Quality of Argumentation Models

This study investigated the effectiveness of updated argumentation quality criteria. It evaluated the scale and quality of selected argumentation models judged by the new criteria. Effectiveness concerned content validity, reliability, and practicality of the criteria. The argumentation models were regarded as possessing good quality when they featured important elements in the criteria and received high scores. Five argumentation models were purposefully selected from an argumentative writing course. The models were evaluated by three evaluators with expertise in academic writing. Analysis confirmed the effectiveness of the quality criteria and scale. It addressed all important concerns in evaluation of argumentation; evaluation scores were in accordance with each other, and the important argumentation elements carried equivalent weight. Only three of the models received a quality score of 4 on a scale of 0 (null) to 5 (highest), because they did not feature all quality elements required by the criteria. The updated framework and argumentation models can be further employed for teaching, learning and evaluating argumentation.