Digital Writing Tools
Teaching Argumentative Essays beyond the Traditional Frontiers
Soni T. Tandiana, Fuad Abdullah and U. Komara
Teacher of English Education Department, Siliwangi University, Tasikmalaya, West Java, Indonesia
Keywords: Argumentative essays, EFL learners, Classroom activities, Digital Writing Tools.
Abstract: Argumentative essay is a text type to convince the readers and drive them to perform an action as framed by
the writers. Constructing an argument within such an essay can determine how the writers persuade and the
readers are persuaded (Rex, et. al. 2010). However, insufficient experience, unsupported prior knowledge and
limited access to information may be a few problematic obstacles for the students to create reasonable and
convincing arguments. For this reason, this study delineated how Digital Writing Tools (DWTs) were utilized
to teach and learn argumentative essays. It involved five EFL learners of an English Education Department
of a University in Tasikmalaya. Classroom observations were deployed as a primary technique to collect the
data. The findings revealed that the teacher and the learners performed various classroom activities while
teaching and learning argumentative essays with Digital Writing Tools such as (1) teacher’s explanations of
learning materials, (2) teacher’s suggestions on the students’ argumentative essays writing, (3) teacher’s
exemplification of learning materials, (4) students’ arguments without using DWTs, (5) teacher’s suggestions
for using DWTs, (6) students’ learning activities with DWTs, (7) teacher’s modelling of text (s) and (8)
students’ arguments after using DWTs. This study suggests that DWTs could foster pedagogical practices in
the digital writing classroom.
1 INTRODUCTION
A rapid advancement of technology and its
integration into language teaching and learning has
significantly changed how teachers and students
communicate each other, including the way they
listen, speak, read and write (UNESCO, 2004;
Kilpatrick, et. al., 2014; Simpson and Obdalova,
2014). In this sense, it enables them to collaborate,
solve problems, make decisions and consume
information (Techataweewan and Prasertsin, 2017).
Besides, the integration of technologies into
classroom activities could bridge the students’ prior
knowledge, learning materials and preceding learning
experiences (Kilpatrick, et. al., 2014, p. 609). Further,
the students require technological skills for preparing
them to enter a novel competitive workforce (Nobles
and Paganucci, 2015, p. 17).
Hence, the growth of Information and
Communication Technology (ICT) in language
teaching and learning does not only affect the
students’ personal lives but also social and
professional ones (Khubyari and Narafshan, 2016, p.
59).
In Indonesia, writing is presumed as one of the
most challenging skills for language learners to grasp
(Widodo, 2008). As a matter of fact, time constraints
become one of the classical problems during teaching
and learning writing (Pujianto, et. al. 2014, p. 100). It
means that the students only write in the target
language (e.g. English) while performing classroom
activities and switch the use of English into their L1
(regional languages) and L2 (Bahasa Indonesia) after
leaving the class. In addition, the practices of teaching
writing in Indonesia typically have been heavily
relied on fostering the students’ knowledge about
spelling, word formation, vocabulary, grammar and
theories of writing instead of the contexts, students’
requirements and goals (Alwasilah, 2001, p. 25). In a
similar vein, the students’ tediousness of learning
English, their insufficient lexical and grammatical
competences in English, the teachers’ monotonous
teaching strategies and the absence of applying
instructional media emerge as other factors affecting
their writing skills (Megawati and Anugerahwati,
2012, p. 184). For these reasons, teaching writing
should not only be emphasized on the linguistic
accuracy as proposed by the traditional product-
oriented writing paradigm (e.g. providing the
336
Tandiana, S., Abdullah, F. and Komara, U.
Digital Writing Tools - Teaching Argumentative Essays beyond the Traditional Frontiers.
