Instructional discourse and argumentative writing
Joshua A. Morris, Institute for the Science of Teaching & Learning, United States ; Brian W. Miller, Department of Elementary Education, United States ; Richard C. Anderson, Center for the Study of Reading, United States ; Kim Thi Nguyen-Jahiel, College of Engineering, United States ; Tzu-Jung Lin, Department of Educational Studies, United States ; Theresa Scott, Greene Street Friends School, United States ; Jie Zhang, College of Education, United States ; Jingjing Sun, Department of Teaching and Learning, United States ; Shufeng Ma, Institute of Education, China
International Journal of Educational Research Volume 90, Number 1, ISSN 0883-0355 Publisher: Elsevier Ltd
Fifth-grade students from two urban school districts completed an integrated unit on wolves. Classes received either direct instruction (DI) or collaborative group work (CG). Analysis of reasoning in classroom talk indicated that CG students more often used connective and contrastive words and the performative verb phrases I think and I know than DI students. Analysis of written arguments about a controversial question raised by the unit indicated that, compared to DI students, CG students included more logical connectives, contrastives, and performative verbs, produced fewer unelaborated arguments, more frequently asked rhetorical questions, and more often considered both sides of the policy issue. The study provides fresh insight into how instructional frameworks can affect how students view themselves as writers in relation to a prospective audience.
Morris, J.A., Miller, B.W., Anderson, R.C., Nguyen-Jahiel, K.T., Lin, T.J., Scott, T., Zhang, J., Sun, J. & Ma, S. (2018). Instructional discourse and argumentative writing. International Journal of Educational Research, 90(1), 234-247. Elsevier Ltd.