Skip to main content

Analyzing Argumentative Essay as an Academic Genre on Assessment Framework of IELTS and TOEFL

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Book cover English Language Teaching Research in the Middle East and North Africa

Abstract

The chapter was aimed to analyze the argumentative essay as an academic genre on the assessment framework of International English Language Testing Systems (IELTS) and Test of English as a Foreign Language (TOEFL) tests. Widely acknowledged as central to academic discourse for their complex and challenging nature, argumentative essays reflect the extent of discourse competence student writers have achieved as members of their academic discourse community. The chapter begins with a comprehensive inside-out overview of argumentative essay based on insights from theoretical, linguistic, and pedagogic perspectives. Following this overview, assessment for academic writing especially, that of argumentative essay, assessment rubrics for IELTS and TOEFL, and key issues with their assessment are discussed. The later part of the chapter introduces a new framework for the assessment of argumentative essay which will be offered for piloting for later validation.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 84.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Hardcover Book
USD 109.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

References

  • Banerjee, J., Franceschina, F., & Smith, A. M. (2007). Documenting features of written language production typical at different IELTS band score levels. IELTS Research Reports, Vol 7. IELTS Australia, Canberra and British Council, London.

    Google Scholar 

  • Baume, D., & Baume, C. (1996). Running tutorials and seminars training materials for research students. Oxford: Oxford Centre for Staff Development, Oxford Brookes.

    Google Scholar 

  • Becker, A. (2011). Examining rubrics used to measure writing performance in US intensive English programs. The CATESOL Journal, 22(1), 113–130.

    Google Scholar 

  • Birrell, B. (2006). Implications of low English standards among overseas students at Australian universities. People and Place, 14(4), 53–64.

    Google Scholar 

  • Breland, H. M., Kubota, M. Y., & Bonner, M. W. (1999). The performance assessment study in writing: Analysis of the SAT II: Writing subject test (College Board Report No. 99-4). New York: College Entrance Examination Board.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bretag, T. (2007). The Emperor’s new clothes: Yes, there is a link between English language competence and academic standards. People & Place, 15(1), 13–21.

    Google Scholar 

  • Brown, J. D., & Hudson, T. (2002). Criterion-referenced language testing. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Bruce, I. (2008). Academic writing and genre: A systematic analysis. London: Bloomsbury.

    Google Scholar 

  • Carrell, P. (1982). Cohesion is not coherence. TESOL Quarterly, 16(4), 479–488.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chala, P. A., & Chapetón, C. M. (2012). EFL argumentative essay writing as a situated-social practice: A review of concepts. Folios, 36, 23–36.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chalhoub-Deville, M., & Turner, C. E. (2000). What to look for in ESL admission tests: Cambridge certificate exams, IELTS, and TOEFL. System, 28, 523–539.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Connor, U. (1987). Argumentative patterns in student essays: Cross-cultural differences. In U. Connor & R. B. Kaplan (Eds.), Writing across languages: Analysis of L2 text (pp. 57–72). Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.

    Google Scholar 

  • Connor, U. (1990). Linguistic/rhetorical measures for international persuasive student writing. Research in the Teaching of English, 24, 67–87.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cumming, A. (1989). Writing expertise and second-language proficiency. Language Learning, 39, 81–141. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-1770.1989.tb00592.x.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cumming, A. (2001). The difficulty of standards, for example in second language writing. In T. Silva & P. Matsuda (Eds.), On second language writing (pp. 209–229). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cumming, A., & Mellow, J. D. (1996). An investigation into the validity of written indicators of second language proficiency. In A. Cumming & R. Berwick (Eds.), Validation in language testing (pp. 72–93). Clevedon and London: Multilingual Matters and Avon.

    Google Scholar 

  • Educational Testing Service. (2008). Reliability and comparability of TOEFL® iBT Scores. Princeton, NJ: Author.

    Google Scholar 

  • Eggins, S. (1994). An introduction to systemic functional grammar. London: Printer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Elbow, P. (1996). Writing assessment in the 21st century: A utopian view. In L. Bloom, D. Daiker, & E. White (Eds.), Composition in the twenty-first century: Crisis and change (pp. 83–100). Carbondale and Edwardsville, IL: Southern Illinois University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Frase, L., Faletti, J., Ginther, A., & Grant, L. (1999). Computer analysis of the TOEFL test of written English (TOEFL Research Report 64). Princeton, NJ: Educational Testing Service.

