Developing persuasive writing skills through scientific argumentation using a time-series design
Abstract
This study investigates the development of persuasive writing skills in a sample of 44 grade VIII English learners from a private school in Rawalpindi-Pakistan. It employs a quasi-experimental time-series design, carrying out three pre-tests at different intervals which are followed by five lessons integrating scientific argumentation. To explore the effectiveness of the intervention, three post-tests at different intervals have also been conducted. The use of this design with six levels of measurement is aimed at improving the reliability in measuring variables. Furthermore, a semi-structured interview protocol has been developed to explore the students’ experience with scientific argumentation, its strengths, and challenges. Quantitative data has been analysed using mean, SD, t-test, and ANOVA, while qualitative data has been thematically analysed. Results from inferential statistics reveal a significant improvement in the students’ persuasive writing. Their involvement in scientific argumentation has enabled them to think critically, make an informed decision, and support it with valid arguments. The interview data highlights certain challenges as well as ways of improving scientific argumentation and its integration into English language teaching.
Downloads
References
Bacha, N. N. (2010). Teaching the academic argument in a university EFL environment. Journal of English for Academic Purposes, 9(3), 229–241. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jeap.2010.05.001
Baghbadorani, E. A., & Roohani, A. (2014). The impact of strategy-based instruction on L2 learners’ persuasive writing. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 98, 235–241. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2014.03.412
Bakry, M. S., & Alsamadani, H. A. (2015). Improving the persuasive essay writing of students of Arabic as a foreign language (AFL): Effects of self-regulated strategy development. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 182, 89–97. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2015.04.742
Chang, S., & Chiu, M. (2008). Lakatos’ scientific research programmes as a framework for analysing informal argumentation about socio‐scientific issues. International Journal of Science Education, 30(13), 1753–1773. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500690701534582
Creswell, J. W., & Poth, C. N. (2016). Qualitative inquiry and research design: Choosing among five approaches. Sage publications.
Duschl, R. (2008). Science education in three-part harmony: Balancing conceptual, epistemic, and social learning goals. Review of Research in Education, 32(1), 268–291. https://doi.org/10.3102/0091732X07309371
Erduran, S., Simon, S., & Osborne, J. (2004). TAPping into argumentation: Developments in the application of Toulmin’s Argument Pattern for studying science discourse. Science Education, 88(6), 915–933. https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.20012
Faize, F.A. & Akhtar, M. (2020). Addressing Environmental Knowledge and Attitude in Undergraduate Students Through Scientific Argumentation. Journal of Cleaner Production, 252, 1-8. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2019.119928
Faize, F.A. & Nawaz, M. (2020). Evaluation and Improvement of students’ satisfaction in Online learning during COVID-19. Open Praxis, 12(4). 495–507. https://dx.doi.org/10.5944/openpraxis.12.4.1153
Faize, F.A. (2011). Problem and prospect of science education at secondary level in Pakistan (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). International Islamic University, Islamabad: Pakistan.
Faize, F.A. (2015). Introducing Argumentation at Higher Education in Pakistan- A New Paradigm of Teaching Ethic based Topics. FWU Journal of Social Sciences, 9(1), 8-13.http://sbbwu.edu.pk/journal/pages/FWUJournal,summer%202015%20Vol.9,No.1.php
Faize, F.A. (2022). Assessing Science Teachers' Understanding About the Nature of Scientific Inquiry and its Reflection in Students' Responses Using the VASI Questionnaire. International Journal of Science Education, 44(14), 2224-2240.
https://doi.org/10.1080/09500693.2022.2116959
Faize, F.A., Hussain, W. & Nisar, F. (2018). A Critical Review of Scientific Argumentation in Science Education. EURASIA Journal of Mathematics, Science and Technology Education, 14(1), 475-483. https://doi.org/10.12973/ejmste/80353
Foong, C., & Daniel, E. (2013). Students’ argumentation skills across two socio-scientific issues in a Confucian classroom: Is transfer possible? International Journal of Science Education, 35(14), 2331–2355. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500693.2012.697209
Gill, A. A., Kausar, G., & Haider, S. (2022). A corpus-based analysis of interpersonal persuasive writing skills of Pakistani English language learners. Pakistan Journal of Social Research, 4(2), 50–59.
Graham, S., & Perin, D. (2007). Writing next-effective strategies to improve writing of adolescents in middle and high schools-A report to Carnegie Corporation of New York. Alliance for Excellent Education. http://dl.ueb.edu.vn/handle/1247/9990
Gravetter, F. J., & Forzano, L.-A. B. (2019). Research methods for the behavioral sciences (sixth ed). Cengage Learning.
Grooms, J., Sampson, V., & Enderle, P. (2018). How concept familiarity and experience with scientific argumentation are related to the way groups participate in an episode of argumentation. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 55(9), 1264–1286. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.21451
Hadfield, J., & Hadfield, C. (2008). Introduction to teaching English. Oxford University Press.
Handayani, F. (2020). An Analysis of Students’ Attitude toward the Use of Google Documents in Writing Persuasive Essay at Second Year of English Department UMMY Solok on 2019/2020 Academic Year. Mahaputra Muhammad Yamin Solok University.