DOI: 10.5220/0007167003360343
In Proceedings of the Tenth Conference on Applied Linguistics and the Second English Language Teaching and Technology Conference in collaboration with the First International Conference
on Language, Literature, Culture, and Education (CONAPLIN and ICOLLITE 2017) - Literacy, Culture, and Technology in Language Pedagogy and Use, pages 336-343
ISBN: 978-989-758-332-2
Copyright © 2018 by SCITEPRESS – Science and Technology Publications, Lda. All rights reserved

students’ a corrective feedback on the individual
grammatical constituents at the sentence level) (Ling,
1984) but also the macro strategies (e.g. planning,
drafting and revising) and micro strategies (e.g.
content, words and syntax) (Cumming, 2001).
Given these facts, the impetus of paradigmatic
shift from traditional-oriented language teaching to
technological-based language teaching has crucially
influenced teaching and learning second language
writing, particularly English. To illustrate, Cotos
(2011) introduced Intelligent Academic Discourse
Evaluator (IADE) as an automated writing evaluation
(AWE) feedback to teach and to learn L2 academic
writing. She argued that IADE’s colour-coded and
numerical feedback has facilitative potentials in
language learning. More practically, it was
represented in evidence of focus on discourse form,
noticing of negative evidence, improved rhetorical
quality of writing and increased learning gains (p.
420). Likewise, Alanazi (2013) claimed that
electronic writing (E-writing) can assist the students
to write faster and motivate them to be flourishing
writers. Also, E-writing supports the students’ writing
pleasure and shapes their experiences developing
their positive self-esteem and recognition of formal
writing activities. Moreover, Rodrigues, et. al. (2016)
contended that the use of Wiki as web 2.0 enables the
teachers to regularly supervise their students’
progress through their Wiki pages. In addition, Wiki
can establish a learning milieu for the students to
accomplish their writing activities and gain additional
information about writing (p. 20). Furthermore,
Hergenrader (2015) assumed that games would not
only foster the students’ critical sensibilities as media
consumers but also sharpen their skills in using digital
tools. Additionally, games enable the students to
perform collaborative projects, notably in a creative
writing class (p. 57). In short, integrating technology
into language teaching and learning generates an
innovative paradigm among English language
teachers currently.
Argumentative essay is a text type to convince the
readers and drive them to perform an action as framed
by the writers. Argumentation is a popular kind of
essays question for it forces the students to think on
their own positions. For instance, they should take a
stance on an issue, reinforce their stances with strong
reasons and fortify their reasons with solid evidence
(Oshima and Hogue, 2006, p. 142). As a result,
argumentative essay is sketched to accentuate on
debatable issues in the public eyes. More practically,
it is deployed to be one of the placement tests for the
prospective university students and a way to help
them detect and overcome a controversial issue in
their daily activities due to Western culture believes
it as a medium for reinforcing intellectual
development (Macdonald and Macdonald, 1996, p.
388). Consequently, argumentative essay is
considered as an indispensable genre for the
university students.
Empirically, there have been various
investigations focusing on teaching and learning
argumentative essays. To depict, Hillocks Jr (2010)
studied how teaching arguments affected the
development of critical thinking and writing. Besides,
de Smet, et. al. (2011) identified the effect of
electronic outlining on the quality of students’ writing
products and how outlining affects perceived mental
effort during the writing task, especially
argumentative texts. They reported that electronic
outlining increased the quality of students’
argumentative texts and mitigated mental effort.
Moreover, Soleymanzadeh and Gholami (2014)
scrutinized the possible correlation between the
students’ essay scores based on IELTS analytic essay
scoring criteria and those based on the ratio of
thematic progression patterns. Furthermore, Tandiana
(2014) identified the students’ errors in
argumentative writing. The findings revealed that the
weak arguments, bias claims and unconvincing
warrants become the salient causes of their errors.
