The current study replicated an earlier investigation by Bouwer and van der Veen (2023) where 10 Grade 5 and 6 classrooms in the Netherlands (210 students) were randomly assigned to a treatment or control condition, with treatment students evidencing improvements in the quality of their essays after practice writing argumentative essays, reading and discussing them with a small group of peers, and revising each essay based on the discussion that ensued. In the present study, 12 Grade 2 to 4 classrooms in Türkiye (383 students) were randomly assigned to this write, talk, and rewrite dialogic treatment or to a control condition. Students in the control condition practiced planning and writing the same four argumentative essays as treatment students did during the experiment, and each of these essays was shared with peers (time spent in both conditions was comparable). Control students did not, however, discuss their essay with peers or use such feedback to revise them as was done by students in the write, talk, and rewrite dialogic treatment. When the nested nature of the data and pretest scores were held constant, the quality of the argumentative posttest essays produced by students in the treatment condition evidenced greater improvement than essays written by control students. The same outcome was obtained for the length of essays (number of words) when the nested nature of the data and pretest scores were held constant. This investigation provided evidence that the write, talk, and rewrite dialogic intervention tested by Bouwer and van der Veen (2023) was effective in improving the argumentative writing of even younger students in a different country. Implications for research and practice are provided.