Arguing from sources: design and evaluation of a programme to improve written argumentation and its impact according to students’ writing beliefs / Argumentar a partir de fuentes: diseño y evaluación de un programa para mejorar la argumentación escrita y su impacto en función de las creencias acerca de la escritura académica que mantienen los estudiantes
Abstract
This study has the aim of evaluating the efficacy of an intervention programme in secondary education designed to improve the writing of argumentative syntheses from reading texts that present opposing views on an issue. The programme is based on teaching self-regulation strategies. In order to test its efficacy, it was compared to another intervention in which the same processes were taught but in a rather traditional fashion. In addition, we take into account the students’ writing beliefs as a variable that could interact with the programme’s effectiveness. Results show that both interventions were effective, except in the integration of arguments and counterarguments, where only students in the programme based on teaching self-regulation strategies improved. In addition, we found a differential impact of the programmes according to the writing beliefs.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
Students have trouble completing synthesis writing tasks successfully.
“When students are faced with synthesis writing tasks, they have trouble completing them successfully (González-Lamas et al., 2016).”
From Teaching argumentative synthesis writing through deliberative dialogues: instructional practices in secondary education (2021) · cites this paper as González-Lamas et al., 2016
Teaching cognitive and self-regulation strategies through video modelling and a procedural guideline enabled secondary students to integrate arguments and counterarguments.
“The results showed that the teaching of cognitive and self-regulation strategies, through a video modelling session and the support of a procedural guideline, enabled the students to integrate arguments and counterarguments.”
From Teaching argumentative synthesis writing through deliberative dialogues: instructional practices in secondary education (2021) · cites this paper as González-Lamas et al., 2016
Previous programs aimed at improving argumentative synthesis writing have traditionally included a collaborative practice component.
“Programs developed to date that are aimed improving argumentative synthesis writing (González-Lamas et al., 2016;Granado-Peinado et al., 2019;Mateos et al., 2018Mateos et al., , 2020) ) have traditionally included a collaborative practice component, whereby students work in pairs to develop argumentative synthesis writing tasks.”
From Teaching argumentative synthesis writing through deliberative dialogues: instructional practices in secondary education (2021) · cites this paper as González-Lamas et al., 2016
Cites
Kuhn, D. (1991) · doi:10.1017/cbo9780511571350 · Cited by 2,094 · see citing works
A meta-analysis of writing instruction for adolescent students
Graham, S., & Perin, D. (2007) · Journal of Educational Psychology · doi:10.1037/0022-0663.99.3.445 · Cited by 1,609 · see citing works
Conditions Under Which Assessment Supports Students’ Learning
Gibbs, G., & Simpson, C. (2005) · Research Repository (University of Gloucestershire) · Cited by 1,265 · see citing works
A Developmental Model of Critical Thinking
Kuhn, D. (1999) · Educational Researcher · doi:10.3102/0013189x028002016 · Cited by 1,188 · see citing works
Best practices in writing instruction
(2007) · Choice Reviews Online · doi:10.5860/choice.45-2158 · Cited by 462 · see citing works
The Constructivist Metaphor: Reading, Writing, and the Making of Meaning
Spivey, N. N. (1997) · College Composition and Communication · doi:10.2307/358470 · Cited by 338 · see citing works
Paz, S. D. L., & Graham, S. (2002) · Journal of Educational Psychology · doi:10.1037/0022-0663.94.4.687 · Cited by 311 · see citing works
An investigation into written comments on assignments: do students find them usable?
Walker, M. (2008) · Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education · doi:10.1080/02602930801895752 · Cited by 182 · see citing works
Implicit writing beliefs and their relation to writing quality
White, M. J., & Bruning, R. (2004) · Contemporary Educational Psychology · doi:10.1016/j.cedpsych.2004.07.002 · Cited by 178 · see citing works
Do goals affect the structure of students’ argumentative writing strategies?
Ferretti, R. P., Lewis, W. E., & Andrews-Weckerly, S. (2009) · Journal of Educational Psychology · doi:10.1037/a0014702 · Cited by 161 · see citing works
The impact of formative feedback on the development of academic writing
Wingate, U. (2010) · Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education · doi:10.1080/02602930903512909 · Cited by 143 · see citing works
Learning and Teaching in Higher Education
Horrod, S. (2023) · Springer eBooks · doi:10.1007/978-3-031-28038-2 · Cited by 135 · see citing works
Argumentation in Psychology: Background Comments
Voss, J. F., & Dyke, J. A. V. (2001) · Discourse Processes · doi:10.1080/0163853x.2001.9651593 · Cited by 102 · see citing works
Mateos, M., Ortega, E. M., Villalón, R., et al. (2007) · Reading and Writing · doi:10.1007/s11145-007-9086-6 · Cited by 79 · see citing works
Self-citationSelf-regulation and strategy instruction for students who find writing and learning challenging.