Similarly, Tandiana et. al. (2016) probed the
application of Talk-Write Technique to enhance the
students’ argumentative writing skills, particularly in
terms of Discussion essays. They claimed that the
implementation of Talk-Write technique enabled the
students to learn in a more effective, blissful and
energetic situation. Recently, Pessoa (2017) delved
how SFL and explicit language instruction can
enhance the teaching of argumentation in the
disciplines. She noted that SFL-based
conceptualization of argumentation was able to cater
teachers and students with the linguistic tools to learn
to argue for the sake of engaging them in arguing to
learn. Unfortunately, there has been surprisingly a
few studies scrutinizing the deployment of
technology to teaching argumentative essays or
argumentative writing (e.g. Tan-Ooi, 2013; Ismial,
2016; Fink, 2017), particularly in Indonesian EFL
context (e.g. Silcha, 2016 et. al.). With this in mind,
this study was in part motivated to fill the voids in
delineating how Digital Writing Tools are utilized to
teach and learn argumentative essays.
Digital Writing Tools - Teaching Argumentative Essays beyond the Traditional Frontiers
337

2 LITERATURE REVIEW
2.1 Description of Argumentative
Essay
Argumentative essay refers to an essay functioning to
convince the readers about the truth of an essential
statement (Hyland, 1990). It engages the arguments,
facts, reasons, description or explanation favouring
the matter being argued to reinforce the writers’
positions (Emilia, 2005, p. 59). Moreover, Fahim and
Mirzaii (2013, p. 8) claim that the capacity to write
argumentatively relies on EFL/ESL learners’
equipment of intellectual capacity to think critically.
Consequently, the writer’s ability to think critically
can influence how they argue in their writing.
Likewise, the writers should be able to situate
themselves in what positions they are related to an
arguable issue. In this case, ensuring the readers with
reasoning and facts can be a supportive aspect while
arguing (Lap and Truc, 2014, p. 68). Therefore,
argumentative essay is probably constructed in a
particular way, such as the inclusion of an opinion
with support, a statement of a counterargument, a
rebuttal and a concluding statement espousing the
opening opinion (Chase, 2011, p. 1-2).
The structure of writing, argumentative essay is
assumed to possess some versions of essay outline
(Hyland, 1990; Toumlin, 2003; Emilia, 2005).
Initially, Hyland (1990) views argumentative essay
from the genre analysis, In this case, a text (essay) is
outlined based on its purpose rather than content. The
essay is considered as the highest unit of description
consisting of organized boundaries and an
unambiguous function. Specifically, this essay is
characteristically typified by a three-stage structure,
namely Thesis, Argument and Conclusion (Hyland,
1990, p. 68). Actually, each stage consists of moves
functioning to specify the information within those
stages (Thesis, Argument and Conclusion) (Hyland,
1990). Shortly, the units of essay described in this
view tends to emphasize on the communicative
purposes of written language.
The present study determines Argumentative
essay as the focus of investigation it enables the
students to evaluate the issue based on two different
perspectives (Bailey, 2006) and decide one of them as
the final judgement.
2.2 Teaching Arguentative Essays in
Indonesian EFL Contexts
Writing argumentative essay has obviously become
one of the most crucial enterprises in higher education
level (Crowhurst, 1988; Hillocks Jr, 2010; Helwa,
2014). To illustrate, it assists the students to write
miscellaneous writing tasks. This requires the
students to be able to ensure the audiences (readers)
and focus on a situation representing the distinctions
between the writers’ and the readers’ beliefs and
attitudes (Helwa, 2014, p. 3). Another reason is the
coherent production of a well-argued case is
necessitated in university entrance examinations and
in the process of scientific articles selection
(Crowhurst, 1988, p. 3). This indicates that the
university students are expected to posses an arguing
capacity when they learn at the tertiary level of
education as the representation of their critical
thinking (Hillocks Jr, 2010). Similarly, the students’
success in academic realm and career is probably
affected by the ability to identify a case and argue to
it effectively (Hillocks Jr, 2010, p. 25). Moreover, the
L2 writers tend to have insufficient individualized
voice compared to L1 ones so that such a
phenomenon raises an assumption that L2 writers as
falling short of native standards by the non-discerding
readers (Helms-Park and Stapleton, 2003). For these
reasons, the appropriate use of techniques during
teaching writing is presumably required, notably in
producing an argumentative essay.