    Google Scholar 

  • Grabe, W., & Kaplan, R. (1996). Theory and practice of writing: An applied linguistic perspective. New York: Longman.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hyland, K. (1990). A genre description of the argumentative essay. RELC Journal, 21, 66–78.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hyland, K. (2004). Genre and second language writing. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Hyland, K. (2009). Academic discourse. London: Continuum.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jenkins, S., Jordan, M. K., & Weilland, P. O. (1993). The role of writing in graduate engineering education: A survey of faculty beliefs and practices. English for Specific Purposes, 12, 51–67.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kachru, Y., & Smith, L. E. (2008). Cultures, contexts, and world Englishes. New York: Routledge.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Kaplan, R. B. (1966). Cultural thought patterns in intercultural education. Language Learning, 16, 1–20.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kaplan, R. (1984). Cultural thought patterns in intercultural education. In S. McKay (Ed.), Composing in a second language (pp. 43–62). New York: Harper & Row.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kennedy, C., & Thorp, D. (2002). A corpus-based investigation of linguistic responses to an IELTS academic writing task. Birmingham: University of Birmingham.

    Google Scholar 

  • Leki, I., Cumming, A., & Silva, T. (2008). A synthesis of research on second language writing. London: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Maimon, E. P., Peritz, J. H., & Yancey, K. B. (2007). A writer’s resource: A handbook for writing and research (2nd ed.). New York: McGraw Hill.

    Google Scholar 

  • Martin, J. R. (2001). Language, register and genre. In A. Burns & C. Coffin (Eds.), Analysing English in a global context: A reader (pp. 149–166). London: Routledge, Macquarie University, and The Open University.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mayor, B., Hewings, A., North, S., Swann, J., & Coffin, C. (1999). A Linguistic analysis of Chinese and Greek L1 scripts for IELTS Academic Writing Task 2. In L. Taylor & P. Falvey (Eds.), IELTS collected papers: Research in speaking and writing assessment—Studies in language testing (Vol. 19, pp. 250–315). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mickan, P., Slater, S., & Gibson, C. (2000). Study of response validity of the IELTS Writing Subtest. In R. Tulloh (Ed.), IELTS research reports (Vol. 3, pp. 29–48). Canberra: IELTS Australia.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mohamed, A. H., & Omer, M. R. (2000). Texture and culture: Cohesion as a marker of rhetorical organization in Arabic and English narrative texts. RELC Journal, 31(2), 45–75.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Németh, N., & Kormos, J. (2001). Pragmatic aspects of task-performance: The case of argumentation. Language Teaching Research, 5, 213–240.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nichols, S. N., & Berliner, D. C. (2005). The inevitable corruption of indicators and educators through high-stakes testing. Tempe, AZ: College of Education. Education Policy Studies Laboratory Report EPSL-0503-101-EPRU. Retrieved from http://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED508483.pdf.

  • Nicol, D. (2009). Transforming assessment and feedback: Enhancing integration and empowerment in the first year. The Quality Assurance Agency, Scotland. Retrieved from http://www.enhancementthemes.ac.uk/docs/publications/transforming-assessment-and-feedback.pdf?sfvrsn=12.

  • Purdue University Online Writing Lab. (2007). Organizing your argument. Retrieved October 2007, from http://owl.english.purdue.edu/owl/resource/588/03/.

  • Qin, J., & Karabacak, E. (2010). The analysis of Toulmin elements in Chinese EFL university argumentative writing. System, 38, 444–456.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rogoff, B. (1990). Apprenticeship in thinking: Cognitive development in social context. New York: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rose, M. (1984). Writer’s block: The cognitive dimension. Carbondale, IL: Southern Illinois University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Swales, J. M. (1990). Genre analysis: English in academic and research settings. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tankó, G., & Tamási, G. (2008). A comprehensive taxonomy of argumentative thesis statements: A preliminary pilot study. Working Papers in Language Pedagogy, 2, 1–17.

    Google Scholar 

  • Toulmin, S. (2003). The uses of argument. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Troyka, L. Q. (2004). Quick access: Reference for writers (2nd ed.). Toronto: Pearson.

    Google Scholar 

  • Van Dijk, T. A. (1980). Macrostructures. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.

    Google Scholar 

  • Veerapan, V., & Sulaiman, T. (2012). Theory and practice in language studies. Academy Publisher, 2(1), 138–143.

    Google Scholar 

  • Vygotsky, L. (1978). Mind in society: The development of higher psychological processes. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Weigle, S. C. (2002). Assessing writing. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Weigle, S. C. (2006). Investing in assessment: Designing tests to promote positive washback. In P. Matsuda, C. Ortmeier-Hooper, & X. You (Eds.), Politics of second language writing: In search of the promised land (pp. 222–244). West Lafayette, IN: Parlor Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Zhu, W. (2004). Faculty views on the importance of writing, the nature of academic writing, and teaching and responding to writing in the disciplines. Journal of Second Language Writing, 13, 29–48.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2019 The Author(s)

About this chapter

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this chapter

Ahmad, Z. (2019). Analyzing Argumentative Essay as an Academic Genre on Assessment Framework of IELTS and TOEFL. In: Hidri, S. (eds) English Language Teaching Research in the Middle East and North Africa. Palgrave Macmillan, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-98533-6_13

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-98533-6_13

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Palgrave Macmillan, Cham

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-319-98532-9

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-319-98533-6

  • eBook Packages: Social SciencesSocial Sciences (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics