“Argumentation” refers to how well (convincingly) you layout the text-based details and reasoning for your claim and explain the possible stakes of your claim. The two primary areas I look for when assessing the strength of your argument are:
1- the clarity and effectiveness of how you organize or layout your argument.
-Do you provide your reader with all the necessary contextualizing information the need to understand your points?
-Do you present your points in the most effective order?
-Do you clearly introduce the different parts of your argument and how they relate to the overall claim and/or stakes?
2- the strength and clarity of the logic on and with which you construct your argument.
-Is the premise of your claim solid?
Often faulty premises can occur: when the objects of analysis is too large or vague; when the object of analysis is not actually text-based; when the claim is not actually about the stated object of analysis; and/or when the premise is based on some degree of misreading (i.e. making a claim that depends on the paragraph you’re analysis being the first time a character is introduced, when it turns out that the character actually appears in an earlier scene).
– Is the method of illustrating the claim appropriate to the scope of analysis?
– Do you demonstrate an awareness of the limits of its premise/logic/and method of arguing?
– Does your method of arguing consist of circular reasoning, begging the question, or some other type of logical fallacy?
Imaged accessed at: https://michelerosenthal.com/portfolio/logical-fallacies/
image accessed at: https://www.freetech4teachers.com/2015/11/videos-and-poster-explaining-logical.html