To see the other types of publications on this topic, follow the link: Argumentation method.
Journal articles on the topic 'Argumentation method'
Create a spot-on reference in APA, MLA, Chicago, Harvard, and other styles
Consult the top 50 journal articles for your research on the topic 'Argumentation method.'
Next to every source in the list of references, there is an 'Add to bibliography' button. Press on it, and we will generate automatically the bibliographic reference to the chosen work in the citation style you need: APA, MLA, Harvard, Chicago, Vancouver, etc.
You can also download the full text of the academic publication as pdf and read online its abstract whenever available in the metadata.
Browse journal articles on a wide variety of disciplines and organise your bibliography correctly.
1
Nariţa, Ionel. "Argumentation Moods." Acta Universitatis Sapientiae, Communicatio 7, no. 1 (2020): 107–22. http://dx.doi.org/10.2478/auscom-2020-0008.
Full textAbstract:
Abstract Argumentation is an act of communication performed by a speaker aiming to persuade a listener to accept or reject a proposition, named thesis, using another proposition, called argument, and a relation between them – the frame of argumentation. Argumentations are evaluated relatively to the pragmatic value of success and to the logical value of correctness. These values are independent of each other – namely, from the success of an argumentation, nothing can be inferred about its correctitude, and reciprocally. In order to establish the correctness of an argumentation, we can classify all argumentations into moods such as the syllogisms. A necessary condition for the correctitude of an argumentation is the validity of its mood. The validity of the argumentative moods is investigated using the reduction method established by Aristotle for syllogistic moods.
2
Hassan, Raad Ahmed, and Lubna Hussein Salman. "The Argumentative Elements Of Discours In The Plague For Albert Camus Les éléments argumentatifs dans le discours de La Peste d’Albert Camus." Journal of the College of languages, no. 45 (January 2, 2022): 150–60. http://dx.doi.org/10.36586/jcl.2.2022.0.45.0150.
Full textAbstract:
Argumentation is not a contemporary, yet a deep rooted intellectual phenomenon dates back to Romans and Greeks times. The argumentative elements ,the author is trying to convey to the reader, are linguistic procedures aim at persuading and being persuaded of what is true. The present study traces, through Camus’ novel The plague, the best method to construct argumentative techniques used to express the author’s deep philosophies. Résumé L’argumentation n’est pas un phénomène intellectuel nouveau, ses origines reviennent aux savants grecs et romains. Elle est une activité langagière ayant pour objectif de justifier un raisonnement en vue de persuader et convaincre l’autre. Cette argumentation est au centre des discours. Camus essaye juste de transmettre d’une manière argumentative un message au lecteur. C’est cette constatation qui sera l’objet de ce présent travail dans lequel nous allons savoir comment se construit le discours philosophique et argumentatif à travers le roman intitulé La Peste. Ensuite nous allons analyser les éléments argumentatifs que Camus met en scène pour transmettre sa philosophie à son lecteur.
3
Antonova, Irina B. "“IT SEEMS TO ME I KNOW THE TRUTH BUT I HAVE NO WORDS TO EXPRESS IT”: ARGUMENTATION, ITS PECULIARITIES AND POTENTIALS." RSUH/RGGU Bulletin. Series Psychology. Pedagogics. Education, no. 3 (2022): 54–65. http://dx.doi.org/10.28995/2073-6398-2022-3-54-65.
Full textAbstract:
The problem of argumentation caused by the ambiguity and multi-functionality of the phenomenon itself is ranked to be an infinite one. In ancient times argumentation used to be rightly considered a component of cognition and a method to prove the truth. Its functions today have extended considerably – from systematizing the knowledge to influencing rhetorically human views and behavior. It fulfills even more ambitious targets affecting the essence of ethical standards and thus the social and political background of the society. Teaching argumentation is a constituent of the modern educational system in Russia. In accordance with the requirements registered in the State Educational Standard for higher professional training of the Russian Federation (2010), experts in the humanitarian non-linguistic fields must demonstrate the ability to critical thinking which, in its turn, presupposes thinking and speaking logically in both – native and foreign – languages, holding, formulating logically one’s thoughts in the native and foreign languages, holding argumentative discussions, accepting or counter arguing a debatable issue. The author considers the phenomenon of argumentation applying the activity approach and thus analyzing its aims, correlating argumentation and proof concepts, and estimating teacher (argumentator) – student (recipient) relationships. In addition to this, the paper is aimed at considering the factors of transforming educational process from an informative to an argumentative (persuasive) one in which argumentation might be regarded as a method of impact
4
Nasihah, Durotun, and Sonny Elfiyanto. "ARGUMENTATIVE WRITING CONSTRUCTION OF EFL WRITING CLASS THROUGH DECLARATIVE SPEECH ACTS APPROACH." IJEE (Indonesian Journal of English Education) 9, no. 2 (2022): 192–210. http://dx.doi.org/10.15408/ijee.v9i2.28522.
Full textAbstract:
ABSTRACTThis study investigates how Indonesian undergraduate EFL students construct argumentative essays through critical discussion using Declarative speech acts and pragmatic approaches. This study employed a qualitative research method. The data consist of argumentative essays authored by undergraduate students majoring in English at a private university in Indonesia (N=34). Students worked in pairs to discuss a controversial topic, separated into protagonist and antagonist groups. The analysis showed that students used four steps of argumentation: confrontation, opening, argumentation, and conclusion. Most students used confrontation and opening stages in the introduction, argumentation stage in developing a paragraph, and end with a conclusion. To understand the purpose of argumentation, the students used four types of speech acts, which have different functions: assertive, commissive, declarative, and directive speeches. Implementing the declarative speech acts theory helps the students comprehend argumentative writing and trains them to have good critical thinking in resolving different opinions. ABSTRAKPenelitian ini mengkaji bagaimana siswa EFL Indonesia menuliskan esai argumentatif melalui diskusi kritis dengan menggunakan pendekatan pragma-dialektika Van Eemeren dan Grootendorst (1970) dan pragmatis Searle (1969). Penelitian ini menggunakan metode kualitatif. Data berasal dari esai argumentatif semester ketiga yang ditulis oleh mahasiswa Indonesia di jurusan bahasa Inggris. Tiga puluh empat siswa di kelas menulis mendiskusikan topik yang berbeda. Siswa bekerja berpasangan untuk mendiskusikan topik kontroversial, dipisahkan menjadi kelompok protagonis dan antagonis. Analisis mengklaim bahwa siswa menggunakan empat langkah argumentasi: konfrontasi, pembukaan, argumentasi, dan kesimpulan. Penelitian ini menemukan bahwa sebagian besar siswa menggunakan tahap konfrontasi dan pembukaan dalam pendahuluan, tahap argumentasi dalam mengembangkan paragraf, dan diakhiri dengan kesimpulan. Untuk mengetahui tujuan penggunaan argumentasi, siswa menggunakan empat tindak tutur, yang memiliki fungsi berbeda: asertif, komisif, deklaratif, dan direktif. Menerapkan teori pragma-dialektika membantu siswa memahami tulisan argumentatif dan melatih mereka untuk memiliki pemikiran kritis yang baik dalam menyelesaikan pendapat yang berbeda.How to Cite: Nasihah, D., Elfiyanto, S. (2022). Argumentative Writing Construction of EFL Writing Class Through Declarative Speech Acts Approach. IJEE (Indonesian Journal of English Education), 9(2), 192-210. doi:10.15408/ijee.v9i2.28522
5
Macagno, Fabrizio. "Argumentation Profiles." Informal Logic 42, no. 1 (2022): 83–138. http://dx.doi.org/10.22329/il.v42i1.7215.
Full textAbstract:
An argumentation profile is defined as a methodological instrument for analyzing argumentative discourse considering distinct and interrelated dimensions: the types of argument used, their quality, and the emotions triggered. Walton’s theoretical contributions are developed as a coherent analytical and multifaceted toolbox for capturing these aspects. Argumentation schemes are used to detect and quantify the types of argument. Fallacy analysis and the assessment of the implicit premises retrieved through the schemes allow evaluating arguments. Finally, the frequency of emotive words signals the most common emotions aroused. This method is illustrated through a corpus of argumentative tweets of three politicians.
6
Nishina, Kei, and Katsumi Nitta. "Summarization Method of Argumentation Based on Argumentation Framework." Transactions of the Japanese Society for Artificial Intelligence 39, no. 1 (2024): C—N12_1–18. http://dx.doi.org/10.1527/tjsai.39-1_c-n12.
Full text
7
Gobbo, Federico, Marco Benini, and Jean H. M. Wagemans. "More than Relata Refero: Representing the Various Roles of Reported Speech in Argumentative Discourse." Languages 7, no. 1 (2022): 59. http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/languages7010059.
