國立虎尾科技大學 |

Developing university students' argumentative discourse : = An ill-structured issue pertaining to Black African immigrants and African Americans.

Record Type:	Language materials, manuscript : Monograph/item
Title/Author:	Developing university students' argumentative discourse :/
Reminder of title:	An ill-structured issue pertaining to Black African immigrants and African Americans.
Author:	Olojo-Adeoye, Olubusayo Oyeyemi.
Description:	1 online resource (177 pages)
Notes:	Source: Dissertation Abstracts International, Volume: 77-09(E), Section: A.
Contained By:	Dissertation Abstracts International77-09A(E).
Subject:	Curriculum development. -
Online resource:	click for full text (PQDT)
ISBN:	9781339685847

Developing university students' argumentative discourse : = An ill-structured issue pertaining to Black African immigrants and African Americans.
Olojo-Adeoye, Olubusayo Oyeyemi.

Developing university students' argumentative discourse :An ill-structured issue pertaining to Black African immigrants and African Americans. - 1 online resource (177 pages)

Source: Dissertation Abstracts International, Volume: 77-09(E), Section: A.

Thesis (Ph.D.)

Includes bibliographical references

The overarching goal of this three-article five-chapter dissertation was to develop university students' argument-counterargument integration abilities in persuasive essay writing on an ill-structured issue pertaining to black African immigrants and African Americans. Article One consisted of using phenomenography as a research approach to identify the qualitatively different ways university students perceive black African immigrants and African Americans. The university participants had 24 perceptions in which 10 pertained to black African immigrants and 14 to African Americans. The perceptions were grouped into six descriptive categories. The variations in perceptions were then used as statements for argumentation. The study implies that university students' perceptions can be translated into arguments or claims to teach argumentation. Article Two is a mixed methods study that examined the effectiveness of criteria instruction and collaborative reasoning on university students' argumentation abilities. The study consisted of 23 participants in the experimental group and 17 in the control. The following data were collected over the course of 10 weeks: participants' pre-tests, mid-tests, post-tests, and final term papers; audio recordings of the collaborative reasoning group discussions; and observation notes. Analyses were done using a rubric, statistical tests, and dialogue types. The Mann-Whitney U test indicated that while there was no significant statistical difference between the experimental group and control group at the start of study (pre-test), there was a significant statistical difference between the groups on the mid-test, post-test, and final term paper. The findings indicate that the experimental group exhibited better argument-counterargument integration on the writing assessments as a result of learning the criteria instruction and participating in collaborative reasoning. A qualitative analysis revealed that mixed dialogue transpired in each collaborative reasoning group. The study implies that criteria instruction and collaborative reasoning can be used to develop university students' argumentative discourse. Article Three is a case study that documented two first-year university students' experiences in the learning of argument-counterargument integration in persuasive essay writing. Learning the criteria instruction for argumentation and participating in collaborative reasoning groups helped the case study university students (one) construct arguments using key elements specified in modified TAP, (two) discuss and explore the ill-structured issue with other university students, and (three) acquire information to develop their arguments and counterarguments. The study implies that educators meet with university students independently and recurrently to monitor students' learning since paper analyzing is not enough to comprehend students' knowledge and understanding of argumentation.

Electronic reproduction.
Ann Arbor, Mich. :
ProQuest,
2018

Mode of access: World Wide Web

ISBN: 9781339685847Subjects--Topical Terms:

1148494
Curriculum development.
Index Terms--Genre/Form:

554714
Electronic books.

Developing university students' argumentative discourse : = An ill-structured issue pertaining to Black African immigrants and African Americans.
LDR:04329ntm a2200361Ki 4500 001 911020
005 20180517121917.5
006 m o u
007 cr mn||||a|a||
008 190606s2016 xx obm 000 0 eng d
020 $a 9781339685847
035 $a (MiAaPQ)AAI10105069
035 $a (MiAaPQ)wayne:12878
035 $a AAI10105069
040 $a MiAaPQ $b eng $c MiAaPQ
099 $a TUL $f hyy $c available through World Wide Web
100 1 $a Olojo-Adeoye, Olubusayo Oyeyemi. $3 1182609
245 1 0 $a Developing university students' argumentative discourse : $b An ill-structured issue pertaining to Black African immigrants and African Americans.
264 0 $c 2016
300 $a 1 online resource (177 pages)
336 $a text $b txt $2 rdacontent
337 $a computer $b c $2 rdamedia
338 $a online resource $b cr $2 rdacarrier
500 $a Source: Dissertation Abstracts International, Volume: 77-09(E), Section: A.
500 $a Adviser: Jazlin Ebenezer.
502 $a Thesis (Ph.D.) $c Wayne State University $d 2016.
504 $a Includes bibliographical references
520 $a The overarching goal of this three-article five-chapter dissertation was to develop university students' argument-counterargument integration abilities in persuasive essay writing on an ill-structured issue pertaining to black African immigrants and African Americans. Article One consisted of using phenomenography as a research approach to identify the qualitatively different ways university students perceive black African immigrants and African Americans. The university participants had 24 perceptions in which 10 pertained to black African immigrants and 14 to African Americans. The perceptions were grouped into six descriptive categories. The variations in perceptions were then used as statements for argumentation. The study implies that university students' perceptions can be translated into arguments or claims to teach argumentation. Article Two is a mixed methods study that examined the effectiveness of criteria instruction and collaborative reasoning on university students' argumentation abilities. The study consisted of 23 participants in the experimental group and 17 in the control. The following data were collected over the course of 10 weeks: participants' pre-tests, mid-tests, post-tests, and final term papers; audio recordings of the collaborative reasoning group discussions; and observation notes. Analyses were done using a rubric, statistical tests, and dialogue types. The Mann-Whitney U test indicated that while there was no significant statistical difference between the experimental group and control group at the start of study (pre-test), there was a significant statistical difference between the groups on the mid-test, post-test, and final term paper. The findings indicate that the experimental group exhibited better argument-counterargument integration on the writing assessments as a result of learning the criteria instruction and participating in collaborative reasoning. A qualitative analysis revealed that mixed dialogue transpired in each collaborative reasoning group. The study implies that criteria instruction and collaborative reasoning can be used to develop university students' argumentative discourse. Article Three is a case study that documented two first-year university students' experiences in the learning of argument-counterargument integration in persuasive essay writing. Learning the criteria instruction for argumentation and participating in collaborative reasoning groups helped the case study university students (one) construct arguments using key elements specified in modified TAP, (two) discuss and explore the ill-structured issue with other university students, and (three) acquire information to develop their arguments and counterarguments. The study implies that educators meet with university students independently and recurrently to monitor students' learning since paper analyzing is not enough to comprehend students' knowledge and understanding of argumentation.
533 $a Electronic reproduction. $b Ann Arbor, Mich. : $c ProQuest, $d 2018
538 $a Mode of access: World Wide Web
650 4 $a Curriculum development. $3 1148494
650 4 $a Higher education. $3 1148448
650 4 $a Rhetoric. $3 567738
655 7 $a Electronic books. $2 local $3 554714
690 $a 0727
690 $a 0745
690 $a 0681
710 2 $a ProQuest Information and Learning Co. $3 1178819
710 2 $a Wayne State University. $b Curriculum and Instruction. $3 1182610
773 0 $t Dissertation Abstracts International $g 77-09A(E).
856 4 0 $u http://pqdd.sinica.edu.tw/twdaoapp/servlet/advanced?query=10105069 $z click for full text (PQDT)