Papers
Topics
Authors
Recent
Gemini 2.5 Flash
Gemini 2.5 Flash
126 tokens/sec
GPT-4o
47 tokens/sec
Gemini 2.5 Pro Pro
43 tokens/sec
o3 Pro
4 tokens/sec
GPT-4.1 Pro
47 tokens/sec
DeepSeek R1 via Azure Pro
28 tokens/sec
2000 character limit reached

A School Student Essay Corpus for Analyzing Interactions of Argumentative Structure and Quality (2404.02529v1)

Published 3 Apr 2024 in cs.CL

Abstract: 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. Although studies have shown the usefulness of using information about the argumentative structure for essay scoring, no argument mining corpus with ground-truth essay quality annotations has been published yet. Moreover, none of the existing corpora contain essays written by school students specifically. To fill this research gap, we present a German corpus of 1,320 essays from school students of two age groups. Each essay has been manually annotated for argumentative structure and quality on multiple levels of granularity. We propose baseline approaches to argument mining and essay scoring, and we analyze interactions between both tasks, thereby laying the ground for quality-oriented argumentative writing support.

Definition Search Book Streamline Icon: https://streamlinehq.com
References (62)
  1. Tazin Afrin and Diane Litman. 2018. Annotation and classification of sentence-level revision improvement. In Proceedings of the Thirteenth Workshop on Innovative Use of NLP for Building Educational Applications, pages 240–246, New Orleans, Louisiana. Association for Computational Linguistics.
  2. Aniket Ajit Tambe and Manasi Kulkarni. 2022. Automated essay scoring system with grammar score analysis. In 2022 Smart Technologies, Communication and Robotics (STCR), pages 1–7.
  3. Confronting the challenges of undergraduates’ argumentation writing in a “learning how to learn” course. Written Communication, 40(2):482–517.
  4. Michael Becker-Mrotzek and Joachim Grabowski. 2018. Textkorpus Scriptoria. In Michael Becker-Mrotzek and Joachim Grabowski, editors, FD-LEX (Forschungsdatenbank Lernertexte). Mercator-Institut für Sprachförderung und Deutsch als Zweitsprache, Köln. Available at: https://fd-lex.uni-koeln.de.
  5. Argumentierendes Schreiben - lehren und lernen. Vorschläge für einen systematischen Kompetenzaufbau in den Stufen 5 bis 8.
  6. Argumentation: Content, structure, and relationship with essay quality. In Proceedings of the Third Workshop on Argument Mining (ArgMining2016), pages 70–75, Berlin, Germany. Association for Computational Linguistics.
  7. Aquaplane: The argument quality explainer app. In Proceedings of the 32nd ACM International Conference on Information and Knowledge Management, CIKM ’23, page 5015–5020, New York, NY, USA. Association for Computing Machinery.
  8. Assessing students’ skills at writing analytically in response to texts. The Elementary School Journal, 114(2):142–177.
  9. A study on the difficulties in writing argumentative essays of english-majored sophomores at tay do university, vietnam. European Journal of English Language Teaching, 6(1).
  10. Neele Falk and Gabriella Lapesa. 2023. Bridging argument quality and deliberative quality annotations with adapters. In Findings of the Association for Computational Linguistics: EACL 2023, pages 2469–2488, Dubrovnik, Croatia. Association for Computational Linguistics.
  11. Neural automated essay scoring and coherence modeling for adversarially crafted input. In Proceedings of the 2018 Conference of the North American Chapter of the Association for Computational Linguistics: Human Language Technologies, Volume 1 (Long Papers), pages 263–271, New Orleans, Louisiana. Association for Computational Linguistics.
  12. Helmuth Feilke. 2017. Schreib- und Textprozeduren. In Jürgen Baurmann, Clemens Kammler, and Astrid Müller, editors, Handbuch Deutschunterricht. Theorie und Praxis des Lehrens und Lernens, 1 edition, pages 51–57. Reihe Praxis Deutsch.
  13. Helmuth Feilke and Sara Rezat. 2021. Textprozeduren und der Erwerb literaler Kompetenz. In Nikolas Koch and Barbara Kozikowski, editors, Sprach(en)erwerb, pages 69–79. Der Deutschunterricht.
  14. Improving the argumentative writing of students with learning disabilities: Descriptive and normative considerations. Reading & Writing Quarterly, 23(3):267–285.
  15. The International Corpus of Learner English. Presses universitaires de Louvain, Louvain-la-Neuve.
  16. Assessing the sufficiency of arguments through conclusion generation. In Proceedings of the 8th Workshop on Argument Mining, pages 67–77, Punta Cana, Dominican Republic. Association for Computational Linguistics.
  17. Positionierung. Zur Entwicklung des Gebrauchs modalisierender Prozeduren in argumentativen Texten von Schülern und Studenten. In Helmuth Feilke and Katrin Lehnen, editors, Textroutinen. Theorie, Erwerb und didaktisch-mediale Modellierung, pages 125–153. Lang, Frankfurt/Main.