Full textAbstract:
Reported speech, or relata refero, although not always part of the argumentation tout court, can be an important element of argumentative discourse. It might, for instance, provide information on the position of another party in the discussion or function as part of the premise of an argument from authority. Whereas existing methods of representing argumentative discourse focus on arguments and their interrelations, this paper develops a method that enables the analyst to also include informative elements in the representation, focusing on reported speech. It does so by incorporating the notion of ‘voice’ into the representation framework of Adpositional Argumentation (AdArg). In particular, the paper explains how to formalize the constituents of this notion and illustrates its use in representing (1) an author’s report of the position of another party (including the supporting argumentation); (2) an author’s own position (including the supporting argumentation); and (3) source-based arguments such as the argument from authority, with an indication of the distance of the source from the author.
8
Fitri, Nurul Rahmiah, Muhammad Rusdi, and Muhammad Haris Effendi-Hasibuan. "The effect of argumentation-oriented learning models, inquiry-based learning models and science process skills on students' argumentation ability in chemistry." Jurnal Pendidikan Kimia 14, no. 3 (2022): 180–86. http://dx.doi.org/10.24114/jpkim.v14i3.39788.
Full textAbstract:
One of the models whose learning syntax matches the science process skill component and students' argumentation ability is the inquiry model. Inquiry models have been widely applied, such as Guided Inquiry Based Learning (GIBL), and modified, such as the Argument Driven Inquiry (ADI) and Argumentative Inquiry Blended Learning (AIBL) learning models, where the ADI and AIBL learning models in the learning syntax have been integrated with argumentation activities. The purpose of this study was to examine the effect of learning models and students' science process skills on students' argumentation ability. The research design used a 3 x 2 factorial design with a mixed method. The results showed that: (1) there was an effect of argumentation-oriented learning on the inquiry learning models on students' argumentation ability; (2) there is an effect of science process skill level on students' argumentation ability; and (3) there is no interaction between argumentation-oriented learning on the inquiry learning models and the level of science process skill on students' argumentation ability.
9
FENG, YUNFEI. "Argumentative geometry of the Chinese eight-part essay." Филология: научные исследования, no. 4 (April 2024): 142–51. http://dx.doi.org/10.7256/2454-0749.2024.4.70438.
Full textAbstract:
The subject of the study is the linguistic and cultural features of the Chinese argumentation tradition. The object of the study is the elements of the logical structure of reasoning. The author examines such aspects of the topic as the differences between Eastern and Western models of argumentation and the prerequisites for the formation of the Chinese style of argumentation. Definitions of argumentation and related terms included in the range of concepts of argumentative discourse are given. In the aspect of this problem, the question of the relationship between the functional and semantic type of reasoning and argumentation is also highlighted. The author believes that argumentation is a more detailed development of reasoning based on ways of presenting facts, quotations, appealing to authority, emotions, expert opinion, and laws. In the social contexts of polemics, public discussions, Essenes, and science, the ability to argue is understood as an art. The author also notes that argumentation is a mental and predominantly verbal activity. Special attention is paid to the structure of classical Chinese literary argumentation. For analysis, the author turns to the scientific metaphor "geometry of argumentation". This facet of argumentation is a methodology for reconstructing argumentative discourse. According to this, a reconstruction method based on the identification of argumentation schemes is used. Argumentation schemes are generalized models of how an argument relates to a conclusion or thesis. The main conclusion of the work is that the structure of argumentation in the Chinese text differs from that in the generally accepted model of argumentation of the Western type. To substantiate this conclusion, the author considers S. Tulmin's model, which consists of six elements, believing that the elements of the model can be distinguished in the representative texts of the argumentation. Therefore, the essay can be considered as an explication of argumentation schemes. After that, the author proceeds to analyze the structure of the argumentation in the text of the "Essay on Eight Legs" (八股文), which consists of eight elements. The intermediate conclusion of the work is information about the positive and negative prescriptive aspects of using the eight-part essay scheme in an educational and professional context and in the context of application in less institutional discourses.
10
Macagno, Fabrizio. "Esquemas de argumentação para a interpretação da lei." Teoria Jurídica Contemporânea 3, no. 2 (2019): 73–96. http://dx.doi.org/10.21875/tjc.v3i2.22710.
Full textAbstract:
RESUMO:Neste artigo demonstra-se como os esquemas argumentativos (esquemas que representam argumentos refutáveis, combinados com perguntas críticas correspondentes), podem ser usados para representar a estrutura lógica dos vários tipos de argumentos reconhecidos como fundamentais na interpretação da lei por Tarello (1980). Defende-se que o processo de interpretação da lei tem uma estrutura argumentativa distinta na qual a conclusão, nomeadamente o significado disputável ou questionado atribuído a uma fonte jurídica, é uma afirmação que necessita ser respaldada por argumentos refutáveis a favor ou contra. Esta transformação de argumentos de interpretação numa estrutura de esquemas argumentativos é analisada em detalhe em dois argumentos, o argumento psicológico e o argumento a contrario. A natureza refutável de cada esquema é demonstrada por meio de questões críticas que identificam as condições padrão para a aceitação de argumentos interpretativos e fornecem um método para avaliar a força ou a fraqueza de um determinado argumento. ABSTRACT:In this paper, the logical structures of the interpretative arguments summarizing the various interpretative canons considered fundamental by Tarello (1980) are represented by argumentation schemes, namely patterns of defeasible arguments combined with their corresponding critical questions. The process of statutory interpretation is shown to have a specific argumentative structure where the conclusion corresponds to the disputed or questionable meaning attributed to a legal source and needs to be supported and attacked through defeasible arguments. This translation of interpretative arguments into argumentation schemes is illustrated in detail considering two specific arguments, the psychological and the a contrario arguments. The defeasibility conditions of each scheme are summarized in a set of critical questions, which identify the default conditions for accepting interpretative arguments and provide a method for evaluating a given argument as weak or strong.
11
Purnamasari, Nuraida Delia, Jekti Prihatin, and Bea Hana Siswati. "Optimalisasi Model Brain-Based Learning dengan Media AI Plant Net Identifier dalam Meningkatkan Minat Belajar dan Keterampilan Berargumentasi Siswa SMA." Jurnal Inovasi Pembelajaran Biologi 6, no. 1 (2025): 52–64. https://doi.org/10.26740/jipb.v6n1.p52-64.
Full textAbstract:
Biology learning is a study of science with complex material, making it difficult for students to understand and reducing their interest and motivation to learn. Therefore, engaging and meaningful learning methods, such as the Brain-Based Learning (BBL) model using the AI Plant Net Identifier media, are needed. This study aimed to determine the effect of the BBL model using the AI Plant Net Identifier media on students' learning interest and argumentative skills. The research method employed a quantitative quasi-experimental method involving two classes: an experimental class and a control class. Data analysis was conducted using ANACOVA tests for learning interest and argumentative skills. Learning interest obtained a significance value of 0.011, while argumentation skills obtained a significance value of 0.000. Thus, it was concluded that the Brain-Based Learning model using the AI Plant Net Identifier media influenced students' learning interest and argumentation skills. The average scores obtained in the experimental and control classes for learning interest were 62.4, categorized as interested, and 57.7, categorized as moderately interested. The average scores for argumentation skills in the experimental and control classes were 71.4, categorized as high, and 60.5, categorized as moderate.
12
Nurjanah, Kokom, and Santi Setiyaningsih. "CRITICAL READING SKILLS, ACADEMIC VOCABULARY MASTERY, AND ARGUMENTATION WRITING SKILLS." JHSS (JOURNAL OF HUMANITIES AND SOCIAL STUDIES) 6, no. 1 (2022): 007–10. http://dx.doi.org/10.33751/jhss.v6i1.4979.
Full textAbstract:
The purpose of this study was to investigate argumentation writing skills in terms of critical reading and student academic vocabulary mastery. This research was conducted at the Department of English Education, Semester VII, STKIP Kusuma Negara Cijantung. The research method used is a correlation survey with technical regression analysis. Collecting data from research variables using test instruments. The results of this study reveal that: (1) critical reading has a positive effect on students' argumentation writing skills; (2) academic vocabulary mastery has a positive influence on students' argumentative writing skills; and (3) critical reading and mastery of academic vocabulary have a positive influence on students' argumentative writing skills. Therefore, it can be concluded that the improvement of critical reading skills, mastery of academic vocabulary supports the improvement of students' argumentation writing
13
Kattakulovna, Turabova Sevara. "The Importance Of The Discussion Method In The Development Of Argumentative Competence In Students." American Journal of Social Science and Education Innovations 2, no. 09 (2020): 442–46. http://dx.doi.org/10.37547/tajssei/volume02issue09-68.
Full textAbstract:
This article discusses the importance of using debate as a teaching method in mastering key technologies to improve students’ argumentative competence. At the same time, the ability to argue constructively is interpreted as the ability to perform various argumentative actions to substantiate or refute certain points of view. The article presents the characteristics of argumentative skills, as well as the conditions for the formation of logical and psychological components of debate, which is one of the specific manifestations of argumentation.
14
Sidorova, E. A., I. R. Akhmadeeva, Yu A. Zagorulko, A. S. Sery, and V. K. Shestakov. "Research platform for the study of argumentation in popular science discourse." Ontology of designing 10, no. 4 (2020): 489–502. http://dx.doi.org/10.18287/2223-9537-2020-10-4-489-502.
