Do Goals Affect the Structure of Students' Argumentative Writing Strategies?

Fourth- and sixth-grade students with and without learning disabilities wrote essays about a controversial topic after receiving either a general persuasion goal or an elaborated goal that included subgoals based on elements of argumentative discourse. Students in the elaborated goal condition produced more persuasive essays that were responsive to alternative standpoints than students in the general goal condition. Students with learning disabilities wrote poorer quality and less elaborated arguments than students without disabilities. Measures derived from the structure of students' argumentative strategies were highly predictive of essay quality, and they accounted for the effects of goal condition, grade, and disability status. Nearly all students used the argument from consequences strategy to defend their standpoint. The implications for argumentative writing are discussed.

[1]  S. Jackson,et al.  Reconstructing Argumentative Discourse , 1993 .

[2]  P. Coirier,et al.  Foundations of argumentative text processing , 2000 .

[3]  Deanna Kuhn,et al.  The Development of Argumentive Discourse Skill , 2001 .

[4]  Aristotle,et al.  The Art of Rhetoric , 1924 .

[5]  S. Graham,et al.  Executive control in the revising of students with learning and writing difficulties. , 1997 .

[6]  J. Stevens,et al.  Applied multivariate statistics for the social sciences, 4th ed. , 2002 .

[7]  Steve Graham,et al.  Strategy Instruction and the Teaching of Writing: A Meta-Analysis. , 2006 .

[8]  C. Michael Levy,et al.  The Science of Writing : Theories, Methods, Individual Differences and Applications , 1996 .

[9]  Karen R. Harris,et al.  Making the Writing Process Work : Strategies for Composition and Self-Regulation , 1999 .

[10]  S. Graham,et al.  Improving Learning Disabled Students' Composition Skills: Self-Control Strategy Training , 1985 .

[11]  F. H. Eemeren,et al.  Argumentation, Communication, and Fallacies: A Pragma-dialectical Perspective , 1992 .

[12]  F. H. van Eemeren,et al.  Argumentation: Analysis, Evaluation, Presentation , 2002 .

[13]  Barry J. Zimmerman,et al.  Becoming a Self-Regulated Writer: A Social Cognitive Perspective , 1997 .

[14]  D. Wechsler.  Wechsler Intelligence Scale for Children , 2020, Definitions.

[15]  B. Tabachnick,et al.  Using Multivariate Statistics , 1983 .

[16]  S. Graham,et al.  Strategy Instruction in Planning: Effects on the Writing Performance and Behavior of Students with Learning Difficulties , 1997 .

[17]  C. Miller,et al.  A theory of argumentative understanding: Relationships among position preference, judgments of goodness, memory and reasoning , 1993 .

[18]  S. Graham,et al.  Self-Regulated Strategy Development and the Writing Process: Effects on Essay Writing and Attributions , 1998 .

[19]  E. Nussbaum,et al.  Promoting Argument-Counterargument Integration in Students' Writing , 2007 .

[20]  J. P. Rushton,et al.  Behavioral Development and Construct Validity: The Principle of Aggregation , 1983 .

[21]  S Graham,et al.  Instructional Recommendations for Teaching Writing to Exceptional Students , 1988, Exceptional children.

[22]  Steve Graham,et al.  The Contribution of Executive Control to the Revising by Students with Writing and Learning Difficulties. , 1998 .

[23]  S Graham,et al.  Improving the Compositions of Students with Learning Disabilities Using a Strategy Involving Product and Process Goal Setting , 1992, Exceptional children.

[24]  F. H. Eemeren,et al.  Handboek van de argumentatietheorie. Historische achtergronden en hedendaagse ontwikkelingen [Vertaling van: 'Fundamentals of Argumentation Theory. Handbook of Historical Backgrounds and Contemporary Developments, Lawrence Erlbaum Ass., Mawhaw N.J.] , 1997 .

[25]  Jerry Andriessen,et al.  From planning to translating: The specificity of argumentative writing. , 1999 .