Responding to the magnitude of teaching
argumentative essay to the higher education level
students, there have been a number of inquiries
conducted in the last years. For examples, Chase
(2011) analyzed the argumentative writing skills of
academically uderprepared college students at the
Columbia University. Besides, Dabaghi, et. al.,
(2013) tried to compare the dissimilar roles of critical
thinking in students’ performance on argumentative
and narrative written tasks with Watson-Glaser
Critical Thinking Appraisal (WGCTA).
In Indonesian educational context, various
research also have apparently emerged as a reaction
to the importance of writing and teaching how to
write argumentative essays. For instances,
Mutiaraningrum and Cahyono (2015) conducted a
study on examining online debate in argumentative
writing course by exploring its potentials and
challenges. In particular, the researchers distributed
the questionnaires to identify their participants’
thought about the potentials and challenges of online
debate. As a result, they found that the potentials of
online debate covered the form of time flexibility,
CONAPLIN and ICOLLITE 2017 - Tenth Conference on Applied Linguistics and the Second English Language Teaching and Technology
Conference in collaboration with the First International Conference on Language, Literature, Culture, and Education
338

learning autonomy, and critical thinking based on the
Revised Bloom’s Taxonomy. Besides, the challenges
of the online debate were the emergence of delayed
responses, confusion in the implementation on the
part of the students, and technical problems dealing
with signing up and posting delivery
(Mutiaraningrum and Cahyono, 2015, p. 43).
2.3 Description of Digital Writing
The development of web-based technology is
assumed to boost teaching writing and bridge the
disparity of writing skills (Vue, et. al., 2016).
Additionally, Mayer (2005) adds that the studies on
the impacts of multimedia to language learning
demonstrated that providing information in multiple
formats (e.g. text with pictures, complex diagrams
with audio narration, animations, simulations, and
video) presumably reduced cognitive load on
working memory, increase information processing
and extend comprehension. In this respect, webs, as a
multimodal platform, cater a plethora of options for
accessing, presenting, encouraging writing practices
and acquisition of writing insights and skills (Vue, et.
al., 2016).
2.4 The Practical Implementation of
Digital Writing Tools
Digital literacy has allowed the students to access
various information easily. As an example, it allows
the users to obtain rich data available in internet
compared to the paper-based resources.
Managing information is a digital literacy
component that students acquire and use in their daily
lives when joining online communities and keeping
up with the diverse networks they are a part of.
Moreover, integrating and evaluating information are
vital skills required by the students in the current age.
With this in mind, the teacher should be able to play
their roles as an expert in evaluating information,
showing students the differences between reliable and
unrealiable digital resources.
The most important components of digital literacy
are common for future computer users and ICT
professionals: accessing, managing, evaluating,
integrating, creating, and communicating information
individually or collaboratively in a networked,
computer-supported, and web-based environment for
learning, working, or leisure. These skills are directly
related to basic competences. Therefore, digital
literacy is as relevant as traditional literacies, such as
reading and writing, mathematics, or the management
of social behaviour. Below is an overview of the
relationships of digital literacy components and basic
competences.
Accessing information, defined as identifying
information sources as well as having the techniques
for collection and retrieval of such information, is a
basic component of all literacies. Digital literacy
significantly broadens the scope of potential sources
of knowledge. However, information search in this
area requires more sophisticated information
management skills than traditional literacies that use
resources whose validity and authenticity is
relatively easier to assess. When using an Internet-
based knowledge portal, applying an existing
organizational or classification scheme to evaluate its
content is not always possible. Books and journals,
for example, may be validated by the reputation of
their publishers. Conversely, most web sites do not
bear the label of a well- known institution.
In relation to such an issue, evaluating
information (making judgements about its adequacy,
currency, usefulness, quality, relevance, or
efficiency) comes to play here. Being able to
determine the authority or time of the information
retrieved online requires digital literacy skills that
only the expertise and experience of education may
furnish individuals.