Full textAbstract:
The paper discusses a software system designed to support the study of argumentation in Russian-language popular science texts. This system is based on an ontology built on modern principles of argumentation modeling. In particular, this ontology contains formal descriptions of typical reasoning schemes that are used for annotating texts, analyzing the arguments presented in them, and assessment of its persuasiveness relative to a given audience. A method of argumentative marking of a text is proposed, which provides the allocation of statements and the construction on their basis of an argumentation graph using knowledge about typical reasoning schemes. The paper also describes a set of web tools that provide the creation of thematic corpora, visualization of the argumentation ontology used, the construction of the argumentation graph, the selection of argumentation indicators in the texts, as well as the search for various entities in the text corpora in ontology terms. Analytical tools are presented by means of collecting statistical information on the occurrence of typical elements of argumentation in the body of texts, by means of researching indicators of argumentation and by means of analyzing the persuasiveness of argumentation. The novelty of the work consists in the development of an original methodology for studying argumentation in popular science discourse, based on the ontology of argumentation and supported by a specialized web platform.
15
Regina Olii, Lukman Abdul Rauf Laliyo, Ahmad Kadir Kilo, Akram La Kilo, Julhim S. Tangio, and Erga Kurniawati. "Analisis Kemampuan Berargumentasi Ilmiah Siswa Kelas XI di SMA Negeri 1 Telaga pada Materi Larutan Elektrolit dan Nonelektrolit." Algoritma : Jurnal Matematika, Ilmu pengetahuan Alam, Kebumian dan Angkasa 3, no. 1 (2024): 131–41. https://doi.org/10.62383/algoritma.v3i1.361.
Full textAbstract:
This study aims to assess the scientific argumentation skills of eleventh grade students at SMA Negeri 1 Telaga on the topic of electrolyte and nonelectrolyte solutions. The study employs a descriptive qualitative approach. The data collection method utilized a multiple-choice test with five indicators of scientific argumentatio, comprising 25 questions. The sample comprises 132 students from the eleventh grade at SMA Negeri 1 Telaga. The results reveal that students’ scientific argumentation skills on the topic of electrolyte and nonelectrolyte solutions are categorized as fair, with a claim level of 48,4%, data level of 53%, warrant level of 50,6%, backing level of 44,4%, and rebuttal level of 44,3%. It can be concluded that while students’ argumentation skills are aduwuate, many students still struggle to present a complete argumentation using all indicators. The active participation of both students and teachers during lessons is crucial to improving students’ scientific argumentation abilities, particularly in overcoming misconceptions related to electrolyte and nonelectrolyte solutions.
16
Osuna, Bartolomé Gil. "Soliloquies On Legal Argumentation From Post-Positivist Thought: Manuel Atienza." Revista de Gestão Social e Ambiental 18, no. 12 (2024): e010632. https://doi.org/10.24857/rgsa.v18n12-223.
Full textAbstract:
Objective: To roughly analyze Manuel Atienza's thought through the practice of the soliloquy and the decalogue, linking legal argumentation to the process to justify legal decisions in a rational and persuasive manner, based on democratic values and social needs. Theoretical framework: It is based on concepts and theories of post legal positivism and references of the argumentative dimension of law, conceptualizing law from an argumentative point of view, weighting, argumentation, review of the conceptions of law from the theories of normativism positivism, iusnaturalism, legal realism, legal formalism and critical theories of law. Method: A qualitative approach was used, descriptive depth level, under the hermeneutic and analytical-synthetic method of the relevant legal theories and doctrines to synthesize the principles of legal argumentation according to Atienza. With documentary review technique. Results and Discussion: The findings show how the doctrine established by this theory, unlike formalist approaches, proposes an argumentation oriented to social justice and conflict resolution in complex contexts. The discussion contextualizes these results in the usefulness of this perspective in the integration of norms and values. Implications: Derives connivance with post-positivist theory as a viable route to strengthen the rule of law and social justice, as it integrates deliberation and critical judgment in legal practice, prioritizing a more humane law committed to fundamental rights. Originality/Value: Research that becomes a leitmotiv for a sui generis contribution of the analysis of legal argumentation to improve the quality of legal reasoning.
17
Liu, Min. "The Study of Literary Criticism on The Well of Loneliness from the Perspective of Toulmin’s Argumentation Model." International Journal of English Linguistics 7, no. 6 (2017): 101. http://dx.doi.org/10.5539/ijel.v7n6p101.
Full textAbstract:
Literary criticism is a kind of commentary genre, with a certain color of argumentation. Toulmin’s model, as an important method of non-formal logic, has played an important role in the analysis of argumentative discourse (Yang, 2004). Therefore, it also provides a new perspective for the study of literary criticism. This paper, on the basis of consummating Toulmin’s model, analyzes different specific arguments of The Well of Loneliness, this controversial literary work whether can become a literary classic and widely recognized in different times, combined with literary criticism, and tries to characterize the internal structure of the argumentation, analysis of the dynamic process of argumentation and improvement of the pragmatic strategies of argumentation in a finer way. Thereby, it is more rational to verdict and to verify the rationality and effectiveness of the argumentation. Then suggestions of the construction and perfection of literary criticism can be provided.
18
Aguirre, Flor de María Sánchez, Elva Luz Castañeda Alvarado, Sonia María Loayza Chácara, and Patrik Manuel Toledo Quispe. "Pedagogical Practice and Socialized Method." International Journal of Early Childhood Special Education 14, no. 1 (2022): 74–80. http://dx.doi.org/10.9756/int-jecse/v14i1.221010.
Full textAbstract:
Throughout history, civilizations have developed paradigms for the formation of the person. Education allows the explanation of the world, the teacher being an active participant in pedagogical practice that complements the situated learning of students through the use of methods that allow stimulating the assimilation and accommodation of knowledge. The objective of the study was to determine the relationship between pedagogical practice and the socialized method in higher education students. The characterization of the socialized method has three dimensions: (1) thought-language, (2) participatory critical activation and (3) argumentation-posture. The research approach was quantitative, basic type, non-experimental design; the instrument of the questionnaire was used that was validated by experts who judged the clarity, relevance, relevance and reliability according to Cronbach's Alpha with 0.972; the sample investigated was 80 students. The results show that 61.25% were at a regular level in participatory critical activation, while 26.25% were at a good level of thought-language and 12.50% were at an inadequate level of argumentation-posture. The relationship between pedagogical practice and the socialized method in higher education students is determined according to Spearman's rho statistic, being 0.782. at an inadequate level of argumentation-position. The relationship between pedagogical practice and the socialized method in higher education students is determined according to Spearman's rho statistic, being 0.782. at an inadequate level of argumentation-position. The relationship between pedagogical practice and the socialized method in higher education students is determined according to Spearman's rho statistic, being 0.782.
19
Dewantari, Tantri, Neni Hasnunidah, and Dina Maulina. "Kajian Kemampuan Argumentasi Siswa pada Materi Pokok Animalia Melalui Pendekatan Saintifik di SMA dengan Peringkat Akreditasi yang Berbeda." BIOEDUSAINS:Jurnal Pendidikan Biologi dan Sains 5, no. 1 (2022): 267–78. http://dx.doi.org/10.31539/bioedusains.v5i1.3285.
Full textAbstract:
This study aims to determine the differences in the argumentation ability of students in high school with different accreditation ratings. The method used is a survey with an ex post facto research design and a sample selection technique using purposive sampling. The results of the student's argumentative ability test were analyzed statistically with the ANOVA test with a significance level of 5% and the data from interviews and teacher questionnaires were analyzed descriptively. The results showed that the argumentation ability of students in schools with accreditation ratings A was significantly different from those with accreditation ratings B and C. In addition, the argumentation ability of students in schools with accreditation rating B was significantly different from those with accreditation rating C. In conclusion, the average value of argumentation ability of students in high school with accreditation ratings of A, B and C on the subject matter of Animalia has a significant difference.
 Keywords: Accreditation, Animalia, Argumentation, Scientific Approach
20
Kamariah, Kamariah, Kisyani Laksono, and Agusniar Dian Savitri. "Potential Topics as Discourse Shapers Argumentation The Forum Holds a Talk With the Theme of the Covid-19 Pandemic: Pragma-dialectical Studies." International Journal Of Education, Social Studies, And Management (IJESSM) 3, no. 1 (2023): 28–48. http://dx.doi.org/10.52121/ijessm.v3i1.131.
Full textAbstract:
The purpose of writing this article is to find potential topics with dialectical objectives and potential topics with rhetorical objectives as argumentation makers at each stage of critical discussion at the COVID-19-themed talk forum. The method used is descriptive qualitative with data analysis techniques emphasizing pragma-dialectical studies focusing on argumentative discourse. Data analysis techniques emphasize pragma-dialectical studies focusing on argumentative discourse. The results showed that potential topics with dialectical and rhetorical functions were found at each stage of the argumentation. Each function found has a different role as an argumentative. Potential topics with an analytic function in the confrontation stage are used to explain the issues discussed. The opening stage ensures that disputes exist and are unambiguous. At the argumentation stage, it is used to test the acceptance of a descriptive, evaluative, or prescriptive point of view. The closing stage ensures that everything that has been said is concluded with sufficient evidence. At the same time, the potential topics with a rhetorical function in the confrontation stage are used to ensure that the issues in the discussion degree are helpful. In the opening stage, it is used to select arguments that do not involve the burden of proof. At the argumentation stage, it is used to apply persuasion tools that will make someone win the argument. The closing stage is used to ensure the argument ends.