[26]  Steve Graham,et al.  Writing Better: Effective Strategies for Teaching Students with Learning Difficulties , 2005 .

[27]  Stephen Graham,et al.  Effects of goal setting and strategy use on the writing performance and self-efficacy of students with writing and learning problems. , 1999 .

[28]  S. Graham,et al.  It can be taught, but it does not develop naturally: Myths and realities in writing instruction. , 1997 .

[29]  C. Kardash,et al.  The Effects of Goal Instructions and Text on the Generation of Counterarguments During Writing. , 2005 .

[30]  D. R. Smith,et al.  CHAPTER 6 – Wechsler Individual Achievement Test , 2001 .

[31]  William E. Lewis,et al.  Improving the Argumentative Writing of Students with Learning Disabilities: Descriptive and Normative Considerations , 2007 .

[32]  G. Bear,et al.  Impact of a full‐time integrated program on the achievement of nonhandicapped and mildly handicapped children , 1990 .

[33]  C. Willard.  A theory of argumentation , 1989 .

[34]  J. Stevens.  Applied Multivariate Statistics for the Social Sciences , 1986 .

[35]  P. Schellens,et al.  Argumentation Schemes in Persuasive Brochures , 2004 .

[36]  F. H. Eemeren,et al.  A Systematic Theory of Argumentation: The pragma-dialectical approach , 2003 .

[37]  Douglas Walton,et al.  Plausible argument in everyday conversation , 1992 .

[38]  R. Glaser.  Advances in Instructional Psychology , 1978 .

[39]  M. Scardamalia,et al.  The psychology of written composition , 1987 .

[40]  S. Graham.  The Role of Production Factors in Learning Disabled Students' Compositions. , 1990 .

[41]  L. Cohen.  Wechsler Individual Achievement Test. , 1993 .

[42]  R. Ferretti,et al.  The effects of an elaborated goal on the persuasive writing of students with learning disabilities and their normally achieving peers. , 2000 .

[43]  E. Feteris.  The Rational Reconstruction of Argumentation Referring to Consequences and Purposes in the Application of Legal Rules: A Pragma-Dialectical Perspective , 2005 .

[44]  C. Miller,et al.  The Development of Memory and Reasoning Skill in Argumentative Contexts: Evaluating, Explaining, and Generating Evidence , 2019, Advances in Instructional Psychology.

[45]  J. A. Blair,et al.  Fundamentals of Argumentation Theory : A Handbook of Historical Backgrounds and Contemporary Developments , 1997 .

[46]  Hayes.  identifying the organization of wi iiing processes , 1980 .

[47]  B. Tabachnick,et al.  Using multivariate statistics, 5th ed. , 2007 .

[48]  M. Daane,et al.  The Nation's Report Card: Writing, 2002. , 2003 .

[49]  T. Mccann.  Student Argumentative Writing Knowledge and Ability at Three Grade Levels , 1989, Research in the Teaching of English.

[50]  William B. Borgers.  DEMOCRACY AND EDUCATION. , 1919 .

[51]  J. Hayes.  A new framework for understanding cognition and affect in writing. , 1996 .

[52]  R. Sprott.  On Giving Reasons in Verbal Disputes: The Development of Justifying , 1992 .

[53]  Linda Flower,et al.  The Dynamics of Composing : Making Plans and Juggling Constraints , 1980 .

[54]  S. Graham,et al.  Components analysis of cognitive strategy instruction: Effects on learning disabled students' compositions and self-efficacy. , 1989 .

[55]  C. L. Olson.  On choosing a test statistic in multivariate analysis of variance. , 1976 .

[56]  Charles A. MacArthur,et al.  Handbook of Writing Research , 2005 .

[57]  D. Walton.  Argumentation Schemes for Presumptive Reasoning , 1995 .

[58]  J. Hayes,et al.  Writing Research and the Writer. , 1986 .