Improving Written Argumentative Synthesis by Teaching the Integration of Conflicting Information from Multiple Sources

References

• Baker, M. J. (1999). Argumentation and constructive interaction. In J. E. B. Andriessen & P. Coirier (Eds), Foundation of argumentative text processing (pp. 179–202). Amsterdam, The Netherlands: Amsterdam University Press. doi:10.5117/9789053563403
   Google Scholar
• Baker, M., Quignard, M., Lund, K., & Séjourné, A. (2003). Computer-supported collaborative learning in the space of debate. In B. Wasson, S. Ludvigsen, & U. Hoppe (Eds), Designing for change in networked learning environments (pp. 11–20). Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Kluwer Academic. doi:10.1007/978-94-017-0195-2
   Google Scholar
• Boscolo, P., Arfé, B., & Quarisa, M. (2007). Improving the quality of students´ academic writing: An intervention study. Studies in Higher Education, 32, 419–438. doi:10.1080/03075070701476092
   Google Scholar
• Braaksma, M. A. H., Rijlaarsdam, G., Van den Bergh, H., & Van Hout-Wolters, B. H. A. M. (2004). Observational learning and its effects on the orchestration of writing processes. Cognition and Instruction, 22, 1–36. doi:10.1207/s1532690xci2201_1
   Google Scholar
• Bråten, I., & Strømsø, H. I. (2009). Effects of task instruction and personal epistemology on the understanding of multiple texts about climate change. Discourse Processes, 47, 1–31. doi:10.1080/01638530902959646
   Google Scholar
• Britt, M. A., & Sommer, J. (2004). Facilitating textual integration with macrostructure focusing tasks. Reading Psychology, 25(4), 313–339. doi:10.1080/02702710490522658
   Google Scholar
• Cerdán, R., & Vidal-Abarca, E. (2008). The effects of tasks on integrating information from multiple documents. Journal of Educational Psychology, 100, 209–222. doi:10.1037/0022-0663.100.1.209
   Google Scholar
• De La Paz, S., & Felton, M. K. (2010). Reading and writing from multiple source documents in history: Effects of strategy instruction with low to average high school writers. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 35, 174–192. doi:10.1016/j.cedpsych.2010.03.001
   Google Scholar
• Ferreti, R. P., & Lewis, W. E. (2013). Best practices in teaching argumentative writing. In S. Graham, C. A., MacArthur, & J. Fitzgerald (Eds.), Best practices in writing instruction (2nd ed., pp. 113–140). New York, NY: Guilford. doi:10.5860/choice.45-2158
   Google Scholar
• Flower, L., Stein, V., Ackerman, J., Kantz, M. J., McCormick, K., & Peck, W. C. (1990). Reading to write: Exploring a cognitive and social process. New York, NY: Oxford University Press, Oxford doi:10.2307/358232
   Google Scholar
• García-Mila, M., Gilabert, S., Erduran, S., & Felton, M. (2013). The effect of argumentative task goal on the quality of argumentative discourse. Science Education, 97, 497–523. doi:10.1002/sce.21057
   Google Scholar
• Graham, S., Harris, K. R., & McKeown, D. (2013). The writing of students with learning disabilities, meta-analysis of self-regulated strategy development writing intervention studies, and future directions: Redux. In H. L. Swanson, K. R. Harris, & S. Graham (Eds.), Handbook of learning disabilities (2nd ed., pp. 405–438). New York, NY: Guilford.
   Google Scholar
• Graham, S., & Perin, D. (2007). Writing next: Effective strategies to improve writing of adolescents in middle and high schools. New York, NY: Carnegie Corporation. Retrieved from http://all4ed.org/wp-content/uploads/2006/10/WritingNext.pdf
   Google Scholar
• Janssen, J., Erkens, G., Kirschner, P. A., & Kanselaar, G. (2010). Effects of representational guidance during computer-supported collaborative learning. Instructional Science, 38, 59–88. doi:10.1007/s11251-008-9078-1
   Google Scholar
• Kanselaar, G., Andriessen, J., Erkens, G., Jaspers, J., Prangsma, M., & Veerman, A. (2002). Co-construction of knowledge in computer supported collaborative argumentation (CSCA). In P. Kirschner (Ed.), Three worlds of CSCL: Can we support CSCL? (pp. 93–130). Heerlen, The Netherlands: Open Universiteit.