21
Morina (Golyshkina), L. A. "Argumentation in the Pandemic Media Discourse: Decoding Rhetoric Practice." Vestnik NSU. Series: History and Philology 22, no. 6 (2023): 171–82. http://dx.doi.org/10.25205/1818-7919-2023-22-6-171-182.
Full textAbstract:
Purpose. The paper examines argumentation in the pandemic media discourse. Within the concept of decoding rhetoric, argumentation is considered a procedure for effective text formation acting as an instrument of influence.Method. The research method used is argument reconstruction based on the following parameters: a thesis, types of arguments, and argumentation structures. The material has been selected according to the criterion of an addressee of the media discourse, where the addressee is a politician, a doctor, or a publicist.Results. Media texts about the pandemic demonstrate that politicians propose orthodox theses, whereas doctor (D. Protsenko) proposes prescriptive ones and publicist (D. Bykov) – paradoxical ones.Politicians use the universal system and rational arguments based on statistics. The influencing message of D. Protsenko’s media text is formed due to personal empirical argumentation. D. Bykov relies on collective empirical argumentation.Concerning the argumentation structures, coordinate argumentation dominates in the media texts of politicians, making it possible to defend their opinion in the most revealing way. D. Protsenko combines coordinate argumentation with the subordinate one, creating opportunities for interpretation. The text of D. Bykov does not show any steady tendencies for argumentative structuring, reflecting a creative approach to text formation.Conclusion. The argument reconstruction reveals mechanisms of text formation and decodes the pragmatic motives of the speakers in the pandemic media discourse.
22
Sari, Anisa Puspita, Harizon Harizon, and Muhammad Haris Effendi-Hasibuan. "The effectiveness of argumentation based learning and problem based learning models in improving student’s argumentation skills about salt hydrolysis concept." Jurnal Pendidikan Kimia 13, no. 3 (2021): 230–40. http://dx.doi.org/10.24114/jpkim.v13i3.29928.
Full textAbstract:
Learning model that can train students in developing their argumentative skills includes the Argumentation Based Learning (ABL) and Problem Based Learning (PBL). This study aimed to see the effectiveness of the ABL and PBL models in improving students' argumentation skills about the concept of salt hydrolysis. The study was conducted in the class XI MIA SMAN 1 Tebo Jambi with a sample consisting of two classes. Some 50 students were recruited purposively to be the participants of this study. Concurrent embedded mix method using two group pretest posttest control group design was used in this study. The results of independent t-test showed that ABL was more effective than PBL (t= 4.864; p-value=0.00 < 0.05) in improving the students' argumentation skills. This was supported by the N-gain test of ABL which was 0.82 and the N -Gain test of PBL was 0.68. The results of observations revealed that the ABL students had more intensive opportunities to debate their argumentation than those in the PBL class. This was believed as the major factor influencing the difference in the students’ argumentation skills.
23
Korzhuev, A. V., S. A. Lesnichuk, N. A. Kontarov, and Yu B. Ikrennikova. "Argumentation resource in scientific pedagogy as an object of research." Education and science journal 27, no. 1 (2025): 9–32. https://doi.org/10.17853/1994-5639-2025-1-9-32.
Full textAbstract:
Introduction. The analysis of the argumentation employed by scientists and educators in recent years reveals a tendency to adopt an uncritical attitude towards the opinions of scientific authorities, as well as distortions in the formulation of definitions and inaccuracies in both theoretical and empirical justifications of conclusions. These issues indicate attempts at methodological “interference” within the argumentative discourse in science education. Aim. The present research aims to identify the specifics of scientific argumentation in pedagogy and categorise the criteria for its compliance with the methodological framework into two parts: the formulation of “strict” and “soft” requirements. Methodology and research methods. The following research methods were employed: analysis of recordings of scientific dialogues, as well as texts from articles, monographs, and dissertations on pedagogy to assess argumentative correctness; analysis of methodological literature addressing the issues of argumentation across various fields of knowledge; and a method for dividing the field of scientific argumentation into two categories based on the characteristics of the subject of pedagogical research, including the potential for definition and the construction of theoretical frameworks. Results. The outcome of the study is the identification of the requirements for scientific arguments in pedagogy, shaped by the unique characteristics of its subject area. These requirements can be categorised into two types: “strict” requirements, which should be aspired to, and “soft” requirements, which can be described as mitigating circumstances that assist pedagogical researchers in addressing criticisms arising from comparisons between pedagogical argumentation and analogous processes in other scientific disciplines. Scientific novelty. The scientific novelty of this research lies in the justification for dividing the field of argumentation – an essential component of pedagogical methodology – into “hard” and “soft” criteria that align the arguments of scientific pedagogy with methodological norms. Practical significance of the results lies in the potential to utilise the presented material as educational content for students enrolled in pedagogical education programmes, serving as a guide for completing their final qualifying works.
24
Puspitasari, Yeni, Sri Widoretno, Joko Ariyanto, Bowo Sugiharto, Sri Dwiastuti, and Candra Adi Prabowo. "Profile of High School Students' Arguments on Environmental Pollution Materials in the Covid-19 Era." AL-ISHLAH: Jurnal Pendidikan 14, no. 4 (2022): 6483–92. http://dx.doi.org/10.35445/alishlah.v14i4.1989.
Full textAbstract:
The study aims to identify the argumentation profile of high school students in learning in the covid-19 era. This research is quantitative descriptive with a survey method. The research population was 172 students, with a sample of 72 students. Determination of the sample using cluster random sampling technique has a balanced quality from the results of the paired F test. The research procedure was carried out by collecting data on student answers from argumentative essay questions distributed via a google form. Argumentative questions based on TAP contain six components, namely Evidence (E), Warrant (W), Backing (B), Qualifier (Q), Rebuttal (R), and Claim (C). The argumentation scoring rubric is calculated based on the Patton-Pickle rule. Data analysis was carried out by interpreting the scores obtained by students on each argumentation component that showed the argumentation profile. Most of the students' argumentation profiles, according to their components, are in the very low category scores, namely 0.5 and 1. A score of 0.5 is obtained by comparing the percentages of students: E: E: W: W: B: Q: R: C: C: C by 23.61%: 1.39%: 0.00%: 52.78%: 45.83%: 83.33 %: 4.17%: 2.78%: 2.78%: 0.00% while the score of 1 is 41.67%: 55.56%: 83.33%: 47.22%: 54.17%: 8.33%: 75.00%: 83.33%: 79.17%: 98 ,61%. Scores were obtained due to various factors, including the learning process that was less meaningful, students' understanding and reasoning of the material was not in-depth, the generalization process of evidence or theory was not appropriate.
25
Barebina, Natalya Sergeevna, and Dmitrii Anatol'evich Zibrov. "Logical and linguistic features of conductive arguments in environmental media discourse." Филология: научные исследования, no. 7 (July 2024): 142–51. http://dx.doi.org/10.7256/2454-0749.2024.7.71218.
Full textAbstract:
The subject of the study is the logical and grammatical structure of conclusions. The object of the study is conductive arguments. The authors of the article consider the implementation of such arguments in an environmental media discourse. Unlike formal logic, natural language argumentation is more often based on examples, analogies and reasoning that do not ensure the full truth of conclusions, since they can only be true with a certain degree of probability. Probabilistic arguments can have different interpretations and lead to different conclusions. A variety of such arguments is the class of conductive arguments. These are arguments that contradict other arguments presented in support of a particular conclusion. The study of conductive arguments is relevant because their role in argumentation has been little studied. In addition, environmental topics in the media give contextual characteristics to the argumentation, which makes it possible to trace the change in logical canons in reasoning. The method of reconstruction of argumentative discourse using the analytical tool "Argumentative Step" was used in the work. The elements of argumentation were analyzed in accordance with the model of argumentative functions. A theoretical analysis of the literature has shown that conductive elements in the process of argumentation do not receive sufficient coverage in Russian argumentology. The analysis of empirical material revealed a significant number of non-deductive conclusions in the argumentation. As a result of the study, the following conclusions were drawn. 1. Conductive arguments are an immanent part of the proof structure. 2. The textual constructions corresponding to the conductive arguments reflect the semantics of the counterthesis, the balance between arguments, reservations, as well as the extension of the thesis, that is, the expansion of the scope of the thesis. In the analyzed texts in English, markers of opposition and limitations were found, such as conjunctions, particles, prepositions "but", "even", "although", "even if", "in spite of", "despite of", "unless". These markers indicate the presence of conductive arguments in the text.
