Argumentative Writing Research Articles

Effectiveness of Grammarly Application on the Students' Argumentative Writing Progress

This research aims to describe the effectiveness of Grammarly feedback on students' progress in argumentative writing. Grammarly is an online automated writing evaluation tool that focuses on giving feedback on the language used in any type of writing. The tool was used in argumentative writing courses for 34 third-semester students at a state university in Mataram. The research used a descriptive qualitative method to collect data on the students' perceptions. The data was collected using validated questionnaires with a four-point Likert scale and supported by interviews. The findings show that students generally had positive perceptions of Grammarly. They found it effective for identifying and correcting errors in their writing, especially in grammar, punctuation, and sentence structure. They considered the correctness feature to be the most helpful. Additionally, they believed that using Grammarly improved their motivation and grammatical competence in argumentative writing. However, some participants had negative perceptions of Grammarly's weaknesses, particularly in providing feedback on the arrangement of thesis statements, counter-arguments, and the use of evidence in argumentative writing.

The Effectiveness of a Brain-Based Program in Developing Al Azhar EFL University Students' Argumentative Writing

The Effectiveness of a Brain-Based Program in Developing Al Azhar EFL University Students' Argumentative Writing

The Practical Study of Genre-Based Teaching Approach in Argumentative Essay Reading and Writing for High School English

This paper discusses the integration model of argumentative essay reading and writing under the genre-based teaching approach in high school English instruction, and elaborates on the three implementation steps of this teaching model. Through practical verification, applying the genre-based teaching approach to English reading and writing instruction can effectively improve students overall reading and writing abilities.

Argumentative Writing for Students With Disabilities in Inclusive Science Classes: A Pilot Study

As larger numbers of students with disabilities (SWDs) are being included in general education or inclusive science classes, many of them experience difficulties with scientific reasoning and argumentation. In inclusive science classes, there are greater demands to learn more complex concepts and use scientific practices, such as argumentative writing with evidence. In addition, SWDs struggle with writing tasks, compounding their difficulties, particularly when asked to incorporate science content into their writing. To address these writing difficulties, an argumentative intervention was developed that was comprised of an argumentative strategy and graphic organizer that assessed students’ writing performance on an argumentative essay. The results of this pilot study found that experimental students improved their argumentative writing from pre to post writing tasks and experimental students in the argumentative intervention group outperformed control students. In addition, SWDs who used the intervention outperformed control group students that included both SWDs and students without disabilities. Limitations of the study are discussed, as well as implications for teachers

The Analysis of Schematic Structure in Students’ Argumentative Essays

Argumentative essay is an important component in English writing for students in China. The present study investigated the schematic structure of a higher vocational college students’ argumentative writings and its pedagogical implementation in teaching and learning English writing in China context. This study utilized a descriptive qualitative approach to analyze fifteen English argumentative essays of students from a higher vocational college in Anhui, China. The schematic structure was analyzed based on Lee’s (2006) model under Systemic Functional Linguistics. The findings showed that when writing argumentative essays, higher vocational college students in China centered on giving ‘Thesis’, ‘Arguments’ and ‘Reinforcement’ stages. Some essays including high-graded essays did not present the ‘Identification’ stage and many essays ignored the ‘Recommendation’ stage. For the ‘Arguments’ stage, middle-graded and low-graded essays did not exhibit the ‘Point’ and ‘Elaboration’ steps clearly. As many students failed to write reasonable and persuasive argumentative essays, the pedagogical implication is that teachers should help students be conscious of the schematic structure of different writing genres, and give students more opportunities to practice writing.

