Argumentative Writing Research Papers - Academia.edu (original) (raw)

Indicates that everything standing on top of naive set theory is also proven.

- by
- •
- Cognitive Science, Logic And Foundations Of Mathematics, Set Theory, Computer Science
- by Kristina Malinauskaite
- •
- Global Citizenship, Social Justice, Political communication, Argumentation

The most challenging skill perceived by students when they learn the English language is the writing skill. This recent study would like to identify the rhetorical strategies used by good writers and poor writers. Two participants were selected, and written essays was the instrument employed for this study. Both participants were required to write an essay on 'Should examinations be abolished?' The essays written were analysed using a coding technique. The findings indicated that both writers utilised the three elements, Logos, Ethos and Pathos, differently. Both were considerate to the readers when they wrote the essays and presented their message, which was also heavily emphasised. However, they did not focus on their roles as writers. Based on the findings, it can be concluded that teachers need to help students familiarise themselves with rhetorical strategies. As for students, they should be aware of the rhetorical strategies to enhance their writing skills to write arg...

- by DR. MAIZURA MOHD NOOR
- •
- Argumentative Writing, Rhetorical Strategies
- by Sergio Sánchez
- •
- Argumentation, Argumentative Writing, Argumentación, Texto Argumentativo

En fonction de la langue évaluée dans les examens de certification officielle pour l’obtention du DELF et du DELE B1 et B2, les exigences concernant le développement de la compétence argumentative chez le candidat vont être spécifiques. Conditionné par les normes auxquelles se plient les épreuves qui visent à la certification officielle d’un niveau, le contenu de la tâche attendu dans les exercices des sujets révèle une conception propre de la dimension argumentative que doit avoir un discours en français ou en espagnol.

- by Noor Hanim Rahmat, (Professor, Dr) and +1
- •
- Argumentative Writing, Rhetorical Strategies

This study reports a quantitative and qualitative analysis of the use of discourse markers (DMs) in personal narrative and argumentative papers written by 30 undergraduate students: 15 native speakers (NS) and 15 non- native speakers (NNS). The study also ascertains whether the frequency and the incorrect use of DMs plays a role in determining the quality of ESL writings. Findings showed that there was no significant difference in the use of DMs. In both types of composition, NS and NNS writers used elaborative, contrastive and reason markers at higher rates than any DMs in other categories, forming, as consequence, a hierarchy of use. The qualitative analysis of NNS writings showed an overuse of DMs at sentence-initial position and an unnecessary use of semantically similar DMs within the boundary of a single sentence. The incorrect use and the frequency of DMs were key indicators of the quality of ESL writings. Finally, some pedagogical implications are offered.

- by Emad A Alghamdi
- •
- Academic Writing, Discourse Markers, Argumentative Writing, ESL/EFL Writing
- by Ansie Labuschagne
- •
- Argumentative Writing

Argumentative writing is an important skill expected of all students from the institutions of higher learning. These tertiary students are often required to state their opinions and put forward their arguments in their written essays, assignments, and projects. As Shannon (2011) points out students are required to write to fulfill their academic course requirements. Hyland (2005) also emphasises the importance of writing which involves interactions between writers and readers. The ways that the writers express their opinions to the readers are very much related to the choices of their language use. Therefore, this study explores how undergraduate writers state their stances in English argumentative essays. The analysis of the argumentative essays for stance was based on the framework proposed by Biber (2006), focusing on the lexico-grammatical features. The findings of this study were obtained from the argumentative essays of thirty undergraduate writers from a public university in Malaysia. The findings of this study have provided a more in-depth understanding of how stance-taking can be identified through the use of particular linguistic features such as modal verbs, stance adverbs, and stance complement clauses in argumentative writing by these ESL undergraduate writers. Further, the findings from the analysis of the use of linguistic features in English for stating stances can then be used to guide these writers improve their abilities to write for academic purposes, specifically in argumentative writing. INTRODUCTION Writing is an important skill expected of all the undergraduates from the institutions of higher learning (IHL). It is often the case that these undergraduates need to do some forms of writing like essays, assignments, projects or theses. The writing skills that are required of them are often to state their stances and put forward their arguments. As Shannon (2011) points out, the students are required to write to fulfill their academic course requirements. As writing is considered important to the undergraduates, it is essential for them to be aware of how they express their stances in their academic writing, particularly in their argumentative writing. According to Hyland (2005), when the writers state their stances, they show how they convey their opinions, judgments, and commitments to the propositions. To him, stating a stance in writing involves interaction with the readers. The competency in stance-taking can establish writer-reader dialogue, and relationships between people and ideas.

