The Dimensions of Argumentative Texts and Their Assessment

Abstract

The definition and the assessment of the quality of argumentative texts has become an increasingly crucial issue in education, classroom discourse, and argumentation theory. The different methods developed and used in the literature are all characterized by specific perspectives that fail to capture the complexity of the subject matter, which remains ill-defined and not systematically investigated. This paper addresses this problem by building on the four main dimensions of argument quality resulting from the definition of argument and the literature in classroom discourse: dialogicity, accountability, relevance, and textuality (DART). We use and develop the insights from the literature in education and argumentation by integrating the frameworks that capture both the textual and the argumentative nature of argumentative texts. This theoretical background will be used to propose a method for translating the DART dimensions into specific and clear proxies and evaluation criteria.

Argument-based teaching

“…Most research has focused on methods to assess students' written argumentation, usually in essays or letters with an argumentative purpose. The most frequently used or adapted instruments for school students are (see also Macagno & Rapanta, 2019 for an overview): Toulmin's (1958)Argument Pattern, looking at the presence of argument elements such as claims, data, warrants, backings, rebuttals, and qualifiers; and Kuhn et al's (2016) coding scheme identifying statements that 'support own', 'support other', 'weaken own', 'weaken other' as well as the so-called 'however' structures that combine an evidence-based support of one's position with a recognition of a strength in a contrary position or a weakness in one's own, followed by an additional evidence to support one's argument (what would correspond to an integrated argument; see also Nussbaum, 2021).…”

Investigating the element distribution of argumentative essay and its quality: The case of Indonesian EFL students’ writing

“…On the other hand, in the dialogical dimension, the different perspectives are also accommodated besides presenting their arguments. This model is claimed to be the most sophisticated because it is presented in a balanced way (Macagno & Rapanta, 2019). In the current study, we were concerned about the dialogical dimension of argumentative essays.…”

Introduction to the Special Issue “Boundaries between dialogic pedagogy and argumentation theory”

“…The highest evidence of skilled argumentative reasoning has been identified with the ability to recognize the restrictions of one's own reasoning through counterarguing against oneself but then integrating these counterarguments in one's own reasoning (Nussbaum, 2021;Rapanta, 2019). This ability is also manifested in the academic writing (Macagno & Rapanta, 2019). Therefore, (skilled) argumentation presupposes dialogue.…”