26
Morawski, Michael, and Alexandra Budke. "How Digital and Oral Peer Feedback Improves High School Students’ Written Argumentation—A Case Study Exploring the Effectiveness of Peer Feedback in Geography." Education Sciences 9, no. 3 (2019): 178. http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/educsci9030178.
Full textAbstract:
This article approaches written argumentation as a concept of promoting geographical literacy. It is argued that student-centered peer feedback is an effective method with which to improve individual students’ argumentative texts. This research uses a case-study design, which analyzed how high school students in different pairs improve their argumentation text under subject-specific criteria. For the feedback process, a subject-specific feedback sheet for students has been designed for them to review their partner’s argumentative text. The findings mainly suggest two outcomes: Different kinds of feedback in terms of interaction, content and argumentative integration of text material lead to text improvement, and that there are varying complexities of feedback acceptance in terms of subject-specific criteria. The results provide a deeper insight into how students can be prepared and rewarded for producing qualitatively high and effective feedback on argumentative texts in socio-scientific contexts with a strong focus on the (linguistic) skills they need for these procedures.
27
Al-Khazaali, Musaab A. Raheem. "Argumentation in the Glorious Qur’an: A Rhetorical Pragmatic Perspective." global journal al thaqafah 10, no. 2 (2020): 9–18. http://dx.doi.org/10.7187/gjat122020-2.
Full textAbstract:
The study aims via a qualitative discourse analytic method to investigate the pragmatic and rhetorical devices and strategies in the Qur’anic argumentation. In an attempt to contribute to the pragmatic and rhetorical understanding of argumentation in the Glorious Qur’an depending on contemporary models, the study has focused on originating the notion of Hijãj in both Arabic and Western rhetoric in their pragmatic and dialectic spheres. The findings revealed that the most important strategies that are employed in the Glorious Qur’an involve rhetorical questions, speech acts, argumentative structures and persuasive rhetorical moves (logos, pathos and ethos). The paper concludes with the finding that the Qur’an has a highly organized structure of argumentation which is based on a set of dialectic, pragmatic and rhetorical devices and strategies including strategic maneuvers and rhetorical questions.
28
Danilevskaya, Natalia V. "Arguments vs emotions: Argumentative models as a tool of ideological confrontation in the mass media." Media Linguistics 10, no. 2 (2023): 148–65. http://dx.doi.org/10.21638/spbu22.2023.201.
Full textAbstract:
The article analyzes the texts covering the special military operation (SVO) of the Russian Federation on the territory of Ukraine in the modern media discourse. The question of language strategies and tactics used in media texts belonging to authors professing different ideological positions is considered. By means of linguistic-stylistic, functional-grammatical and comparative analyses, it is concluded that in the texts, on the one hand, pro-Russian-minded, and on the other — liberal-minded journalists and bloggers, different argumentation methods are chosen as language strategies. As a result of the study of texts devoted to the topic of SVO, the author of the article comes to the conclusion about the predominantly reasoned nature of the speech of pro-Russian authors and, conversely, about the predominantly evaluative and hypothetical, i. e., in general, the emotional type of speech in the texts of liberal-minded authors. It is argued that the main method of argumentation of “pro-Russian texts” is the factual method, whereas the main methods of argumentation in “liberal texts” are evaluative and hypothetical methods. Special attention is paid to the question of the place and role of argumentation in texts representing new knowledge. In this regard, the problem of logical and cognitive actions relevant to substantiating truth in scientific communication is considered. Based on a comparative analysis of the logic of argumentation in journalistic and scientific communication, a conclusion is made about the similarity of communicative and cognitive strategies of science and quality journalism. The description of argumentative actions representing the position of journalists and bloggers belonging to the liberal wing of the media sphere allows the author to speak about the low-quality nature of liberal journalism.
29
Korablev, Yuri A. "ARGUMENTATION OF CAPACITY METHOD DEMAND DETERMINATION." Statistics and Economics, no. 5 (January 1, 2015): 100–104. http://dx.doi.org/10.21686/2500-3925-2015-5-100-104.
Full text
30
Peixoto, Fabiano Hatmann. "Análise da argumentação jurídica em decisão judicial: desenvolvimento e aplicação de modelo analítico-sintético / Analysis of the theory of juridical argumentation in judicial decision: development and application of analytical-synthetic model." Revista Brasileira de Direito 13, no. 3 (2017): 206. http://dx.doi.org/10.18256/2238-0604.2017.v13i3.1916.
Full textAbstract:
RESUMOA temática da justificação e da correção das decisões judiciais colocou um interesse ainda maior na compreensão das conexões entre decidir e argumentar. O presente estudo parte da relevância da proposta teórica de Robert Alexy para a argumentação jurídica. O primeiro passo foi construir um modelo apto a permitir uma abordagem analítica de um conjunto (unitário ou múltiplo) de decisões. A partir desta concepção analítica stardart é que se destacará a operabilidade de mecanismos avaliativos da estrutura argumentativa. Buscando estruturar um raciocínio pelo método dedutivo, ele tem como objetivo a explicação da construção de um modelo tabular analítico sintético que permita posteriormente a realização da avaliação da compatibilidade e qualidade argumentativa.Palavras-chaves: Argumentação Jurídica. Racionalidade. Modelo de Análise. Robert Alexy. ABSTRACTThe theme of justification and correction of judicial decisions placed an even greater interest in understanding the connections between deciding and arguing. The present study arises from the relevance of the Robert Alexy's theoretical proposal for the juridical argumentation. The first step was to construct a model capable of allowing an analytical approach to a set (unitary or multiple) of decisions. From this standard analytic conception, it will be highlighted the operability of evaluative mechanisms of the argumentative structure. Seeking to structure a reasoning by the deductive method, it aims to explain the construction of a synthetic analytical tabular model that allows later the accomplishment of the evaluation of the compatibility and argumentative quality.Keywords: Juridical Argumentation. Rationale. Analysis model. Robert Alexy.
31
Oh, Jinnyoung. "A Study on Developing QBL-MODEL in the Debate Classroom for Liberal Education at University." Korean Association of General Education 16, no. 6 (2022): 131–47. http://dx.doi.org/10.46392/kjge.2022.16.6.131.
Full textAbstract:
The purpose of this study is to develop a teaching-learning model using argumentative questions as an effective method for a discussion class. The researcher guided the students to learn the concept of argument as an essential part while learning the ＜Reading Classics of Great Literature＞ course at Pusan National University. This learning process can improve the student’s ability to analyze classical works logically, and to identify correct arguments and errors in discussion activities. As a result learners can realize that the argumentation of a specific topic can be opened in another way through analysis of classical works and discussion activities based on the concept of argumentation. In other words, the learner discover new question to argumentation. This researcher thinks that the learner’s ability to ask such questions eventually approaches the pedagogical significance of promoting true creativity.
32
Yulianing, Fadilah Rohmah, Suyono Suyono, Sukarmin Sukarmin, Farrizky Noor Thoriq, Nurul Auliya, and Rezi Ulya Fauziah. "Are Argumentation Skills Can Describe Understanding Concepts?" International Journal of Current Educational Research 2, no. 2 (2023): 92–105. http://dx.doi.org/10.53621/ijocer.v2i2.241.
Full textAbstract:
Objective: Based on the several aspects, one aspect is quite important in the process of learning science, namely communicating. Argumentation is one of communication skills. Are argumentation can describe understanding concepts? Method: This study uses a literature review method from thirteen articles. Results: Argumentation skills can describe understanding concepts. Interpretation of the correlation coefficient shows that argumentation skills strongly correlate with understanding concepts. It is because argumentation skills positively correlate with critical thinking and logic skills. Argumentation skills can improve students' critical thinking level and logical skills in the thinking process. Everyone has good argumentation skills if has good critical thinking and good logic skills. Novelty: Argumentation skills are one of the communication skills that improve understanding of concepts. Argumentation skills are moderators for high-order thinking skills. It can occur because the components of argumentation skills are claim, evidence, and reasoning. Someone can meet all the argumentation skills components with good thinking.
33
Admoko, Setyo, Kafa Pramitha Anggraini Indhira Artanti, Eko Hariyono, and Madlazim Madlazim. "Implementation of the Argument-Driven Inquiry (ADI) Model in Physics Learning of 2012-2021: Bibliometric Analysis." International Journal of Current Educational Research 1, no. 2 (2022): 121–34. http://dx.doi.org/10.53621/ijocer.v1i2.183.
Full textAbstract:
Argumentation is a core practice of scientific discourse. One of the problems in learning science is the low level of argumentation skills of students. Efforts to improve argumentation skills include implementing the Argument-Driven Inquiry (ADI) learning model. This study aims to identify the contribution and find out the trend of applying ADI in physics learning in 2012-2021. The method used in this research is a bibliometric analysis based on Scopus data with the help of MS Excel and VOSviewer to visualize the metadata obtained. The results of this study obtained 100 documents. The development of ADI every year does not have a significant increase in the number of publications produced. Research visualization using VOSviewer produces 14 clusters and is closely related to argumentative learning, guided inquiry, and so on. Based on the results of this study, it can be concluded that the ADI has several contributions to science learning, mostly done in Chemistry, and it is still rare in Physics, so it can be an opportunity for further research. It is hoped that further research can discuss more deeply the ADI learning model, which is applied to physics learning to improve students' argumentation skills.