- by Hacer Hande Uysal
- •
- Discourse Analysis, Literacy, Rhetoric, Composition and Rhetoric
- by Juan Pablo Carrión
- •
- Education, Composition and Rhetoric, Argentina, Argumentative Writing
- by Jorge Albornoz Barrientos and +1
- •
- Argumentation Systems (Computer Science), Argumentation, Transcendental Arguments, Legal argumentation

Birkenstein; uncovers several ideas and misconceptions that emerged in argumentative writing. This outstanding book remarks through " moves " the strategies and ideas writers have to keep in mind when it comes to comprehend what others say and their own conceptions. In this way, it is exceptional how such moves of argumentative writing are presented through templates, patterns, instances and exercises in order for writers to connect, clarify misunderstandings, and practice these strategies they have in the argumentative style. Thus, it is impressive the clear and comprehensible way the language is used in the book, allowing writers from beginner to advanced level to have a better and proper notion of how to express their viewpoints kindly; throughout their texts taking into account several aspects such as agreeing and disagreeing. This useful book is divided into fourteen parts under 4 major parts which helps readers to think analytically so as to enhance and create a successful persuasive writing. Chapter 1 encloses the first four parts and it makes emphasis on several aspects when it comes to use and write others' ideas. For instance, the order of those thoughts illustrated in paraphrasing and quoting; which are meaningful strategies to give a high level of credibility, support and connection to writer's own ideas. Furthermore, within its next four parts Chapter 2 describes how to express writers' views with the " I say " label. Therefore, such crucial aspects as agreeing, disagreeing, and referencing some counterarguments, as well as specific people or groups; are taking into account in order to gain authority and reliability to the writers' arguments. Additionally, Chapter 3 provides several features so as to connect every part of texts as a whole. These are represented in the use of analogies, transition words and pointing words with the aim of avoiding redundancy. Besides the connection among several statements, and the relevance of using metacommentary taking into account that this is a meaningful resource to recognize some implications that might create confusion in the construction of proper arguments. Chapter 4 embraces some strategies and recommendations while writing in some academic settings such as science and social sciences. It is remarkable in this part how the authors give some details in order for writers to deal with data, arguments and conclusions based on information related to these fields. This engaging and fascinating book is really practical for writers in several fields and levels because the language that is used is really comprehensible and clear in order to avoid certain

- by Andrea Buitrago Forero
- •
- Argumentative Writing, Persuasive writing

En el siguiente trabajo se propone que el género discursivo del ensayo podría considerarse una herramienta válida para la enseñanza y el aprendizaje de la escritura académica, ya que ofrece al alumno una amplia libertad de enfoque sin obviar la coherencia argumentativa y expositiva. A partir de la caracterización del ensayo que realizan diferentes textos críticos, estos rasgos constitutivos del género permitirían una aproximación didáctica que lograría un aprendizaje significativo de los conocimientos teóricos y metodológicos de los géneros discursivos académicos e institucionales.

- by Andrés Olaizola
- •
- Argumentative Writing, Essay (Genre Theory), Academic literacy, Essay

They say that argumentative writing skills are best learned through writing argumentative essays. I say that while this is excellent practice for argumentative writing, an important exercise to practice structuring such essays and build critical thinking skills simultaneously is what I call the four-sentence paper. The exercise has the template They say…, I say…, one might object…, I reply… One might object that the assignment oversimplifies argumentative writing, stifles creativity, promotes an adversarial attitude, or that students can't consider objections well anyway. I reply that a simplified form of argumentative writing is fine for beginners, especially since the template is ubiquitous in philosophy; that any assignment template has room for creativity; that considering objections is consistent with good manners; and that despite some pitfalls of trying to defend a thesis and consider objections, students are capable of considering objections well with proper instruction and practice. Most everyone reading this who is a philosopher surely assigns argumentative, " thesis-defense " papers. Most everyone reading this surely struggles with grading such papers, and most everyone reading this surely thinks about how best to help students improve their argumentative writing skills. A first thought is that if we want students to be able to write good argumentative papers, we should assign more papers. But we all know we're limited in that—in terms of load on both students and us—and most of us wind up assigning just a few papers in any one course, and the consequence is that progress is slow. What to do? I agree with the common thought just mentioned, and also with the thought that practicing various components or subskills of argumentative writing is helpful too. One of the most important of these is that of considering and replying to objections. This might be the most important skill in argumentative writing after getting the expository material right and having clear and cogent arguments of one's own. But in my experience, and my own department's assessment data confirm this, students only rarely consider objections to their own theses and arguments. Or if they do, it is usually by way of just a passing mention of an opposing view. Again, what to do? What I offer here is a tool to help build argumentative writing skills by way of making more practice of them possible, where the tool essentially includes practice at considering and replying to objections. I call it " the four-sentence paper. " It is inspired by the approach to writing favored by Graff and Birkenstein's (2014) They Say / I Say: The Moves that Matter in Academic Writing, which advocates using templates to help students see general argumentative " moves " in

- by Dennis Earl
- •
- Academic Writing, Argumentative Writing

Formato para organizar las ideas de un texto persuasivo.

