Improving the Argumentative Writing of Students with Learning Disabilities: Descriptive and Normative Considerations

Education seeks to cultivate dispositions and skills that promote effective participation in democratic institutions, including the capacity to produce thoughtful written arguments about controversial issues. Unfortunately, students' argumentative writing is generally neither effective nor persuasive, and this is especially so for students with learning disabilities (LD). The most efficacious argumentative writing interventions explicitly teach strategies that can be used to self-regulate the writing process. These interventions reflect the descriptive approach to argumentation, which seeks to understand the influence of content and context on argumentative performance. A contrasting and complementary perspective, called the normative approach, seeks to understand how critical standards can be ideally used to guide argumentation. The latter approach has received scant attention in instruction for students with LD. In this article, we first review studies in the LD literature that illustrate the descriptive approach to instructing argumentative writing, and then discuss how normative standards may be used to further promote the quality of students' written arguments.

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

[2]  Giambattista Vico The Art of Rhetoric , 1996 .

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

[4]  R. Gersten,et al.  Teaching Expressive Writing to Students with Learning Disabilities , 1999, Journal of learning disabilities.

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

[6]  J. Geoghegan Return to Reason! , 1942, Nature.

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

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

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

[10]  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 .

[11]  Lester Faigley,et al.  Assessing writers' knowledge and processes of composing , 1985 .

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

[13]  J. Baron Thinking and Deciding , 2023 .

[14]  L. S. Vygotskiĭ,et al.  Mind in society : the development of higher psychological processes , 1978 .

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

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

[17]  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 .

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

[19]  S Graham,et al.  Improving Learning Disabled Students' Skills at Composing Essays: Self-Instructional Strategy Training , 1989, Exceptional children.

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

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

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

[23]  J. Baron Thinking and deciding, 3rd ed. , 2000 .

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

[25]  Russell Gersten,et al.  Teaching Expressive Writing to Students with Learning Disabilities: A Meta-Analysis , 2001, The Elementary School Journal.

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