Hassan, S. A., Movassagh, H., & Radi Arbabi, H. (2017). The interrelationship among critical thinking, writing an argumentative essay in an L2 and their subskills. The Language Learning Journal, 45(4), 419–433. https://doi.org/10.1080/09571736.2017.1320420
Hewson, M. G., & Ogunniyi, M. B. (2011). Argumentation-teaching as a method to introduce indigenous knowledge into science classrooms: Opportunities and challenges. Cultural Studies of Science Education, 6(3), 679–692. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11422-010-9303-5
Ho, H.-Y., Chang, T.-L., Lee, T.-N., Chou, C.-C., Hsiao, S.-H., Chen, Y.-H., & Lu, Y.-L. (2019). Above-and below-average students think differently: Their scientific argumentation patterns. Thinking Skills and Creativity, 34, 100607. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tsc.2019.100607
Indah, O. D., & Hermini, H. (2023). Analysis of the students’ persuasive paragraph writing ability at university. IDEAS: Journal on English Language Teaching and Learning, Linguistics and Literature, 10(2), 1778–1786. https://doi.org/10.24256/ideas.v10i2.3243
Jin, Q., & Kim, M. (2021). Supporting elementary students’ scientific argumentation with argument-focused metacognitive scaffolds (AMS). International Journal of Science Education, 43(12), 1984–2006. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500693.2016.1218567
Kaur, S. (2015). Teaching strategies used by Thai EFL lecturers to teach argumentative writing. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 208, 143–156.
Klimova, B. F. (2014). Approaches to the teaching of writing skills. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 112, 147–151.
Lammers, A., Goedhart, M. J., & Avraamidou, L. (2019). Reading and synthesising science texts using a scientific argumentation model by undergraduate biology students. International Journal of Science Education, 41(16), 2323–2346. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500693.2019.1675197
Loucks-Horsley, S., Stiles, K. E., Mundry, S., Love, N., & Hewson, P. W. (2009). Designing professional development for teachers of science and mathematics. Corwin press.
Mahmood, M. A., Haider, S., & Asghar, S. A. (2021). A Corpus-based Analysis of Persuasive Linguistic Choices of Pakistani Argumentative Essay Writing. Harf-O-Sukhan, 5(1), 28–46.
McNeill, K. L., & Krajcik, J. (2012). Book study facilitator’s guide: Supporting grade 5–8 students in constructing explanations in science: The claim, evidence and reasoning framework for talk and writing. Pearson Allyn & Bacon.
Mikeska, J. N., & Lottero‐Perdue, P. S. (2022). How preservice and in‐service elementary teachers engage student avatars in scientific argumentation within a simulated classroom environment. Science Education, 106(4), 980–1009. https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.21726
Nurtjahyo, S. N., Drajati, N. A., & Sumardi, S. (2019). G.R.A.S.P.S strategy: Decreasing learners’ difficulties in writing persuasive text. International Journal of Language Teaching and Education, 3(2), 158–172. https://doi.org/10.22437/ijolte.v3i2.7391
Osborne, J., Erduran, S., & Simon, S. (2004). Enhancing the quality of argumentation in school science. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 41(10), 994–1020. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.20035
Passmore, C., & Svoboda, J. (2012). Exploring opportunities for argumentation in modelling classrooms. International Journal of Science Education, 34(10), 1535–1554.
Qin, J., & Karabacak, E. (2010). The analysis of Toulmin elements in Chinese EFL university argumentative writing. System, 38(3), 444–456. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.system.2010.06.012
Rohayati., S., Anshori, D., & Sastromiharjo, A. (2023). Effectiveness of epistemic beliefs and scientific argument to improve learning process quality. International Journal of Instruction, 16(2), 493–510.
Sajid, M. K. M., & Siddiqui, J. A. (2015). Lack of academic writing skills in English language at higher education level in Pakistan: Causes, effects and remedies evaluation and improvement of students’ satisfaction. International Journal of Language and Linguistics, 2(4), 174–186.
Toulmin, S. (1958). The uses of argument. Cambridge University Press.
Vygotsky, L. (1978). Mind in society: The development of higher psychological process. Harvard University Press.
Wang, J. (2020). Scrutinising the positions of students and teacher engaged in argumentation in a high school physics classroom. International Journal of Science Education, 42(1), 25–49. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500693.2019.1700315
Copyright (c) 2024 Journal of Educational Research
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.
The articles and scientific documents published in RIE abide the following conditions:
1. The Servicio de Publicaciones de la Universidad de Murcia (the publisher) has the property rights (copyright) of all the documents published and allows the reuse under the user’s license indicated in point 2.
2. All documents are published in the digital edition of RIE under a Creative Commons Reconocimiento-NoComercial-SinObraDerivada 3.0 España (legal document) license. These documents can be copied, used, distributed, communicated and explained publicly if: i) the author(s) and its original source of publishing (magazine, publisher and URL of the document) are cited; ii) it is not used for commercial purpose; iii) the existence and the specifications about this license are mentioned.
3. Auto-archive’s conditions. The authors are allowed and encouraged to digitally distribute the pre-print versions (a version before evaluation) and/or post-print (a version that it is already evaluated and accepted to its publication). This promotes circulation and distribution earlier and can increase the citations and significance within the academic community.
