Argumentation in Higher Education: Improving Practice Through Theory and Research

244 Pages·2009·9.31 MB·English

by  Richard Andrews

Argumentation in Higher Education
Argumentation in Higher Education offers professors, lecturers, and researchers
informative guidance for teaching effective argumentation skills to their
undergraduate and graduate students. This professional guide aims to make the
complex topic of argumentation open and transparent. Grounded in empirical
research and theory but with student voices heard strongly throughout, this
book fills the gap of argumentation instruction for the undergraduate and
graduate level.
Written to enlighten even the most experienced professor, this text
contributes to a better understanding of the demands of spoken, written,
and visual argumentation in higher education and will undoubtedly inform
and enhance course design. The book argues for a more explicit treatment of
argument (the product) and argumentation (the process) in higher education
so that the ground rules of the academic discipline in question are made clear.
Each chapter concludes with practical exercises for staff development use.
Topics discussed include the following:
• The importance of argument
• The current state of argumentation in higher education
• Generic skills in argumentation
• The balance between generic and discipline-specific skills
• Information communication technologies and visual argumentation
How can we best teach argumentation so that students feel fully empowered
in their academic composition? Professors (new and experienced), lecturers,
researchers, professional developers, and writing coaches worldwide grappling
with this question will find this accessible text to be an extremely valuable
resource.
Richard Andrews is Professor in English at the Institute of Education,
University of London.

Argumentation in Higher
Education
Improving Practice Through Theory
and Research
Richard Andrews
First published 2010
by Routledge
270 Madison Ave, New York, NY 10016
Simultaneously published in the UK
by Routledge
2 Park Square, Milton Park, Abingdon, Oxon OX14 4RN
Routledge is an imprint of the Taylor & Francis Group, an informa business
This edition published in the Taylor & Francis e-Library, 2009.
To purchase your own copy of this or any of Taylor & Francis or Routledge’s
collection of thousands of eBooks please go to www.eBookstore.tandf.co.uk.
© 2010 Taylor & Francis
All rights reserved. No part of this book may be reprinted or reproduced
or utilized in any form or by any electronic, mechanical, or other means,
now known or hereafter invented, including photocopying and recording,
or in any information storage or retrieval system, without permission in
writing from the publishers.
Trademark Notice: Product or corporate names may be trademarks
or registered trademarks, and are used only for identification and
explanation without intent to infringe.
Library of Congress Cataloging in Publication Data
Andrews, Richard, 1953 Apr. 1-
Argumentation in higher education : improving practice through
theory and research / Richard Andrews.
p. cm.
Includes bibliographical references and index.
Academic disputations. 2. Debates and debating – Study and teaching
(Higher) 3. Communication in education. I. Title.
PN4181.A59 2009
808.53–dc22 2009009259
ISBN 0-203-87271-1 Master e-book ISBN
ISBN 10: 0-415-99500-0 (hbk)
ISBN 10: 0-415-99501-9 (pbk)
ISBN 10: 0-203-87271-1 (ebk)
ISBN 13: 978-0-415-99500-9 (hbk)
ISBN 13: 978-0-415-99501-6 (pbk)
ISBN 13: 978-0-203-87271-0 (ebk)
Contents
Illustrations viii
Acknowledgements ix
1 Why Argument? 1
The Importance of Argument 1
Argument and/or Argumentation 2
Argumentation in Higher Education 3
An Example 5
Is Argumentation Too ‘High’ a Term? 8
The Position of Argumentation 10
Theoretical Justifications for the Focus on Argumentation 12