2.5 Previous Studies on Digital Writing
Tools
The advent of sophisticated technologies in English
language teaching and learning has rapidly and
considerably affected the way of reading, writing and
communicating (Kilpatrick, et. al. 2014). More
specifically, Blogs, wikis, email, instant messaging,
text messaging, digital gaming, social networking,
and applications software have all become an integral
part of students’ community and personal literacies
(New London Group, 1996; Leu and Kinzer, 2000;
Kress, 2003; Kist, 2010). Conversely, although the
increasing amount of studies on teaching writing
based on technology (Niesten and Sussex, 2006; Chi,
2006; Zochs, et. al.; Mc Williams et. al., 2015; 2016;
Yamac and Ulusoy, 2016), a little attention is
addressed to the study investigating the
implementation of digital writing tools in teaching
writing (e.g. Kilpatrick, 2014). In fact, the integration
of technologies to the teaching and learning process
potentially enables the students to connect their prior
knowledge and construct their previous experiences
(Kilpatrick, 2014: 609). To fill this void, the current
study depicted how Digital Writing Tools (DWTs)
were utilized to teach and learn argumentative essays.
Digital Writing Tools - Teaching Argumentative Essays beyond the Traditional Frontiers
339

3 METHOD
The present study applied the lesson observations in
which the transcription was provided as the primary
data to analyze. Once the data had been collected,
they were analysed qualitatively. This enables to have
interpretive scheme. The data of this study were
obtained from lesson observation of the classroom
activities covering the teacher’s performance and the
students learning activities. The whole classroom
activities were recorded by utilizing video recorder.
The video recording of lesson observation was
transcribed and analysed as the primary data of this
study. The data were taken focusing on answering the
research question, how are DWTs are utilized to teach
and learn argumentative essays in the classroom?
Once the data had been collected, they were
analyzed qualitatively. This enabled us to have
interpretive scheme. The data of this study namely
observational data were analyzed by employing
Anderson’s interaction framework model (2009) to
explore the digital data collected from the
observations. Another term of this enterprise was the
so-called micro-interaction analysis (Widodo, 2016).
Digital data were transcribed and reviewed.
Technically, the actions, moves and interactional
patterns of the participants were organized and
classified into particular interactional patterns, such
as the interaction of the teacher-the students and the
students-students.
4 FINDINGS AND DISCUSSION
Anchored by the in-depth analysis proposed by
Anderson’s interaction framework (2009) to identify
the digital data collected from the observations, the
researchers discovered eight emergent themes. The
themes were drawn based on interactional patterns,
such as the interaction of the teacher-the students and
the students-students. Such themes are (1) teacher’s
explanations of learning materials, (2) teacher’s
suggestions on the students’ argumentative essays
writing, (3) teacher’s exemplification of learning
materials, (4) students’ arguments without using
DWTs, (5) teacher’s suggestions for using DWTs, (6)
students’ learning activities with DWTs, (7) teacher’s
modelling of text (s) and (8) students’ arguments after
using DWTs. As a result, more specific explanations
on those themes are presented subsequently.
4.1 Teacher’s Explanations of
Learning Materials
Teacher’s explanations of learning materials
occupied the most frequent appearance, namely 22. It
occurred in the entire observations, namely
observation 1 (four occurrences), observation 2 (13
occurrences) and observation 3 (five occurrences). As
an example, the teacher defined what writing is and
wrote his definition on the whiteboard, as depicted
below.
Excerpt # 1
Yah, writing in here means pouring something,
pouring ideas by getting ideas, generating and
devolving ideas into a written form or printed
material. ((Teacher wrote the sentence on the white
board)) (Video # 1 Observation 1)
In this case, the teacher explained the definition of
writing to help the students understand the basic
concept of writing, such as generating ideas, pouring
and developing them into the written mode.
4.2 Teacher’s Suggestions on the
Students’ Argumentative Essays
Writing
In relation to teacher’s suggestions on the students’
argumentative essays writing, the teacher suggested
his students to review their own B.A. theses, notably
the first paragraph of Introduction section. In this
sense, he questioned the existence of theories in their
Introduction section. Then, he confirmed that they did
not need to insert theories in Introduction section due
to it functions to introduce their writing issues. He
mentioned that his claim was based on the viewpoints
of some authors, scientists or linguists. Basically, it is
aimed at convincing the students towards his claim.
