Bolstering students’ written argumentation by refining an effective discourse intervention: negotiating the fine line between flexibility and fidelity

Carla Firetto, P. Karen Murphy, Jeffrey A. Greene, Mengyi Li, Liwei Wei, Cristin Montalbano, Brendan Hendrick, Rachel M.V. Croninger

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

1 Citation (Scopus)

Abstract

Effective interventions are needed to bolster students’ argumentation capacities, an area in which they consistently struggle. Quality Talk (QT) is an approach to small-group classroom discussion shown to support students’ oral argumentation with preliminary evidence that it may also bolster students’ written argumentation. Teachers often must adapt interventions to their local context, balancing needed flexibility with sufficient adherence to fidelity to reach expected efficacy. The present study was conducted over one school year with two fifth-grade teachers and their 46 students. In Phase I, two participating teachers implemented a refined version of QT, and we examined the effects on students’ oral and written argumentation performance. While typical gains in students’ oral argumentation performance were evidenced, students’ written argumentation did not improve to the degree expected, particularly in terms of performance with unfamiliar texts. In Phase II, both teachers reincorporated a component of QT (i.e., regular post-discussion written argumentation practice) they had adapted in Phase I, and one teacher added a new written argumentation scaffold designed to further bolster students’ transfer from oral to written argumentation. By the end of the study, students from both classes evidenced growth in written argumentation, but the students from the class receiving the writing scaffold outperformed comparison class students with large effects. Findings underscore the importance of including regular post-discussion written argumentation practice and illustrate the added value of a new written argumentation scaffold, while also contributing to a better understanding of how to balance flexibility and fidelity for efficacious QT implementation.

Original languageEnglish (US)
JournalInstructional Science
DOIs
StateAccepted/In press - Jan 1 2018

Fingerprint

Negotiating
argumentation
flexibility
Students
discourse
student
teacher
performance
value added
small group

Keywords

  • Argumentative writing
  • Oral argumentation
  • Quality Talk
  • Small-group discussion

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Education
  • Developmental and Educational Psychology

Cite this

Bolstering students’ written argumentation by refining an effective discourse intervention : negotiating the fine line between flexibility and fidelity. / Firetto, Carla; Murphy, P. Karen; Greene, Jeffrey A.; Li, Mengyi; Wei, Liwei; Montalbano, Cristin; Hendrick, Brendan; Croninger, Rachel M.V.

In: Instructional Science, 01.01.2018.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Firetto, Carla ; Murphy, P. Karen ; Greene, Jeffrey A. ; Li, Mengyi ; Wei, Liwei ; Montalbano, Cristin ; Hendrick, Brendan ; Croninger, Rachel M.V. / Bolstering students’ written argumentation by refining an effective discourse intervention : negotiating the fine line between flexibility and fidelity. In: Instructional Science. 2018.
@article{f5bd4c4046674fe3b67fa7292532659d,
title = "Bolstering students’ written argumentation by refining an effective discourse intervention: negotiating the fine line between flexibility and fidelity",
abstract = "Effective interventions are needed to bolster students’ argumentation capacities, an area in which they consistently struggle. Quality Talk (QT) is an approach to small-group classroom discussion shown to support students’ oral argumentation with preliminary evidence that it may also bolster students’ written argumentation. Teachers often must adapt interventions to their local context, balancing needed flexibility with sufficient adherence to fidelity to reach expected efficacy. The present study was conducted over one school year with two fifth-grade teachers and their 46 students. In Phase I, two participating teachers implemented a refined version of QT, and we examined the effects on students’ oral and written argumentation performance. While typical gains in students’ oral argumentation performance were evidenced, students’ written argumentation did not improve to the degree expected, particularly in terms of performance with unfamiliar texts. In Phase II, both teachers reincorporated a component of QT (i.e., regular post-discussion written argumentation practice) they had adapted in Phase I, and one teacher added a new written argumentation scaffold designed to further bolster students’ transfer from oral to written argumentation. By the end of the study, students from both classes evidenced growth in written argumentation, but the students from the class receiving the writing scaffold outperformed comparison class students with large effects. Findings underscore the importance of including regular post-discussion written argumentation practice and illustrate the added value of a new written argumentation scaffold, while also contributing to a better understanding of how to balance flexibility and fidelity for efficacious QT implementation.",
keywords = "Argumentative writing, Oral argumentation, Quality Talk, Small-group discussion",
author = "Carla Firetto and Murphy, {P. Karen} and Greene, {Jeffrey A.} and Mengyi Li and Liwei Wei and Cristin Montalbano and Brendan Hendrick and Croninger, {Rachel M.V.}",
year = "2018",
month = "1",
day = "1",
doi = "10.1007/s11251-018-9477-x",
language = "English (US)",
journal = "Instructional Science",
issn = "0020-4277",
publisher = "Springer Netherlands",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Bolstering students’ written argumentation by refining an effective discourse intervention

