Applying Argumentation Schemes for Essay Scoring
نویسندگان
چکیده
Under the framework of the argumentation scheme theory (Walton, 1996), we developed annotation protocols for an argumentative writing task to support identification and classification of the arguments being made in essays. Each annotation protocol defined argumentation schemes (i.e., reasoning patterns) in a given writing prompt and listed questions to help evaluate an argument based on these schemes, to make the argument structure in a text explicit and classifiable. We report findings based on an annotation of 600 essays. Most annotation categories were applied reliably by human annotators, and some categories significantly contributed to essay score. An NLP system to identify sentences containing scheme-relevant critical questions was developed based on the human annotations.
منابع مشابه
Using Argument Mining to Assess the Argumentation Quality of Essays
Argument mining aims to determine the argumentative structure of texts. Although it is said to be crucial for future applications such as writing support systems, the benefit of its output has rarely been evaluated. This paper puts the analysis of the output into the focus. In particular, we investigate to what extent the mined structure can be leveraged to assess the argumentation quality of p...
متن کاملOntology-Based Argument Mining and Automatic Essay Scoring
Essays are frequently used as a medium for teaching and evaluating argumentation skills. Recently, there has been interest in diagrammatic outlining as a replacement to the written outline that often precedes essay writing. This paper presents a preliminary approach for automatically identifying diagram ontology elements in essays, and demonstrates its positive correlation with expert scores of...
متن کاملArgumentation-Relevant Metaphors in Test-Taker Essays
This article discusses metaphor annotation in a corpus of argumentative essays written by test-takers during a standardized examination for graduate school admission. The quality of argumentation being the focus of the project, we developed a metaphor annotation protocol that targets metaphors that are relevant for the writer’s arguments. The reliability of the protocol is κ=0.58, on a set of 1...
متن کاملA Question-Answering System Using Argumentation
This paper presents a novel approach to question answering: the use of argumentation techniques. Our question answering system deals with argumentation in student essays: it sees an essay as an answer to a question and gauges its quality on the basis of the argumentation found in it. Thus, the system looks for expected types of argumentation in essays (i.e. the expectation is that the kind of a...
متن کاملEmotional And Non Emotional Persuasion Strength
Emotional argumentation is the result of a rational form of reasoning by the Persuader, subsequently translated into messages by applying some variants of the ‘classical’ argumentation schemes. In this paper, we discuss which may be assumed to be the relative strength of emotional vs. rational persuasion strategies and how this has been represented in a dialogic persuasion testbed.
متن کامل