PQRS Argumentation framework
Single-sentence-structure for analyzing & presenting arguments
Questioning is the beginning of understanding!
Franklin
Introduction
This page introduces the PQRS in argumentation as a mnemonic and framework that is commonly used to help structure arguments and essays effectively. It is used in critical thinking, writing, and reasoning to analyze and present a practical argument in a concise form, sometimes in a single sentence.
Argumentation
Information is gathered for each of the actions and outcomes, then their relationships can be compared by combining them with simple sentences or phrases by using a single-sentence-pattern to illustrates the relationships.
Information gathered
- P information for the principle being appealed to by the argument.
- Q information for the course of action under consideration.
- R information for the wrong that would be committed (by doing or not doing).
- S information for the consequences risked (by doing or not doing).
The single-sentence-pattern
it is a genr.
Examples
Example 1
Since we are committed to having students learn to think as scientists, which among other things requires they decide for themselves the collection of adequate data (P), we must rule out telling them how and what to measure and the amount of accuracy needed (Q); to do otherwise would give them the wrong impression of scientific work (R) and invite the formation of inappropriate authoritarian unscientific attitudes (S).
Example 2:
Since students should not learn incorrect or misleading scientific principles (P), we must rule out allowing them to make false conclusions (Q); to do otherwise would teach falsehoods (R) and invite criticism from scientists, parents, and educators (S).
Sample problems to discuss and improve.
Explain how the following fit and do not fit the argument format and how to edit them for a better fit.
Argument 1
1. Instruction should be planned and implemented based on a constructivist theory of how the brain works to integrate new learning with what the learner already knows (P) instruction must not teach only behaviorally since this ignores the function of the brain within the individual (Q). By only controlling facts and information externally teachers need not consider what the person understands or the student’s ability to transfer information (R), and in the process fail to engage learners in meaningful learning and provide an adequate education (S).
Argument 2
Constructivist theory involves acknowledging how the brain works and creating experiences for learners to relate what they know to an experience and create learning from there (P). Teachers should use the predisposition of the brain to search for meaning in experiences and the capacity to create that meaning (Q). By ignoring this capacity of the brain teachers fail to help students relate what they are learning to what they already know and value, and how learning and experiences connect (R). To not do so will result in learning which is fragmented, impossible for learners to apply information to everyday life, and view school learning as irrelevant to everyday life (S).
Argument 3
Behaviorist learning theory invokes learning through external manipulation of learners and observation of the subsequent behavior (P). There is no need to consider what learners know prior to instruction or how they may interpret presented information (Q) since this would be a waste of valuable time and reduce the amount of material to which students can be presented (R). Thereby, reducing the amount of learning as measured by a standardized achievement test (S).
Argument 4
Since we are committed to following Title IX rules and regulations in athletics, we must rule out any type of discrimination of male and female student athletes concerning the number of sports and benefits offered. To do otherwise invites law suits against college and high school institutions, which may ultimately damage the reputation of the institution and student athletes alike.