FROM TEXT TO ARGUMENT: ACADEMIC READING STRATEGIES FOR BUILDING YOUR OWN ARGUMENT
PDF (Українська)

Keywords

академічне письмо, стратегії читання, критична взаємодія з джерелами, побудова аргументації, аналіз тексту, інтеграція джерел academic writing, reading strategies, critical engagement with sources, argumentation, text analysis, source integration

How to Cite

PRATSOVYTA Н. Д. (2026). FROM TEXT TO ARGUMENT: ACADEMIC READING STRATEGIES FOR BUILDING YOUR OWN ARGUMENT. ACADEMIC STUDIES. SERIES “HUMANITIES”, (2), 93–101. https://doi.org/10.52726/as.humanities/2026.2.12

Abstract

The article examines the organization of reading instruction within an English academic writing course as an integrated pedagogical process aimed not only at text comprehension but also at fostering critical thinking, analytical skills, and the ability to construct independent arguments. Particular attention is paid to developing students’ capacity to engage with academic sources at multiple levels, ranging from basic comprehension to deeper interpretive and evaluative analysis.
Based on an analysis of pedagogical literature and academic writing instruction methodologies (Crowley & Hawhee, 2012; Emmel, 1996; Fulkerson, 1996; Regaignon, 2009), the study discusses an approach proposed in the literature that involves sequential text analysis at the content, formal, and speculative levels for building one’s own argumentation. The content level focuses on identifying key ideas, arguments, and evidence; the formal level addresses textual organization, rhetorical strategies, and linguistic features; and the speculative level involves critical evaluation, intertextual comparison, and the formulation of an independent position.
The article highlights key reading strategies–such as annotation, questioning, summarizing, and synthesis–and explains how their application supports students in formulating their own arguments, synthesizing information, and developing well-substantiated conclusions. The proposed methodologies address common student challenges, including superficial reading and difficulties in identifying and integrating relevant information from multiple sources. Furthermore, the study demonstrates how structured reading practices facilitate the integration of new knowledge into students’ own written work and contribute to the development of coherent, logically grounded academic discourse. This article may be valuable for academic writing instructors, curriculum developers, and researchers in the fields of pedagogy and language education. The described strategies can also be readily adapted for Ukrainian academic writing courses, taking into account the specific features of the national educational context.

https://doi.org/10.52726/as.humanities/2026.2.12
PDF (Українська)

References

Crowley S., Hawhee D. (2012) Ancient rhetorics for contemporary students. 5th ed. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson.

Emmel B. (1996) Evidence as a creative act: An epistemology of argumentative inquiry. In: Emmel B., et al., eds. Argument revisited; argument redefined. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE, pp. 19–44.

Graff G., Birkenstein C. (2006) They say / I say: The moves that matter in persuasive writing. New York, NY; London: W. W. Norton & Company.

Hyland K. (2025) Writing in the AI era: Rethinking writing, research and teaching. Language Teaching, pp. 1–20.

Fulkerson R. (1996) Teaching the argument in writing. Urbana, IL: National Council of Teachers of English.

Regaignon D. R. (2009) Traction: Transferring analysis across the curriculum. Pedagogy: Critical Approaches to Teaching Literature, Language, Composition, and Culture, vol. 9, no. 1, pp. 121–133.

Salvatori M. (1996) The “argument of reading” in the teaching of composition. In: Emmel B., et al., eds. Argument revisited; argument redefined. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE, pp. 181–197.

Creative Commons License

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.