The Power to Move the Eiffel Tower: Conceptual Metaphor and Persuasion in L2 Argumentative Writing

This article analyses conceptual metaphors produced in argumentative writing by learners of English as a second language (L2). Founded on the Conceptual Metaphor Theory, it explores the linguistic metaphorical expressions which reflect an underlying conceptual metaphor. By drawing on Critical Metaphor Analysis, this research adopts a qualitative approach to analysing the concealed motivations behind a conceptual metaphor use. The data of this study comprise five argumentative essay samples collected from foundation year students at a private university in Malaysia. This study reveals how a conceptual metaphor is evoked to frame an argument in a way that is advantageous to the participants, particularly in establishing their stance on the proposition that social media is advantageous rather than disadvantageous to its users. Seven conceptual metaphors identified from the five samples of writing are related to social media, namely global mass gathering, loudspeaker, free society, accommodation, teacher, strong force and maze. While the first six metaphors serve as rhetorical tools to aid the participants in establishing arguments, the last metaphor is raised in the counterclaim section to illustrate how the opposition could equally rely on conceptual metaphors to establish its viewpoint. In instances where the metaphors are deployed as rhetorical devices, the participants’ covert intention to convince readers of their standpoint is achieved by utilising the conceptual metaphors to illuminate abstract ideas, arouse positive or negative emotions in readers, indicate positive or negative evaluations and evoke an ideology.

Students’ Motivation to Write Argumentative Essay Writing

Students’ Motivation to Write Argumentative Essay Writing

Using an Online Collaborative Learning Program Based on the ‎Cognitive Apprenticeship Model for Developing Student Teachers’ EFL Argumentative Writing and Critical Thinking Skills

Using an Online Collaborative Learning Program Based on the ‎Cognitive Apprenticeship Model for Developing Student Teachers’ EFL Argumentative Writing and Critical Thinking Skills

Enhancing Argumentative Writing Skills via the Process-Genre based Approach: A Quasi-Experimental Study among University Students in Ecuador

This research project sought to examine the influence of the process-genre based approach on the enhancement of argumentative writing skills among B2 level English as a Foreign Language (EFL) learners at the Language Center of UNIANDES-CTT de los Andes University. Through a quasi-experimental design, a population of 45 participants was separated into two groups: the experimental group comprising 23 students and the control group consisting of 22 students. Pre and post-tests, modeled after the essay writing section of the FCE standardized Cambridge Exam, were administered and assessed based on four criteria (Content, Communicative achievement, Organization, and Language) in alignment with the B2 level rubric. By employing a mixed research methodology, this study integrated quantitative analysis of test outcomes with qualitative inquiry to derive insights from result interpretation, culminating in conclusions drawn from a comprehensive understanding of the broader context and participants' experiences. Statistical analysis through paired t-tests substantiated that the experimental group demonstrated notably superior progress in argumentative written expression, thereby corroborating the alternative hypothesis. The results underscored the efficacy of the process-genre based approach in improving students' proficiency in argumentative writing. Significantly, this approach furnished scaffolding for writing instruction, facilitating the formulation and execution of coherent and cohesive argumentative essays. It boosted learners' confidence and self-esteem, while also refining strategic planning, organizational, and meticulous editing skills. In conclusion, the integration of the process-genre based approach positively influenced students' writing capabilities, underscoring its pivotal role in skill cultivation and fostering an enriching environment for refining argumentative writing competencies.

A Study of Interactional Metadiscourse Bundles in Chinese College Students' Argumentative Writing

A Study of Interactional Metadiscourse Bundles in Chinese College Students' Argumentative Writing

Critical and Creative Literacy in Argumentative Writing Course: Students’ Needs

Critical and creative literacy (CCL) is crucial for students as it focuses on critical and creative thinking processes and the object of what to think in balance concern. While many teaching models might integrate critical literacy in teaching English, its practical implementation in argumentative writing course is not well-explored. In an argumentative writing course, critical reading tasks of argumentative writing models can facilitate the thinking process and their English development for constructing a new one with a localized issues for contextualized the learning. Therefore, this study aimed to explore the students' learning needs to improve their CCL level as well as their argumentative writing skills development. The study involved 124 university students from four universities in Lombok, Indonesia, using a survey-style research design. Data was collected through questionnaires and in-depth interviews and analyzed qualitatively with a five-Likert scale analysis method. The analysis revealed significant gaps between the current and desired conditions of students' CCL skills integrated into the argumentative writing course, indicating high needs. The results of the needs analysis could be used to develop a conceptual framework for promoting CCL integration into the course.

