Teaching and Learning Argumentative Reading and Writing: A Review of Research

Newell, George E.; Beach, Richard; Smith, Jamie; VanDerHeide, Jennifer

doi:10.1598/rrq.46.3.4

Cited by 218 publications

(40 citation statements)

References 140 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…The group discussion activities likely helped the students develop knowledge and ideas for their essays. Furthermore, prior research supports dialogic writing activities which provide students the opportunity to consider multiple perspectives, see limitations in their initial point of view, and avoid my-side bias (Coker & Lewis, 2008; Kuhn & Crowell, 2011; Kuhn et al, 1997; Newell et al, 2011; Reznitskaya & Anderson, 2002).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

The effects of choice versus preference on writing and the mediating role of perceived competence.

Aitken¹,

Graham²,

McNeish³

2022

Journal of Educational Psychology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Many educators assume that choice in writing leads to better writing outcomes; however, there are few studies to support this belief. In the present study, we examined the effects of choice and preference on writing quality with college students. The students wrote two argumentative essays on controversial topics in special education. For the topic at time 1, half of the students were randomly assigned to choose a position to defend, and the remaining students were assigned their position. For the topic at time 2, student roles reversed. Prior to writing on either topic, students completed a knowledge measure on each topic and a measure of self-efficacy for writing. Before each writing task, students indicated their preference for which position they wanted to defend, and after completing their essays at time 1, they completed a measure of perceived competence for the writing task. Variance attributable to knowledge, writing self-efficacy, and race were controlled for in all analyses. The effects of choice were limited. The quality of students’ writing improved for students who did not choose a topic at time 1 but chose which position to defend at time 2. Quality of writing for students who chose a topic at time 1 and not at time 2 did not differ. Further, having choice at time 1 increased students’ perceived competence, which lead to improved writing quality at time 2. No statistically significant effects for preference were found. Recommendations for future research and practice were provided.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

The effects of choice versus preference on writing and the mediating role of perceived competence.

Aitken¹,

Graham²,

McNeish³

2022

Journal of Educational Psychology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…In terms of article comprehension skills, our conclusions are consistent with other studies (Brosowsky et al, 2020; Sego & Stuart, 2016; Varela et al, 2005; Wenk & Tronsky, 2011) which have demonstrated that using a set of questions to scaffold the reading of research articles helps students to better understand the structure of scientific writing (cf. Madigan et al, 1995; Newell et al, 2011). Taken together with Kershaw et al (2020), our current results suggest that beyond a few practice assignments, more practice is not necessarily better.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Goldman & Bisanz, 2002). In addition, students are often unfamiliar with the basic structure of scientific writing (Newell et al, 2011), which scaffolds readers’ understanding of research (Madigan et al, 1995). Compared to experts, undergraduate students are less likely to utilize strategies such as lowering cognitive load through summarizing and taking notes (Nelms & Segura-Totten, 2019) or to interact with research articles in more complex manners such as critically interpreting data (Hubbard & Dunbar, 2017).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Practice assignments improve research comprehension skills and reinforce concept learning.

Kershaw¹,

Gordon²

2022

Scholarship of Teaching and Learning in Psychology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Empirical research comprehension is important for undergraduate students in many scientific domains. In the present pair of classroom studies, students completed a series of either three or nine structured reading worksheet assignments (RWs) designed to implement deliberate and distributed practice of research article comprehension. In line with our previous work (Kershaw et al., 2018(Kershaw et al., , 2020, students improved across the course of the semester on multiple article comprehension tasks. Extending previous work, students demonstrated greater learning of course concepts that were reinforced by RW assignments compared to course concepts that were presented in lecture alone. Our findings suggest improvement in research article comprehension can occur after a relatively small number of practice sessions. Further, our findings are in line with past literature that learning is best when information is reinforced in multiple contexts. Implications for instruction are discussed.

show abstract

“…Opplaering i argumenterande sakprega skriving − i alle fag − er slik ei viktig side ved skulens samfunnsmandat. Vidare er argumenterande sakprega skriving rekna som ei skrivedidaktisk utfordring, noko som over fleire tiår har fått mykje merksemd i både norsk og internasjonal skriveforsking (Andrews et al 2009;Berge 2005a;Freedman & Pringle 1988;Ferretti & Fan 2016;Hertzberg 2008;Hillocks 2011;Igland 2009;Muller Mirza et al 2009;Newell et al 2011;Skjelten 2013;Øgreid 2017a).…”

Section: Innleiingunclassified

Drøftande skriving på ungdomssteget: Ein elevtekstanalyse med utgangspunkt i stasislæra

Breivega

2022

MOM

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Emnet for artikkelen er drøftande skriving, slik skrivemåten vert forstått i skriveopplæringa. Det å få fram ulike sider ved ei sak er ein mykje brukt karakteristikk av drøfting. I skriveopplæringa vert dette forstått som å legge fram argument både for og mot eit standpunkt, altså drøfting forstått som «pro og kontra»-struktur, noko ein ikkje minst ser operasjonalisert via skriverammer. Formålet med artikkelen er å få fram eit breiare bilete av den drøftande teksten. Artikkelen bygger på ein retorisk analyse av 16 drøftande debattartiklar frå ungdomssteget der stasislæra har vore hovudinnfallsvinkel. Stasislæra er ein typologi over grunnleggande spørsmål ein kan stille til ei sak, ofte vist til som argumentasjonsfasar. Resultata syner at det i alle elevtekstane vart stilt fleire typar grunnleggande spørsmål, og at det dessutan kunne etablerast visse mønster for distribusjonen av argumentasjonsfasane. Artikkelen konkluderer med at opplæringa i drøftande skriving bør fokusere meir på kva spørsmål den drøftande teksten skal svare på.

show abstract

Teaching and Learning Argumentative Reading and Writing: A Review of Research

Cited by 218 publications

References 140 publications

The effects of choice versus preference on writing and the mediating role of perceived competence.

The effects of choice versus preference on writing and the mediating role of perceived competence.

Practice assignments improve research comprehension skills and reinforce concept learning.

Drøftande skriving på ungdomssteget: Ein elevtekstanalyse med utgangspunkt i stasislæra

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About