Search

The influence of the Common Core State Standards (CCSS) has increased attention on the argument writing genre in K-12 writing and literacies. Approaches to argument have been informed by cognitive and structural approaches, with some attention to social dimensions (Newell, Beach, Smith, & VanDerHeide, 2011). Less attention has been given to language and the manner in which purpose and audience inform language choice, especially at the secondary level (Fang & Schleppegrell, 2010). Further, audience and language use are affected by context, culture, and community. To date, rural contexts have often been overlooked in education research, and particularly in writing and literacies (e.g., Azano, 2015). Drawing on appraisal theory (Martin & White, 2005) to inform the interpersonal dynamics present in student-audience relationships that inform language use, the current study explored five experiences of an argument writing project developed as a collaborative initiative by three secondary English / Language Arts (ELA) teachers participating in a rural education network in the Pacific Northwest region of the US. The study explored the relationship between writers’ audience and students’ language choices in their argument writing, as well as teachers’ instruction and support of language. Data collection sources included students’ argument writing samples, teacher interviews, student interviews, and instructional artifacts. Findings indicate that multiple factors inform students’ audience awareness and language choices, including the relationship between students’ rural identities and audience, and teachers’ instruction and support of audience and language. In student writing, audience awareness led to more intentional selection of reasons and evidence to support a claim, as well as effective use of technical and evaluative language. Having an explicit, authentic audience broadly resulted in more effective language use, but students experienced difficulty negotiating between local audience and global perspectives. Findings suggest that incorporating explicit, authentic audiences and providing instructional support in audience and language will lead to more effective argument writing. Implications for practice, policy, and research are discussed, emphasizing interpretation in rural contexts.