Argumentation Across the Curriculum

Christopher R. Wolfe Miami University

Abstract

This study explores how different kinds of arguments are situated in academic contexts and provides an analysis of undergraduate writing assignments. Assignments were collected from the schools of business, education, engineering, fine arts, and interdisciplinary studies as well as the humanities, natural sciences, and social sciences in the College of Arts and Science. A total of 265 undergraduate writing assignments from 71 courses were analyzed. Assignments were reliably categorized into these major categories of argumentative writing: explicitly thesis-driven assignments, text analysis, empirical arguments, decision-based arguments, proposals, short answer arguments, and compound arguments. A majority of writing assignments (59%) required argumentation. All engineering writing assignments required argumentation, as did 90% in fine arts, 80% of interdisciplinary assignments, 72% of social science assignments, 60% of education assignments, 53% in natural science, 47% in the humanities, and 46% in business. Argumentation is valued across the curriculum, yet different academic contexts require different forms of argumentation.

Journal
Written Communication
Published
2011-04-01
DOI
10.1177/0741088311399236
CompPile
Open Access
Closed
Topics
Export

Citation context

Cited by in this index (12)

  1. IEEE Transactions on Professional Communication
  2. Across the Disciplines
  3. Journal of Writing Analytics
  4. Teaching English in the Two-Year College
  5. Written Communication
Show all 12 →
  1. Written Communication
  2. Written Communication
  3. Written Communication
  4. Argumentation
  5. Double Helix
  6. Written Communication
  7. Written Communication

References (39) · 6 in this index

  1. National Ranks for ACT Scores
  2. Getting more without assigning more: Implications of the NSSE study for Miami faculty and…
  3. Argumentation in higher education: Improving practice through theory and research
  4. On rhetoric: A theory of civic discourse
  5. 10.1080/00221546.2009.11779016
     ↗
Show all 39 →
  1. 10.1080/01638530701739207
     ↗
  2. 10.1016/S0749-596X(03)00002-0
     ↗
  3. 10.17011/ht/urn.20105241909
     ↗
  4. SAT Percentile Ranks, 2009 College-Bound Seniors
  5. 10.1080/09500690801992870
     ↗
  6. 10.1007/s10648-007-9056-1
     ↗
  7. 10.1002/(SICI)1098-237X(200005)84:3<287::AID-SCE1>3.0.CO;2-A
     ↗
  8. 10.1002/sce.20012
     ↗
  9. A rhetoric of argument: Brief
  10. Written Communication
  11. 10.1177/0170840607079536
     ↗
  12. Giltrow, J. ( 2000). "Argument" as a term in student talk about writing . In S. Mitchell & R. Andrews (Eds.),…
  13. 10.1002/1098-237X(200011)84:6<757::AID-SCE5>3.0.CO;2-F
     ↗
  14. 10.1016/j.cogdev.2008.09.006
     ↗
  15. 10.3200/JEXE.77.4.339-366
     ↗
  16. 10.1177/1750481308091907
     ↗
  17. Did you know? Quick facts about the Oxford Campus Class of 2011
  18. 10.1109/32.142872
     ↗
  19. Regli, W.C., Hu, X., Atwood, M. & Sun, W. ( 2000). Engineering with Computers, 16, 209-235.
     ↗
  20. 10.1016/j.lindif.2008.11.001
     ↗
  21. 10.1207/S15327809JLS1202_3
     ↗
  22. Written Communication
  23. The uses of argument
  24. 10.1023/A:1015100631027
     ↗
  25. Argumentation
  26. Argumentation
  27. 10.1016/S0883-0355(97)89733-9
     ↗
  28. 10.1037/0022-0663.91.2.301
     ↗
  29. Written Communication
  30. 44th Annual Meeting of the Psychonomic Society
  31. 10.1080/13546780701527674
     ↗
  32. Written Communication
  33. Issues in Integrative Studies
  34. Peer Review