Position Analysis
Heuristics to Analyze a position, draw conclusions, & tsate an argument
Questioning is the beginning of understanding!
Franklin
Overview
Introduction
This page introduces ideas to organize information to make decisions and present arguments for any claims made about that information. To do this we present a heuristec or model supported by Toulmin's work and provide related examples.
Background
When we analyze information or a situation to make a claim about them or evaluate them to make good decisions on how to act, we often ask these questions:
- What is useful evidence?
- How should I select and organize the information?
- How should I decide a response?
- What are the arguments for and against?
- How should I decide?
- How can I effectively present my decision?
Evidence
There are two types of evidence: first-hand research and second-hand research.
First-hand research involves conducting research yourself, such as interviews, experiments, surveys, or personal experience and anecdotes.
Second-hand research involves gathering information from various texts that have been compiled and supplied by others, such as books, periodicals, videos, and websites.
Select, organize, decide, present
To effectively organize your argument, use an organizational structure that makes sense to you and organizes the evidence (information, claim, ) to help make decisions and present an argument. The Toulmin Method of logic is a common and easy to use formula for organizing information for an argument.
Stephen Toulmin wrote The Uses of Argument, 1958. In it he claims there are six components of argumentation. Which he uses as the basis for the Toulmin Method to organize information into six component parts: claim, grounds, warrant, qualifier, rebuttal, and backing.
- Claim: The main idea, thesis, opinion, or belief that is your focus.
- Grounds: Facts related to the claim.
- Warrant: Philosophies, beliefs, assumptions, or rules that justify the connection between the data and the conclusion.
- Qualifier: Conditions under which the claim may not hold (exceptions to the rule).
- Rebuttal: Refutes the claim and presents counter arguments.
- Backing: Provides evidence or support for the claim.
These categories are good to suggest what information should be selected, and provide a way to organize that information. The process can provide a comprehensive process to select information to make decisions and present an argument.
While these categories have been used, they have often been modified and presented in different heuristics to organize information to analyze, make decisions, and present arguments. Consequently, we will review vocabulary and different heuristics with examples.
Vocabulary
Let's explore these six categories and related vocabulary a bit more.
Claim
A claim is an assertion of the main idea of your argument. It is not necessarily a statement of fact but a conclusion, thesis, proposition, or main point. A claim is a statement that can be used in an argument to ask others to accept. This includes information you are asking them to accept as accurate or actions you want them to accept and enact.
To generate this information, you might ask yourself:
- What's my point?
- What am I trying to prove?
- What do I want to convince my listeners, viewers, or readers of?
Grounds
Is support. The statements you present to support your claim and they can take forms, such as facts, data, personal experiences, expert opinions, quotations, evidence from other texts or sources, or emotional appeals. The more reliable and comprehensive your support, the more likely your audience is to accept your claim. You can use hard evidence or expert opinions. Consider what information will convince your readers of your claim.
Warrant
Warrant: The logical connection between your claim and the support you present is known as a warrant. It involves the beliefs, values, inferences, and experiences that you assume your audience shares with you. If your audience does not share these assumptions, your argument will not be effective. The warrant serves as the logic and reasoning for your argument, bridging the gap the claim and the support you provide with the why, when, what, where, & how of an explanation based on data. It answers the question: Why does that data support your claim?
Incorporating a well-reasoned warrant or bridge is crucial in presenting a compelling argumentative argument. If you present data to your audience without explaining how it supports your thesis, your listeners or readers may not establish a connection between the two or draw different conclusions.
Qualifier
Qualifier: A qualifier is a statement that modifies the strength of your claim. For instance, if you claim that stains on teeth are caused by drinking coffee, you might need to acknowledge that there could be other causes as well. A qualified claim would be that drinking coffee is the most significant cause (although perhaps not the only cause) of stained teeth.
Rebuttal
Rebuttal and Counterclaim: A claim that contradicts or disagrees with your thesis or claim is a counterclaim. Rebuttal is evidence that contradicts or refutes the opposing claim. A rebuttal is an exception to your claim. For instance, you might acknowledge that a particular type of coffee doesn't stain teeth. However, your claim would be that coffee is the primary cause of stained teeth, except for those who drink the special non-staining coffee.
Avoid dismissing the opposing side of an argument. Instead, acknowledge it as a counterclaim. Research the opposing perspective and respond to it within your own argument. This approach ensures that your audience isn't swayed by weak, unrefuted arguments. By including counterclaims, you can find common ground with more people and enhance your credibility by appearing knowledgeable about the entire situtation rather than being biased or uninformed. You may want to include multiple counterclaims to demonstrate your thorough research on the topic.
Backing
Backing is any additional logic, reasoning, or support that may be necessary to support the warrant. While the warrant is support it should be a streamlined brief powerful communication. Backing provides detail so you can keep the warrant focused and powerful.
Heuristics and examples
These heuristics and examples may or may not use all six categories, some will use different vocabulary for similar categories, and some will add additional categories. Depending on your background and a particular situation, you can select what will be useful for your needs.
