Abstract
Purpose The study sought to examine the effectiveness of a dialogue-based argument intervention in enhancing Chinese middle school students’ integration of conflicting information from multiple texts in argumentative writing. Design/Approach/Methods The study followed a quasi-experimental design with pre-assessment and post-assessment, comparing seventh-grade intervention and non-participating control students’ individual post-assessment writing performance on a non-discourse topic involving genetically modified foods. Findings Intervention students outperformed control students in integrating textual evidence inconsistent with one's position. Specifically, intervention students were more successful in integrating position-inconsistent information with their prior knowledge or integrating multiple pieces of position-inconsistent information from one text or across multiple texts. Intervention students were also more successful in integrating two pieces of conflicting information. When judging text trustworthiness, intervention students trusted a primary source to a greater extent and showed greater gains in taking into consideration the epistemological aspect, as well as one's own or a text's position on the issue. Originality/Value The present study demonstrated the effectiveness of the dialogue-based argument curriculum in promoting Chinese middle school students’ ability to write integrated essays from multiple texts.
Published Version
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a call