   Google Scholar
• Kuhn, D. (1999). A developmental model of critical thinking. Educational Researcher, 28, 16–26. doi:10.2307/1177186 https://doi.org/10.3102/0013189X028002016
   Google Scholar
• Kuhn, D. (2005). Education for thinking. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Kuhn, D., & Crowell, A. (2011). Dialogic argumentation as a vehicle for developing young adolescents' thinking. Psychological Science, 22, 545–552. doi:10.1177/0956797611402512
   Google Scholar
• Kuhn, D., & Weinstock, M. (2002). What is epistemological thinking and why does it matter? In B. K. Hofer & P. R. Pintrich (Ed.), Personal epistemology: The psychology of beliefs about knowledge and knowing (pp. 121–144). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum. doi:10.4324/9781410604316
   Google Scholar
• Mateos, M., Cuevas, I., Martín, E., Martín, A., Echeita, G., & Luna, M. (2011). Reading to write an argumentation: The role of epistemological, reading and writing beliefs. Journal of Research in Reading, 34, 281–297. doi:10.1111/j.1467-9817.2010.01437.x
   Google Scholar
• Mateos, M., Villalón, R., De Dios, M. J., & Martín, E. (2007). Reading-and-writing tasks on different university degree courses: What do the students say they do? Studies in Higher Education, 32, 489–510. doi:10.1080/03075070701476183
   Google Scholar
• Nussbaum, E. M. (2008a). Using argumentation vee diagrams (AVDs) for promoting argument–counterargument integration in reflective writing. Journal of Educational Psychology, 100, 549–565. doi:10.1037/0022-0663.100.3.549
   Google Scholar
• Nussbaum, E. M. (2008b). Collaborative discourse, argumentation, and learning: Preface and literature review. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 33, 345–359. doi:10.1016/j.cedpsych.2008.06.001
   Google Scholar
• Nussbaum, E. M., & Edwards, O. V. (2011). Critical questions and argument stratagems: A framework for enhancing and analyzing students' reasoning practices. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 20, 443–488. doi:10.1080/10508406.2011.564567
   Google Scholar
• Nussbaum, E. M., & Schraw, G. (2007). Promoting argument–counterargument integration in students' writing. Journal of Experimental Education, 76, 59–92. doi:10.3200/jexe.76.1.59-92
   Google Scholar
• Perfetti, C. A., Rouet, J. F., & Britt, M. A. (1999). Toward a theory of documents representation. In H. Van Oostendorp & S. R. Goldman (Ed.), The construction on mental representation during reading (pp. 99–122). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum. doi:10.4324/9781410603050
   Google Scholar
• Raedts, M., Rijlaarsdam, G., Van Waes, L., & Daems, F. (2007). Observational learning through video-based models: Impact on students' accuracy of self-efficacy beliefs, task knowledge and writing performances. In G. Rijlaarsdam, P. Boscolo, & S. Hidi (Vol. Eds.), Studies in Writing, vol. 19, Writing and Motivation (pp. 219–238). Oxford, United Kingdom: Elsevier. doi:10.1108/s1572-6304(2006)0000019014.
   Google Scholar
• Reznitskaya, A., Anderson, C., McNurlen, B., Nguyen-Jahiel, K., Archodidou, A., & Kim, S. (2001). Influences of oral discussion on written argument. Discourse Processes, 32, 155–175. doi:10.1080/0163853x.2001.9651596
   Google Scholar
• Segev-Miller, R. (2004). Writing from sources: The effect of explicit instruction on college students' processes and products. L1-Educational Studies in Language and Literature, 4, 5–33. doi:10.1023/b:esll.0000033847.00732.af
   Google Scholar
• Segev-Miller, R. (2007). Cognitive processes in discourse synthesis: The case of intertextual processing strategies. In G. Rijlaarsdam, M. Torrance, L. Van Waes, & D. Galbraith (Vol. Eds.), Studies in Writing: Vol.20: Writing and cognition: Research and applications (pp. 231–250). Amsterdam, The Netherlands: Elsevier. doi:10.1108/s1572-6304(2007)0000020016
   Google Scholar
• Solé, I., Mateos, M., Martín, E., Miras, M., Castells, N., Cuevas, I., & Gracia, M. (2005). Lectura, escritura y adquisición de conocimientos en educación secundaria y educación universitaria [Reading, writing and knowledge adquisition in secondary and higher education]. Infancia y Aprendizaje, 28, 329–348. doi:10.1174/0210370054740241
   Google Scholar
• Song, Y., & Ferreti, R. P. (2013). Teaching critical questions about argumentation through the revision process: Effects of strategy instruction on college students' argumentative essays. Reading and Writing: An Interdisciplinary Journal, 26, 67–90. doi:10.1007/s11145-012-9381-8
   Google Scholar
• Spivey, N. N. (1997). Reading, writing and the making of meaning. The constructivist metaphor. San Diego, CA: Academic Press. doi:10.2307/358470
   Google Scholar
• Toulmin, S. E. (1958). The uses of argument. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press. doi:10.1017/cbo9780511840005.005
   Google Scholar
• Van Amelsvoort, M., Adriessen, J., & Kanselaar, G. (2007). Representational tools in computer-supported collaborative argumentation-based learning: How dyads work with constructed and inspected argumentative diagrams. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 16, 485–452. doi:10.1080/10508400701524785
   Google Scholar
• Tynjälä, P. (2001). Writing, learning and the development of expertise in Higher Education. In P. Tynjälä, L. Mason, & K. Lonka (Ed.), Writing as a learning tool. Integrating theory and practice (pp. 37–56). Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Kluwer Academic Press. doi:10.1007/978-94-010-0740-5_4
   Google Scholar
• Voss, J. F. (2001). Argumentation in psychology: Background comments. Discourse Processes, 32, 89–111. doi:10.1207/s15326950dp3202&3_01
   Google Scholar
• Walton, D. N. (1989). Dialogue theory for critical thinking. Argumentation, 3, 169–184. doi:10.1007/bf00128147
   Google Scholar
• Walton, D. N. (1996). Argumentation schemes for persuasive reasoning. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum. doi:10.4324/978020381
   Google Scholar
• Wiley, J., Steffens, B., Britt, M. A., & Griffin, T. D. (2014). Writing to learn from multiple-source inquiry activities in history. In G. Rijlaarsdam, & P. D. Klein, P. Boscolo, L. C. Kirpatrick, & C. Gelati (Vol. Eds.), Studies in Writing: Vol.28, Writing as a learning activity (pp. 120–148). Leiden, The Netherlands: Brill. doi:10.1163/9789004265011_007.
   Google Scholar