Heuristic that relates claims, support and warrants.
Examples:
Claim: You shouldn't eat that mushroom.
Support: The mushroom is poisonous.
Warrant: The person's knowledge about mushrooms is reliable.
Claim: Most Americans need to exercise more.
Support: According to the latest government figures, most Americans are overweight.
Warrant: Exercise can aid in weight loss.
Claim: You should use a hearing aid.
Support: Over 70% of all people over 65 years have a hearing difficulty.
Warrant: A hearing aid helps most people hear better.
Claim: You should buy our tooth-whitening product.
Support: Studies show that teeth are 50% whiter after using the product for a specified time.
Warrant: People desire whiter teeth.
Heuristic that relates claims, data, warrants, qualifiers, and conclusions.
Claim - statement made as truth or having absolute value
Data - information or facts that support the claim.
Warrants - philosophies, beliefs, assumptions, or rules that we believe justify the connection between the data and the conclusion.
Qualifier - are conditions under which the claim may not hold (exceptions to the rule).
Conclusion - decision for action.
Example 1
Should learners be allowed to make mistakes?
Claim
Students should be given opportunities to discover mistakes on their own without the teacher telling them they are incorrect.
Data
Students sometimes collect inaccurate information, use previous ideas (misconceptions) to draw conclusions, and use faulty logic when making them.
Warrant
Students need to learn the process of scientific inquiry. Students should generally rely on their own judgment rather than on an authority figure to judge what data to collect to resolve a scientific question. Students need to be allowed to make mistakes to develop a risk free environment. Scientific practice has a way of correcting itself. Students must be allowed to construct knowledge for themselves.
Qualifier
Students need supervision to insure a safe environment. For example, students will communicate their procedures to teachers before they begin, so safety will be insured and learning can be facilitated.
Conclusion
Scientific experimentation should not depend on an authority figure. The results should depend on accurate observation and logical reasoning. Students should be allowed to experience the consequences of their investigations.
Example 2
Students should be corrected when they make mistakes
Claim
Students should be corrected when they are mistaken.
Data
Students collect inaccurate information, use previous ideas (misconceptions) to make conclusions, and use faulty logic when making them.
Warrant
Students should not be allowed to learn incorrect or misleading ideas.
Qualifier
Students should be corrected when possible except in the case of “useful fictions” that are not too far wrong and that facilitate learning of the correct thing when students are able to comprehend it.
Conclusion
Students should not be allowed to leave an activity with false and misleading conclusions.
Example 3
Opportunities for critical thinking
Claim
Learners should be provided with opportunities to develop critical thinking skills.
Data
Research suggests learners think critically when the curriculum is based on problem solving and reasoning.
Warrant
Critical thinking is necessary for personal understanding and decision making in the classroom and in life.
Qualifier
Learners should experience critical thinking except when student safety is a concern.
Conclusion
Schools need to provide opportunities for students to become analytical life long learners.
Example 4
Educational standards
Claim
Standards are not necessary as required educational outcomes.
Data
- High levels of achievement were achieved before standardization.
- Standards limit student choice.
- Standards encourage direct instruction and memorization.
- Creativity and higher levels of thinking are encouraged without standardization.
- Teachers teach to the test.
- Testing takes time away from learning.
Warrant
- Teacher empowerment to make curricular decisions will allow students to make choices and achieve at higher levels for a more personalized education.
- Liberal democracy requires an educated citizenry capable to make decision.
- Students need freedom of choice to learn how to live in a liberal democracy.
- Totalitarian political views mandate standardized curriculum for all.
Qualifier
High professional standards can be used to guide teachers to make curricular choices.
Conclusion
Professional educators know best how to make curricular decisions to meet their student needs. Professional educators should be empowered to make curricular decisions.
Example 5
Cooperative learning
Claim
Students should have opportunities for cooperative learning experiences to increase achievement and enhance their social skills.
Data
- Studies suggest students learn better with and from other students.
- Studies show higher achievement in classrooms with social skills.
- Heterogeneous groups work better than homogeneous groups.
- Groups reduce student stress and increase academic communication.
- Social skills are learned by modeling and practice.
Warrant
- We believe students benefit academically and social when the can monitor peers and communicate with peers to share ideas.
- Students need opportunities to work together to learn social skills to be able to cooperate in school and out of school.
Qualifier
Cooperative groups are only one part of a classroom setting. Whole class participation for discussion, sharing, and learning with other instruction models is also important to achieve a variety or learning outcomes.
Conclusion
Cooperative learning needs to be significantly included as a model of instruction to increase student achievement and their effective use of social skills.
Heuristic that relates data, claim, opposite claim, counter claim, rebuttal, with support and interpretations.
Education related examples
Example notes for smaller class size
Analyze this:
A study found that smaller class size significantly increased the achievement of students and increased their positive attitudes toward school and themselves. Authors of the study felt that smaller class size contributed to these positive effects by: creating a positive teacher morale for smaller classes, allowed teachers more time to spend with individual students, less students created an instructional atmosphere that was less hectic, and students had more time on task. The study also showed that while all students achieved more on the average lower ability students achieved less than higher ability students. Thus, attempts to enable lower ability students an opportunity to catch-up instead allowed the higher ability students to move further ahead.