  18. DeBERTav3: Improving deBERTa using ELECTRA-style pre-training with gradient-disentangled embedding sharing. In The Eleventh International Conference on Learning Representations.
  19. Fine-grained essay scoring of a complex writing task for native speakers. In Proceedings of the 12th Workshop on Innovative Use of NLP for Building Educational Applications, pages 357–366, Copenhagen, Denmark. Association for Computational Linguistics.
  20. Parameter-efficient transfer learning for NLP. In Proceedings of the 36th International Conference on Machine Learning, volume 97 of Proceedings of Machine Learning Research, pages 2790–2799. PMLR.
  21. Maleerat Ka-kan-dee and Sarjit Kaur. 2014. Argumentative writing difficulties of thai english major students. In The 2014 WEI International Academic Conference Proceedings, pages 193–207.
  22. Zixuan Ke and Vincent Ng. 2019. Automated essay scoring: A survey of the state of the art. In Proceedings of the Twenty-Eighth International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence, IJCAI-19, pages 6300–6308. International Joint Conferences on Artificial Intelligence Organization.
  23. Does automated feedback help students learn to write? Journal of Educational Computing Research, 42(2):173–196.
  24. Zur qualität von kindertexten. entwicklung eines bewertungsinstruments in der grundschule. Didaktik Deutsch : Halbjahresschrift für die Didaktik der deutschen Sprache und Literatur, 17(32):87–110.
  25. Coherence-based automated essay scoring using self-attention. In Chinese Computational Linguistics and Natural Language Processing Based on Naturally Annotated Big Data, pages 386–397, Cham. Springer International Publishing.
  26. Predicting the quality of revisions in argumentative writing. In Proceedings of the 18th Workshop on Innovative Use of NLP for Building Educational Applications (BEA 2023), pages 275–287, Toronto, Canada. Association for Computational Linguistics.
  27. Huy Nguyen and Diane Litman. 2018. Argument mining for improving the automated scoring of persuasive essays. Proceedings of the AAAI Conference on Artificial Intelligence, 32(1).
  28. John Peloghitis. 2017. Difficulties and strategies in argumentative writing: A qualitative analysis. Transformation in language education. JALT.
  29. Modeling organization in student essays. In Proceedings of the 2010 Conference on Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing, pages 229–239, Cambridge, MA. Association for Computational Linguistics.
  30. Isaac Persing and Vincent Ng. 2013. Modeling thesis clarity in student essays. In Proceedings of the 51st Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics (Volume 1: Long Papers), pages 260–269, Sofia, Bulgaria. Association for Computational Linguistics.
  31. Isaac Persing and Vincent Ng. 2014. Modeling prompt adherence in student essays. In Proceedings of the 52nd Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics (Volume 1: Long Papers), pages 1534–1543, Baltimore, Maryland. Association for Computational Linguistics.
  32. Isaac Persing and Vincent Ng. 2015. Modeling argument strength in student essays. In Proceedings of the 53rd Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics and the 7th International Joint Conference on Natural Language Processing (Volume 1: Long Papers), pages 543–552, Beijing, China. Association for Computational Linguistics.
  33. AdapterFusion: Non-destructive task composition for transfer learning. In Proceedings of the 16th Conference of the European Chapter of the Association for Computational Linguistics: Main Volume, pages 487–503, Online. Association for Computational Linguistics.
  34. AdapterHub: A framework for adapting transformers. In Proceedings of the 2020 Conference on Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing: System Demonstrations, pages 46–54, Online. Association for Computational Linguistics.
  35. Incorporating coherence of topics as a criterion in automatic response-to-text assessment of the organization of writing. In Proceedings of the Tenth Workshop on Innovative Use of NLP for Building Educational Applications, pages 20–30, Denver, Colorado. Association for Computational Linguistics.
  36. Automatic scoring of an analytical response-to-text assessment. In Intelligent Tutoring Systems, pages 601–610, Cham. Springer International Publishing.
  37. Sara Rezat. 2011. Schriftliches Argumentieren. Zur Ontogenese konzessiver Argumentationskompetenz. Didaktik Deutsch: Halbjahresschrift für die Didaktik der deutschen Sprache und Literatur, 16(31):50–67.
  38. Sara Rezat. 2018. Argumentative Textprozeduren als Instrumente zur Anbahnung wissenschaftlicher Textkompetenz. In Sabine Schmölzer-Eibinger, Bora Bushati, Christopher Ebner, and Lisa Niederdorfer, editors, Wissenschaftliches Schreiben lehren und lernen. Diagnose und Förderung wissenschaftlicher Textkompetenz in Schule und Universität, pages 125–146. Waxmann, Münster.
  39. Juliane Schröter. 2021. Linguistische Argumentationsanalyse. Kurze Einführungen in die germanistische Linguistik. Universitätsverlag Winter, Heidelberg.
