“Could They Do It Differently?”: Narrative and Argumentative Changes in Students’ Writing Following Discussion of “Hot” Historical Issues

Abstract

A group of 64 Israeli twelfth-grade students of two different ethnic backgrounds participated in an experiment exploring the effects of argumentative design and social identity on the learning of a charged, ethnicity-related historical controversy. Students were divided into two learning conditions: an argumentative-disciplinary condition and a conventional textbook-based control condition. Students wrote short essays about Israel's “Melting Pot” policy of immigration absorption, prior to and after evaluation of historical sources and discussion. In the argumentative-disciplinary condition the final argumentative level of writing and the frequencies of stand and plot change were higher than in the control essays. As for confirmation bias, primary plot, stand, and argumentative level of pre-essays predicted final outcomes in the conventional textbook-based learning condition; no such relation existed in the argumentative-disciplinary condition. Narratives from the different ethnic groups differed in the frequency, direction, and degree of change, all toward improved in-group image. The design decisions toward the facilitation of argumentative activity seemed to facilitate narrative change, while social identity needs seemed to motivate it.

Notes

Due to the low frequency of students who reported interethnic origin, we did not consider them as a distinct statistical group. Instead they were asked to write which ethnic group they would ascribe themselves if they had to. Interestingly, 6 out of 7 ascribed themselves to the Ashkenazi ethnic group. Due to the structure of the Israeli educational system, neither Arabs nor orthodox religious Jews participated in the study since these students are educated in separate systems.

Five dyslectic participants dictated their compositions to a researcher or a tape recorder.

A possible option of teaching the conventional condition participants additional topics to fill up equal activity time was discarded both for reasons of time economy and for fear that additional unrelated cognitive load would be disruptive to learning.

Reliability scale for inter-rater agreement; over plot schemes α = 0.96, over stand α = 0. 94, over certainty α = 0.86 all results at p < .001.

Independent samples t-test for certainty (comparing negative stand with the rest) t = –2.67, p = .016. (M = 1.23, SD = .72, M = 1.82, SD = .39).

The similar frequency does not mean similar cases; cross-tabulation revealed plot change did not match stand change in 7 of the 18 cases.

Linear regression was performed for the predictive force of primary stand over positive and negative evidence separately, to prevent a canceling out of opposite ratings.

McNemar's exact test (based on frequency of changes regardless of direction, counting cases above and below diagonal axis in the cross-tabulation of pre-post results of the same category) proved significant only in the argumentative-Ashkenazi group p = .022. Paired samples t-tests comparing stand in the first and final narratives (Bonferroni correction lowering significance level to p = .012) also attested to a significant positive change (from M = 1.65, SD = .87 to M = 2.30, SD = .77) only in the argumentative-Ashkenazi group (t = 2.86, p = .011, Cohen's d = 0.54).

Her mean source ratings (3.44) compared to the full sample (M = 3.66, SD = 0.34) in a one-sample t-test produced significant effect; t[63] = 5.02, p < .001.

Tara and Gadi come from Ashkenazi families, while Naan from a Mizrahi one; the families of the three adolescents belong to the middle class.