Issue Analysis - Blank worksheet
Position analysis using a summary of reason, values, conclusions, main arguments.
| Main issue: | |
|---|---|
Position on the issue: |
|
| Reasons for the position (Grounds)
|
Values associated with reasons (Warrants) |
| What other positions were considered? (Rebuttal and Counterclaim) |
Reasons given for not supporting them? | What value is associated with each? |
|---|---|---|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Soundness of the arguments
Logical ideas
Strength of evidence -
Hidden premises
Inclusive not missing information -
Main idea in light of other alternatives
Other ideas -
Other values -
Other assumptions -
Other language -
Origins may suggest other strengths or weaknesses -
What can be inferred from the author -
Summary of the quality of thought
Validity -
Power -
Practical -
Ethical -
Is it acceptable?
Warrants and necessary changes?
Final judgment in relation to the main idea
Analysis for democratic education for all
Position analysis using a summary of reason, values, conclusions, main arguments.
| Main issue: Democratic education for all. | |
|---|---|
Position on the issue: Democratic education provides learners choice in their pursuit of knowledge to empower them to care for and work with others to benefit them as citizens and for the health of a democratic nation. |
|
Reasons for the position (Grounds)
|
Values associated with reasons
(Warrants)
|
| What other positions were considered? (Rebuttal and Counterclaim) |
Reasons given for not supporting them? | What value is associated with each? |
|---|---|---|
| Standardized curriculum to provide common experiences to unify democratic citizens to make better decisions. | Goes against the logic of freedom to make personal decisions. | Freedom, personal choice |
| There is no empirical evidence of the success of preparing learners for today's future with a standardized curriculum. | Evidence for fact based decision making. | |
| Any historical evidence prepared learners for a past life. To say it will work now, relies on the extrapolation of ideas or to be accepted as faith. | Ideals, history, | |
| Offers no evidence of capacity that one size fits all. | Equality. All people need to be treated equally. Unequal opportunities breed ill will and contempt. Differentiation can lead to unequal treatment and oppression. | |
| In the context of schooling people are not similar enough to be treated identical | Human similarities are more important than differences. | |
| To argue learners are the same (yes), by degree, truly means they are different. | Differences | |
Don't need everyone to be educated. |
Choice to do nothing isn't a choice. It is the absence of education. |
Freedom of choice |
Young do not make good decisions. |
Value everyone, need useful or productive citizens |
|
Importance of education is lost on some young people. |
Good decisions, safety |
Soundness of the arguments
Logical ideas
- Education is necessary. to maintain civilization,
- Providing learners experiences in democratic decision making and governance, is logical in thinking it will better prepare them as citizens.
- Acceptance of democracy as politically desirable, is not evidence of its successfulness as a curriculum.
- People who believe young children need strong control will be concerned that democracy and young children is counter to human nature.
Strength of evidence - Compares ideal to reality
Hidden premises
- All will succeed in a democratic curriculum to develop democratic principles
- Democracy is teachable
- Every one is motivated
- Everyone accepts the premise
- May imply common instruction along with common curriculum
Inclusive not missing information - Need to be careful to include comprehensive review. Not to be fooled by rhetorical devices, and unrealistic application of an ideal or idea.
Main idea in light of other alternatives
Other ideas - People need to be told what to do. There is a common history or understanding of our culture.
Other values - Productivity, money, economy,
Other assumptions - There can be one culture, history, narrow social order
Other language - Rhetoric, emotional words, propaganda, pleas to make decisions without critical thinking and decision making
Origins may suggest other strengths or weaknesses - Diversity is a strength. Diverse species survive better than less diverse species. Resilience to adapt. Always doing things the same way will not create change, when it is necessary. Some traditions are valued for their usefulness and should be. Traditions that do not provide value will not survive.
What can be inferred from the author - Diversity is valuable. Democracy is messy and takes commitment and work to be inclusive of a diverse citizenry.
Summary of the quality of thought
Validity - Meaningful, logical, factual
Power - Theoretically seems to be
Practical - Yes. If choice and decision making is considered democratic ideals in school. Methods which include reasonable student choice and teach mastery oriented decision making is shown to help today’s at risk children to be successful and is congruent with current brain research.
Ethical - Democracy for all fits with human nature of fairness, and equality. It can fall apart if democracy is defined as governance of the many and the few be damned. Then the ethical ground is narrower.
Is it acceptable? most people accept democracy as the best government. Some, have credible concerns, about the timeliness of decisions being made in extreme times and the majority oppression of the minority.
Warrants and necessary changes? Democracy in schools needs to be defined to be inclusive for the well being of all learners and developmentally appropriate within reasonable expectations of schools and schooling.
Final judgment in relation to the main idea need to live a democracy to learn to function in a democracy and to live it means need choices, which may or may not be achieved in a structured standard common curriculum, which centers on career preparation.