Intervention study demonstrates source-based argumentative writing growth in secondary history classrooms, highlighting comparable progress between English learners and native peers.
The current study examines secondary students' growth in source-based argumentative writing inhistory classrooms after a 1-year teacher professional development intervention. We explorevariations in growth across key competencies and skills underlying effective source-basedargument writing. We also examine how writing growth varies by student age and languageproficiency. Essays of 195 secondary students’ pre- and post-tests were analytically scored tomeasure multiple competencies and skills in student writing and identify specific areas that aremore or less challenging to develop. Results indicated that there was significant growth across allexamined competencies, with Evidence Use and Presentation of Ideas demonstrating the mostimprovement. Less growth was observed in Historical Thinking, highlighting the need forexplicit instruction in this aspect. Middle school students exhibited more growth than high schoolstudents across competencies, indicating the capability of middle schoolers to improve complexdisciplinary thinking and writing. Additionally, EL students showed comparable growth to non-EL peers, challenging deficit narratives of their reasoning and writing skills. The findingsindicate the effectiveness of a cognitive strategies approach to improving writing and highlightareas where more tailored instruction could address diverse student needs.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Moon et al. (2024) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: