Teaching and learning argumentative writing in the digital age English classroom

332 Pages·2017·4.4 MB·English

Southern Cross University
ePublications@SCU
Theses
2017
Arguing with technology: Teaching and learning
argumentative writing in the digital age English
classroom
Tom Gyenes
Southern Cross University
Publication details
Gyenes, T 2017, 'Arguing with technology: Teaching and learning argumentative writing in the digital age English classroom', PhD
thesis, Southern Cross University, Lismore, NSW.
Copyright T Gyenes 2017
ePublications@SCU is an electronic repository administered by Southern Cross University Library. Its goal is to capture and preserve the intellectual
output of Southern Cross University authors and researchers, and to increase visibility and impact through open access to researchers around the
world. For further information please [email protected].
Arguing with Technology
Teaching and Learning Argumentative
Writing in the Digital Age English
Classroom
Tom Gyenes
BA(Hons)(Macq.), MA(UEL), MTeach(USyd)
School of Education
Southern Cross University

Thesis submitted to fulfil requirements of Doctor of Philosophy

Final thesis submitted 22nd December 2017
I certify that the work presented in this thesis is, to the best of my knowledge and
belief, original, except as acknowledged in the text, and that the material has not
been submitted, either in whole or in part, for a degree at this or any other
university.
I acknowledge that I have read and understood the University's rules, requirements,
procedures and policy relating to my higher degree research award and to my
thesis. I certify that I have complied with the rules, requirements, procedures and
policy of the University (as they may be from time to time).

Signed ………………………………………………….. Date 22/12/17
ii
Abstract
Argumentation is an under-developed practice in secondary English classrooms where the
focus of essay-writing instruction has become the testing of content and the practising of text
and paragraph templates. Under these constraints students are failing to see the process or
product of writing as authentic or meaningful. In one response, educational technology
promises much, with its multimodal hook, the lure of real-world communication and the
proposed independence of its users. To date, however, the potential of educational technology
to promote critical thinking that can be transferred to critical writing is under-explored. An
opportunity exists to evaluate how argumentation can provide a communicative impetus in a
digital learning environment focused on dialogue and collaboration. Theory and practice –
based on student voices – can be foregrounded to evaluate the use of scaffolding-type
programs, such as digital argument mapping, in the writing classroom.
Adopting a design-based research methodological approach, data collected from treatment
and control groups of Year 9 and 10 students (aged 14-16 years) explored argumentation and
digital argument mapping skills and interactions as part of a normal term’s unit of work in
two school settings. This research aimed to discover the nature of student disengagement with
contemporary practices for the writing of opinion, then explore the results and interpretations
of working in an alternative approach. Digital argument mapping was trialed in order to
evaluate both its impact on the effectiveness of student writing, and its impact on student
engagement with practices dependent on dialogue and collaboration during the writing
process.
Skills in argumentation improved from pre- to post-test writing and both students and teachers
reported the usefulness and energy of an approach that focused on the purpose of writing.
Most significantly, the use of a digital scaffolding type program challenges several
contemporary assumptions about the effectiveness of educational technology in the writing
classroom, and for learning more generally. In particular, the creation of a dialogic learning
environment around intervention technology used to supplement, not replace, the teacher, was
found to lead to more engagement in the writing process and more effective writing. Research
findings suggest that a carefully structured teaching program centred on argument can
reinvigorate writing by focusing on dialogue and collaboration as part of the planning stage of
writing.
iii
Acknowledgements
I would like to thank, above all, my supervisors Dr Judith Wilks and Dr Robert
Smith at Southern Cross University. Judith, my principal supervisor, you have
guided me with care and vision and a joy for ideas that has made this experience
meaningful and enjoyable. Robert your attention to detail and breadth of knowledge
about our field is inspiring. Both of you have given me optimism about the future of
schools and academia.
My many critical friends have been invaluable and I am indebted to you all. For
support with statistics, thanks to Dr Alison Bowling, and Matt Snow. For support
around design-based research thanks to Dr Jan Hetherington and Prof. David
Lynch. For chats about literacy and schools thanks to Dr Jenny Johnston. For
helping me keep this real in terms of actual schools and actual students, thanks to
Mick Klipin. For helping me keep the abstract connected to the actual, thanks
especially to Jo Parker, and to Dr Dallas Baker and Martin Galafassi. Thank you to
Jenni Clement for the final proof read; remaining errors are of course my
responsibility alone. I owe a particular debt to Helen Boutell and Jennifer Stratten,
my writing markers, for your generosity of time and energy for this project,
especially because I would not tell you what it was all about until it was over!
Thank you Margie Wallin in the SCU Coffs Harbour library for your tireless
support and encouragement. Finally, I would like to acknowledge my three
examiners for their time and energy, and the many excellent recommendations that
have immeasurably improved this project.
I would like to thank and acknowledge the staff and students at my two research
schools. You were all welcoming, fun to be around and interesting subjects. Thank
you for co-designing, participating, and sharing thoughts and experiences with such
grace and energy; I wish I could name you all!
To my family: the most heartfelt thanks and an apology. It’s over now.
Thank you also to Paul Holding and Dot Panaretos, Principal and Deputy Principal
(at the time) at Bellingen High School, NSW, for your support of my leave
applications to complete this project.
iv
Table of contents
Abstract …………………………………………………………………………………………….iii
Acknowledgements ................................................................................................................................. iv
Abbreviations ………………………………………………………………………………………….x
Chapter 1 – Introduction ........................................................................................................................ 1
1.1 Background .............................................................................................................................. 2
1.2 Argument and Communication in a Digital Age Learning Environment ................................. 7
1.3 The Research Problem ............................................................................................................ 10
1.4 Research Design and Organisation of Dissertation ................................................................ 14
1.5 Research Aim, Question and Objectives ................................................................................ 15
1.5.1 Aim: ............................................................................................................................ 15
1.5.2 Research question:....................................................................................................... 15
1.5.3 Research objectives: .................................................................................................... 15
Chapter 2 – Literature Review ............................................................................................................. 18
2.1 Introduction: The Problem of Writing. ................................................................................... 20
2.2 Luddites and Reactionaries in the English Staffroom............................................................. 22
2.3 The Digital Age ...................................................................................................................... 25
2.3.1 Multiliteracies and digital educational technology. ..................................................... 25
2.3.2 The digital age and its inhabitants. .............................................................................. 27
2.4 Technology and Learning ....................................................................................................... 30
2.4.1 Technology and ideology. ........................................................................................... 31
2.4.2 Contemporary digital age learning. ............................................................................. 34
2.4.3 Literacy, writing, knowledge-production and educational technology. ...................... 36
2.5 Argumentation ........................................................................................................................ 39
2.5.1 Defining argument....................................................................................................... 39
2.5.2 Argumentation and learning ........................................................................................ 41
2.5.3 Digital argument mapping. .......................................................................................... 45
Chapter 3 – Methodology ..................................................................................................................... 48
3.1 Introduction ............................................................................................................................ 48
3.2 Design-based Research ........................................................................................................... 49
3.3 Mixed Methods ....................................................................................................................... 53
3.3.1 The rationale for using a mixed methods approach in this investigation. ................... 53
3.3.2 Framework. ................................................................................................................. 55
3.4 Quasi-experiment ................................................................................................................... 60
3.5 Methods 62
3.5.1 Participants. ................................................................................................................. 62
3.5.2 The Quantitative Phase ................................................................................................ 65
3.5.3 The Qualitative Phase .................................................................................................. 72
3.6 Trustworthiness and Generalisability ..................................................................................... 78
3.6.1 Anne Brown and design science. ................................................................................ 78
3.6.2 Generalisability. .......................................................................................................... 80
3.6.3 Documentation. ........................................................................................................... 81
3.6.4 Quasi-experimental design. ......................................................................................... 81
3.6.5 The learning trajectory. ............................................................................................... 81
3.6.6 Sampling. .................................................................................................................... 82
3.6.7 The validity of the mixed methods approach to data. .................................................. 82
3.7 Limitations of the methodology ............................................................................................. 83
3.8 Summary ................................................................................................................................ 85
Chapter 4 – The Enacted Research Design ......................................................................................... 86
4.1 Introduction ............................................................................................................................ 86
4.2 The Design of the Intervention ............................................................................................... 88
v
4.2.1 Research settings. ........................................................................................................ 88
4.2.2 Ethics. .......................................................................................................................... 91
4.2.3 The pilot study. ............................................................................................................ 92
4.2.4 The program used in the Intervention. ........................................................................ 93
4.2.5 Researcher role. ........................................................................................................... 97
4.2.6 Researcher and participant-teacher co-design. ............................................................ 99
4.3 The Enacted Design .............................................................................................................. 102
4.3.1 Two schools. ............................................................................................................. 102
4.3.2 Student introductions. ................................................................................................ 103
4.3.3 Cycles of design and analysis. ................................................................................... 103
4.4 A Feasibility Study to Formatively Evaluate the Intervention (Phase 3).............................. 105
4.4.1 Questionnaires. .......................................................................................................... 105
4.4.2 Writing pre- and post-test. ......................................................................................... 105
4.4.3 Observations. ............................................................................................................. 105
4.4.4 Interviews. ................................................................................................................. 105
4.5 The ‘Difficult’ and the ‘Unexpected’ During the Intervention ............................................. 106
4.5.1 Technology. ............................................................................................................... 106
4.5.2 Personnel. .................................................................................................................. 106
4.6 Summary .............................................................................................................................. 106
Chapter 5 – Findings 1: Writing Pre- and Post-tests ....................................................................... 108
5.1 Introduction .......................................................................................................................... 109
5.2 Presentation of Treatment vs Control Writing Results ......................................................... 110
5.2.1 Changes in overall writing means for argument skills. ............................................. 111
5.2.2 Changes in students’ thesis development skills. ........................................................ 112
5.2.3 Changes in Structure. ................................................................................................ 112
5.2.4 Changes in the use of evidence. ................................................................................ 113
5.2.5 Changes in the incorporation of alternative viewpoints. ........................................... 114
5.2.6 Changes in use of persuasive techniques. .................................................................. 115
5.2.7 Changes in Voice. ..................................................................................................... 116
5.2.8 Changes in conceptual orientation............................................................................. 117
5.3 Discussion of Treatment vs Control Writing Results ........................................................... 118
5.4 Evaluation of Treatment Groups’ Writing Results: Streaming, School and Year Group ..... 118
5.4.1 Streaming. ................................................................................................................. 119
5.4.2 School. ....................................................................................................................... 121
5.4.3 Year. .......................................................................................................................... 123
5.5 Discussion of the Impact of Streaming, School and Year .................................................... 124
5.6 Evaluation of Treatment Groups’ Writing Results: Personal Preferences ............................ 125
5.6.1 Enjoyment of collaboration ....................................................................................... 125
5.6.2 Enjoyment of discussion ........................................................................................... 127
5.6.3 Positive view of ICT for learning .............................................................................. 128
5.6.4 Positive feelings towards non-fiction writing ............................................................ 129
5.6.5 High use of web2.0 platforms ................................................................................... 129
5.7 Summary .............................................................................................................................. 130
Chapter 6 – Findings 2: Attitudes to Writing ................................................................................... 133
6.1 Introduction: Writing to Intervene in the World? ................................................................. 134
6.2 Student Experiences Of and Engagement With Writing. ..................................................... 136
6.2.1 Student perceptions of writing as a social practice. ................................................... 136
6.2.2 Student perceptions of themselves as analytical writers............................................ 142
6.3 Student attitudes to classroom writing strategies. ................................................................. 144
6.3.1 What works in the opinions of student and teachers? ............................................... 145
6.3.2 “Pointless” versus “meaningful” writing. .................................................................. 148
6.4 Attitudes to Using the Digital Argument Mapping Program in Class. ................................. 150
6.4.1 Planning and understanding structure. ...................................................................... 150
6.4.2 Visual organization. .................................................................................................. 151
6.4.3 Elements of argumentation. ....................................................................................... 152
6.4.4 Thinking and reflection. ............................................................................................ 155
6.4.5 Other benefits discussed in interviews. ..................................................................... 157
6.4.6 Perceived weaknesses. .............................................................................................. 158
6.5 Summary and conclusions .................................................................................................... 159
vi
Chapter 7 – Findings 3: Attitudes to Educational Technology ........................................................ 163
7.1 Introduction .......................................................................................................................... 164
7.2 Working with Educational Technology as ‘Learning’. ......................................................... 166
7.2.1 Ease of use. ................................................................................................................ 166
7.2.2 Typing versus writing. ............................................................................................... 167
7.2.3 Searching for information. ........................................................................................ 167
7.2.4 Creativity. .................................................................................................................. 168
7.2.5 Variety and engagement. ........................................................................................... 170
7.2.6 Technology infrastructure ......................................................................................... 172
7.2.7 Behaviour and distraction .......................................................................................... 172
7.2.8 Learning and ideas. ................................................................................................... 173
7.3 Collaborating on Educational Technologies as ‘Learning’................................................... 176
7.3.1 The broadening of ideas and worldviews. ................................................................. 177
7.3.2 The perils of partners. ................................................................................................ 180
7.3.3 Connecting and communicating. ............................................................................... 182
7.4 The Teacher-student Dynamic in Technology-based Classes and its Impact on ‘Learning’. 183
7.4.1 The views of teachers. ............................................................................................... 183
7.4.2 The views of students. ............................................................................................... 186
7.5 Summary .............................................................................................................................. 190
7.6 From Findings to Discussion ................................................................................................ 191
Chapter 8 – Discussion 1: Argument and the Development of Purposeful and Communicative Writing.
