Assessing Argumentative Competence: A CAPNA/PTA Analysis of Student Exam Essays Case of Third year EFL level at ENS Laghouat

Résumé

This study analyzes argumentation in seven exam essays written by third-year university students using the Comprehensive Assessment Procedure for Natural Argumentation (CAPNA) and the Periodic Table of Arguments (PTA). Focusing on a listening lesson plan design prompt, the research investigates the types and strength of premises used. A quantitative approach examines the frequency and distribution of premise types (Premise of Fact/Value, Premise of Value/Policy, Implicitly Linked Premise of Value/Policy) and the strength of their reasoning (strong, moderately strong, weak). The combined CAPNA/PTA framework reveals a consistent weakness in strong reasoning, despite variations in premise types, highlighting the need for pedagogical interventions focused on argument structure, critical thinking, and targeted feedback to improve argumentative competence in academic contexts.