- by Damiana Leyva-Loría
- •
- Technical Writing, Argumentative Writing, Escritura, Texto Argumentativo

En este manual argumentamos sobre la utilidad del debate competitivo como metodología activa de enseñanza aprendizaje, que permite desarrollar pensamiento crítico, innovación y metacognición, en base al estudio y práctica de la argumentación.
En la primera parte, explicamos en términos generales los aspectos básicos que debe conocer una persona que quiera participar en debate competitivo.
La segunda parte, dirigida principalmente a debatientes avanzados y profesores, se dedica al análisis de aspectos argumentativos, que sirven de base para sostener que el debate es una metodología activa de enseñanza aprendizaje, y que permite desarrollar habilidades cognitivas de nivel superior.
Se acompañan planificaciones de un curso de debate, con sus respectivos instrumentos de evaluación y materiales complementarios, en la búsqueda de ser un aporte para quienes quieran enseñar debate con miras a fortalecer el pensamiento crítico en la educación.

- by Jorge Albornoz Barrientos and +3
- •
- Critical Theory, Critical Discourse Studies, Critical Pedagogy, Metacognition and its development

The authors investigated ways of encouraging students to consider more counterarguments when writing
argumentative texts. One hundred eighty-four undergraduates wrote essays on TV violence. In Experiment
1, students given specific goals generated more counterarguments and rebuttals than controls. In
Experiment 2, some participants were provided with a text outlining arguments/counterarguments; some
were also asked to write a persuasive letter. Prior attitudes toward the topic were also measured.
Persuasion instructions negatively affected and text (without persuasion instructions) positively affected
counterargumentation and the overall quality of arguments. Text was only effective, however, for
students with less extreme prior attitudes. The danger of using persuasion goals and the advantages of
using more specific goals (with text) are discussed.

Literature, derived from the Latin word littera which means letter or handwriting, encompasses of various types from poetry to drama. Although nowadays literature seems to gradually lose its value within the modern society, literature remains an essential portion to it. The contributions literature continues to make, even when it is neglected, could not be set aside. Literature is a leading role in the development of our society by shaping our civilization, developing each individual tolerance, and catalyzing the procurement of our social actions.

It is important, when writing opinion essays, for students to
consider and integrate both arguments and counterarguments to develop
a final conclusion. In this article, the authors explored the effect of criteria
instruction and a graphic organizer to promote integration of arguments
and counterarguments. The researchers randomly assigned 84 participants
from an undergraduate educational psychology course to 1 of 4 conditions:
training only, organizer only, combined, and control. The graphic organizer
resulted in more refutations of counterarguments. However, criteria instruction
resulted in better integration of argument and counterargument (with
stronger rebuttals and more balanced reasoning). The authors discussed
how the 2 interventions may have activated somewhat different argumentation
schema in students.

Cohesive devices are important elements in that they contribute to the overall quality of writing in terms of establishing connections, actualizing transitions and linking ideas. Related to this, conjunctions also carry the same importance as cohesive devices since they connect paragraphs, sentences and clauses. In this regard, the present study aims to document the use of conjunctions by upper-intermediate and advanced learners of EFL in their argumentative essays and look for potential relationships between the frequency of the use of conjunctions and argumentative essay performance. The study is of a descriptive nature, utilizing quantitative data to conduct analyses. The corpus for the study is comprised of 160 argumentative essays written by 40 students throughout one semester in an English Literature course. The frequency values regarding the use of conjunctions for each essay in the corpus were formed by the researcher taking Halliday and Hasan's (1976) taxonomy of conjunctions as a basis. For the scoring of the essays, a holistic rubric developed for the scoring of argumentative essays was preferred. The use of conjunctions in the corpus was reported as frequencies and percentages classfying them under the subtitles of additive, adversative, causal and temporal. Spearman's Rank Order Correlation Coefficient was computed to see if there was a relationship between argumentative writing performance and the frequency of conjunction use. The findings are discussed in relation to relevant litearture in the conclusion section.