34
Parunova, Yulia D. "LOGICAL METHODS IN LEGAL ARGUMENTATION." IZVESTIYA VUZOV SEVERO-KAVKAZSKII REGION SOCIAL SCIENCE, no. 3 (215) (September 30, 2022): 21–26. http://dx.doi.org/10.18522/2687-0770-2022-3-21-26.
Full textAbstract:
The article considers the logical level of argumentation in the legal sphere, which allows to organize the argumentation process into a coherent system, ensuring the consistency of arguments, linking them in such a way, that a logically reliable conclusion could be obtained. While in modern views on argumentation it is presented rather as a rhetorical process, its essence is defined as a rational operation, based on arguments of reason and facts that must be systematized in a certain way. The application of such logical methods, as the method of systematization, classification, methods of analysis, synthesis, terminological method is justified. The possibilities of deduction, induction and analogy in the practice of legal argumentation are determined: the deductive method is used in the absolutization of a legal norm, the idea of the closeness and orderliness of law, when the right issue is taken under the current legal norm, induction and, also, analogy, allows us to make a conclusion, based on the generalization of individual rules of law, link them to real life situations, apply in practice. In the article the conclusion about an integrated approach to the application of logical methods is substantiated, because only in this way is ensured the coherence, consistency and persuasiveness of legal argumentation.
35
Yurkevych, Olena. "PLURALISM AND ARGUMENTATION IN THE «NEW RHETORIC»." Journal of V. N. Karazin Kharkiv National University, Series "Philosophy. Philosophical Peripeteias", no. 70 (June 21, 2024): 113–21. https://doi.org/10.26565/2226-0994-2024-70-9.
Full textAbstract:
The article examines the modern theory of argumentation, which was called the «new rhetoric» project. An interdisciplinary approach with a methodological toolkit of philosophical epistemology, social philosophy, logic, axiology, etc. is used for the analysis. Special attention is paid to logical issues of argument strength, structures and methods of reasoning, counter-argumentation, and truth value related to the pluralistic nature of modern argumentation practice. It was found that the modern theory of argumentation develops in the direction of non-classical informal logic, with the involvement of the theory of critical thinking. Its communicative characteristics, the importance of the audience, the dialogicity and polylogic nature of communicative structures, and its affinity with pluralism as a philosophical «doctrine of plurality» are highlighted. A pluralistic approach is considered as an alternative to a monistic one. It is proved that in the social concept, argumentation appears as a special form of the mind, which is used to solve issues that arise on the basis of conflicting values. This involves rethinking the concepts of reason and truth. A conclusion is made regarding the difference between demonstrative proof and rhetorical argumentation. The mind appears as a philosophical construction of the ideal audience, which replaces the universal mind and appears as the communicative mind of rhetorical genesis. Monistic argumentation is a form of rational reasoning, while pluralistic argumentation of the rhetorical type requires a form of reasonableness. Communicative intelligence manifests itself in contrasting forms of criticism or apology. The social concept of argumentation as a reasonable form, as opposed to rational demonstration, is guided by the principle of justice, which is carried out by means of the method of analogy with respect to value conditions through precedents. The difference between strong and weak arguments is based on this. A strong argument is such an argumentative form that arises in communication in a pluralistic situation and is inertially fixed by social practice as a precedent of justice, which testifies to its reasonableness. A strong argument is formed on the basis of social values. In contrast, a weak argument is not based on stable values, the principle of justice, which means it lacks reasonableness and causes distrust in the audience. Thus, the project of «new rhetoric» is a pluralistic construction of social types of intelligence formed by the audience in communicative situations in the process of rhetorical argumentation.
36
Rahman, Mustafa A. "An Argumentative Discourse Analysis of the Newspaper Editorial “The 9/30 Tragedy”." Jurnal Ilmiah Peuradeun 12, no. 1 (2024): 333. http://dx.doi.org/10.26811/peuradeun.v12i1.956.
Full textAbstract:
Academic studies on newspaper discourse have focused primarily on the structure of news items. Research on an argumentative discourse of newspaper editorials is understudied. By using the sociocognitive theory of knowledge and opinion as the theoretical basis, this article aims to analyze the argumentative discourse constructed in “The 9/30 Tragedy” editorial published in The Jakarta Post and to discuss whether the arguments in the text constitute knowledge or solely opinions of the editorial team on the defunct Indonesian Communist Party (PKI). The eclectic research method used the pragma-dialectical model of argumentation supported by intertextuality and vocabulary analysis. The findings reveal that the editorial has a standpoint that the tragedy of September 30, 1965, has led the course of Indonesia’s history for the worst tragedy and that the argumentation is manifested in three stages: confrontational stage, argumentation stage, and concluding stage. Acting as the protagonist, the editorial team maneuvers strategically by quoting other voices and using an evaluative lexical repertoire to support their arguments criticizing Soeharto’s leadership legacy. Overall, the editorial seems to reconstruct mental models for the readers by questioning the reliability of the military-dictated textbooks about the 9/30 Tragedy, thereby reshaping the historical knowledge about the calamity, which is justifiable.
37
JoonHo Park. "Between Dogmatism and Argumentation: Method of Hypothesis." Studies in Philosophy East-West ll, no. 74 (2014): 395–422. http://dx.doi.org/10.15841/kspew..74.201412.395.
Full text
38
Gutierez, Sally B. "Teacher’s Dialogic Prompts That Scaffold Students’ Participation in Classroom Argumentation: A Case of a Biology Teacher." Asia Pacific Journal of Educators and Education 36, no. 1 (2021): 59–73. http://dx.doi.org/10.21315/apjee2021.36.1.4.
Full textAbstract:
In this qualitative case study, a male biology teacher teaching Bioethics in Senior High School was purposively selected for the documentation and examination of the types and functions of dialogic prompts he used to scaffold his students’ participation in classroom argumentation. Using various data such as classroom transcripts from audio- and video-records, interviews and field notes, these were subjected to microlevel analyses using the constant comparison method. Using an analysis framework with codes from literature that were subsequently merged with data driven codes, thematic analysis yielded three types of dialogic prompts: conceptual, analytical, and reflective with several functions such as providing background information, giving extended ‘think-time’, guiding students to formulate counterarguments, eliciting examples that either support or refute a claim, and asking issue-based questions which were sometimes backed up by stating personal arguments and reiterating students’ responses. Excerpts from video transcripts revealed that these dialogic prompts elicited students’ ideas which resulted to argumentative and collaborative inquiry. Findings of the study suggest that students’ participation to classroom argumentation should be understood together with teachers’ provision of dialogic scaffolding. More than conceptual and factual knowledge, teachers’ dialogic scaffolding for argumentation is a promising method for the gradual enhancement of students’ communication skills and honing of their reasoning skills. Since the results are only conclusive to the case teacher, the study informs the potentials of dialogic scaffolding to support classroom argumentation. It is therefore recommended that for future professional development efforts, both in-service and pre-service teachers should be influenced towards intentionality of harnessing talk inside the classroom as a tool to enhance the implementation of classroom argumentation.
39
Sadieda, Lisanul Uswah. "Kemampuan argumentasi mahasiswa melalui model berpikir induktif dengan metode probing-prompting learning." Pythagoras: Jurnal Pendidikan Matematika 14, no. 1 (2019): 23–32. http://dx.doi.org/10.21831/pg.v14i1.24038.
Full textAbstract:
Penelitian ini bertujuan untuk mendeskripsikan peningkatan kemampuan argumentasi mahasiswa sesudah mengikuti perkuliahan yang menerapkan model berpikir induktif dengan metode probing-prompting learning pada materi subgrup. Jenis penelitian ini adalah quasi eksperimen dengan pendekatan kuantitatif. Sampel penelitian adalah 38 mahasiswa angkatan 2016/2017 Prodi Pendidikan Matematika UIN Sunan Ampel Surabaya. Instrumen yang digunakan adalah lembar tes kemampuan argumentasi. Kemampuan argumentasi mahasiswa diidentifikasi berdasarkan komponen argumentasi McNeill dan Krajcik yang terdiri dari claim, evidence, reasoning, dan rebuttal. Peningkatan kemampuan argumentasi mahasiswa dianalisis dengan statistik non parametrik menggunakan uji Wilcoxon Signed-Rank pada taraf signifikan 5% (α = 0,05). Hasil analisis data menunjukkan bahwa kemampuan argumentasi mahasiswa setelah perlakuan lebih baik dibandingkan sebelum perlakuan dan terdapat perbedaan signifikan (Z = -7,397, p = 0,000) kemampuan argumentasi mahasiswa sebelum dan setelah diterapkan model berpikir induktif dengan metode probing-prompting learning pada materi subgrup. Dengan demikian, penerapan model berpikir induktif dengan metode probing-prompting learning pada materi subgrup efektif untuk meningkatkan kemampuan argumentasi mahasiswa. Students’ argumentation ability through inductive thinking model with the probing-prompting learning methodAbstractThis study aimed to describe an increase in students' argumentative abilities after attending lectures that apply inductive thinking models with probing-prompting learning methods in subgroup material. This type of research was quasi-experimental with a quantitative approach. The study sample was 38 students of Mathematics Education Department of State Islamic University Sunan Ampel Surabaya, Indonesia. The instrument used was the argumentation ability test sheet. The student's argumentation ability was identified based on McNeill and Krajcik's argumentation component consisting of claims, evidence, reasoning, and rebuttal. Improved student argumentation skills were analyzed by non-parametric statistics using the Wilcoxon Signed-Rank test. The results of data analysis showed that the students’ argumentation ability after treatment was better than before treatment and there was a significant difference (Z = -7,397, p = 0,000) the ability of students' argumentation before and after the inductive thinking model with the probing-prompting learning method was applied in the subgroup material. Thus, the implementation of inductive thinking models with probing-prompting learning methods in subgroup material was effective for improving students' argumentation abilities.
