Abstract

Students’ written argumentation, including historical argumentation, is an important aspect of standardized assessments under the Common Core State Standards (CCSS). This mixed methods study explores the differences in students’ written argumentation when inquiry methods of instruction are employed and a rubric designed for CCSS standardized assessment is used in evaluation. Results indicate that inquiry methods do not necessarily improve students’ argumentative writing when scored on CCSS criteria, though qualitative analysis reveals considerable differences in the demonstration of historical thinking by students in the treatment group. Many of these differences were captured with additional quantitative evaluation using a disciplinary specific instrument, though concerns remain regarding the ability to capture student knowledge through purely quantitative means. Implications for further assessment, research and instruction are discussed.