This article reports research investigating instances of linguistic metaphor in contextualized corpus data. Since the issue of metaphor identification in naturally-occurring data has been reason of current debate among cognitive and applied linguists, this paper focuses particularly on the process of identification of this type of language in corpus data and proposes a combined procedure for metaphor identification. The findings inform about the presence and word class of metaphorical language in the argumentative writing of EFL university students. Implications and directions for future research are highlighted. Resumen Este artículo reporta un estudio de instancias de lenguaje metafórico en datos contextualizados enmarcados en la lingüística del corpus. Dado que el problema de la identificación del lenguaje metafórico se ha constituido como causa de debate entre estudiosos de la lingüística cognitiva y la lingüística aplicada, este artículo se enfoca principalmente en los procesos de identificación de este tipo de lenguaje en datos auténticos de corpus, y propone un procedimiento combinado aplicable a este tipo de análisis. Los resultados informan acerca de la presencia del lenguaje metafórico y su clasificación gramatical en textos argumentativos escritos por estudiantes universitarios de inglés como lengua extranjera. El artículo discute las implicaciones de este estudio y propone posibles direcciones para futuras investigaciones. Palabras clave Metáfora lingüística, lingüística del corpus, procedimientos de identificación de metáfora, producción metafórica de estudiantes de inglés como lengua extranjera.

Yoon, Choongil. Nominalization in Korean EFL Learners' Argumentative Writing: A Comparative Study of Distribution and Use. The New Studies of English Language & Literature 69 (2018): 249-274. Nominalization has been identified as a key feature of academic writing for its high frequency and the cohesive and rhetorical functions it serves in text. The present study examined the instances of nominalization and related linguistic features in a corpus of Korean EFL college students' argumentative essays and compared the data with those from a corresponding corpus of native speakers. Results showed that the Korean EFL writers' nominalization use was almost as frequent as that of their NS counterparts. Despite the similar frequency, however, the Korean EFL writers' nominalizations were overall simpler in their syntactic patterns, less elaborated and less effective in terms of cohesive and rhetorical functions than those used by the native speaker university students. The paper concludes by discussing the pedagogical implications of the findings. (Dongguk University Gyeongju Campus)

- by Choongil Yoon
- •
- Corpus Linguistics, Argumentative Writing, Nouns and Nominalizations

This study aims to initially develop a Critical-Thinking-in-Argumentative-Essay Rubric (CTER) for EFL college students. Participants of this study were five experts and two groups of raters. Data sources included the experts' validation survey for the CTER, interviews and writing samples. Three phases for developing the CTER were conducted, and the evaluative descriptors of the rubric were revised based on the experts' comments. To complete the initial development of the rubric, the raters and the first researcher used the CTER to evaluate the writing samples. The scores obtained from the evaluation were analyzed to examine the inter-rater reliability of the rubric. The findings showed that the CTER contained six clear and valid domains for assessing critical thinking in argumentative essays of EFL students. The total scoring results from the six domains achieved a moderate inter-rater reliability with ICC of 0.70 and Kendall's W of 0.5 (p < 0.05). The raters perceived that the CTER could be used to promote learning and critical thinking of EFL learners. Pedagogical implications were presented based on the findings.

- by Nattawut Nakkaew and +1
- •
- Critical Thinking, Language Assessment, Argumentative Writing
- by Nabilah chusna khairunisa
- •
- Health, Argumentative Writing, Essays, Essay Writing

University students across disciplines are often expected to write argumentative texts. However, many students, particularly L2 writers, struggle writing arguments and teachers may not be prepared to effectively scaffold argument writing. Despite its importance, argumentative writing is still an underresearched area in second language writing. In this paper, we use a Systemic Functional Linguistics conceptualization of argumentation to examine emergent arguments, texts that meet some of the expectations for argumentative writing but not others. We adapt Humphrey et al. (2010) 3 × 3 professional learning toolkit to analyze student writing from a first-year university history class. The 3 × 3 allows us to highlight these texts' mixed effectiveness in meeting genre expectations, based on how they control the resources of each of SFL's three metafunctions (ideational, interpersonal, and textual) at the levels of whole-text, paragraph , and sentence/clause. Our analysis of three emergent arguments shows how each exhibits challenges controlling the resources of a particular metafunction. Our application of the 3 × 3 provides a theoretical conceptualization of argumentative writing that can help teachers uncover subtle ways that student writing does and does not meet genre expectations.