Is Argument a New Preoccupation? 18
The Structure of the Book 19
The Practical Dimension 22
2 The Current State of Argumentation in Higher
Education 23
Who? 29
What? 30
To Whom? 30
Why? 31
A Case Study: Argumentation in History 32
The Practical Dimension 36
3 Generic Skills in Argumentation 37
Recent Models of Argumentation in Education 38
Definitions 39
Literature Review 40
The ‘Toulmin Model’ 41
Models of Argument 43
Visual Argumentation 50
A Spectrum of Models 52
The Practical Dimension 53
4 Discipline-Specific Skills in Argumentation 54
RICHARD ANDREWS, CAROLE TORGERSON AND BENG-HUAT SEE
First-Year Students Believe Argument to be Important in Their
Disciplines 55
Students Feel the Need for More Explicit Instruction 56
vi • Contents
Students Tend to Draw on Argumentation Skills Learned in the
Previous Stage of Formal Education 57
Most Students are not Sceptical in their Academic Reading 58
Differences Among Institutions, Disciplines and Individual
Lecturers are Highly Significant 60
There is a Mismatch Between the Way Lecturers and Students see
Argument 61
If Argument is Formally Assessed, it is More Highly Valued by
Students 62
Argument in Three Disciplines: History, Biology, Electronics 62
History 65
Biology 72
Electronics/Electrical Engineering 77
Conclusion 78
The Practical Dimension 80
5 The Balance Between Generic and Discipline-Specific Skills 81
Generic Stages in the Development of an Argument 81
The Balance Between Generic and Discipline-Specific Skills 89
Argumentation and Academic Literacy/Literacies 91
Interdisciplinarity 93
The Practical Dimension 95
6 Information and Communication Technologies, Multimodality
and Argumentation 96
An Example of an Undergraduate Dissertation 96
What Does Argumentation Look Like From a Modal
Perspective? 101
Argumentation and Information and Communication Technologies
in Higher Education 110
Conclusion 115
The Practical Dimension 116
7 Further Evidence from Research 117
Argumentation at School Level: Lessons for Higher Education 117
Implications for Higher Education 118
Implications: The Conditions That Have to be in Place 119
Implications: Specific Activities 121
Transitions in Education: How Does Argument Change? 130
The Practical Dimension 134
8 Students’ Views on Argumentation 135
Students Interviewing Other Students 135
Case Study 1: Argumentation in a Medical Course 137
Case Study 2: Argumentation in Mathematics 139
Case Study 3: Argumentation in Psychology 140
Case Study 4: Argumentation in Politics 142
Case Study 5: Argumentation in Literature Studies, Writing and
Performance 143
Contents • vii
Case Study 6: Argumentation and Discussion in a Vocational Course 146
Case Study 7: A More In-Depth Look at Argumentation in
Chemistry 148
The Practical Dimension 152
9 Students’ Essays and Reports in a Range of Disciplines 153
Two Examples 154
The End of the Essay? 158
The Personal Voice 167
Conclusion 168
The Practical Dimension 168
10 The Significance of Feedback from Lecturers 169
Feedback at Undergraduate Level 169
Feedback at Postgraduate Level 172
The Practical Dimension 177
11 Methodological Issues in Researching Argumentation 178
What Counts as Evidence? 178
Existing Evidence 179
New Evidence 182
Questions to Ask Regarding ‘Evidence’: A Provisional Checklist 185
What Kinds of Methods can be Used to Investigate
Argumentation? 187
Argumentation and Scientific Method 190
The Practical Dimension 192
12 Conclusion and a Way Forward in Argumentation Studies in
Education 193
Introduction 193
Looking Back 194
The Distinctiveness of the English Argumentational Tradition at
Postgraduate Level 196
What are the Principles of Argumentation as Manifested in
Postgraduate Student Writing? 198
Four Dissertations 199
Argument in Engineering: The Case of a Dissertation 203
The Critical Dimension 206
Interim Conclusion 210
Further Discussion 218
References and Bibliography 220
