共查询到20条相似文献，搜索用时 31 毫秒
2.
Argumentation, and the production of scientific arguments are critical elements of inquiry that are necessary for helping students become scientifically literate through engaging them in constructing and critiquing ideas. This case study employed a mixed methods research design to examine the development in 5th grade students’ practices of oral and written argumentation from one unit to another over 16 weeks utilizing the science writing heuristic approach. Data sources included five rounds of whole-class discussion focused on group presentations of arguments that occurred over eleven class periods; students’ group writings; interviews with six target students and the teacher; and the researcher’s field notes. The results revealed five salient trends in students’ development of oral and written argumentative practices over time: (1) Students came to use more critique components as they participated in more rounds of whole-class discussion focused on group presentations of arguments; (2) by challenging each other’s arguments, students came to focus on the coherence of the argument and the quality of evidence; (3) students came to use evidence to defend, support, and reject arguments; (4) the quality of students’ writing continuously improved over time; and (5) students connected oral argument skills to written argument skills as they had opportunities to revise their writing after debating and developed awareness of the usefulness of critique from peers. Given the development in oral argumentative practices and the quality of written arguments over time, this study indicates that students’ development of oral and written argumentative practices is positively related to each other. This study suggests that argumentative practices should be framed through both a social and epistemic understanding of argument-utilizing talk and writing as vehicles to create norms of these complex practices. 相似文献
3.
遵循指标体系编制原则,通过文献分析、调查修订,得出议论文写作能力的测评指标体系。通过探索性因素分析和验证性因素分析,论证了议论文写作能力测评的指标体系。高中生议论文写作能力框架主要由8个写作一级指标,包括搜集和积累材料的能力、思维能力、审题立论能力、选择论据能力、论证能力、语言表达能力、书写能力和修改能力及22个二级指标构成。 相似文献
4.
This paper describes the development of a software program that supports argumentative reading and writing, especially for novice students. The software helps readers create a graphic organizer from the text as a knowledge map while they are reading and use their prior knowledge to build their own opinion as new information while they think about writing their essays. Readers using this software can read a text, underline important words or sentences, pick up and dynamically cite the underlined portions of the text onto a knowledge map as quotation nodes, illustrate a knowledge map by linking the nodes, and later write their opinion as an essay while viewing the knowledge map; thus, the software bridges argumentative reading and writing. Sixty-three freshman and sophomore students with no prior argumentative reading and writing education participated in a design case study to evaluate the software in classrooms. Thirty-four students were assigned to a class in which each student developed a knowledge map after underlining and/or highlighting a text with the software, while twenty-nine students were assigned to a class in which they simply wrote their essays after underlining and/or highlighting the text without creating knowledge maps. After receiving an instruction regarding a simplified Toulmin’s model followed by instructions for the software usage in argumentative reading and writing along with reading one training text, the students read the target text and developed their essays. The results revealed that students who drew a knowledge map based on the underlining and/or highlighting of the target text developed more argumentative essays than those who did not draw maps. Further analyses revealed that developing knowledge maps fostered an ability to capture the target text’s argument, and linking students’ ideas to the text’s argument directly on the knowledge map helped students develop more constructive essays. Accordingly, we discussed additional necessary scaffolds, such as automatic argument detection and collaborative learning functions, for improving the students’ use of appropriate reading and writing strategies. 相似文献
5.
The use of argumentative strategies that promote the defense of well-grounded personal arguments contributes to the development of a critical, ethical and political thought that leads to responsible and socially committed people. Based on the quality of the produced arguments in philosophical essays, this work evaluates the potential application of a cooperative learning method – the constructive controversy – for the development of argumentative skills in secondary school students in philosophy. The quality of the arguments was evaluated through the analysis of a total of 144 philosophical essays produced by the students over a school year. The results point to the advantages of using this method over more traditional ones in the acquisition of argumentative skills. 相似文献
6.
As English-only efforts continue in the US schooling system, dual-language programs have served as attempts to preserve students’ home language. An after-school, dual-language, Spanish–English, mathematics program, Los Rayos was developed in a predominantly Mexican/Mexican–American neighborhood in Chicago. As participant observers with a sociocultural perspective, we explored the linguistic and personal resources used by participating 4th grade bilingual Latina/o students. We found that students used imaginative, playful, and hybrid linguistic resources to make sense of and solve probability tasks when engaged within a zone of mathematical practice. Results challenge narrow perspectives on bilingual students’ linguistic resources. Language implications are discussed. 相似文献
7.
In a longitudinal design, 51 low-achieving adolescents’ development in writing proficiency from Grades 7 to 9 was measured. There were 25 native-Dutch and 26 language-minority students. In addition, the roles of (1) linguistic knowledge, (2) metacognitive knowledge, and (3) linguistic fluency in predicting both the level and development of writing proficiency were assessed. Low-achieving students improved in writing proficiency, the language-minority students more so than the native-Dutch students. Regarding the level of writing proficiency, individual differences between low achieving adolescents could be accounted for by receptive vocabulary, grammatical knowledge, and speed of sentence verification, suggesting that these are important components in low-achieving adolescents’ writing. Regarding development in writing proficiency, grammatical knowledge predicted variation between low-achieving students. Explanations and educational implications of these findings are discussed. 相似文献
8.
