Skip to main content

Research Project IV DFG-Project Q+ASA

Visualising argumentative structures in dialectical discussions – an empirical study of a quantitative and qualitative analysis method (Q+ASA)

General aim

The DFG research project Q+ASA (02/26 – 02/27; No. GI1972/2-1) contributes to the evidence-based investigation of argumentative writing skills and to the further development of computer-assisted analysis in an educational context. The central question is how argumentative structures in texts written by school and university students can be reliably recorded, analysed and automatically evaluated. In doing so, the project combines qualitative and quantitative research approaches with current methods of argument mining and machine learning.

 

 

Current status of the project

The project builds on discussion texts from secondary school students (grade 9) that have already been collected. These originate largely from Research Project I, Fair Debating and Written Argumentation, and have already been holistically and analytically evaluated within that framework, thus preparing them for the DFG project. 

Building on this, the first work package involves the annotation of argumentative structures. This is based on established annotation schemes from argumentation research. In addition, suitable software tools for the graphical annotation of tree structures will be evaluated.

In the second work package, the annotated texts will be examined using qualitative structural tree analyses. The aim is to highlight correlations between the quality of argumentative structures and the overall text quality. In particular, the analysis will focus on identifying the characteristics that distinguish coherent and high-quality arguments.

The third work package is dedicated to developing a proficiency level model for written argumentation. To this end, quantitative methods such as factor and cluster analyses will be used to empirically model different proficiency levels. The model will be validated through external peer review.

Finally, the fourth work package focuses on automated argument mining. To this end, various language models, including BERT, RoBERTa and freely available large language models such as LLaMA, will be trained and evaluated for tasks such as segmentation, classification of argumentative units and the prediction of support/attack relations. Particular attention will be paid to the question of how well models can be transferred to new datasets.

Future work

In the long term, the project is aimed to provide the foundations for a prolonged follow up project in which the developed analysis tool and the evidence-based competence level model will be tested and further developed in school contexts in collaboration with teachers. 

Furthermore, research into automated argument analysis is to be deepened. In particular, the use of large language models for complex argument mining tasks offers great potential for future applications in research and teaching. In the long term, this could lead to the development of methods that support teachers in analysing argumentative texts and open up new approaches to fostering argumentative writing skills.

Contact | Prof. Dr. Winnie-Karen Giera

Project Manager

Contact | Prof. Dr. Manfred Stede

Project Manager

Contact | Mariesa Keskemeti

Research Staff Member

Contact | Sheikh Muhammed Subhan, Dietmar Benndorf, Eric Graßnick

Research Assistants

Publications related to the project

  • Bai, X., Stede, M. (2026) Fine-Grained Content Zone Prediction in German Argumentative Essays Using LLMs. To appear in: Proc. Of the 21st Workshop on Innovative Use of NLP for Building Educational Applications, San Diego. 

  • Bai, X., Afzal, K., Benndorf, D., Deutzmann, L., Giera, W.-K., Graßnick, E., & Stede, M. (2026). From newspapers to classrooms: Adapting an annotation scheme and automatic classifiers to mixed-quality argumentative school essays. Argument & Computation. 

  • Giera, W.-K. & Deutzmann, L. (2026). Kodiermanual für das Bewerten dialektischer Erörterungen. Giera, Prof. Dr. Winnie-Karen. DOI: 10.48702/4255r89zptyspbgm
  • Giera, W.-K. & Deutzmann, L.  (2026). Textkorpus aus dem Projekt "Fair Debattieren und Erörtern". Prof. Dr. Winnie-Karen Giera. DOI: 10.48702/a8k67ardqs2bvgf5

