Scaffolding Analytical and Argumentative Writing in Higher Education: Developing Tools and Assessing Outcomes

The ability to analyze and argue effectively is crucial for students’ success in academia and their professional lives. Writing an effective argument involves analysis to put forth an explicit evaluation which typically unfolds in a text with claims and reasons. However, many students, particularly second language (L2) writers, encounter difficulties when writing analytical and argumentative texts, and disciplinary faculty often lack the expertise to make expectations explicit for students (Hirvela, 2017; Schleppegrell, 2006). Our previous QNRF-funded research revealed that without explicit instruction on the linguistic features of argumentation, students often produce non-arguments or emergent arguments that do not entirely meet genre expectations (Pessoa, Mitchell, & Miller, 2017). For instance, in history, students struggle with formulating argumentative theses and maintaining a consistent argumentative stance while managing multiple voices and perspectives (Miller, Mitchell, & Pessoa, 2014). In information systems and business administration case analyses, students face challenges in utilizing their disciplinary knowledge to identify problems, opportunities, and provide recommendations. Instead, students tend to rely on descriptive language, neglecting the assignment’s call for analysis and argumentation (Miller & Pessoa, 2016). To address these needs, we, applied linguists, have embarked on interdisciplinary collaborations at our university to develop a comprehensive set of tools to explicitly scaffold analytical and argumentative writing. These tools aim to clarify the distinction between description, analysis, and argumentation, and make visible the linguistic features of argumentation and the discourse patterns of analysis using disciplinary frameworks. While these tools have proven effective in improving students’ writing in various disciplines, there remains a clear necessity to further enhance the teaching of analytical and argumentative writing to help students meet the rigorous demands of disciplinary writing and better prepare them for professional contexts. Building upon our prior work, we propose a three-year project that aims to enhance our existing pedagogical tools and develop new resources to scaffold analytical and argumentative writing at the university level. To develop these tools, we draw on Systemic Functional Linguistics (SFL) (Halliday, 1994), a sophisticated theory of language that has been used to scaffold writing at the elementary and secondary school level, albeit with less work done at the university level. We aim to make SFL tools accessible for university students and disciplinary teachers, assess the effectiveness of these tools by analyzing student writing, and use this analysis to refine our tools. Ultimately, this project contributes to Qatar’s effort to develop its human capital by enhancing the teaching and production of valuable communication skills needed in today’s knowledge-based society.