…………………………………………………………………………………………………….193
8.1 Introduction: The Decline of the Essay ................................................................................ 194
8.2 The Potential of Argument ................................................................................................... 197
8.2.1 The explicit teaching of argumentation skills............................................................ 198
8.2.2 Argument and the revitalisation of the process of writing. ....................................... 200
8.2.3 Exposure to counter-argument .................................................................................. 205
8.2.4 Mapping out the argument ........................................................................................ 209
8.3 Conclusion ............................................................................................................................ 213
Chapter 9 – Discussion 2: Arguing with Technology ....................................................................... 217
9.1 Introduction .......................................................................................................................... 218
9.2 Purposeful Learning with Technology ................................................................................. 220
9.2.1 A teacher-oriented not a teacher-centred tool. ........................................................... 222
9.2.2 A collaborative tool. .................................................................................................. 224
9.2.3 A tool for discussion and ideas. ................................................................................. 224
9.2.4 Purposeful learning. .................................................................................................. 225
9.3 A Dialogic Learning Environment ....................................................................................... 227
9.3.1 Interactivity. .............................................................................................................. 228
9.3.2 Collaboration. ............................................................................................................ 230
9.3.3 Dialogue. ................................................................................................................... 233
9.4 Scaffolding and Multiliteracies: Mutually Exclusive Paradigms? ........................................ 235
9.4.1 Learning-by-design. .................................................................................................. 236
9.4.2 Authentic products of learning. ................................................................................. 238
9.4.3 Netizens and social mindtools. .................................................................................. 240
9.5 Summary. ............................................................................................................................. 243
Chapter 10 – Conclusion and Recommendations ............................................................................. 246
10.1 Research Objectives. ............................................................................................................ 247
10.1.1 The effectiveness of student argumentative writing and the engagement of
students in the digital argument mapping practice. ................................................... 248
10.1.2 Digital technologies in the classroom and ‘learning’. ............................................... 252
10.2 Recommendations for Pedagogy and Teaching Practice ...................................................... 258
10.2.1 DAM and current approaches to writing pedagogy. .................................................. 258
10.2.2 Authenticity ............................................................................................................... 261
10.2.3 Literacy disengagement ............................................................................................. 262
10.2.4 Technology and ideology .......................................................................................... 262
10.2.5 Lesson design involving educational technology ...................................................... 263
10.3 Issues in Research and Methodology. .................................................................................. 265
10.3.1 Limitations of this investigation. ............................................................................... 265
vii
10.3.2 Researcher reflection. ................................................................................................ 267
10.3.3 Overview: The contribution of this investigation. ..................................................... 268
References ……………………………………………………………………………………………271
Appendices ……………………………………………………………………………………………284
Appendix 1 Introduction to students (version used for SERAP application) ................................ 285
Appendix 2 Introduction for participating teachers ...................................................................... 288
Appendix 3 Cycles of discussion, adjustment and re-design ........................................................ 290
Appendix 4 Argumentative writing grading rubric ....................................................................... 292
Appendix 5 Student questionnaire ................................................................................................ 293
Appendix 6 Interview questions and prompts ............................................................................... 299
Appendix 7 Observation record .................................................................................................... 302
Appendix 8 Using the 5 clines to plan technology lessons ........................................................... 304
Appendix 9 Descriptive statistics for treatment groups’ personal preferences ............................. 306
Appendix 10 Task sheets for student pre and post-writing essays .................................................. 307