40
Freedman, Gabriel, Adam Dejl, Deniz Gorur, Xiang Yin, Antonio Rago, and Francesca Toni. "Argumentative Large Language Models for Explainable and Contestable Claim Verification." Proceedings of the AAAI Conference on Artificial Intelligence 39, no. 14 (2025): 14930–39. https://doi.org/10.1609/aaai.v39i14.33637.
Full textAbstract:
The profusion of knowledge encoded in large language models (LLMs) and their ability to apply this knowledge zero-shot in a range of settings makes them promising candidates for use in decision-making. However, they are currently limited by their inability to provide outputs which can be faithfully explained and effectively contested to correct mistakes. In this paper, we attempt to reconcile these strengths and weaknesses by introducing argumentative LLMs (ArgLLMs), a method for augmenting LLMs with argumentative reasoning. Concretely, ArgLLMs construct argumentation frameworks, which then serve as the basis for formal reasoning in support of decision-making. The interpretable nature of these argumentation frameworks and formal reasoning means that any decision made by ArgLLMs may be explained and contested. We evaluate ArgLLMs’ performance experimentally in comparison with state-of-the-art techniques, in the context of the decision-making task of claim verification. We also define novel properties to characterise contestability and assess ArgLLMs formally in terms of these properties.
41
Barebina, Natalia, Galina Kostyushkina, and Zhiyong Fang. "Vectors of Argumentative Orientation in the Study of Language Aspects Dynamic of Political Media Discourse." Bulletin of Baikal State University 31, no. 1 (2021): 98–102. http://dx.doi.org/10.17150/2500-2759.2021.31(1).98-102.
Full textAbstract:
The article presents an attempt to analyze the argumentative constants and variations in the analytical genre of a political media discourse from the point of view of focusing on the formation of different opinions of the audience. This task is solved by using the concept of strategic maneuvering. This concept contains a theoretical tool that allows you to identify violations of dialectical standards of argumentation in the form of rhetorical goals in the author's reasoning. Using the method of random selection, a corpus of examples was formed as fragments of speeches of political leaders. Examples were taken from the website of the Munich Security Conference 2016-2020. An evaluative-critical analysis of theoretical literature has revealed the main characteristics of the political media discourse. It was found that this social practice presupposes an argumentative way of organizing a discourse. The article states that any forms of the analytical genre of the political media discourse presuppose a certain standard of rationality in terms of its logical presentation and the quality of arguments. Using the method of pragma-dialectical reconstruction of the text, the authors illustrate the rational goal of argumentation realized by the speaker. However, the specificity of the genre inevitably leads to the desire of the addressees to present arguments in their favor. This is manifested in the rhetorical analogue of the logical dimension of the text-reasoning. It is concluded that the norm and violations in argumentation show how the language system functions in the formation of vectors of audience attitude.
42
Maretha, Annisa Laura, and Intan Pradita. "A case study of argument diagramming in Thai and Indonesian higher education argumentative essays." Studies in English Language and Education 11, no. 1 (2024): 153–67. http://dx.doi.org/10.24815/siele.v11i1.30418.
Full textAbstract:
This study explores first-year undergraduate students’ argumentation essays using argument diagramming structure. A corpus-driven data of 394 argumentative essays were gathered from both Indonesian and Thai universities. A content analysis was employed to examine the dataset of the students’ argumentative essays. After gathering primary information from the body parts of their essays, we subcategorized their argumentations into claims and premises in a compliant reading. To ensure data trustworthiness, this study employed triangulation by source and method. The findings show that the most prominent type of argument diagramming was a basic argument, followed by convergent and divergent arguments. Regardless of how the argument diagramming was written, the study found that the students still lacked mastery in structuring their logic when building up the case to be extended to claims and premises. This study suggests a need to revisit pedagogical instructions, in which there should be a provision not only on the basic knowledge of argument structures but also on the skills to recognize the quality of a good argument cognitively. This additional practice will provide important insights to recognize the representational strengths and weaknesses of the students’ argumentative writing proficiency to achieve a better performance in the content of their essays.
43
Santika, Ayu Ratna. "Level of students' argumentation skills in socio-scientific issues of biodiversity subject." Bioedunis Journal 3, no. 2 (2025): 247–60. https://doi.org/10.24952/bioedunis.v3i2.13852.
Full textAbstract:
Argumentation is one of the important skills that students need to master in facing the global challenges of the 21st century. Argumentation plays an important role in the learning process to build students' understanding, which will also develop their critical thinking skills. Argumentation skills are not just a process of gathering facts but also involve the coordination between evidence and theory. This research aims to analyze students' argumentation skills in social-scientific issues on the of biodiversity subject. The method used in this research is the descriptive method. The subjects of the research are first-grade students at senior high schools in Subang Regency. This research uses open-ended questions to analyze the presence of students' argumentation components based on the Toulmin Argumentation Pattern: claim, data, warrant, rebuttal. The results of this study indicate that the most frequently expressed argumentation component by students in the learning of social-scientific issues on biodiversity material is the claim, placing students' argumentation skills at level 1.
44
Agustiningsih, Agustiningsih, Ngatijo Ngatijo, and Muhammad Haris Effendi-Hasibuan. "The effectiveness of modified flip-based argumentation learning in improving students’ argumentation skills about hydrocarbon." Jurnal Pendidikan Kimia 13, no. 3 (2021): 250–60. http://dx.doi.org/10.24114/jpkim.v13i3.29930.
Full textAbstract:
The FBAL learning model is a learning model that has a specific purpose to improve students’ argumentation skills by integrating Toulmin's argumentation pattern. This study aimed to see the effectiveness of the Modified Flip-Based Argumentation Learning in improving students' argumentation skills about the concept of hydrocarbon compounds. The effectiveness was examined by comparing this model to Flip-Based Argumentation Learning and Flipped Classroom model. The factors that influence the differences in students’ argumentation skills amongst the three classes were also investigated. Concurrent embedded mix method design was used in this study. Some 93 students of 11 grade of SMA Negeri 1 Merangin Jambi were participated in this study. Data were collected using argumentation test (pre-test and post-test) and observations. The results showed that there was no difference between the Modified FBAL and FBAL in improving the students’ argumentation skills but both were different from the Flipped Classroom. The N-gain was 0.80 and 0.81 respectively for the Modified FBAL and FBAL. However, those were higher than the N-Gain of Flipped Classroom which was 0.71. Difference in providing the students with opportunities to practice their argumentation skills amongst the three models was the major factors influencing the students' argumentation skills in the three classes.
45
Ragonis, Noa, and Gila Shilo. "Analogies Between Logic Programming and Linguistics For Developing Students' Understanding of Argumentation Texts." Journal of Information Technology Education: Research 17 (2018): 549–75. http://dx.doi.org/10.28945/4163.
