The Effectiveness of Dialogical Argumentation in Supporting Low-Level EAP Learners’ Evidence-Based Writing: A Longitudinal Study

This longitudinal study evaluated the effectiveness of dialogical argumentation in enhancing the quality of written argumentation in evidence-based writing among lower-level EAP (English for Academic Purposes) learners at a Sino-British university in China. The study introduced an argument-based learning design, which incorporated a series of student-centred dialogical argumentation activities, within an EAP classroom setting. To assess the intervention's impact, the study established both a treatment group and a control group, comparing their writing performances across five time points within a semester. These performances were evaluated using an adapted rubric designed to assess the quality of arguments in evidence-based writing. Results from linear mixed-effects models indicated that dialogical argumentation significantly improved the overall writing quality and ‘reasoning’ skills in writing of low-level EAP learners. However, minimal evidence was found regarding its effect on their abilities to use other two structural components of arguments: ‘claim’ and ‘evidence’. The findings underscored the importance of explicit instruction and assessment in the development of ideas in academic evidence-based writing. Additionally, practical pedagogical implications were discussed.