Index 227
Illustrations
Figures
1.1 The relationship between generic and discipline-specific
skills of argumentation 4
1.2 The place of argumentation 11
3.1 Toulmin’s model (1) 44
3.2 Toulmin’s model (2) (1984) 44
3.3 Mitchell and Riddle’s triangle model 46
3.4 The evolution of concepts in relation to narrative and
argumentational structure 47
3.5 Kaufer and Geisler’s main path/faulty path model (1991) 50
5.1 An example of balanced argumentational approaches in
literature studies 90
6.1 From an undergraduate dissertation (1) 99
6.2 From an undergraduate dissertation (2) 100
6.3 Jean Shrimpton at the 1965 Melbourne Cup 104
6.4 Visual argument from contiguity 105
6.5 ‘Anyone for green tea?’ 106
7.1 Hierarchical pattern 122
7.2 Example of hierarchical plan 123
7.3 Sequencing 124
7.4 3 + 1 sequencing 125
7.5 1 + 3 sequencing 125
7.6 Combination of hierarchical and sequential structures 126
7.7 Structure of debate, represented by ‘rooted digraph trees’ (1) 127
7.8 Structure of debate, represented by ‘rooted digraph trees’ (2) 127
7.9 Structure of debate, represented by ‘rooted digraph trees’ –
how to represent counter-argument/debate 127
Tables
11.1 Questions to ask regarding evidence 186
12.1 From implicit to explicit argumentation in dissertations 215
Acknowledgements
I am grateful to Taylor & Francis, Mouton de Gruyter, and Routledge, and to
the editors of Teaching in Higher Education (‘The end of the essay?’, 8:1, 117–
128); Text (‘Models of argumentation in educational discourse’, 25:1, 107–28);
and Educational Review (‘Argument, critical thinking and the postgraduate
dissertation’, 59:1, 1–18; DOI: 10.1080/00131910600796777) for allowing me
to include updated and revised versions of articles that first appeared in their
journals in 2003, 2005, and 2007, respectively. In particular, I acknowledge the
co-authors of the research reports that emerged from the Higher Education
Academy research of 2005 in the United Kingdom and United States and form
the basis of Chapter 4 (Carole Torgerson, Sally Mitchell, Paul Prior, Kelly Peake,
Rebecca Bilbro, Beng Huat See, Samantha Looker) and those of the systematic
research review that is referred to in Chapter 7 (Carole Torgerson, Graham
Low, Nick McGuinn, and Alison Robinson). Part of Chapter 11 was first
prepared for the Editorial and Commissioning Advisory Board of the Teacher
Training Resource Bank, an initiative of the United Kingdom’s Training and
Development Agency, and was published online in July 2008. I am grateful to
Paul Jenkins at the TDA and Mike Blamires at TTRB for their help.
Parts of Chapter 12 appeared in earlier versions as papers given at the
Multimodality and Learning conference in London in June 2008 and in a public
lecture given in the Graduate School of Library and Information Science, the
University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign (UIUC) in September 2008. I am
grateful to the conference organizers (Jeff Bezemer, Sophia Diamantopoulou,
Gunther Kress, and Diane Mavers) and to Caroline Haythornthwaite at the
UIUC for the opportunity to include these as-yet-unpublished papers. We are
grateful to Donna Al-Bu-Saidi at Magimix United Kingdom for permission
to use the advertisement “Anyone for green tea?” and to Gillian Hilton for
permission to use excerpts from essays from Middlesex University.
I am indebted to Henrice Altink, Gillian Anderson, Rebecca Bilbro, Andrew
Burn, Caroline Coffin, Caroline Daly, Frans van Eemeren, Anton Franks, David
Gough, John Hardcastle, Frøydis Hertzberg, Ann Hewings, Carey Jewitt, Petr
Kaderka, Peter Keeley, Morlette Lindsay, Lia Litosseliti, Terry Locke, Samantha
Looker, Graham Low, Nick McGuinn, Kieran O’Halloran, Kelly Peake, Andrew
Ravenscroft, Chris Reed, Alison Robinson, Mark Roodhouse, Mary Scott,
Chris Tindale, Carole Torgerson, Anne Turvey, Dominic Wyse, and John
ix