Role of Conjunctions and Students’ Cognitive Characteristics in Argumentative Essay Writing

Teti Sobari, Yadi Mulyadi, Wikanengsih Wikanengsih, Ika Mustika

Abstract


Most high school students are able to write arguments. However, most students are still unable to develop complex writing. The purpose of this research was to investigate the students' argumentative writing which displays various linguistic features and cognitive characteristics, and to investigate the conjunctions that fall into several categories (addition, opposition, causal, and time), which are markers of the complexity of the students' reasoning. The method used in this research was factorial analysis because it aimed to determine the students' linguistic and cognitive features in relation to improving the quality of the students' argumentative writing. The sample in this study was 350 high school students from grades 10 to 12. Analysis was carried out on the students' written argumentative essays which were written in the context of formal or academic language, transcribed and given an analysis code. The research findings show that students are able to demonstrate complex and high-level reasoning according to their use of conjunctions in their essays. The use of conjunctions based on class is relatively low in terms of the number of addition, contradiction, causal, and temporal conjunctions in each essay. The interclass correlation analysis shows that the essay length variable is in a stable condition, while student variability is higher in relation to the use of argument types and conjunctions. Based on the results following the testing of the predictability of conjunction use on argument sophistication, it was found that conflicting conjunctions contributed positively to argument sophistication apart from other variables (essay length, topic, gender, and student socioeconomic status). Contradictory conjunctions are the most complex conjunctions used by students using the integrative perspective. These conjunctions are also used to control the length and type of essay topic. Conjunctions can also contribute to the sophistication of the students' argumentative essays.

https://doi.org/10.26803/ijlter.23.3.6


Keywords


writing ability; cognitive characteristics; linguistic features; argumentation essay; conjunctions

Full Text:

PDF

References


Allagui, B. (2021). TED talk comments to enhance critical thinking skills in an undergraduate reading and writing course. Education and Information Technologies, 26(3), 2941–2960. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-020-10388-w

Aziz, F. I. B. A., & Said, S. B. M. (2020). Developing a persuasive writing model for secondary school. Educational Research for Policy and Practice, 19(2), 143–158. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10671-019-09253-6

Casado-Ledesma, L., Cuevas, I., & Martín, E. (2023). Learning science through argumentative synthesis writing and deliberative dialogues: a comprehensive and effective methodology in secondary education. In Reading and Writing (Vol. 36, Issue 4). Springer Netherlands. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11145-021-10191-0

Casado-Ledesma, L., Cuevas, I., Van den Bergh, H., Rijlaarsdam, G., Mateos, M., Granado-Peinado, M., & Martín, E. (2021). Teaching argumentative synthesis writing through deliberative dialogues: instructional practices in secondary education. In Instructional Science (Vol. 49, Issue 4). Springer Netherlands. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11251-021-09548-3

Cheong, C. M., Zhu, X., & Liao, X. (2018). Differences between the relationship of L1 learners’ performance in integrated writing with both independent listening and independent reading cognitive skills. Reading and Writing, 31(4), 779–811. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11145-017-9811-8

Deane, P., Wilson, J., Zhang, M., Li, C., van Rijn, P., Guo, H., Roth, A., Winchester, E., & Richter, T. (2021). The Sensitivity of a Scenario-Based Assessment of Written Argumentation to School Differences in Curriculum and Instruction. International Journal of Artificial Intelligence in Education, 31(1), 57–98. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40593-020-00227-x

Ferretti, R. P., & Graham, S. (2019). Argumentative writing: theory, assessment, and instruction. Reading and Writing, 32(6), 1345–1357. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11145-019-09950-x

Granado-Peinado, M., Mateos, M., Martín, E., & Cuevas, I. (2019). Teaching to write collaborative argumentative syntheses in higher education. Reading and Writing, 32(8), 2037–2058. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11145-019-09939-6

Hadianto, D., Damaianti, V. S., Mulyati, Y., & Sastromiharjo, A. (2021a). Does reading comprehension competence determine level of solving mathematical word problems competence? Journal of Physics: Conference Series, 1806(1). https://doi.org/10.1088/1742-6596/1806/1/012049

Hadianto, D., Damaianti, V. S., Mulyati, Y., & Sastromiharjo, A. (2021b). Enhancing scientific argumentation skill through partnership comprehensive literacy. Journal of Physics: Conference Series, 2098(1). https://doi.org/10.1088/1742-6596/2098/1/012015

