.png){kind=icon}
.png){kind=icon}
Return
Both Quantity and Quality Matter: Investigating the Presence and Effectiveness of Key Argumentative Elements in the Persuasive Writing of US Secondary Students
.png){kind=icon}
PRE
AI
X
C
H
DOI：10.1111/ijal.70174.png)
.png){kind=icon}
Original request for help.png){kind=icon}
Share.png){kind=icon}
Save
Abstract
En 中文
This study examined variations in the presence and effectiveness of argumentative elements in students' persuasive essays. Argumentative essays are used from the PERSUADE 2.0 corpus (n = 13,121) written by US students from grades 8 to 12. We first constructed a basic model representing the prototypical structure of independent argumentative essays, including fundamental elements (e.g., claims), secondary elements (e.g., counterclaims), and organizational elements (e.g., concluding statement). We then tracked the frequency of each element and assessed its effectiveness. Differences in usage rates across score bands were evaluated using independent sample t-tests, while changes in effectiveness distributions were analyzed with Dirichlet modeling. Results showed that the foundational elements were observed in lower score bands with gradient gains in both frequency and effectiveness. The secondary elements remained underused even in essays at the highest score band. The organizational elements showed a continuous growth and were the key indicators of higher scores. Pedagogical implications are discussed, focusing on targeted instructional strategies to support the staged development of argumentative writing skills among adolescent students. (sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic).(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic) PERSUADE 2.0 (sic)(sic)(sic), (sic)(sic)(sic) 13121 (sic)(sic)(sic)(sic) 8 (sic) 12 (sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic).(sic)(sic), (sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic), (sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)((sic)(sic)(sic)),(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)((sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic))(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)((sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)).(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic), (sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic), (sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic).(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic) t (sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic), (sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic).(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic), (sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic), (sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic);(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic), (sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic);(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic), (sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic).(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic), (sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic).
Keywords:
argumentative writing
corpus linguistics
Dirichlet distribution modeling
Toulmin model
writing assessment
(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)
(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)
(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)
(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)
(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)
Journal
I
IF:
1.7
Papers:
183
Citations:
0
Organization
Cited Papers