz, 2023; VanDerHeide et al, 2023).…”