Instructional discourse and argumentative writing

Morris, Joshua A.; Miller, Brian; Anderson, Richard C.; Nguyen-Jahiel, Kim; Lin, Tzu‐Jung; Scott, Theresa; Zhang, Jie; Sun, Jingjing; Ma, Shufeng

doi:10.1016/j.ijer.2018.03.001

Cited by 24 publications

(18 citation statements)

References 32 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…This learning activity helps students to improve their collaborative reasoning. It was reinforced by Lin et al (2015); Ma et al (2017); and Morris et al (2018) who found that small-group and dialogic instruction direct students to develop their cognitive aspects.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

The Effect of Team Product to Improve Students’ Creativity in Writing at SMPN 1 Jonggat

Prayati¹

2020

JOLLT

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This study investigated the effect of team product to improve students’ creativity in writing at the 8th-grade students of SMPN 1 Jonggat, Central Lombok in the academic year 2018/2019. The research was designed as quasi experiment research. The students were divided into the experimental group and control group. The experimental group was treated using the team product method while the control group was subjected to a conventional method. The data were analyzed using descriptive and inferential analysis. The data in this research was taken from the mean scores of students’ achievement and the score percentages. The subject of this research was the 8th-grade students of SMPN 1 Jonggat, which consisted of 54 students. The instruments of this research were tests and questionnaires. The mean score of students’ creativity in the experimental group was 75 and the writing skill was 76. It was higher than the students in the control group. It can be concluded that the team product had a positive effect on students’ writing skills in relation to creativity at SMPN 1 Jonggat.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

The Effect of Team Product to Improve Students’ Creativity in Writing at SMPN 1 Jonggat

Prayati¹

2020

JOLLT

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…After the intervention, students completed two unit mastery tests: a 100-item sentence verification test that addressed the main concepts and information in the wolf unit and a 50-minute individually written essay in which they explained their personal decision about whether the pack of wolves should be eradicated. Analysis of performance on the sentence verification test indicated that DI students grasped significantly more concepts and information from the wolf unit than CG students or control students (for details, see Morris, Anderson, & Collaborative Reasoning Research Group, 2013). Morris and colleagues (2013) also examined argument elements in the essays children wrote to explain and justify their decisions about whether the pack of wolves should be eradicated.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Analysis of performance on the sentence verification test indicated that DI students grasped significantly more concepts and information from the wolf unit than CG students or control students (for details, see Morris, Anderson, & Collaborative Reasoning Research Group, 2013). Morris and colleagues (2013) also examined argument elements in the essays children wrote to explain and justify their decisions about whether the pack of wolves should be eradicated. Using a coding scheme somewhat different from the one employed here, based on an argument-counterargument-rebuttal structure, Morris et al (2013) found that CG and DI students were equally good at considering counterarguments and rebutting counterarguments as well as producing elaborated reasons based on the concepts and information from the wolf unit.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Morris and colleagues (2013) also examined argument elements in the essays children wrote to explain and justify their decisions about whether the pack of wolves should be eradicated. Using a coding scheme somewhat different from the one employed here, based on an argument-counterargument-rebuttal structure, Morris et al (2013) found that CG and DI students were equally good at considering counterarguments and rebutting counterarguments as well as producing elaborated reasons based on the concepts and information from the wolf unit. Thus, DI students were able to use knowledge acquired from the wolf unit in an essay that was a recapitulation of the unit.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Improving Children’s Competence as Decision Makers

Xin

Anderson

Morris

et al. 2016

American Educational Research Journal

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…In teacher-centered learning strategies, students receive an immediate source of information from teachers [12]. DI strategy can be planned together by teachers and students [13]. The advantage of using this DI strategy, the teacher can control the content of the material and the sequence of information received by the students so that students can focus on the learning objectives that must be achieved.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

The Differences in Using Direct Instruction (DI) Learning Strategy Based on Competitive Behavior to Civic Education Learning Achivement

Susilawati¹,

Sitompul²,

Situmorang³

2018

Proceedings of the 3rd Annual International Seminar on Transformative Education and Educational Leadership (AISTEEL 2018)

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The purpose of this study was to see the difference of learning outcomes of Citizenship Education based on competitive behavior and uncompetitive using Direct Instruction learning strategy in grade VII-3 students of SMP Negeri I Labuhan Deli, Deli Serdang Regency North Sumatra Province. Population and sample were 38 students in academic year 2015/2016. Samples were taken using a saturated sampling technique. Methods of data collection in this study were obtained by using Test Results of Cognitive Learning. The data in this study were analyzed using Independent T-Test. The result of the research shows that the average learning outcomes of Civic Education students are taught by using direct instruction instruction that has competitive behavior (x1) = 81,73, while those who do not have competitive behavior (x2) = 93,98. The result of hypothesis testing showed that the learning result of Civic Education of students taught by Direct Instruction learning strategy for students who have competitive behavior were higher than students who did not have competitive behavior.

show abstract

Instructional discourse and argumentative writing

Cited by 24 publications

References 32 publications

The Effect of Team Product to Improve Students’ Creativity in Writing at SMPN 1 Jonggat

The Effect of Team Product to Improve Students’ Creativity in Writing at SMPN 1 Jonggat

Improving Children’s Competence as Decision Makers

The Differences in Using Direct Instruction (DI) Learning Strategy Based on Competitive Behavior to Civic Education Learning Achivement

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About