Improving written argumentative synthesis by teaching the integration of conflicting information from multiple sources

Ver/Abrir
Identificadores
URI: http://hdl.handle.net/10902/16158
ISSN: 0737-0008
ISSN: 1532-690X
Compartir
Estadísticas
Ver Estadísticas
Google Scholar
Registro completo
Mostrar el registro completo DC
Autoría
Mateos, Mar; Martín, Elena; Cuevas, Isabel; Villalón Molina, RuthAutoridad Unican; Martínez, Isabel; González-Lamas, Jara
Fecha
2018
Derechos
This is an Accepted Manuscript of an article published by Taylor & Francis in Cognition & Instruction on 2018, available online: https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/07370008.2018.1425300
Publicado en
Cognition and Instruction, 2018, 36(2), 119-138
Editorial
Taylor & Francis
Enlace a la publicación
Palabras clave
Collaborative argumentation
Explicit instruction
Graphic guide
Synthesis of multiple sources
Written argumentation
Resumen/Abstract
The goal of this study was to assess the effectiveness of 2 different types of intervention aimed at improving written argumentative synthesis by integrating conflicting information from different sources. Both interventions combined the use of a guide with collaborative practice, but one of them also included explicit strategy instruction. Only students who received additional explicit instruction showed an improved ability to integrate conflicting information and increased the number of arguments they selected from the sources.
Colecciones a las que pertenece