  40. Claim optimization in computational argumentation. In Proceedings of the 16th International Natural Language Generation Conference, pages 134–152, Prague, Czechia. Association for Computational Linguistics.
  41. Gabriella Skitalinskaya and Henning Wachsmuth. 2023. To revise or not to revise: Learning to detect improvable claims for argumentative writing support. In Proceedings of the 61st Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics (Volume 1: Long Papers), pages 15799–15816, Toronto, Canada. Association for Computational Linguistics.
  42. Carlota S. Smith. 2003. Modes of Discourse: The Local Structure of Texts. Cambridge Studies in Linguistics. Cambridge University Press.
  43. Christian Stab. 2017. Argumentative Writing Support by means of Natural Language Processing. Ph.D. thesis, Technische Universität Darmstadt, Darmstadt.
  44. Christian Stab and Iryna Gurevych. 2017a. Parsing argumentation structures in persuasive essays. Computational Linguistics, 43(3):619–659.
  45. Christian Stab and Iryna Gurevych. 2017b. Recognizing insufficiently supported arguments in argumentative essays. In Proceedings of the 15th Conference of the European Chapter of the Association for Computational Linguistics: Volume 1, Long Papers, pages 980–990, Valencia, Spain. Association for Computational Linguistics.
  46. Mind the gap: Automated corpus creation for enthymeme detection and reconstruction in learner arguments. In Findings of the Association for Computational Linguistics: EMNLP 2023, pages 4703–4717, Singapore. Association for Computational Linguistics.
  47. Manfred Stede and Jodi Schneider. 2019. Argumentation Mining. Springer International Publishing.
  48. Stanford alpaca: An instruction-following llama model. https://github.com/tatsu-lab/stanford_alpaca.
  49. Effects of introductions and conclusions in assessment of student essays. Journal of Educational Psychology, 85(4):670–678.
  50. Neural automated essay scoring incorporating handcrafted features. In Proceedings of the 28th International Conference on Computational Linguistics, pages 6077–6088, Barcelona, Spain (Online). International Committee on Computational Linguistics.
  51. Using argument mining to assess the argumentation quality of essays. In Proceedings of COLING 2016, the 26th International Conference on Computational Linguistics: Technical Papers, pages 1680–1691, Osaka, Japan. The COLING 2016 Organizing Committee.
  52. Argumentation Schemes. Cambridge University Press.
  53. ALEN app: Argumentative writing support to foster English language learning. In Proceedings of the 17th Workshop on Innovative Use of NLP for Building Educational Applications (BEA 2022), pages 134–140, Seattle, Washington. Association for Computational Linguistics.
  54. Enhancing argumentative writing with automated feedback and social comparison nudging. Computers and Education, 191:104644.
  55. Thiemo Wambsganss and Christina Niklaus. 2022. Modeling persuasive discourse to adaptively support students’ argumentative writing. In Proceedings of the 60th Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics (Volume 1: Long Papers), pages 8748–8760, Dublin, Ireland. Association for Computational Linguistics.
  56. A corpus for argumentative writing support in German. In Proceedings of the 28th International Conference on Computational Linguistics, pages 856–869, Barcelona, Spain (Online). International Committee on Computational Linguistics.
  57. Thiemo Wambsganss and Roman Rietsche. 2019. Towards designing an adaptive argumentation learning tool. In International Conference on Interaction Sciences.
  58. Aggregating multiple heuristic signals as supervision for unsupervised automated essay scoring. In Proceedings of the 61st Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics (Volume 1: Long Papers), pages 13999–14013, Toronto, Canada. Association for Computational Linguistics.
  59. Structured persuasive writing support in legal education: A model and tool for German legal case solutions. In Findings of the Association for Computational Linguistics: ACL 2023, pages 2296–2313, Toronto, Canada. Association for Computational Linguistics.
  60. Transformers: State-of-the-art natural language processing. In Proceedings of the 2020 Conference on Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing: System Demonstrations, pages 38–45, Online. Association for Computational Linguistics.
  61. Enhancing automated essay scoring performance via fine-tuning pre-trained language models with combination of regression and ranking. In Findings of the Association for Computational Linguistics: EMNLP 2020, pages 1560–1569, Online. Association for Computational Linguistics.
  62. Wei Zhu. 2001. Performing argumentative writing in english: Difficulties, processes, and strategies. TESL Canada Journal, 19(1):34–50.

Summary

We haven't generated a summary for this paper yet.

Ai Sparkles Streamline Icon: https://streamlinehq.com Summarize Now