How to improve argumentative synthesis writing using guides and instructional rubrics

Abstract

Undergraduates often struggle performing tasks such as writing argumentative syntheses from conflicting sources. To help with these difficulties, we are interested in evaluating the effectiveness of different instructional aids. Written guides help in the different phases of the process involved in these tasks, and have been employed in many studies focused on writing syntheses and argumentative texts. The effectiveness of a guide improves when accompanied by explicit strategy instruction. Besides, although rubrics have been used primarily to assess the quality of the texts, they may also be used to facilitate the use of integration strategies and self-regulation during the synthesis writing process. Objectives. (1) To compare the efficacy of a guide and a rubric as aids to the process of writing an argumentative synthesis – argument selection and integration; (2) To determine whether explicit strategy instruction enhances the effects of both tools during the intervention and after removing the aids. Method. We asked 120 university students to read four pairs of texts on controversial topics, with the objective of writing argumentative syntheses. After a pre-test, the participants received instruction according to their assigned group (explicit instruction vs. traditional). Afterwards, they wrote two new syntheses with the aid provided (Guide/Rubric). Finally, they wrote a post-test synthesis. Results. The guide facilitated the selection of arguments. Both guide and rubric promoted integration, improving the quality of syntheses. Their impact was greater when the students received explicit instruction on their use