4.3 Teacher’s Exemplification of
Learning Materials
Dealing with teacher’s exemplification of learning
materials, the teacher gave an example about how to
solve the grammatical errors in TOEFL test. In
particular, he suggested his students to use their prior
knowledge to help them answer each question
correctly. Besides, he contended that the use of
analogy during taking TOEFL test enables them to
predict the correct answer through connecting their
prior knowledge to the problems their faced currently.
For instance, if they find a question about a common
expression in English and they are required to match
the use of expression and the context where it occurs.
CONAPLIN and ICOLLITE 2017 - Tenth Conference on Applied Linguistics and the Second English Language Teaching and Technology
Conference in collaboration with the First International Conference on Language, Literature, Culture, and Education
340

4.4 Students’ Arguments without using
DWTs
The teacher seemingly endeavored to examine the
students’ prior knowledge of what writing is. In
response to it, student 1 answered that writing is a
way how the ideas are transformed into a written
mode and it was based on his personal opinion. Even,
he presumably showed a doubtful expression when
answering such a question. This fact is supported
from his uncertain facial expression, namely seeing
his friends to get a help. Another response of student
1 was to address the teacher’s question on how
Obama can produce a powerful and convincing
arguments while delivering a speech. To illustrate, he
assumed that Obama said “We are together, we will
make American to be better on the future.”
Nonetheless, his argument has not convinced the
teacher because it was not backed up by the
convincing facts. With this in mind, although the
student 1 tried to actively answer each question posed
by the teacher, his answer was not based on the
theoretical underpinnings or empirical evidence. In
other words, his answer still cannot convince the
teacher. This phenomenon belongs students’
arguments without using DWTs as one of the
classroom activities because he did not use any digital
devices to search for supportive information on his
arguments.
4.5 Teacher’s Suggestions for using
DWTs
Teacher encouraged the students to utilize DWTs
while arguing, including when they are writing an
argumentative essay. He further suggested his
students to utilize any sorts of DWTs, such as Google.
Hence, they can discover more accurate information
and produce a convincing, powerful and well-
established argument. This activity is categorized as
teacher’s suggestions for using DWTs.
4.6 Students’ Learning Activities with
DWTs
The excerpt # 15 below denotes that the students did
what the teacher’s suggestions for using DWTs while
comprehending and producing argumentative essays.
For example, they were required to locate the
definition of writing based on various theories or
experts’ notions. This classroom activity belongs to
students’ learning activities with DWTs.
Excerpt # 15
The students were searching in google the
definition of writing (Video # 1 Observation
1)
4.7 Teacher’s Modelling of Text (s)
Another finding revealed that the teacher tried to
facilitate the students to recognize and understand
types of argumentative essay through giving a
number of texts as models. In other words, he did not
only teach his students argumentative essays
theoretically but also practically. As a result, the
students can internalize the learning materials (e.g.
argumentative essays) conveyed by the teacher and
put it into practice. This type of classroom activity
enables the students to have a learning experience on
recognizing each part of argumentative essays
systematically. Briefly stated, this activity is called as
teacher’s modelling of text (s).
4.8 Students’ Arguments After using
DWTs
The excerpt # 18 emphasizes the previous classroom
activities (e.g. teacher’s suggestions for using DWTs
and students’ learning activities with DWTs)
representing the importance of applying DWTs to
learn and write argumentative essays. Also, this
classroom activity contradicts to another one, namely
students’ arguments without using DWTs. The most
salient example can be viewed from the quality of
arguments produced by the students before and after
using DWTs
Overall, DWTs give the significant impacts on the
students’ arguments. This is supported by the facts
that the students are apparently more engaged when
learning in the classroom, notably in learning
argumentative essays writing.
