Abstract:Constructing arguments is essential in science subjects like chemistry. For example, students in organic chemistry should learn to argue about the plausibility of competing chemical reactions by including various sources of evidence and justifying the derived information with reasoning. While doing so, students face significant challenges in coherently structuring their arguments and integrating chemical concepts. For this reason, a reliable assessment of students' argumentation is critical. However, as arguments are usually presented in open‐ended tasks, scoring assessments manually is resource‐consuming and conceptually difficult. To augment human diagnostic capabilities, artificial intelligence techniques such as machine learning or natural language processing offer novel possibilities for an in‐depth analysis of students' argumentation. In this study, we extensively evaluated students' written arguments about the plausibility of competing chemical reactions based on a methodological approach called computational grounded theory. By using an unsupervised clustering technique, we sought to evaluate students' argumentation patterns in detail, providing new insights into the modes of reasoning and levels of granularity applied in students' written accounts. Based on this analysis, we developed a holistic 20‐category rubric by combining the data‐driven clusters with a theory‐driven framework to automate the analysis of the identified argumentation patterns. Pre‐trained large language models in conjunction with deep neural networks provided almost perfect machine‐human score agreement and well‐interpretable results, which underpins the potential of the applied state‐of‐the‐art deep learning techniques in analyzing students' argument complexity. The findings demonstrate an approach to combining human and computer‐based analysis in uncovering written argumentation.

"Sharks are not the threat humans are": Argument Component Segmentation in School Student Essays

Aspect-Based Argument Mining

Can Unsupervised Knowledge Transfer from Social Discussions Help Argument Mining?

An Exploratory Study of Argumentative Writing by Young Students: A Transformer-based Approach

Identifying patterns in students’ scientific argumentation: content analysis through text mining using Latent Dirichlet Allocation

Enhancing argumentation component classification using contextual language model

Automated Essay Scoring in Argumentative Writing: DeBERTeachingAssistant

Detection of fields of applications in biomedical abstracts with the support of argumentation elements

Explainable Topic-Enhanced Argument Mining from Heterogeneous Sources

Argumentation Mining in User-Generated Web Discourse

Cross-topic Argument Mining from Heterogeneous Sources Using Attention-based Neural Networks

Multi-Task Learning Improves Performance In Deep Argument Mining Models

Towards an Argument Mining Pipeline Transforming Texts to Argument Graphs

A Hybrid Intelligence Method for Argument Mining

AutoAM: An End-To-End Neural Model for Automatic and Universal Argument Mining

Efficient argument classification with compact language models and ChatGPT-4 refinements

Exploring new depths: Applying machine learning for the analysis of student argumentation in chemistry

Detecting Attackable Sentences in Arguments

Assessing Argumentation Using Machine Learning and Cognitive Diagnostic Modeling

Multi-Task Learning for Argumentation Mining

Classifying Argumentative Relations Using Logical Mechanisms and Argumentation Schemes