PHYSICS PROBLEM SOLVING

(^)
more amenable to analyzing spoken arguments (Rieke and Sillars, 1975). The videotapes
of these 14 problem-solving groups are a record of spoken words. But there is an even
more important reason for using Toulmin in analyzing cooperative group problem
solving.
The purpose of this research is to search for patterns in argument construction.
This suggests that the argument construction must be described, both in terms of words
and a “visual” pattern or diagram. There are four aspects of the Toulmin structure that
make it attractive for this purpose. First of all, Toulmin would say an argument is
constructed (Bettinghaus, 1966; Toulmin, 1958, 1990) by the maker of the argument.
The support of a Claim with Grounds, Warrants, and Backings is constructivist: The
meaning, and hence validity of the Claim rests in the choice of appropriate support
statements. That is, the claimant constructs reality out of his or her understanding of the
Claim. Second, the Toulmin structure is useful in describing an argument (Smith and
Hunsaker, 1972). This is because it is based on actual speech patterns of people (Rieke
and Sillars, 1975). The Claims, Grounds, Warrants, and Backings are types of
statements. While the Claim is like a major premise, the Grounds, Warrants, and
Backings classifications allow for greater descriptive nuances than just classifying
secondary statements as minor premises. In a response to Willard (1976), Burleson
(1979; p. 146) notes that an important condition for the Toulmin model to work “is the
careful consideration of the context from which units of analysis are drawn, for it is the
context which gives meaning to statements as features of an argument.” In this research,
the arguments are based on a very specific context: physics problem-solving groups.
Third, Toulmin himself notes “...scientists in all cultures develop systematic procedures