Hadianto, D., S. Damaianti, V., Mulyati, Y., & Sastromiharjo, A. (2022). Effectiveness of Literacy Teaching Design Integrating Local Culture Discourse and Activities to Enhance Reading Skills. Cogent Education, 9(1), 0–13. https://doi.org/10.1080/2331186X.2021.2016040

Hand, B., Chen, Y. C., & Suh, J. K. (2021). Does a Knowledge Generation Approach to Learning Benefit Students? A Systematic Review of Research on the Science Writing Heuristic Approach. Educational Psychology Review, 33(2), 535–577. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-020-09550-0

Harris, K. R., Ray, A., Graham, S., & Houston, J. (2019). Answering the challenge: SRSD instruction for close reading of text to write to persuade with 4th and 5th Grade students experiencing writing difficulties. Reading and Writing, 32(6), 1459–1482. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11145-018-9910-1

Kabata? Memi?, E., & Çakan Akka?, B. N. (2020). Developing critical thinking skills in the thinking-discussion-writing cycle: the argumentation-based inquiry approach. Asia Pacific Education Review, 21(3), 441–453. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12564-020-09635-z

Kara, S., & Kingir, S. (2022). Implementation of the Model-Based Science Writing Heuristic Approach in Elementary School Science. International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 20(4), 683–703. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10763-021-10191-0

Kim, J. S., Relyea, J. E., Burkhauser, M. A., Scherer, E., & Rich, P. (2021). Improving Elementary Grade Students’ Science and Social Studies Vocabulary Knowledge Depth, Reading Comprehension, and Argumentative Writing: a Conceptual Replication. Educational Psychology Review, 33(4), 1935–1964. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-021-09609-6

Kiuhara, S. A., Levin, J. R., Tolbert, M., O’Keeffe, B. V., O’Neill, R. E., & Jameson, J. M. (2023). Teaching argument writing in math class: challenges and solutions to improve the performance of 4th and 5th graders with disabilities. Reading and Writing, 0123456789. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11145-023-10459-7

Latifi, S., Noroozi, O., & Talaee, E. (2023). Worked example or scripting? Fostering students’ online argumentative peer feedback, essay writing and learning. Interactive Learning Environments, 31(2), 655–669. https://doi.org/10.1080/10494820.2020.1799032

Lehmann, T., Rott, B., & Schmidt-Borcherding, F. (2019). Promoting pre-service teachers’ integration of professional knowledge: effects of writing tasks and prompts on learning from multiple documents. Instructional Science, 47(1), 99–126. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11251-018-9472-2

Li, A. W., & Hebert, M. (2023). Unpacking an online peer-mediated and self-reflective revision process in second-language persuasive writing. Reading and Writing, 0123456789. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11145-023-10466-8

Li, J., & Cui, X. (2021). Evaluating College English Textbooks for Chinese Students’ English Academic Writing: Voices of Students and Teachers’. Asia-Pacific Education Researcher, 30(1), 47–58. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40299-020-00513-1

Lin, T. J., Nagpal, M., VanDerHeide, J., Ha, S. Y., & Newell, G. (2020). Instructional patterns for the teaching and learning of argumentative writing in high school English language arts classrooms. Reading and Writing, 33(10), 2549–2575. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11145-020-10056-y

Lotfi, S. A. T., Sarkeshikian, S. A. H., & Saleh, E. (2019). A cross-cultural study of the use of metadiscourse markers in argumentative essays by Iranian and Chinese EFL students. Cogent Arts and Humanities, 6(1). https://doi.org/10.1080/23311983.2019.1601540

Mateos, M., Rijlaarsdam, G., Martín, E., Cuevas, I., Van den Bergh, H., & Solari, M. (2020). Learning paths in synthesis writing: Which learning path contributes most to which learning outcome? Instructional Science, 48(2), 137–157. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11251-020-09508-3

Matos, F. (2021). Collaborative writing as a bridge from peer discourse to individual argumentative writing. Reading and Writing, 34(5), 1321–1342. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11145-020-10117-2

Michael Nussbaum, E., Dove, I. J., Slife, N., Kardash, C. A. M., Turgut, R., & Vallett, D. (2019). Using critical questions to evaluate written and oral arguments in an undergraduate general education seminar: a quasi-experimental study. Reading and Writing, 32(6), 1531–1552. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11145-018-9848-3