This corpus-based study compares L1-English and L1-Chinese undergraduate students' use of lexical bundles in English argumentative essays, and identifies the most common bundle misuses in L2 student writing. Data consist of two corpora of student-produced argumentative essays: 101 high-rated essays written by L1-English students and 105 high-rated essays written by L1-Chinese students. Using Biber's (Biber et al., 1999; Biber et al., 2004) structural and functional taxonomy, we compared the forms and functions of four-word bundles used by L1-English and L1-Chinese university students. Findings indicate that L2 students not only use substantially more bundle types and tokens than L1 writers, but the structural and functional patterns of bundles also differ. While L1 writers' bundles consist of mostly noun and preposition phrases, L2 students use significantly more verb phrase (clausal) bundles. Results also show that L2 student writers use significantly more stance bundles than L1 writers. In addition, most of the misused bundles in the L2 writers' essays pertain to grammatical mistakes, particularly with articles and prepositions. We conclude with some pedagogical implications for ESL composition.

This study examined a new prewriting tool, argumentation vee diagrams (AVDs), which are used to write
reflective opinion essays. AVDs are based on the theoretical concept of argument– counterargument
integration, which involves evaluating and integrating both sides of an issue before developing a final
conclusion on a controversial question. In a test of the effectiveness of AVDs, 45 undergraduates at a
large, southwestern university were randomly assigned to an experimental or control group. Both groups
wrote 4 opinion essays over a 4-week period. The experimental group also received training on using the
AVDs, including instruction on criteria for weighing arguments. Results indicated that AVD training was
effective in enhancing argument– counterargument integration. Furthermore, examination of integration
strategies used by participants revealed a new strategy, minimization, which was not previously part of
E. M. Nussbaum and G. Schraw’s (2007) argument– counterargument integration framework. Minimization
involves curtailing the importance or extensiveness of a problem or advantage as a heuristic
shortcut for weighing advantages and disadvantages. The role of critical questions and argumentation
schemata in argument-counterargument integration is discussed.

Brainstorming, as a pre-writing activity, facilitates the process of generating ideas and helps organize learners' thoughts to get involved in writing activities. The present convergent mixed methods study investigated whether the integration of technology and brainstorming could affect the argumentative writing of EFL learners. Initially, 68 university students in three intact classes (n=26, n=23, n=20) were exposed to mobile-assisted brainstorming (n=26), wordle-assisted brainstorming (n=23), and cooperative brainstorming (n=20) in the quantitative phase. For qualitative data collection, each session, some paper strips with three questions on them were distributed among the groups to help the researchers discover the participants' learning processes and perceptions during the instruction. Sixty-five participants who had attended all treatment sessions took one immediate post-test on a seen and one delayed post-test on an unseen topic. Two one-way analysis of variance tests (ANOVA) examined whether there were statistically significant differences between the means of the groups. The results revealed that the wordle-assisted brainstorming group outperformed the two other groups in both post-tests. The findings supported the use of word clouds as a cognitive activity in promoting the argumentative essay writing of Iranian EFL learners. The study has implications for teachers, practitioners, and educators.

- by Mojgan Rashtchi and +1
- •
- Writing, Argumentative Writing, Teaching and Learning Writing and Reading, Technology-Assisted Language Learning

The paper shows how error statistical theory can be deployed to grasp the deeper epistemic logic of the peer-review process. The intent is to provide the readers with a novel lens through which to make sense of the practices of academic... more

- by Dragos Simandan
- •
- Discourse Analysis, Sociology, Geography, Human Geography

Teaching writing has been challenging for some teachers particularly in the context of teaching English as a Foreign Language. Learners' problems with regard to vocabulary, grammar, organization, and mechanics are among those which can become the sources of the challenge. For that reason, various teaching strategies have been developed to facilitate learners in improving their writing skills among which include Problem-Based Learning (PBL). This paper investigates the effectiveness of Problem-Based writing instruction on students' argumentative writing skills with regard to content, organization, vocabulary, grammar, and mechanics. It employs a quasi-experimental study by involving the intermediate level students of Lambung Mangkurat University, a state university in Indonesia as the experimental and the control groups. The instrument is a writing test which is statistically proven to be valid and reliable. The findings show that there is a significant difference in the mean scores of argumentative writing skills of students taught using Problem-Based writing instruction compared to those taught using guided-writing instruction in which the obtained p value is .041 which is less than the α .05 significance level. A significant difference is also found in the components of organization, vocabulary, and grammar. The results confirm that Problem-Based writing instruction can be recommended as an alternative teaching strategy particularly in teaching argumentative essay writing. The study also suggests that further research involves larger samples and the skills in listening, speaking, and reading to establish more conclusive findings on the roles of PBL in English Language Teaching contexts.