The aims of this paper are twofold. First, we present, justify, and characterise an instrument for analysing students’ argumentative reasoning developed from Walton’s ideas. Then, from the analysis of students’ argumentative discussion about a socio-scientific controversy, we identify the advantages and disadvantages of using the instrument. The results show that the analysis of students’ argumentative reasoning require nine stages, which have logical and pragmatic criteria that should be used in order to decrease the subjectivity of the analysis. The analysis sheds light on the characterisation of students’ argumentative reasoning by supporting the understanding of the move of students’ argumentative clusters, since it enables us to understand that: the argumentative quality depends on the relations between arguments and other statements; and an argumentative cluster can be developed according to the frequency of refutations or attacks by means of questions involving its constituents. This is because when arguments, questions, and/or claims are evaluated, the individuals have the possibility of bringing other reasons and/or arguments that support them in the discussion. Therefore, the main contribution of this study is the development of an instrument, based on dialectical principles, that contributes to analyse students’ argumentative discuss and to support discussions of their argumentative quality. 相似文献
9.
Kaplan认为亚洲学生不能进行抽象思维的语言表达,中国学生的议论文写作是螺旋迂回归纳式,而西方人的议论文写作是直线演绎的方式。论文采用回溯访谈方法,记录五个中国学生的写作过程。英语写作的思维方式受英语程度的影响,而不是简单地归结为东、西方议论文写作思维模式的不同。 相似文献
10.
英语议论文一直以来被认为是书面语篇中一种基本的文本模式。而英语议论文对外语学习者来说也是较难的一种语篇类型。来自于某高校英语专业学生的100篇英语议论文建成一个小型语料库,使用Hyland（1990）英语议论文分析框架对这100篇议论文进行语步结构模式分析。研究结果显示大部分学生的议论文都符合所选分析框架的三个步骤,分析结果也显示本语料库中的议论文有使用新语步的现象。 相似文献
11.
Taking a stance and supporting it are intrinsic acts in expository/argumentative essays. One question of interest to English teachers is how to improve the development and expression of support arguments in students' essays. This paper offers an answer by examining students' stance‐support strategies in informal argument, and identifying the associated lexico‐grammatical features that they use and do not use to realise those strategies. The paper will show how research findings on students' argument practices and use of language resources in an informal context can inform the process of deciding what thinking skills and language forms to teach in composition classes. 相似文献
12.
Writing skill is essential in English learning.The present thesis makes an attempt to explore the universal features of English coordinators in argumentative essays of the students in Pre-departure Training Department of BLCU.This is accomplished by conducting a contrastive analysis between the native speaker corpus and a self-built corpus based on the computerized corpora and database software tools.It will also find the difference and the degree of difference between the two corpora.And,it will be detecting the problems behind these performances and the relevant causes,while offering some corresponding solutions from the qualitative perspective.The study turns out that the Chinese English learners "misuse"and "overuse" English coordinators to a certain extent in the writing of argumentative essays compared with the native English speakers,which is mainly attributed to such factors as:language transfer,overgeneralization,the lack of the awareness of stylistic and different ways of thinking between eastern and western people. 相似文献
13.
Argumentation skills of secondary school students were evaluated in Finland ( n?=?290), France ( n?=?54), and England ( n?=?41). The data were collected from 4 tasks comprising 7 variables. The results indicated that most of the students had correctly justified arguments and conclusions, and composed clear claims and relevant arguments. However, many students had difficulties in recognising the main claim and arguments for it in an expository text, and in commenting analytically on an argumentative text. Thus the students possessed the prerequisites for argumentative reasoning and writing but need further practice in analytical and critical reading. 相似文献
14.
A widespread instructional practice in the teaching of argumentative writing is the use of writing samples or models during instructional conversations about what counts as “good argumentative writing.” In this article, we focus on a set of lessons in a high school English language arts classroom in order to gain insight into how a teacher’s use of writing samples contributed not only to what counts as “good argumentative writing” in that classroom, but how her instructional conversations with a group of 11th grade students revealed a shift in her “argumentative epistemologies” for teaching literature-related argumentative writing. We examine simultaneously the impact of instructional conversations on the evolution of the socially constructed definitions of good argumentative writing and the teacher’s shifting argumentative epistemologies by tracing the teacher’s socially constructed definitions of good argumentative writing in the instructional conversations around argumentative writing samples as they evolve and change over time.
The findings suggest that the interactional construction of “good argumentative writing” in instructional conversations was influenced by the broader instructional context (e.g., a testing regimen), by the teacher’s argumentative epistemologies for what counts as good writing, and by the conversational interaction of teachers and students in classroom lessons. 相似文献
15.
