Student Scholar Symposium Abstracts and Posters

Document Type


Publication Date


Faculty Advisor(s)

Jennifer Bevan


This paper aimed to study the relationship between length of serial arguments and perceived resolvability and number of serial arguments and perceived resolvability in the K-12 setting. Role theory explains people’s predictable behaviors based on the roles they take on; thus, it explains the role of parents and teachers in their unique relationships and how roles play into the level of involvement teachers and parents have in the education of children, which can inadvertently result in serial arguments. Role theory was chosen for this study because it works hand-in-hand with identifying predictable behaviors teachers and parents have that contribute to the formation of serial arguments in terms of length and frequency and it can help explain how length and frequency are related to the perceived resolvability of serial arguments among teachers and parents. The hypotheses tested in this study were H1) The length of serial arguments is negatively associated with perceived resolvability in the K-12 education context and H2) K-12 teachers who engage in serial arguments more frequently have lower perceived resolvability The study included 100 participants who were either parents of K-12 students or who were K-12 teachers themselves. Participants were asked to fill out an anonymous survey.

The study found that as the length of serial arguments rose, perceived resolvability fell. Likewise, as the number of serial arguments rose, perceived resolvability fell. Thus, both hypotheses were supported by our findings. Future research should study serial arguments in the K-12 area further, as there was no prior research.


Presented at the Fall 2014 Undergraduate Student Research Day at Chapman University.