5 CONCLUSIONS
This study reported a general overview of findings
obtained from the data analysis procedures. To begin
with, the findings revealed that the teacher frequently
explained the learning materials traditionally without
involving DWTs. This fact is represented by the
amount of such a classroom activities, namely 22
occurrences. Also, he positioned himself as a center
of attention during teaching and learning process in
the classroom. Hence, his teaching approach
presumably still reflects teacher-centered approach.
Unfortunately, the use of DWTs in the classroom
Digital Writing Tools - Teaching Argumentative Essays beyond the Traditional Frontiers
341

remains a limited portion. However, he tried to lead
his students to apply DWTs during teaching and
learning process because one of the classroom
activities in which he performed is suggestions for
using teacher’s DWTs.
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
This study is a part of the research project funded by
Ministry of Research, Technology and Higher
Education of the Republic of Indonesia. In particular,
we are extremely grateful to the rector, head of
Institute for Research and Community Services, the
dean of Faculty of Educational Sciences and
Teachers’ Training and the colleagues in English
Education Department of Siliwangi University
providing a tremendous opportunity for developing
our professionalism and leading to the philosophy of
long life learning so that our motivation in conducting
research increases significantly.
REFERENCES
Alanazi, M. A. 2013. Using electronic writing to promote
students' writing (Unpublished M.A. Theses). Eastern
Washington University, Cheney, Washington.
Alwasilah, A. C. 2001. Language, culture, and education:
Portrait of contemporary Indonesia. Bandung: CV.
Andira.
Anderson, K. T. 2009. Applying positioning theory to the
analysis of classroom interactions: Mediating micro-
identities, macro kinds, and ideologies of knowing.
Linguistics and Education, 20, pp. 291–310.
Cahyono, B. Y., Mutiaraningrum, I., 2015. Indonesian EFL
Teachers’ Familiarity with and Opinion on the Internet-
Based Teaching of Writing. English Language
Teaching, 9(1), p. 199-208.
Cotos, E. 2011. Potential of automated writing evaluation
feedback. Calico Journal, 28(2), pp. 420-459.
Cumming, A. 2001. Learning to write in a second language:
two decades of research. International Journal of
English Studies, pp. 1(2), 1-23.
De Smet, M. J., Broekkamp, H., Brand‐Gruwel, S. and
Kirschner, P. A., 2011. Effects of electronic outlining
on students' argumentative writing performance.
Journal of computer assisted learning, 27(6), pp. 557-
574.
Fink, R., 2017. Rap and Technology Teach the Art of
Argument. Learning Disabilities: A Contemporary
Journal, 15(1), pp.39-53.
Hergenrader, T. 2015. Game spaces: Videogames as story-
generating systems for creative writers. In Michael
Dean Clark, Trent Hergenrader and Joseph Rein (Eds.),
Creative Writing in the digital age theory, practice, and
pedagogy (pp. 46-59). London: Bloomsbury Academic.
Hillocks Jr, G. 2010. Teaching argument for critical
thinking and writing: An Introduction. English Journal
99(6), pp. 24–32.
Ismial, A. A. M., 2016. Reflective Blogfolios in the
Language Classroom: Impact on EFL Tertiary
Students’ Argumentative Writing Skills and Ways of
Knowing. Advances in Language and Literary Studies,
7(5), pp.247-261.
Khubyari, L., Narafshan, M.H., 2016. A study on the
impact of MALL (Mobile Assisted Language Learning)
on EFL learners’ reading comprehension. International
Journal of English Language Teaching, 4(2), pp.58-69.
Kilpatrick, J. R., Saulsburry, R., Dostal, H. M., Wolbers, K.
A., Graham, S. 2014. The integration of digital tools
during strategic and interactive writing instruction. In
Rebecca S. Anderson and Clif Mims (Ed.), Handbook
of research on digital tools for writing instruction in K-
12 settings (pp. 608-628). U.S.A.: IGI Global.
Ling, S., 1986. Responding to Product in the Composing
Process.
TESL Canada Journal, 4(1), pp.65-75.