Appendix 11 Student essay writing samples with marking rubrics ................................................ 309

viii
List of figures
Figure 1 Overview of key elements of the investigation .................................................................................. 17
Figure 2.1 The literature review element of this investigation .............................................................................. 19
Figure 3.1 Flowchart of embedded design procedures utilised in this study. ........................................................ 59
Figure 3.2 Common notations to describe the mixed between-within design. ...................................................... 60
Figure 3.3 Variables for this experiment ............................................................................................................... 61
Figure 4.1 Map of Australia indicating the setting for this investigation .............................................................. 89
Figure 4.2 Screenshot of argument map constructed by a participant student using Draw.io ............................. 94
Figure 4.3 Screenshot of argument map constructed in Rationale Online ............................................................ 96
Figure 4.4 Overview of Typical Student Experience of 10-week Intervention ................................................... 100
Figure 5.1 The quantitative phase of this investigation I ..................................................................................... 108
Figure 5.2 The quantitative phase II .................................................................................................................... 120
Figure 6.1 The qualitative phase of the investigation I ........................................................................................ 133
Figure 6.2 Student attitudes to writing ................................................................................................................ 137
Figure 6.3 Student enjoyment of non-fiction writing .......................................................................................... 137
Figure 6.4 Student attitudes to the usefulness and power of writing 1 ................................................................ 138
Figure 6.5 Student attitudes to the usefulness and power of writing 2 ................................................................ 138
Survey Statement: Writing can change things in my life. ................................................................................... 138
Figure 6.6. How often do you get to choose a topic to work on in class? ........................................................... 140
Figure 6.7. How often do you create something in class that gets seen outside of school? ................................. 140
Figure 6.8. How often do you get to choose what to write about in English class? ............................................ 141
Figure 6.9. How often do you write something in English that gets seen by a real audience outside of school? 141
Figure 7.1 The qualitative phase II ...................................................................................................................... 163
Figure 8.1 The discussion stage of this investigation I ........................................................................................ 193
Figure 9.1 The discussion stage II. ...................................................................................................................... 217
Figure 9.1. The four types of communicative approach (Mortimer & Scott, 2003). .......................................... 233

List of tables
Table 3.1 Summary of the key strengths of the mixed methods approach as applied to this investigation ........... 55
Table 3.4 Overview of participant numbers and class arrangements .................................................................... 63
Table 4.1 The enacted research process ................................................................................................................ 87
Table 5.1 Pre-test and post-test means for writing element scores for treatment and control groups.................. 110
Table 5.2 ANOVA results for thesis development: time and between-subjects effects ...................................... 112
Table 5.3 ANOVA results for structure: time and between-subjects effects ....................................................... 112
Table 5.4 ANOVA results for evidence: time and between-subjects effects ....................................................... 113
Table 5.5 ANOVA results for alternative viewpoints: time and between-subjects effects .................................. 114
Table 5.6 ANOVA results for persuasive techniques: time and between-subjects effects .................................. 115
Table 5.7 ANOVA results for personal voice: time and between-subjects effects .............................................. 116
Table 5.8 ANOVA results for conceptual orientation: time and between-subjects effects ................................. 117
Table 5.9 ANOVA results for streaming: time and between-subjects effects ..................................................... 119
Table 5.10 ANOVA results for school: time and between-subjects effects ........................................................ 121
Table 5.11 ANOVA results for year: time and between-subjects effects ............................................................ 123
Table 5.12 ANOVA results for enjoyment of collaboration: time and between-subjects effects ........................ 126
Table 5.13 ANOVA results for enjoyment of discussion: time and between-subjects effects ............................ 127
Table 5.14 ANOVA results for positive attitude towards ICT: time and between-subjects effects .................... 128
Table 5.15 ANOVA results for positive attitude towards NF writing: time and between-subjects effects ......... 129
Table 5.16 ANOVA results for high use of web 2.0: time and between-subjects effects .................................... 130

ix