Bibliography for the Q+ASA Project

  • Achour, S., Höppner, A., & Jordan, A. (2020). Zwischen status quo und state of the art. Politische Bildung und Demokratiebildung an Berliner Schulen (N. Langenbacher, Hrsg.). Friedrich-Ebert-Stiftung.
  • Alhindi, T. & Ghosh, D. (2021). ”Sharks are not the Threat Humans are”: Argument Component Segmentation in School Student Essays. In J. Burstein, A. Horbach, E. Kochmar, R. Laarmann-Quante, C. Leacock, N. Madnani, I. Pilán, H. Yannakodakis & T. Zesch (Hrsg.), Proceedings
    of the 16th Workshop on Innovative Use of NLP for Building Educational Applications, 210–222. Association for Computational Linguistics.
  • Anderau, G. (2023). Fake news and epistemic flooding. Synthese, 202(106).https://doi.org/10.1007/s11229-023-04336-7
  • Bai, X., Stede, M. (2026) Fine-Grained Content Zone Prediction in German Argumentative Essays Using LLMs. To appear in: Proc. Of the 21st Workshop on Innovative Use of NLP for Building Educational Applications, San Diego.
  • Bai, X., Afzal, K., Benndorf, D., Deutzmann, L., Giera, W.-K., Graßnick, E., & Stede, M. (2026). From newspapers to classrooms: Adapting an annotation scheme and automatic classifiers to mixed-quality argumentative school essays. Argument & Computation.
  • Becker-Mrotzek, M., & Grabowski, J. (2018). Textkorpus Scriptoria. In M. Becker-Mrotzek & J. Grabowski (Hrsg.), FD-LEX (Forschungsdatenbank Lernertexte). Mercator-Institut für Sprachförderung und Deutsch als Zweitsprache. https://doi.org/10.18716/FD-LEX/861
  • Becker-Mrotzek, M., Grabowski, J., Jost, J., Knopp, M. & Linnemann, M. (2014). Adressatenorientierung und Kohärenzherstellung im Text. Zum Zusammenhang kognitiver und schriftlich realisierter Teilkomponenten von Schreibkompetenz. Didaktik Deutsch, 37, 21–43.
  • Böhme, K., & Köller, O. (2014). Kompetenzstufenmodelle zu den Bildungsstandards im Kompetenzbereich Schreiben, Teilbereich freies Schreiben für den Mittleren Schulabschluss.Berlin: Institut zur Qualitätsentwicklung im Bildungswesen. Bundesarbeitskreis Lehrerbildung e. V. (2024). Diversity trifft Digitalität (bak – Seminartag in Potsdam, Heft 1/2024).
  • Council of the European Union (2018, June 4). Council recommendation of 22 May 2018 on key competences for lifelong learning (2018/C 189/01).Official Journal of the European Union, C 189, 1–13. https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=oj:JOC_2018_189_R_0001
  • European Commission: Directorate-General for Education, Youth, Sport and Culture (2019). Key competences for lifelong learning. Publications Office of European Union. https://doi.org/10.2766/569540
  • Felton, M., Crowell, A., & Liu, T. (2015). Arguing to Agree: Mitigating My-Side Bias Through Consensus-Seeking Dialogue. Written Communication, 32(3), 317–331.https://doi.org/10.1177/0741088315590788
  • Ferretti, R. P., & Graham, S. (2019). Argumentative writing: Theory, assessment, and instruction. In Reading and Writing: An Interdisciplinary Journal, 32(6), 1345–1357.https://doi.org/10.1007/s11145-019-09950-x
  • Gemechu, D., Ruiz-Dolz, R. & Reed, C. (2024). ARIES: A General Benchmark for Argument Relation Identification. In Y. Ajjour, R. Bar-Haim, R. El Baff, Z. Liu & G. Skitalinskaya (Hrsg.), Proceedingsof the 11th Workshop on Argument Mining, 1–14. https://doi.org/10.18653/v1/2024.argmining-1.1
  • Giera, W.-K., & Deutzmann, L. (2026a). Textkorpus aus dem Projekt "Fair Debattieren und Erörtern". doi.org/10.48702/A8K67ARDQS2BVGF5
    Giera, W.-K. & Deutzmann, L. (2026b). Kodiermanual für das Bewerten dialektischer Erörterungen. DOI: 10.48702/4255r89zptyspbgm
  • Giera, W.-K. (2026). Vernetzung aller Phasen der Lehramtsausbildung. www.uni-potsdam.de/de/inklusive-deutschdidaktik/kooperationen/vernetzung-aller-phasen-der-lehramtsausbildung  
  • Giera, W.-K., Stede, M., Deutzmann, L., & Graßnick, E. (2025). Exploring the Power of Persuasion in Written Argumentation: A Mixed-Methods Pilot Study (QASA). Journal of Applied Language Learning, 2(2), 1–10. https://doi.org/10.33140/JALL.02.02.04
  • Giera, W. K. (2020). Berufsorientierte Schreibkompetenz mithilfe von SRSD fördern: Evaluation eines schulischen Schreibprojekts.(Kommunizieren im Beruf/Fachwissenschaftliche und fachdidaktische Perspektiven, Bd.1). Narr. Hayes, J. R. (2012). Modeling and remodeling writing. Written Communication, 29(3), 369–388. https://doi.org/10.1177/0741088312451260