Mierwald, M., Lehmann, T., & Brauch, N. (2022). Writing about the past: the impact of different authentic instructional material on students’ argument writing in history. European Journal of Psychology of Education, 37(1), 163–184. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10212-021-00541-5

Miller, D. M., Scott, C. E., & McTigue, E. M. (2018). Writing in the Secondary-Level Disciplines: a Systematic Review of Context, Cognition, and Content. Educational Psychology Review, 30(1), 83–120. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-016-9393-z

Nagao, A. (2019). The SFL genre-based approach to writing in EFL contexts. Asian-Pacific Journal of Second and Foreign Language Education, 4(1). https://doi.org/10.1186/s40862-019-0069-3

Newell, G. E., Bloome, D., Kim, M. Y., & Goff, B. (2019). Shifting epistemologies during instructional conversations about “good” argumentative writing in a high school English language arts classroom. Reading and Writing, 32(6), 1359–1382. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11145-018-9905-y

Noroozi, O., Hatami, J., Bayat, A., van Ginkel, S., Biemans, H. J. A., & Mulder, M. (2020). Students’ online argumentative peer feedback, essay writing, and content learning: does gender matter? Interactive Learning Environments, 28(6), 698–712. https://doi.org/10.1080/10494820.2018.1543200

Ollesch, L., Heimbuch, S., & Bodemer, D. (2021). Improving learning and writing outcomes: Influence of cognitive and behavioral group awareness tools in wikis. In International Journal of Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning (Vol. 16, Issue 2). Springer US. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11412-021-09346-6

Sherman, D., Mentzer, N., Bartholomew, S., Chesley, A., Baniya, S., & Laux, D. (2022). Across the disciplines: our gained knowledge in assessing a first-year integrated experience. International Journal of Technology and Design Education, 32(2), 1369–1391. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10798-020-09650-6

Stuart, N. J., Connelly, V., & Dockrell, J. E. (2020). Written verb use and diversity in children with Developmental Language Disorder: stepping stones to academic writing. Reading and Writing, 33(1), 67–96. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11145-019-09978-z

Teng, M. F., Qin, C., & Wang, C. (2022). Validation of metacognitive academic writing strategies and the predictive effects on academic writing performance in a foreign language context. Metacognition and Learning, 17(1), 167–190. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11409-021-09278-4

Valero Haro, A., Noroozi, O., Biemans, H. J. A., Mulder, M., & Banihashem, S. K. (2023). How does the type of online peer feedback influence feedback quality, argumentative essay writing quality, and domain-specific learning? Interactive Learning Environments, May, 1–20. https://doi.org/10.1080/10494820.2023.2215822

van Driel, J., van Driel, J., & van Boxtel, C. (2022). Writing about the significance of historical agents: the effects of reading and writing instruction. Reading and Writing, 0123456789. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11145-022-10404-0

Weston-Sementelli, J. L., Allen, L. K., & McNamara, D. S. (2018). Comprehension and Writing Strategy Training Improves Performance on Content-Specific Source-Based Writing Tasks. International Journal of Artificial Intelligence in Education, 28(1), 106–137. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40593-016-0127-7

Yaman, F. (2018). Effects of the Science Writing Heuristic Approach on the Quality of Prospective Science Teachers’ Argumentative Writing and Their Understanding of Scientific Argumentation. International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 16(3), 421–442. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10763-016-9788-9

Yaman, F. (2020). Pre-Service Science Teachers’ Development and Use of Multiple Levels of Representation and Written Arguments in General Chemistry Laboratory Courses. Research in Science Education, 50(6), 2331–2362. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11165-018-9781-0

Yang, R. (2022). An empirical study of claims and qualifiers in ESL students’ argumentative writing based on Toulmin model. Asian-Pacific Journal of Second and Foreign Language Education, 7(1). https://doi.org/10.1186/s40862-022-00133-w

Yoon, H. J. (2021). Interactions in EFL argumentative writing: effects of topic, L1 background, and L2 proficiency on interactional metadiscourse. Reading and Writing, 34(3), 705–725. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11145-020-10085-7


Refbacks

  • There are currently no refbacks.


e-ISSN: 1694-2116

p-ISSN: 1694-2493