Megawati, F., Anugerahwati, M., 2012. Comic Strips: a
study on the teaching of writing narrative texts to
Indonesian EFL students. TEFLIN Journal, 23(2),
pp.183-205.
Mayer, R. E. 200). Cognitive theory of multimedia
learning. In R. E. Mayer (Ed.), The Cambridge
handbook of multimedia learning (pp. 31–48). New
York, NY: Cambridge University Press.
Nobles, S., Paganucci, L., 2015. Do digital writing tools
deliver? Student perceptions of writing quality using
digital tools and online writing environments.
Computers and Composition, 38, pp.16-31.
Oshima, A., Hogue, A., 2006. Writing Academic English.
White Plains, NY: Pearson Education.
Pujianto, D., Emilia, E., Ihrom, S.M., 2014. A process-
genre approach to teaching writing report text to senior
high school students. Indonesian Journal of Applied
Linguistics, 4(1), pp.99-110.
Pessoa, S., 2017. How SFL and explicit language
instruction can enhance the teaching of argumentation
in the disciplines. Journal of Second Language Writing,
36, pp.77-78.
Rex, L. A., Thomas, E. E., Engel, S., 2010. Applying
Toulmin: Teaching logical reasoning and
argumentative writing. English Journal, pp.56-62.
Rodrigues, P., Williams, S. J. and Vethamani, M. E., 2016.
Student Response to Using Wiki in Written Discourse.
Journal of Interdisciplinary Research in Education, pp.
180.
Silcha, W. N., Mukminatien, N., Ivone, F. M., 2016.
Developing A Web-based Argumentative Writing
Media for Students of English Department. Jurnal
Pendidikan: Teori, Penelitian, dan Pengembangan,
1(9), pp.1848-1852.
Simpson, R., Obdalova, O. A., 2014. New technologies in
higher education–ICT skills or digital literacy?
Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 154, pp.104-
111.
Soleymanzadeh, L., Gholami, J., 2014. Scoring
argumentative essays based on thematic progression
CONAPLIN and ICOLLITE 2017 - Tenth Conference on Applied Linguistics and the Second English Language Teaching and Technology
Conference in collaboration with the First International Conference on Language, Literature, Culture, and Education
342

patterns and IELTS analytic scoring criteria. Procedia-
Social and Behavioral Sciences, 98, pp.1811-1819.
Tandiana, S. T. 2014. Errors Analysis in Argumentative
Writing. Tasikmalaya: Prosiding SIEC’2014 English
Department Siliwangi University.
Tandiana, S. T., Abdullah, F., Komara, U., 2017. Talk-
Write: A groundbreaking technique for shaping the
students’ argumentative writing skills on discussion
essays. Educational Sciences: Jurnal Ilmu Pendidikan
Bahasa Inggris, 2(1), pp.11-20.
Tan-Ooi, L. C., Tan, K. E. 2013. Using WebQLM to
enhance performance in argumentative writing among
year 12 ESL students. Advances in Language and
Literary Studies, 4(1), pp. 57-67.
Toulmin, S. E. 2003. The Uses of Argument: Updated
Edition. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Techataweewan, W., Prasertsin, U., 2017. Development of
digital literacy indicators for Thai undergraduate
students using mixed method research. Kasetsart
Journal of Social Sciences.
Vue, G., Hall, T. E., Robinson, K., Ganley, P., Elizalde, E.
Graham, S., 2016. Informing understanding of young
students’ writing challenges and opportunities: Insights
from the development of a digital writing tool that
supports students with learning disabilities. Learning
Disability Quarterly, 39(2), pp. 83-94.
Widodo, H. P. 2008. Process-based academic essay writing
instruction in an EFL context. Bahasa and Seni, 36(1),
pp. 101-111.
Widodo, H. P. 2016. Engaging students in literature circles:
Vocational English reading programs. Asia-Pacific Edu
Res, 25(2), pp. 347–359.
Digital Writing Tools - Teaching Argumentative Essays beyond the Traditional Frontiers
343