Arguing controversies through civic discourse

Peter Smagorinsky Universidad Univer

Abstract

This article draws on Toulmin’s model of argumentation to propose a way of engaging with controversial topics in ways that require not only the assertion of a point of view, but attentive listening to contrasting beliefs. Given the paucity of models of respectful listening in public discourse, school becomes a place where teachers can provide opportunities for contentious discussions to be conducted through civic discourse. The article begins with an outline of Toulmin’s model, with an emphasis on warranting examples so that they serve as evidence for a claim, and engages with opposing viewpoints for a reasoned rebuttal and synthesis. The article then suggests that the topic of school dress codes would be a fruitful topic of student inquiry and argumentation, given the ideological basis of a dress code and the many differences of opinion surrounding them. Such instruction is illustrated through a method that relies on inductive reasoning and discussion as the basis for generating ideas in argumentative writing. The article concludes with a view of writing pedagogy that promotes responsible argumentation in light of critical responses that lead to a synthesis and extension of learning.

Journal
Writing and Pedagogy
Published
2023-05-04
DOI
10.1558/wap.23638
CompPile
Search in CompPile ↗
Open Access
Closed
Topics
Export

Citation Context

Cited by in this index (0)

No articles in this index cite this work.

Cites in this index (4)

  1. Argumentation
  2. Research in the Teaching of English
  3. Written Communication
  4. Written Communication
Also cites 15 works outside this index ↓
  1. Applebee, A. N. (1986). Problems in process approaches: Toward a reconceptualization of process instruction. …
  2. Dale, H. (1994). Collaborative writing interactions in one ninth-grade classroom. The Journal of Educational …
  3. Kleinfeld, R. (2021). The rise of political violence in the United States. Journal of Democracy, 32(4), 160–1…
  4. Lee, C. D., White, G. & Dong, D. (Eds.). (2021). Executive summary. Educating for civic reasoning and discour…
  5. Lewinski, M. & Mohammed, D. (2016). Argumentation theory. In K. B. Jensen, R. T. Craig, J. D. Pooley, & E. W.…
  6. Macagno, F. (2014). Manipulating emotions: Value-based reasoning and emotive language. Argumentation and Advo…
  7. MacKuen, M., Wolak, J., Keele, L. & Marcus, G. E. (2010). Civic engagements: Resolute partisanship or reflect…
  8. Nunnally, T. E. (1991). Breaking the five-paragraph-theme barrier. English Journal, 80(1), 67–71. https://doi…
  9. Rasmussen, R., Levari, D. E., Akhtar, M., Crittle, C. S., Gately, M., Pagan, J., Brennen, A., Cashman, D., Wu…
  10. Russell-Brown, K. (2022). ‘The Stop WOKE Act’: HB 7, race, and Florida’s 21st century anti-literacy campaign.…
  11. Schnitker, S. A. & Emmons, R. A. (2013). Hegel’s thesis-antithesis-synthesis model. In A. L. C. Runehov & L. …
  12. Slater, G. B. & Griggs, C. B. (2015). Standardization and subjection: An autonomist critique of neoliberal sc…
  13. Smagorinsky, P. (2018). Emotion, reason, and argument: Teaching persuasive writing in tense times. English Jo…
  14. Smagorinsky, P. (2023). Talking and listening for civic engagement. English Journal, 112(3), 57–63. https://d…
  15. Yagelski, R. P. (2009). A thousand writers writing: Seeking change through the radical practice of writing as…