Additive and Causal Connectives in GFL Argumentative Writing

The main objective of foreign language learning and teaching is the development of communicative language competence. One of its key components is discourse competence which consists of three main elements: cohesion, coherence and text composition (Bagarić Medve and Pavičić Takač 2013). The development of writing skills is acknowledged as one of the main challenges in foreign language learning and teaching, which includes the appropriate usage of cohesive devices in order to tackle the semantic relationships within a text. In German, explicit cohesive devices refer to coordinating conjunctions, subordinating conjunctions and adverbial connectors. While a bulk of previous research has focused on English as a foreign language, the studies conducted among the learners of German are still scarce Earlier studies (e.g. Breindl 2016; Vaakanainen and Maijala 2022) pointed to a limited range of variations within the same semantic group and an inappropriate use of connectives when comparing their usage between native speakers and learners of German as a foreign language (GFL). The aim of the present study is to analyse the frequency, variation and errors of causal and additive connectives (coordinating conjunctions, subordinating conjunctions and adverbial connectors) in GFL argumentative writing. The corpus consists of 43 argumentative essays written by Croatian GFL students at B2 level. The findings concerning frequency show that additional connectives are most frequently used within the whole corpus, whereas causal connectives take third place. The additive coordinating conjunction und is the most frequent additive item, the subordinating conjunction weil is the most frequently used causal item. The results connected to variation point to a wider range in the use of additional connectives in comparison to causal, but also reveal more error recognition within the additive semantic group. The most common types of errors concerning connectors detected in the corpus are as follows: syntax, meaning, spelling/punctuation, redundancy and register. In order to utilize these research findings aiming at improving the writing skills of GFL students in the learning/instructional process, practical implications are presented at the end.

A Corpus-based Investigation on the English Majors’ Use of Cohesive Devices in Argumentative Writing

Many factors affect the quality of English writing. Among them, the cohesion of discourse has been an important topic in writing research. This study aims to investigate the use of local, global, and text cohesion features in Chinese English majors’ argumentative writing and how EFL learners of higher proficiency (Grade 4) develop their written discourse competence as compared with the lower proficiency (Grade 1). The Written English Corpus of Chinese Learners (WECCL 2.0) was adopted as the main corpus. The research finds that connectives and lexical overlaps are more frequently used in English writing, and a tiny minority of cohesive devices showed growth across the two grade levels. The findings provide important insights for researchers and teachers on second language acquisition, English writing development and English writing teaching.

Online PBPD and Coaching for Teaching SRSD Argumentative Writing in Middle School Classrooms

Teachers report a need for professional development in order to feel more confident and be more effective in providing writing instruction and intensive intervention to support middle school students. This study investigates the impacts of online practice-based professional development (PBPD) and coaching for self-regulated strategy development (SRSD) argumentative writing instruction on teachers’ implementation of the instruction. Using a pre-test–post-test design, the study also examined the effects of the SRSD instruction on students’ argumentative writing from source texts. Five middle school teachers from three regions across the United States participated in the PBPD and implemented SRSD with 55 middle school students with high-incidence disabilities or below-proficient writing skills. Following PBPD, teachers implemented the SRSD argumentative writing instruction with high adherence to dosage, fidelity of implementation, and quality. Student writing was scored for argumentative genre elements, holistic quality, total words written, and transition words. Results demonstrate that students improved on all measures. In addition, students reported feeling confident in their argumentative writing abilities. Teachers and students reported high social validity for the intervention. The benefits found in this research study provide a strong foundation supporting the application of comprehensive online PBPD with follow-up coaching to support teacher implementation of SRSD.

