Dialogical argumentation practice contributes positively to argumentative writing skills. Specifically, deliberative dialogues are effective in promoting argument and counterargument integration in students' essays. However, the potential of dialogic activities may be increased if they are combined with instructional practices. The primary objective of this research is to compare the impact of four intervention programs, aimed at improving argumentative synthesis writing from conflicting sources. The four programs resulted from the combination of two instructional components (Explicit Instruction through video modelling—EI, or a Procedural Guideline—G), while Deliberative Dialogues—DD—were a constant element. We conducted a pre-post quasi-experimental study in which 186 Spanish third grade secondary school students (aged 14–15) participated. We evaluated the quality of the syntheses by examining the level of argumentative coverage (the total number of arguments included in the synthesis) and the level of integration (the type and frequency of the argumentative strategies used in the syntheses). The results showed that the effectiveness of the instructional methods varies according to the synthesis quality indicator. Explicit instruction, in combination with deliberative dialogues, was especially helpful in improving the level of integration of syntheses. The procedural guideline, in combination with deliberative dialogues, contributed significantly to the coverage of arguments. The combination of these two elements did not favor the writing of synthesis as expected, probably due to the conditions in which the intervention was carried out. The findings of this study revealed that the coverage of arguments and integration processes are of different nature, follow different learning paths and require different instructional processes.

对话论证练习对论证写作技巧有积极的贡献。具体而言，协商对话在促进学生论文中的论点和反论点整合方面是有效的。但是，如果将对话活动与教学实践相结合，可能会增加对话活动的潜力。本研究的主要目的是比较四个干预计划的影响，旨在改善来自冲突来源的议论文综合写作。这四个程序是由两个教学组件（通过视频建模的显式教学 - EI 或程序指南 - G）组合而成的，而协商对话 - DD - 是一个不变的元素。我们进行了一项前后准实验研究，其中有 186 名西班牙三年级中学生（14-15 岁）参与。我们通过检查论证覆盖的水平（综合中包含的论证总数）和整合水平（综合中使用的论证策略的类型和频率）来评估综合的质量。结果表明，教学方法的有效性因综合质量指标而异。明确的指导与协商对话相结合，特别有助于提高综合的整合水平。程序指南与协商对话相结合，极大地促进了论点的覆盖。这两个元素的结合并不像预期的那样有利于综合的写作，可能是由于进行干预的条件。