Deane et al. SBAs provide students with a purpose for reading thematically related texts and engaging in tasks that are sequenced to assess increasingly complex reasoning skills. The sequence of SBAs is guided by an hypothesized learning progression LP framework that describes skills of increasing sophistication that are thought to contribute to proficiency in argumentative writing Deane and Song, Furthermore, the component skills were analyzed to see if they were aligned with the hypothesized LP.
They found that linguistic features and the component skills contributed unique variance to the prediction of argumentative writing. Furthermore, the component skills were generally aligned with the hypothesized LP. This finding has resulted in the hypothesis that skilled writing results from the flexible use of linguistic style rather than a fixed set of linguistic features Allen et al.
All students in this study received formative and summative feedback about their writing, and half of students also received feedback about spelling and grammar. The authors were interested in whether feedback about spelling and grammar affected linguistic flexibility, and whether linguistic flexibility was related to writing quality. In addition, they sought information about the dimensions along which linguistic variation was observed.
However, feedback about writing mechanics did not influence the linguistic properties of their writing. Students are expected to integrate and evaluate information from diverse sources when writing, identify arguments and evaluate specific claims in a text, and assess the adequacy of the evidence offered in support of those claims Common Core State Standards Initiative, These are formidable tasks for native language L1 speakers, and even more challenging for second language L2 students.
Confronted with these challenges, Cummins has argued that L2 students may draw on a shared pool of shared academic concepts and skills to support transfer across languages, that is, the linguistic interdependence hypothesis LIH. In addition, they found that students tended to rely more heavily on source material when writing in L2, but in general, writers tended to use common source features when writing in both languages.
Students also tended to incorporate evidence for and against the proposition in L1 and L2. Finally, the same two features of source material predicted writing quality in L1 and L2, and that these relationships were not language dependent. In sum, these findings provide some support for the LIH, and suggest that students draw on a shared pool of concepts and skills when writing from source material in L1 and L2.
The papers in this special issue highlight a range of theoretical perspectives and analytic methods that have been used to study argumentative writing and understand the conditions that influence its development. The sociocultural, cognitive, and linguistic perspectives have each made important contributions to our understanding of argumentative writing, but as the studies in this special issue show, unique synergies arise when scholarship is not constrained by theoretical, methodological, and analytic siloes.
5 Steps to Teaching Argumentative Writing
Skip to main content Skip to sections. Advertisement Hide. Download PDF.
Argumentative writing: theory, assessment, and instruction. Article First Online: 09 May Alexander, P. Mapping the multidimensional nature of domain learning: The interplay of cognitive, motivational, and strategic forces. Pintrich Eds. Google Scholar. The nature of disciplinary and domain learning: The knowledge, interest, and strategic dimensions of learning from subject-matter text.
Argumentative Essay Language Features - The argumentative text. Structure and features.
Hynd Ed. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum. Allen, L. Writing flexibility in argumentative essays: A multidimensional analysis. Reading and Writing: An Interdisciplinary Journal. The narrative waltz: The role of flexibility on writing performance.
Journal of Educational Psychology, , — CrossRef Google Scholar. Applebee, A.
Aristotle trans. On interpretation. Attali, Y. Automated essay scoring with E-rater v. ETS research report series, 2. Bartsch, K. Social Development, 23, — Bazerman, C. What to sociocultural studies of writing tell us about learning to write? MacArthur, S. Fitzgerald Eds. NY: Guilford. Beach, R. Bereiter, C. The psychology of written composition. Biancarosa, G. Reading next: A vision for action and research in middle and high school literacy: A report from the Carnegie Corporation of New York 2nd ed.
Chapelle, C. Validity arguments for diagnostic assessment using automated writing evaluation. Language Testing, 32, — Common Core State Standards Initiative. Crossley, S.
- Social Counter?
- Resources for Persuasive and Argumentative Essay Writing | Common Sense Education.
- 43 Other related Resources.
What is successful writing? An investigation into the multiple ways writers can write high quality essays.
Written Communication, 31, — Cummins, J. Deane, P. On the relation between automated essay scoring and modern views of the writing construct.
- short essay on food and nutrition.
- the separability thesis!
- Elements of Argumentative Writing.
- printable essays for students.
Assessing Writing, 18, 7— A case study in principled assessment design: Designing assessments to measure and support the development of argumentative reading and writing skills. Spanish Journal of Educational Psychology, 20, 99— The case for scenario-based assessment of written argumentation.
Duke, N. Essential elements of fostering and teaching reading comprehension. Farstrup Eds. Dunn, J. The beginnings of social understanding. Cambridge: Harvard University Press. Becoming a family member: Family conflict and the development of social understanding. Child Developmental, 56, — Englert, C.
The best argumentative essay topic examples
Tenets of sociocultural theory in writing instruction research. New York: Guilford Press. Ferretti, R.
Related teaching writing argumentative essays
Copyright 2019 - All Right Reserved