Argumentation is increasingly recognized as a fundamental intellectual skill, but evidence suggests that few adolescents or adults are skilled arguers. This article reports on an extended (3-year, twice weekly) intervention designed to afford dense practice in dialogic argumentation to middle-school students from traditionally academically disadvantaged backgrounds, with the goal of supporting development of argumentation skills. Students collaborated with peers who shared their positions on a series of social issues, both in small-group argument-building and reflective activities and in electronic dialogues with a succession of opposing-side peers. Annual assessments of individual argumentative skills on new topics showed students gaining in argumentative discourse skills across all 3 years of the intervention. Continued gains during the 3rd year, however, were concentrated among students who began with the least skill, highlighting the potentially equalizing role of such an intervention.
Stored only when both papers are in the corpus — 179 citations exist upstream.