Process-Genre Approach: Iranian EFL Learners’ Argumentative Writing as an Example

Comparing the effect of implementing process versus process-genre approach on Iranian EFL students’ argumentative writing was the primary aim of the study. Three discourse features were selected for analysis (i.e., organizationpattern, coherence, and cohesion). In a quasi-experimental design, ninety-two EFL learners (from a subject pool of 117) were selected based on the BABEL test at upper-intermediate level in the age range of 18-36. The chosen participants were randomly allocated to an experimental group (N = 47) given process-genre approach instruction and a control group (N = 45) that was instructed utilizing the process approach. Then, two post-tests were taken: one right away and the other later. The results showed that the distinction between the two groups regarding three discourse features was statistically significant and the effects of process-genre approach retained in delayed post-test. The findings suggested that the integration of genre with writing processes can enhance Iranian EFL learners’ argumentative writing. The pedagogical implications of the study are also discussed. Keywords: Argumentative Writing, Coherence, Cohesive devices, Organization patterns, Process-Genre Approach.

Investigating Attitudes, Perceptions, and Challenges of Moroccan EFL Teachers' Incorporation of Critical Thinking in Argumentative Writing Instructions

Investigating Attitudes, Perceptions, and Challenges of Moroccan EFL Teachers' Incorporation of Critical Thinking in Argumentative Writing Instructions

A Constructivist Based Program For Developing EFL Argumentative Writing and Self-Efficacy among Secondary Stage Students in Palestine

A Constructivist Based Program For Developing EFL Argumentative Writing and Self-Efficacy among Secondary Stage Students in Palestine

The Application of the Hamburger Structural Writing Method in Teaching Argumentative Essay Writing in Junior High School English

Writing is an important way of language output, which can objectively reflect students’ comprehensive language skills. Writing argumentative essays is one of the effective ways to develop students’ thinking quality. Therefore, the article takes “Unit 3 Could You Please Clean Your Room?” of the PEP edition as an example, and applies the “Hamburger structural writing method” to the teaching and writing process, to cultivate students’ problem analysis, logical reasoning, viewpoint expression, and critical thinking, and ultimately to improve the effect of English writing.

Crafting Compelling Argumentative Writing for Undergraduates: Exploring the Nexus of Digital Annotations, Conversational Agents, and Collaborative Concept Maps

Argumentative writing is a fundamental aspect of undergraduate students’ academic and scientific writing related to critical thinking and problem-solving skills. However, previous studies have shown that students face various difficulties with argumentative writing, such as unclear and illogical ideas, less-structured arguments, and unbalanced interpretation of issues, data, and evidence. This study aims to improve the argumentative writing skills of undergraduate students by integrating computer-supported argumentative writing tools, such as annotation, conversational agents (CAs), and collaborative concept maps, into an online learning management system. Since the study was conducted during the COVID-19 pandemic, these tools can support meaningful learning activities and investigation in argumentative writing. The researchers divided sixty participants into the experimental group ( N = 30) and the control group ( N = 30). The results showed that the experimental group’s writing achievements outperformed the control group, and the three tools effectively improved the five elements of argumentative writing, including claims, grounds, warrants, backings, and rebuttal. Furthermore, a deep analysis found that the number of annotations, valid CAs’ responses, and argument nodes on collaborative concept maps can significantly predict students’ argumentative writing development. Moreover, students perceived that the incorporated tools could effectively improve their argumentative writing skills.

Lexical Bundles in the Argumentative Essays of Vietnamese and American Student Writers

This study examines lexical bundles used in argumentative writings by Vietnamese EFL university students-L2 learners and American university students-L1 learners to see how two groups use bundles and identify problems which L2 learners face. Two corpora including writings by L2 and L1 learners are collected. By using Biber et al.’s structural taxonomy (1999, 2004) and Hyland’s functional framework (2008a), we analyse the structures and functions of the four-word bundles used by the two group writings to see any differences. Compared with L1 learners, L2 learners use a wider range of bundles. Regarding structures, L2 learners overuse VP-based bundles, while L1 learners use VP, NP and PP-based bundles flexibly. For functions, L1 learners prefer to use participant-oriented bundles, while L2 learners tend to employ researchoriented bundles. The text-oriented bundles are the least commonly occurring ones in the two groups’ essays. To understand how L2 learners overuse bundles in their writings, a qualitative method is used to examine each essay. Some underlying explanations for the overuse might be side effects of teaching and lack of knowledge of the bundle. A pedagogical implication of teaching L2 learners to use bundles in writing class is suggested to help their writing more convincingly and academically.