Get 20M+ Full-Text Papers For Less Than $1.50/day. Start a 14-Day Trial for You or Your Team.

Learn More →

Missing the Opportunity to Advance Argumentation Instruction? Reply to Sellnow and Polcar

Missing the Opportunity to Advance Argumentation Instruction? Reply to Sellnow and Polcar ARGUMENTATION AND ADVOCACY 42 (Winter 2006): 175-178 MISSING THE OPPORTUNITY TO ADVANCE ARGUMENTATION INSTRUCTION? REPLY TO SELLNOW AND POLCAR Stephen K. Hunt, Kevin R. Meyer, and LanceR. Lippert Although argumentation can take many different forms and will vary with the unique stylistic and propositional preferences of the individual speaker, pedagogical materials and practices have tended to privilege certain types of evidence and models of reasoning while devaluing others. Our position is that traditional approaches to pedagogy favor particular advocacy preferences while risking marginalization of other legitimate approaches. Specif­ ically, we believe that field dependent (FD) students experience a mismatch between their preferred ways of thinking and argumentation pedagogy. As a result, we urge instructors to include FD thinking and to create a sensitive mismatch between traditional approaches, which favor field independent (FI) thinking, and FD learning preferences. Our advocacy of pedagogical reform is grounded in Witkin's (1978) work on cognitive styles, which is the most widely accepted approach to learning styles in education. Both Polcar (2006) and Sellnow (2006) have raised certain issues regarding our call for reform. Although we have great respect for them both and appreciate their willingness to engage in a discussion about argumentation pedagogy, we http://www.deepdyve.com/assets/images/DeepDyve-Logo-lg.png Argumentation and Advocacy Taylor & Francis

Missing the Opportunity to Advance Argumentation Instruction? Reply to Sellnow and Polcar

Download PDF

Missing the Opportunity to Advance Argumentation Instruction? Reply to Sellnow and Polcar

Abstract

ARGUMENTATION AND ADVOCACY 42 (Winter 2006): 175-178 MISSING THE OPPORTUNITY TO ADVANCE ARGUMENTATION INSTRUCTION? REPLY TO SELLNOW AND POLCAR Stephen K. Hunt, Kevin R. Meyer, and LanceR. Lippert Although argumentation can take many different forms and will vary with the unique stylistic and propositional preferences of the individual speaker, pedagogical materials and practices have tended to privilege certain types of evidence and models of reasoning while devaluing others. Our position is...
Loading next page...
 
/lp/taylor-francis/missing-the-opportunity-to-advance-argumentation-instruction-reply-to-CreDSA0chE
Publisher
Taylor & Francis
Copyright
© 2006 Taylor and Francis Group, LLC
ISSN
2576-8476
eISSN
1051-1431
DOI
10.1080/00028533.2006.11821651
Publisher site
See Article on Publisher Site

Abstract

ARGUMENTATION AND ADVOCACY 42 (Winter 2006): 175-178 MISSING THE OPPORTUNITY TO ADVANCE ARGUMENTATION INSTRUCTION? REPLY TO SELLNOW AND POLCAR Stephen K. Hunt, Kevin R. Meyer, and LanceR. Lippert Although argumentation can take many different forms and will vary with the unique stylistic and propositional preferences of the individual speaker, pedagogical materials and practices have tended to privilege certain types of evidence and models of reasoning while devaluing others. Our position is that traditional approaches to pedagogy favor particular advocacy preferences while risking marginalization of other legitimate approaches. Specif­ ically, we believe that field dependent (FD) students experience a mismatch between their preferred ways of thinking and argumentation pedagogy. As a result, we urge instructors to include FD thinking and to create a sensitive mismatch between traditional approaches, which favor field independent (FI) thinking, and FD learning preferences. Our advocacy of pedagogical reform is grounded in Witkin's (1978) work on cognitive styles, which is the most widely accepted approach to learning styles in education. Both Polcar (2006) and Sellnow (2006) have raised certain issues regarding our call for reform. Although we have great respect for them both and appreciate their willingness to engage in a discussion about argumentation pedagogy, we

Journal

Argumentation and Advocacy – Taylor & Francis

Published: Jan 1, 2006

References

  • Teachers and cultural styles in a pluralistic society
  • The nature of cognitive styles: Problems and promise in educational practice
  • Rethinking the basic public speaking course for African American students and other students of color
  • From dialectical theory to reflective practice: Response to Hunt, Meyer, and Lippert
  • Moving the debate about argumentation pedagogy to the next level: Response to Hunt, Meyer, and Lippert