Collaborative Writing of Argumentative Syntheses by Low-Performing Undergraduate Writers: Explicit Instruction and Practice

Autor/inn/en	Granado-Peinado, Miriam; Cuevas, Isabel; Olmos, Ricardo; Martín, Elena; Casado-Ledesma, Lidia; Mateos, Mar
Titel	Collaborative Writing of Argumentative Syntheses by Low-Performing Undergraduate Writers: Explicit Instruction and Practice
Quelle	In: Reading and Writing: An Interdisciplinary Journal, 36 (2023) 4, S.909-936 (28 Seiten)Infoseite zur Zeitschrift PDF als Volltext Verfügbarkeit
Zusatzinformation	ORCID (Granado-Peinado, Miriam) ORCID (Cuevas, Isabel) ORCID (Olmos, Ricardo) ORCID (Martín, Elena) ORCID (Casado-Ledesma, Lidia) ORCID (Mateos, Mar)
Sprache	englisch
Dokumenttyp	gedruckt; online; Zeitschriftenaufsatz
ISSN	0922-4777
DOI	10.1007/s11145-022-10318-x
Schlagwörter	Persuasive Discourse; Collaborative Writing; Undergraduate Students; Intervention; Cooperation; Direct Instruction; Writing (Composition); Program Effectiveness; Cooperative Learning + Suchen Sie Ihr Suchwort? Persuasion; Persuasive Kommunikation; Co-operation; Kooperation; Direct instructional procedues; Direct instructional approach; Unterrichtsverfahren; Schreibübung; Kooperatives Lernen
Abstract	In writing argumentative syntheses from multiple and contradictory sources, students must contrast and integrate different perspectives on a topic or issue. This complex task of source-based argumentation has been shown to be effective for learning, but it has also been shown to be quite challenging. Because of the challenges, educational interventions have been developed to facilitate performance through such means as explicit instruction of strategies and students' engagement in collaborative writing. Whereas these interventions have been beneficial for many writers, some students continue to perform poorly. The present study builds on prior research into collaborative writing of source-based argumentative syntheses by focusing on these students who experience difficulty with this academic task. Undergraduate psychology students who had previously underperformed on the argumentative task were organized into 56 pairs to participate in one of four versions of an intervention program, which differed in terms of the extent of support provided. The most complete program included collaboration as well as explicit instruction in argumentative synthesis writing and in the collaboration process. Statistical analyses were carried out with two ANOVAs with planned comparisons as well as two mediation models. Results showed that the pairs of students who received this most complete program significantly improved the quality of their synthesis in two dimensions, argument identification and argument analysis. The quality of their performance exceeded the performance of students in the three other intervention programs. The combination of explicit instruction and practice in pairs had positive effects on argument identification; but, for argument integration, effectiveness could be attributed solely to the explicit instruction component of the intervention. The study contributes to prior research by showing how the components of an intervention can make differential contributions to its effectiveness for a particular group of students. (As Provided).
Anmerkungen	Springer. Available from: Springer Nature. One New York Plaza, Suite 4600, New York, NY 10004. Tel: 800-777-4643; Tel: 212-460-1500; Fax: 212-460-1700; e-mail: customerservice@springernature.com; Web site: https://link.springer.com/
Erfasst von	ERIC (Education Resources Information Center), Washington, DC
Update	2024/1/01