T2 - negotiating the fine line between flexibility and fidelity

AU - Firetto, Carla

AU - Murphy, P. Karen

AU - Greene, Jeffrey A.

AU - Li, Mengyi

AU - Wei, Liwei

AU - Montalbano, Cristin

AU - Hendrick, Brendan

AU - Croninger, Rachel M.V.

PY - 2018/1/1

Y1 - 2018/1/1

N2 - Effective interventions are needed to bolster students’ argumentation capacities, an area in which they consistently struggle. Quality Talk (QT) is an approach to small-group classroom discussion shown to support students’ oral argumentation with preliminary evidence that it may also bolster students’ written argumentation. Teachers often must adapt interventions to their local context, balancing needed flexibility with sufficient adherence to fidelity to reach expected efficacy. The present study was conducted over one school year with two fifth-grade teachers and their 46 students. In Phase I, two participating teachers implemented a refined version of QT, and we examined the effects on students’ oral and written argumentation performance. While typical gains in students’ oral argumentation performance were evidenced, students’ written argumentation did not improve to the degree expected, particularly in terms of performance with unfamiliar texts. In Phase II, both teachers reincorporated a component of QT (i.e., regular post-discussion written argumentation practice) they had adapted in Phase I, and one teacher added a new written argumentation scaffold designed to further bolster students’ transfer from oral to written argumentation. By the end of the study, students from both classes evidenced growth in written argumentation, but the students from the class receiving the writing scaffold outperformed comparison class students with large effects. Findings underscore the importance of including regular post-discussion written argumentation practice and illustrate the added value of a new written argumentation scaffold, while also contributing to a better understanding of how to balance flexibility and fidelity for efficacious QT implementation.

AB - Effective interventions are needed to bolster students’ argumentation capacities, an area in which they consistently struggle. Quality Talk (QT) is an approach to small-group classroom discussion shown to support students’ oral argumentation with preliminary evidence that it may also bolster students’ written argumentation. Teachers often must adapt interventions to their local context, balancing needed flexibility with sufficient adherence to fidelity to reach expected efficacy. The present study was conducted over one school year with two fifth-grade teachers and their 46 students. In Phase I, two participating teachers implemented a refined version of QT, and we examined the effects on students’ oral and written argumentation performance. While typical gains in students’ oral argumentation performance were evidenced, students’ written argumentation did not improve to the degree expected, particularly in terms of performance with unfamiliar texts. In Phase II, both teachers reincorporated a component of QT (i.e., regular post-discussion written argumentation practice) they had adapted in Phase I, and one teacher added a new written argumentation scaffold designed to further bolster students’ transfer from oral to written argumentation. By the end of the study, students from both classes evidenced growth in written argumentation, but the students from the class receiving the writing scaffold outperformed comparison class students with large effects. Findings underscore the importance of including regular post-discussion written argumentation practice and illustrate the added value of a new written argumentation scaffold, while also contributing to a better understanding of how to balance flexibility and fidelity for efficacious QT implementation.

KW - Argumentative writing

KW - Oral argumentation

KW - Quality Talk

KW - Small-group discussion

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85056716248&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85056716248&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1007/s11251-018-9477-x

DO - 10.1007/s11251-018-9477-x

M3 - Article

AN - SCOPUS:85056716248

JO - Instructional Science

JF - Instructional Science

SN - 0020-4277

ER -