Full textAbstract:
Aim/Purpose: Research shows that students encounter difficulties in identifying the structure of argumentation texts and in understanding the main message of the argument. The research examined the effect that learning Logic Programming (LP), while applying logic inference, has on students’ understanding of argumentation texts. Background: Understanding an argumentation text means exposure to its structure, which requires the ability to identify the argument presented and to distinguish between the argument and its justifications. Argumentation is an important cognitive capacity for handling conflicting information, viewpoints, and opinions. Students’ lack of ability to identify the structure of argumentation texts, and to understand its’ main message, affects the understanding of texts in general, the writing of texts, and the presentation of oral arguments. Since Logic Programming is based on inference that is similar to the way in which people commonly believe that human inferential thinking is performed, our research approach was to investigate how learning LP in Computer Science affects the understanding of argumentation texts in Linguistics. Methodology: The research population included 319 11th-grade students from five high schools, divided into a study group and a control group. Students’ understanding was tested using knowledge questionnaires after completing their language studies, before (pre-study) and after (post-study) a year of learning LP. The knowledge questionnaires included argumentation paragraphs where students were asked to give each paragraph a title and to analyze the argument structure. In addition, an attitudes questionnaire was administered at the end of the school year in order to examine the students’ attitudes towards the connection between the two disciplines. The research applied a mixed method approach, combining both qualitative and quantitative methods. Contribution: The research and its’ findings contribute to the previous body of knowledge with relation to students difficulties in understanding argumentation texts in Linguistics studies. Moreover, it suggests a new approach of using argumentation in the framework of inference as apply in LP to scaffold students’ conceptions. The use of an interactive computerized system (like the logic programming language Prolog) can scaffold students in constructing their knowledge, develop their computational thinking skills, and also enables to vary the teaching methods. Findings: Findings show that the students’ understanding of argumentation texts improved after learning LP. The study group students’ achievements were explicitly better compared with the control group students, who did not learn LP, though this was not always reflected with significant statistics. Students’ attitudes questionnaire revealed that students did not identify on their own the connections between the two disciplines and so could not explicitly use it to promote their understanding. Recommendations for Practitioners: Creative educators, who value challenges, can greatly benefit their students if they collaborate in aim for applying interdisciplinary learning while combining those two disciplines. The research conclusions shows that it is possible to improve students’ understanding if teachers explicitly mediate and guide students in drawing analogies. Recommendation for Researchers: The analysis tool we developed and apply can be used by educators and researchers to evaluate the understanding of argumentative texts by learners. It can be used in language classes at all levels as well as by educators in other disciplines in which the understanding of the argumentative structure is fundamental. Impact on Society: Developing argumentation skills and computational thinking skills. Future Research: Vary future possible research can follow the presented approach: examining how LP teachers expose the logical structure of an argumentation paragraph when they write logic programs that describe the inference represented in texts; examining how language teachers coupe with learning and using LP; examines the knowledge and skills of students that experienced a mediate learning process in the two disciplines in parallel.
46
Nakrowi, Zain Syaifudin, Dadang S. Ansori, Yeti Mulyati, and Yuliana Setyaningsih. "The use of intellectual standards to assess the quality of students’ argumentative writings." LITERA 22, no. 2 (2023): 200–212. http://dx.doi.org/10.21831/ltr.v22i2.60465.
Full textAbstract:
To comprehensively examine the quality of argumentative writing, it is important to integrate the aspects of structure and substance. This study seeks to foreground the application of Intellectual Standards (IS) as a core component of the argumentative writing process. The research aims to determine the quality of argumentation in terms of structure using the TAP Toulmin concept and substance using IS. The research participants were 80 high school students in Central Java, Indonesia. A mixed method approach with an exploratory sequential QUAL-quan design is adopted. The results show that the quality of the arguments in terms of structure and substance is in the low category. Structurally, 97.5% of students' written arguments ranged from 1.1 to 2.0 on a scale of 0.0-5.0. In substance, 81.25% of students' argumentation ability scores are in the range of 04.9 - 09.6 on a scale of 0.00-24.00. In addition, the findings show that the completeness of the structure influences the substance score. Furthermore, the results of this study can be used as a reference for teachers in teaching argument texts. Elements of warrant, backing, modal qualifier, and rebuttal must be emphasized in preparing argumentative texts.Keywords: Argumentative Texts, Structure and Substance of Arguments, Toulmin, Intellectual Standards
47
Rusmini, Suyono, and Rudiana Agustini. "Effectiveness of the Connected Learning Cycle (CLC) for Training Scientific Literacy Skills and Argumentation Skills in Prospective Chemistry Teacher Students." Revista de Gestão Social e Ambiental 18, no. 3 (2024): e07546. http://dx.doi.org/10.24857/rgsa.v18n3-154.
Full textAbstract:
Objective: This research aims to determine the use of connected learning cycle (CLC) to practice scientific literacy skills and argumentation skills. Theoretical Framework: Connected learning cycle is a learning strategy using a connected curricular model combined with the 5E learning cycle. There is a relationship between scientific literacy skills and argumentation. Argumentation skills can be improved with literacy skills. Method: This study used a single group pretest post-test research design. The tools and instruments used to collect data have been validated by five experts and received a very valid assessment in the content and construct aspects. The research instruments include scientific literacy and argumentation skills test questions, student activity observation sheets, and student response questionnaires. The analysis used includes learning completeness, in this case completeness in scientific literacy skills, argumentation skills, the n-gain score to see the development of learning outcomes. The Chi square test, and the Fisher test looked at the relationship between scientific literacy and argumentation skills. Results and Discussion: Connected Learning Cycle (CLC) method is effective for training scientific literacy and argumentation skills. Research Implications: Remembering literacy and argumentation skills is the basis for developing other thinking skills, it is hoped that the results of this research can be used as an alternative effort to train scientific literacy skills and argumentation skills. Originality/Value: The Connected Learning Cycle (CLC) method used was a combination of connected curricular model combined with the 5E learning cycle as alternative effort to train scientific literacy skills and argumentation skills.
48
Nusivera, Egi, Ade Hikmat, and Abdul Rahman A. Ghani. "Integration of Chat-GPT Usage in Language Learning Model to Improve Argumentation Skills, Complex Comprehension Skills, and Critical Thinking Skills." International Journal of Learning, Teaching and Educational Research 24, no. 2 (2025): 375–90. https://doi.org/10.26803/ijlter.24.2.19.
Full textAbstract:
This study aims to investigate the effects of integrating Chat-GPT usage in language learning model on students’ argumentation ability, complex comprehension ability, and critical thinking ability. The method used in this study is quasi-experimental to investigate the impact of integrating Chat-GPT usage in a large language model on students’ argumentation and critical thinking ability. Participants involved in this study were 350 students in higher education from semesters 1-6 who were divided into two groups, namely experimental and control. The experimental group received debate intervention integrating Chat-GPT, while the control group received conventional debate intervention. Assessment was conducted in the pretest and posttest phases to assess argumentation ability and critical thinking ability. The findings of the study indicate that integrating Chat-GPT usage in scientific debate language learning model can significantly improve argumentation ability, critical thinking ability, and complex concept understanding compared to argumentation ability and critical thinking ability of students in the conventional debate group. Student interaction with artificial intelligence (AI) Chat-GPT will produce a dialogue that encourages students to analyze, evaluate, and synthesize information, which is a major component in critical thinking skills. Through this process, students’ argumentative skills will be trained because AI directly challenges students to provide strong arguments with varying points of view. The findings of this study imply that AI integration in education should align with specific learning objectives and targeted skill development goals. This study contributes to the use of AI-based educational devices in education and the learning process can be used as a policy in education.
49
Yusnidar, Yusnidar, Harizon Harizon, Haryanto Haryanto, et al. "Socialization and Training on Making Instruments for Arguing Skills Students in Madrasah Aliyah School." Integrated Science Education Journal 5, no. 3 (2024): 134–41. https://doi.org/10.37251/isej.v5i3.1117.
Full textAbstract:
Research objectives: The objectives of this study are to introduce and improve teachers' ability in designing student argumentation assessment instruments in measuring students' level of understanding in learning. Ultimately, it will help students develop good and correct argumentation skills during the learning process. Methodology: The method used in this study is a quantitative method. In using this method, the researcher uses a research design in the form of a questionnaire. By combining this method and design, the research results will be obtained in the form of numbers. The subjects in this study were teachers at Mtss Al-Hidayah. Kebon IX. The results of this study will later become a reference for how this research is conducted and what conclusions can be obtained from the implementation of this research. Main Findings: In the research related to the implementation and application of argumentation instruments, it was found that more than 50% of teachers agreed to implement this argumentation ability instrument. It is seen that teachers strongly agree with the existence of argumentation ability instruments. Teachers are interested and also want to try the argumentation skills instrument. Novelty/Originality of this study: This study is rarely conducted and this study is also quite interesting. From the discussion session, there are still many teachers who do not know about the existence of this argumentation ability instrument. Teachers are interested in implementing this argumentation ability instrument not only in science learning, but also in other subjects.
50
Çömek, Arif, Hakan Sarıçayır, and Yavuz Erdoğan. "Effectiveness of the argumentation method: A meta-analysis." International Journal of Human Sciences 12, no. 2 (2015): 1881. http://dx.doi.org/10.14687/ijhs.v12i2.3522.
Full textAbstract:
<p>In this age of rapidly developing science and technology and with all the ease of access to information regardless of time and location, it is an indispensable component of every country’s educational policy to educate individuals who can think, defend their ideas and make innovations. The purpose of this research is to determine the effect of the argumentation method on the students’ academic achievement. To achieve this purposes, Meta-analysis, also known as the analysis of other analyses, is employed in this study. All the experimental studies in Turkey have been reviewed and examined by means of national and international electronic database searching for this research, and 25 of them have been found to meet our criteria so that we could examine them through meta-analysis. As a result of these analyses, calculated effect size is found to be large. Consequently, the argumentation method has been determined to have a significantly positive effect on the academic achievement (ES=0,997; p&lt;0,05). Considering the population of Turkey, this result indicates that the argumentation method proves itself to be more effective on students' academic achievement than the traditional education.</p>