AbstractThe Faculty Writing Fellows Seminar was designed to develop university instructors’ skill in writing instruction: The 2015–16 professional development project offered faculty at Southern Oregon University a chance to read writing-pedagogy research, collaboratively develop their teaching practices, and—most importantly—put themselves in the shoes of student writers. The seminar had a positive impact on instructors’ teaching and students’ writing. Instructors showed growth in confidence, empathy, knowledge, and instruction. Their students’ essays outscored essays by students in nonparticipating instructors’ classes. The study argues for professional development that simultaneously builds pedagogical knowledge and skills and incorporates emotional and psychosocial aspects of teaching and learning. 相似文献
16.
The aim of this study was to test whether Cummins’ Linguistic Interdependence Hypothesis (LIH) might also apply to writing, by determining to what extent writers’ text quality, source use and argumentation behavior are related in L1 and L2, how effective writers’ behavior is and whether their L2 proficiency influenced the relations between them. To answer these questions, twenty students wrote four short argumentative source based essays each in L1 (Dutch) and four in L2 (English). A within-writer cross-linguistic comparison of their texts revealed that their L1 and L2 writing competencies appear to be related. Furthermore, writers’ source use behavior differed to some extent between languages, but the strong positive correlations found between source use features suggest that in most cases this was more a person than a language effect. Similarly, for argumentation behavior, results showed some learner specific features (e.g. inclusion of titles and reference lists), but differences between languages for others (e.g. the inclusion of both arguments and counter-arguments). Effects of the different source use and argumentation features studied on text quality were limited and no clear effect of L2 proficiency on writers’ behavior or their influence on text quality were found. Overall, in line with earlier research, these findings provide some additional support for Cummins’ LIH and the idea that writers might have a common underlying source for writing related knowledge and practices which they can apply in multiple languages. 相似文献
17.
The analysis of argumentative discourse produced by 68 students aged 10–17 reveals two facets: argumentative discourse involves both dialogal and argumentative operations. When the dialogue goal calls for the speakers to reach a compromise on a debate topic, they are prompted to negotiate the discourse object: negotiation on content of the exchanges (argumentative cooperativeness which presupposes an articulation of each partner’s arguments with the other partner’) and on the level of the formal argumentative markers of negotiation. The key finding is that dialogal and argumentative operations are functionally linked: the percentage of markers of utterance involvement, axiological forms and modalizations is much higher in argumentative cooperative discourse as compared to discourse where cooperativeness is only dialogal (in which the speakers merely regulate turn taking and maintain thematic continuity). Furthermore, the differentiation in frequency of use of negotiation markers as a function of type of cooperativeness increases with age. Argumentative dialogue thus emerges as a complex form of language behavior which brings interconnected language operations into play. 相似文献
18.
文章运用语篇分析方法,以《大学英语》精读课文中的一篇议论文为例进行分析,引导学生认识议论文的篇章结构,了解语篇的衔接与连贯以及议论文的写作技巧,旨在帮助学生写好英语议论文。 相似文献
19.
The development of argumentative writing is studied here by examining the structural organization of argumentative texts. It is assumed that the ability to construct supporting relationships, that is, a conclusion statement supported by argument statements, is acquired gradually with age. The following stages of acquisition are postulated: (1) a preargumentation stage, where at first no explicit position is stated, and then an explicit position is stated but is not supported by an argument; (2) a minimal argumentation stage, where a position is explicitly taken and supported by one argument; and (3) an elaborated argumentation stage, where at least two unrelated supporting arguments are used, and then two related arguments are used. Two corpora were gathered under similar conditions: collective debate in the classroom, followed by individual essays written on the chosen topic. The first corpus was produced by 147 children aged 7 to 14, and a group of 34 college students. The second corpus included the protocols of 92 children aged 11 to 16 the essays were graded for the presence or absence of each structural level, and then classified at the highest structural level exhibited. The resulting classification largely confirmed the hypothesized order for the stages of argumentative development. The minimal argumentative structure (standpoint + one supporting argument) was mastered by nearly 90% of the 7 and 8 year-olds. The most elaborate structural level in our model (two related arguments) was attained later: less than one out of four 7–8 year olds versus three out of four beyond age 14. Techniques involving more complex argumentative relations such as refutations and counterarguments, or restriction of one argument by another, are mastered even later and seem to be strongly linked to the nature of the issues under debate. Three main conclusions can be drawn from these results: precocious argumentative skills exist in children before age 11 or 12, argumentative discourse complexity continues to increase up to age 14 and beyond, and the characteristics of the referential domain of argumentation have an impact on this structural elaboration process. 相似文献
20.
The education of language-minority students is a constitutional right. Throughout this article, the authors synthesize recent literature addressing two main questions: (1) What are secondary teachers’ attitudes toward English language learners (ELLs)? and (2) To what extent are secondary teachers being prepared to teach content effectively to this student population? Secondary teachers’ attitudes about ELLs vary, but are generally positive. The lack of teacher preparation—especially at the secondary level—to teach ELLs effectively is widespread. Thus, it is not surprising that secondary teachers feel ill-prepared to scaffold or differentiate instruction to meet these students’ language and academic needs. Since attitudes, preparation, and practice are interrelated, the authors also provide numerous implications for future practice at various levels: teacher-preparation programs, school district support, and classroom teaching. 相似文献
|
