Transcript The Toulmin Model

The Toulmin Model
Who was Stephen Toulmin?
 March 1922 – December
2009
 Author, Educator,
Philosopher
 Created theories to deal
with practical issues using
moral reasoning.
 Developed a system to
break down any type of
arguments and the
assumptions that surround
it.
 Toulmin has influenced
philosophy, rhetoric, and
computer science.
The Toulmin Model Structure
Claim
Definition of Claim:
An assertion usually supported
with evidence. Usually
includes a support, refute, or
qualify statement.
Example: Students should not
have cell phones in school
because it is a distraction in the
classroom.
Grounds
 Definition of Grounds:
Evidence provided to
bolster the Claim and
support the Warrant.
 Backing: In 2010, cell phone
violations were the second
most disciplined offense at
Kentridge High School.
Warrant
 Definition of Warrant: the
implied statement that
creates a logical
connection between the
Claim and the Backing.
 Example: Even though cell
phones are banned from
school, it is assumed all
students carry a cell phone
with them, and many of
them send text messages in
class, but are never caught.
Rebuttal
 Definition of Rebuttal: an
answer that challenges or
refutes a claim. Rebuttals may
also be offered by writers who
anticipate objections to the
claims or evidence they offer.
 Rebuttal Example: Parents may
argue all students should carry
cell phones with them in case of
an emergency, like the
Columbine shooting.
Qualifier
 Definition of Qualifier: A
word, or phrase, that limits
the scope of a claim: Usually,
Sometimes, In most cases,
etc.
 Qualifier: In most cases, it is
highly unlikely an emergency
will happen in school.
Furthermore, the school
could always contact parents
making a phone call using a
land line.
Create a Toulmin Model on your own
Qualifier – specific
limits to you claim or
warrant.
Grounds – reasons or
evidence that supports
the claim.
Claim – The position or
claim being argued for.
Warrant – implied or
stated principle that
connects the grounds
to the claim.
Rebuttal – counter
arguments to the claim
or warrant
iPad Scenario
 State a Claim, the
Grounds, and a Warrant
supporting, refuting, or
qualifying a Kent School
Board initiative requiring
all students to have an
iPad to attend school in
the Kent School District.
iPad Scenario continued
 Claim:
Students should not be required to
buy an iPad to attend a KSD school
because it would cause an undo
financial burden for families.
 Backing:
The average iPad costs over $400
and would be unaffordable to
most students.
 Warrant:
All families who live within the KSD
boundaries could afford an iPad.
Please write a Paraphrase on the
Toulmin Model