Graham, S., & Harris, K. R. (1996) · Cited by 71 · see citing works
Effective Assessment in a Digital Age
Davies, S. R. (2010) · Cited by 67 · see citing works
The writing approaches of secondary students
Lavelle, E., Smith, J., & O'Ryan, L. W. (2002) · British Journal of Educational Psychology · doi:10.1348/000709902320634564 · Cited by 64 · see citing works
Kirkpatrick, L. C., & Klein, P. D. (2008) · Learning and Instruction · doi:10.1016/j.learninstruc.2008.06.001 · Cited by 59 · see citing works
Hammann, L. A., & Stevens, R. J. (2003) · Journal of Literacy Research · doi:10.1207/s15548430jlr3502_3 · Cited by 59 · see citing works
Concepciones del alumnado de secundaria y universidad sobre la escritura académica
Villalón, R., & Mateos, M. (2009) · Journal for the Study of Education and Development Infancia y Aprendizaje · doi:10.1174/021037009788001761 · Cited by 51 · see citing works
Self-citationAprender a escribir textos argumentativos: características dialógicas de la argumentación escrita
Camps, A. (1995) · Comunicación Lenguaje y Educación · doi:10.1174/021470395321340439 · Cited by 32 · see citing works
Castelló, M., & Font, C. M. I. (1996) · Journal for the Study of Education and Development Infancia y Aprendizaje · doi:10.1174/021037096763000772 · Cited by 29 · see citing works
Scaffolding argumentation in intact class: Integrating technology and pedagogy
Lu, J., & Zhang, Z. (2013) · Computers & Education · doi:10.1016/j.compedu.2013.07.021 · Cited by 26 · see citing works
Writing to Argue: Writing as a Tool for Oral and Written Argumentation
Longo, S. D., & Lerida, C. (2014) · BRILL eBooks · doi:10.1163/9789004265011_003 · Cited by 13 · see citing works
Chapter 4: Undergraduate Students’ Conceptions and Beliefs about Academic Writing
Mateos, M., & Solé, I. (2012) · BRILL eBooks · doi:10.1163/9781780523873_005 · Cited by 11 · see citing works
Self-citationGárate, M., Melero, M. A., Tejerina, I., et al. (2007) · Journal for the Study of Education and Development Infancia y Aprendizaje · doi:10.1174/021037007782334346 · Cited by 6 · see citing works
Enseñar a leer y escribir para aprender en la Educación Primaria
Martínez-Álvarez, I., Ortega, E. M., & Mateos, M. (2011) · Culture and Education · doi:10.1174/113564011797330306 · Cited by 6 · see citing works
Self-citationEstrategias argumentativas: escribir para convencer
Castelló, M. (1995) · Textos de didáctica de la lengua y la literatura · Cited by 4 · see citing works
Flagged first, then by citations
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Promoting Integration of Multiple Texts: a Review of Instructional Approaches and Practices
Barzilai, S., Zohar, A. R., & Mor-Hagani, S. (2018) · Educational Psychology Review · doi:10.1007/s10648-018-9436-8 · Cited by 176 · see citing works
Learning to write synthesis texts in secondary education: a review of intervention studies
Van Ockenburg, L., Van Weijen, D., & Rijlaarsdam, G. (2019) · Journal of Writing Research · doi:10.17239/jowr-2019.10.03.01 · Cited by 57 · see citing works
Casado-Ledesma, L., Cuevas, I., Van den Bergh, H., Rijlaarsdam, G., Mateos, M., Granado-Peinado, M., & Martín, E. (2021) · Instructional Science · doi:10.1007/s11251-021-09548-3 · Cited by 29 · see citing works
Self-citationLuna, M., Villalón, R., Martínez-Álvarez, I., & Mateos, M. (2023) · Reading and Writing · doi:10.1007/s11145-021-10248-0 · Cited by 19 · see citing works
Self-citationCuevas, I., Mateos, M., Casado-Ledesma, L., Olmos, R., Granado-Peinado, M., Luna, M., Núñez, J. A., & Martín, E. (2024) · European Journal of Psychology of Education · doi:10.1007/s10212-024-00890-x · Cited by 1 · see citing works
Self-citation
- Authors
- González-Lamas, J., Cuevas, I., & Mateos, M.
- Affiliations
- Universidad Autónoma de Madrid (ES)
- Corresponding author
- González-Lamas, Jara
- Venue
- Infancia y Aprendizaje
- Publisher
- SAGE Publications
- Published
- 2016-01-02
- Volume
- 39
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 49-83
- ISSN
- 0210-3702 (ISSN-L)
- 1578-4126
- OpenAlex
- W2238461935
- Cited by
- 32
- References
- 28
- Citations by year
- 2026: 1 · 2025: 1 · 2024: 3 · 2023: 5 · 2022: 5 · 2021: 8 · 2020: 4 · 2019: 2 · 2018: 1 · 2016: 1 · 2015: 1
- FWCI
- 3.12
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Journal for the Study of Education and Development Infancia y Aprendizaje (publishedVersion)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Developmental and Educational Psychology › Educational Strategies and Epistemologies
- Social Sciences › Education › Writing and Handwriting Education
- Social Sciences › Arts and Humanities › Literature and Literary Theory › Linguistics and Education Research
- Keywords
- argumentative writing, writing beliefs, self-regulation strategies, academic writing, secondary education, intervention evaluation
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