  • Hayes, J. R., & Olinghouse, N. G. (2015). Can cognitive writing models inform the design of the Common Core State Standards? The Elementary School Journal, 115(4), 480–497. Leitão, S. (2003). Evaluating and Selecting Counterarguments: Studies of Children’s Rhetorical Awareness. In Written Communication, 20(3), 269–306. https://doi.org/10.1177/0741088303257507
  • Malloy, J. A., Tracy, K. N., Scales, R. Q., Menickelli, K., & Scales, W. D. (2020). It’s Not About Being Right: Developing Argument Through Debate. Journal of Literacy Research, 52(1), 79–100. https://doi.org/10.1177/1086296X19896495
  • Mombaers, T., Van Gasse, R., & De Maeyer, S. (2024). Learning from comPA(I)Ring exemplars: Enhancing genre knowledge of argumentative texts. Journal of Writing Research, 16(1), 163–193. https://doi.org/10.17239/jowr-2024.16.01.06
  • OECD (2019). OECD Future of Education and Skills. Conceptual learning framework. Attitudes and values for 2030. OECD Publishing. Abgerufen am 31. Mai 2026, von www.oecd.org/content/dam/oecd/en/about/projects/edu/education-2040/concept-notes Attitudes_and_Values_for_2030_concept_note.pdf    
  • Peldszus, A., & Stede, M. (2013). From Argument Diagrams to Argumentation Mining in Texts: A Survey. International Journal of Cognitive Informatics and Natural Intelligence (IJCINI), 7(1), 1–31. https://doi.org/10.4018/jcini.2013010101
  • Rezat, S., Kilsbach, S., Karabey, R., Michel, N., Stahl, M., & Wachsmuth, H. (2025). Didaktische Modellierung automatisierten adaptiven Feedbacks zu argumentativen Lerner*innentexten.Leseräume. Zeitschrift für Literalität in Schule und Forschung, 12(11), 1–15.
  • Ruiz-Dolz, R., Chiu, C., Chen, C., Kando, N. & Chen, H. (2024). Learning Strategies for Robust Argument Mining: An Analysis of Variations in Language and Domain. In Proceedings of the 2024 Joint International Conference on Computational Linguistics, Language Resources and
    Evaluation (LREC-COLING 2024), 10286–10292, Torino. https://aclanthology.org/2024.lrec-main.898.pdf      
  • Schaller, N.-J., Horbach, A., Höft, L. I., Ding, Y., Bahr, J. L., Meyer, J., & Jansen, T. (2024). DARIUS: A comprehensive learner corpus for argument mining in German-language essays. In Proceedings of the 2024 Joint International Conference on Computational Linguistics,
    Language Resources and Evaluation (LREC-COLING), 4356–4367. ELRA and ICCL.https://aclanthology.org/2024.lrec-main.389.pdf
  • Sonntag, J. & Stede, M. (2014). GraPat: A Tool for Graph Annotations. In N. Calzolari, K. Choukri, T. Declerck, H. Lostsson, B. Maegaard, J. Mariani, A. Moreno, J. Odijk, S. Piperidis (Hrsg.), Proceedingsof Language Resources and Evaluation Conference (LREC), 4147–4151. Reykjavik. http://www.lrec-conf.org/proceedings/lrec2014/pdf/824_Paper.pdf 
  • Spiegel, C. (2019). Erörterung. In B. Rothstein, & C. Müller-Brauers (Hrsg.), Kernbegriffe der Sprachdidaktik Deutsch. Ein Handbuch. (S. 75–77). Schneider Verlag.
  • Stab, C. & Gurevych, I. (2017). Parsing Argumentation Structures in Persuasive Essays. In Computational Linguistics, 43(3), 619–659. https://doi.org/10.1162/COLI_a_00295
  • Stahl, M., Michel, N., Kilsbach, S., Schmidtke, J., Rezat, S. & Wachsmuth, H. (2024). A School Student Essay Corpus for Analyzing Interactions of Argumentative Structure and Quality. In K. Duh, H. Gomez, & S. Bethard (Hrsg.), Proceedings of the 2024 Conference of the North American Chapter of the Association for Computational Linguistics: Human Language Technologies 1, 2661–2674. NAACL. https://doi.org/10.18653/v1/2024.naacl-long.145
  • Stede, M. (2018). Korpusgestützte Textanalyse. Grundzüge der Ebenen-orientierten Textlinguistik (2. überarbeitete Aufl.). Narr, Tübingen.
  • Stede, M. (Hrsg.). (2016). Handbuch Textannotation: Potsdamer Kommentarkorpus 2.0. (Potsdam Cognitive Science Series, Bd. 8). Universitätsverlag Potsdam. Abgerufen am 02. Juni 2026, von https://publishup.uni-potsdam.de/opus4-ubp/frontdoor/deliver/index/docId/8276/file/pcss8.pdf 
  • Stede, M., Schneider, J. & Wachsmuth, H. (2026) Argument Mining. 2nd edition (erscheint August 2026). Springer, Cham. https://link.springer.com/book/9783032322906 
  • UNESCO (2023). The Futures We Build: Abilities and competencies for the future of education and work. Abgerufen am 02. Juni 2026, von https://unesdoc.unesco.org/ark:/48223/pf0000386933_eng