Search

A descriptive study was conducted to delineate a structured representation of one abstract type (theoretical) and suggest how this predictable representation could affect user-system interfaces of information retrieval systems. Fifty-five argumentative type abstracts were selected from issues of "International Political Science Abstracts." Each abstract was classified into one of three groupings: Substantive, Authoritative, or Motivational. Each abstract was examined for the presence of the first and the second triads of elements--i.e. (1) data, warrant, and claim; and (2) backing, rebuttal, and qualifier. Of the abstracts, 68% belonged to the Substantive class, 20% to the Authoritative class, and 11% to the Motivational class. The first triad of elements was found in all of the abstracts. Of the second triad of elements, Rebuttal was found in 16, Qualifier in 24, and Backing in 28 of the abstracts. It is concluded that patterns of form and structure can be found in the argumentation texts, and therefore, that the rhetorical structure of argument is a useful framework in which to describe the structure of theoretical abstracts. Further, if a user-system interface could make use of these findings in information retrieval systems, users would be aided in comprehending the content of retrieved abstracts and in refining their search queries. (8 references) (SD)

This newsletter contains 32 abstracts of approximately 1000 words each of papers presented at the 1988 conference of the National Testing Network in Writing. Abstracts, listed with their authors, include "Instructional Directions from Large Scale K-12 Writing Assessments" (C. Chew); "Portfolio Assessment across the Curriculum: Early Conflicts" (C. Anson and others); "Revamping the Competency Process for Writing: A Case Study" (D. Holdstein and I. Bosworth); "We Did It and Lived: A State University Goes to Exit Testing" (P. Liston and others); "Proficiency Testing: Issues and Models" (G. Gadda and M. Fowles); "Creating, Developing, and Evaluating a College-Wide Writing Assessment Program" (S. Groden); "How to Organize a Cross-Curricula Writing Assessment Program" (G. Hughes-Wiener and others); "Presenting a Unified Front in a University Writing and Testing Program" (L. Silverthorne and P. Stephens); "Evaluating a Literacy across the Curriculum Program: Designing an Appropriate Instrument" (L. Shohet); "Validity Issues in Direct Writing Assessment" (K. Greenberg and S. Witte); "Reliability Revisited: How Meaningful Are Essay Scores?" (E. White); "Establishing and Maintaining Score Scale Stability and Reading Reliability" (W. Patience and J. Auchter); "Training of Essay Readers: A Process for Faculty and Curriculum Development" (R. Christopher); "Discrepancies in Holistic Evaluation" (D. Daiker and N. Grogan); "Problems and Solutions in Using Open-Ended Primary Traits" (M. C. Flanagan); "The Implications of Using the Rhetorical Demands of College Writing for Placement" (K. Fitzgerald); "Using Video in Training New Readers of Assessment Essays" (G. Cooper); "WPA Presentation on Evaluating Writing Programs" (R. Christopher and others); "Developing and Evaluating a Writing Assessment Program" (L. Boehm and M. A. McKeever); "The Changing Task: Tracking Growth over Time" (C. Lucas); "Assessing Writing to Teach Writing" (V. Spandel); "Reader-Response Criticism as a Model for Holistic Evaluation" (K. Schnapp); "The Discourse of Self-Assessment: Analyzing Metaphorical Stories" (B. Tomlinson and P. Mortensen); "The Uses of Computers in the Analysis and Assessment of Writing" (W. Wresch and H. Schwartz); "Legal Ramifications of Writing Assessments" (W. Lutz); "Some Not So Random Thoughts on the Assessment of Writing" (A. Purves); "Research on National and International Writing Assessments" (A. Purves and others); "Teaching Strategies and Rating Criteria: An International Perspective" (S. Takala and R. E. Degenhart); "Effects of Essay Topic Variations on Student Writing" (G. Brossell and J. Hoetker); "What Should Be a Topic?" (S. Murphy and L. Ruth); "Classroom Research and Writing Assessment" (M. Meyers); and "Computers and the Teaching of Writing" (M. Ribaudo and L. Meeker). (RS)