A Corpus of Argumentative Essays by School Students for Analyzing the Interaction between Argumentative Structure and Quality

Core Concepts

Argumentative writing is crucial for school students, but learning to write high-quality arguments is challenging. This work presents a corpus of 1,320 German school student essays annotated for argumentative structure and quality, enabling the analysis of their interaction.

Abstract

The authors present a corpus of 1,320 German school student essays, annotated for argumentative structure and quality. The corpus covers essays from fifth-graders and ninth-graders, equally distributed across genders. The annotation scheme covers four levels of argumentative structure: discourse functions (introduction, body, conclusion), arguments (argument, counter-argument), components (topic, thesis, claim, premise), and discourse modes (comparing, conceding, concluding, etc.). The quality of the essays is annotated across five aspects: relevance, content, structure, style, and overall. The analysis of the corpus provides insights into the correlation between the different levels of argumentative structure and essay quality. Baseline approaches using fine-tuned transformers and adapters are presented for argument mining and essay scoring. The results show that combining information from all levels of argumentative structure helps predict essay quality, underlining the usefulness of the corpus for quality-oriented argumentative writing support.

Stats

The corpus contains 1,320 German school student essays, equally distributed across two age groups (fifth-graders and ninth-graders) and binary genders. On average, the body section of the essays contains 56.75 tokens, while introductions and conclusions are shorter with 20.43 and 15.38 tokens, respectively. Claims are the most frequent argumentative component, appearing 3,137 times in total and 2.38 times per essay on average. The most common discourse modes are positioning, describing, and reasoning. 96.2% of the annotated relations are support, while 3.8% are attack.

Quotes

"Learning argumentative writing is challenging. Besides writing fundamentals such as syntax and grammar, learners must select and arrange argument components meaningfully to create high-quality essays." "To support argumentative writing computationally, one step is to mine the argumentative structure. When combined with automatic essay scoring, interactions of the argumentative structure and quality scores can be exploited for comprehensive writing support."

Key Insights Distilled From

A School Student Essay Corpus for Analyzing Interactions of Argumentative Structure and Quality

by Maja Stahl,N... at arxiv.org 04-04-2024

https://arxiv.org/pdf/2404.02529.pdf

Deeper Inquiries

How can the insights from this corpus be used to develop adaptive writing support systems that provide personalized feedback to students based on their individual strengths and weaknesses in argumentative writing?

The insights gained from this corpus can be instrumental in developing adaptive writing support systems that cater to the individual needs of students in argumentative writing. By analyzing the correlations between argumentative structure and essay quality, these systems can identify patterns in students' writing and provide targeted feedback. For example, if a student consistently struggles with organizing their arguments coherently, the system can offer specific guidance on structuring their essays effectively. Moreover, by leveraging the annotated data on different levels of argumentative structure and quality aspects, these systems can tailor feedback to address each student's strengths and weaknesses. For instance, if a student excels in providing reasoning but struggles with concluding their arguments, the system can focus on enhancing their skills in that particular area. By incorporating machine learning algorithms, these systems can adapt to each student's writing style and progress over time, providing increasingly personalized and effective feedback.

What are the potential biases in the corpus, and how might they affect the generalizability of the findings to other educational contexts or student populations?

One potential bias in the corpus could be related to the selection of essays from specific age groups and genders, which may not fully represent the diversity of student populations. This bias could limit the generalizability of the findings to other educational contexts or student demographics. For example, the writing styles and argumentative approaches of fifth-graders may differ significantly from those of high school students, impacting the applicability of the insights to a broader range of students. Additionally, the corpus being in German may introduce language-specific biases that could affect the transferability of the findings to other linguistic contexts. The linguistic nuances and cultural influences present in German argumentative writing may not align with those in other languages, limiting the generalizability of the results. To mitigate these biases and enhance the generalizability of the findings, future research could involve expanding the corpus to include a more diverse range of student populations, educational levels, and languages. By incorporating a broader representation of students, the insights gained from the corpus can be more widely applicable and beneficial across various educational settings.

What other types of linguistic or cognitive features, beyond argumentative structure, could be explored to gain a more holistic understanding of the factors that contribute to high-quality argumentative writing in school settings?

In addition to argumentative structure, exploring other linguistic and cognitive features can provide a more comprehensive understanding of high-quality argumentative writing in school settings. Some of these features include: Vocabulary and Language Use: Analyzing the sophistication and appropriateness of vocabulary, sentence structures, and language conventions can offer insights into the overall quality of writing. Coherence and Cohesion: Examining how well ideas are connected within and across paragraphs can indicate the clarity and flow of the argumentative text. Critical Thinking Skills: Assessing the depth of analysis, logical reasoning, and evidence-based arguments can shed light on students' ability to think critically and construct persuasive arguments. Metacognitive Strategies: Investigating students' awareness of their writing process, self-regulation skills, and ability to revise and improve their arguments can provide valuable information on their overall writing proficiency. Engagement and Persuasiveness: Evaluating the effectiveness of engaging the reader, maintaining a persuasive tone, and addressing counterarguments can contribute to a more nuanced understanding of argumentative writing quality. By incorporating these additional linguistic and cognitive features into the analysis, researchers and educators can gain a more holistic view of the factors influencing high-quality argumentative writing in school settings. This comprehensive approach can lead to more targeted interventions and support strategies to enhance students' writing skills effectively.