Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
- Institution
- Publication
- Publication Type
Articles 1 - 5 of 5
Full-Text Articles in Education
Designing Arguments For Academic, Public, And Professional Audiences, Phillip Marzluf
Designing Arguments For Academic, Public, And Professional Audiences, Phillip Marzluf
NPP eBooks
This college-level textbook guides students through five different types of arguments: evaluations, responses, persuasive rhetorical arguments, proposals, and practical professional development arguments. Students are introduced to rhetorical concepts and strategies to enable them to more effectively appeal to different types of audiences. Students will gain practice in audience-based reasoning, basing their reasons and evidence on the assumptions, beliefs, and values of their readers.
Teaching Rhetorical Segmentation As A Countermeasure To Post-Truth In The Composition Classroom, John Gagnon
Teaching Rhetorical Segmentation As A Countermeasure To Post-Truth In The Composition Classroom, John Gagnon
The Liminal: Interdisciplinary Journal of Technology in Education
This paper responds to the call for rhetoric and composition instructors to engage with post-truth and fake news in the composition classroom. Pulling from personal experiences with post-truth in the composition classroom, the author leverages recent scholarship to develop a multi-phasic, objective analytical approach – rhetorical segmentation – that students can use to identify the purposes and motivations of a particular text. The approach of rhetorical segmentation relies on three primary steps: measuring rhetorical velocity, evaluating ideological modality, and identifying public harm. By combining these steps in a coherent method of analysis, the author argues that students are better equipped …
Emotional Legal Arguments And A Broken Leg, Rubens Damasceno-Morais
Emotional Legal Arguments And A Broken Leg, Rubens Damasceno-Morais
OSSA Conference Archive
We intend to examine ways that emotions may be intertwined within argumentative legal discourses. From the transcript of a brief trial in a Court of Appeal in Brazil we have the opportunity to observe how the emotional and rational reasoning live together in a deliberation among magistrates. “The leg broken case” allow us to examine how judges define the value of compensation to be paid in cases of moral damage. We show that not only technical arguments are the compounds of one decision; subjectivity is also important in that legal context. We would yet confirm what jurists and …
The Effect Of Argumentative Task Goal On The Quality Of Argumentative Discourse, Merce Garcia-Mila, Sandra Gilabert, Sibel Erduran, Mark Felton
The Effect Of Argumentative Task Goal On The Quality Of Argumentative Discourse, Merce Garcia-Mila, Sandra Gilabert, Sibel Erduran, Mark Felton
Faculty Publications
In argumentative discourse, there are two kinds of activity-dispute and deliberation-that depend on the argumentative task goal. In dispute the goal is to defend a conclusion by undermining alternatives, whereas in deliberation the goal is to arrive at a conclusion by contrasting alternatives. In this study, we examine the impact of these tasks goals on the quality of argumentative discourse. Sixty-five junior high school students were organized into dyads to discuss sources of energy. Dyads were formed by members who had differing viewpoints and were distributed to one of two conditions: 31 dyads were asked to discuss with the goal …
Deliberation Versus Dispute: The Impact Of Argumentative Discourse Goals On Learning And Reasoning In The Science Classroom, Mark Felton, Merce Garcia-Mila, Sandra Gilabert
Deliberation Versus Dispute: The Impact Of Argumentative Discourse Goals On Learning And Reasoning In The Science Classroom, Mark Felton, Merce Garcia-Mila, Sandra Gilabert
Faculty Publications
Researchers in science education have converged on the view that argumentation can be an effective intervention for promoting knowledge construction in science classrooms.However, the impact of such interventions may be mediated by individuals’ task goals while arguing. In argumentative discourse, one can distinguish two overlapping but distinct kinds of activity: dispute and deliberation. In dispute the goal is to defend a conclusion by undermining alternatives, whereas in deliberation the goal is to arrive at a conclusion by contrasting alternatives. In this study, we examine the impact of these discourse goals on both content learning and argument quality in science.