A Theoretical Framework Based on Toulmin’s and Perelman’s Perspectives for the Production and Analysis of Argumentation in Mathematics Education

Research in Mathematics Education has highlighted the contributions of using argumentation as a teaching approach and as a tool for assessing the arguments of both teachers and students. Studies also point to the need for further investigation into the potential of argumentation-based approaches to promote argumentation and analyze the integration of argument models. However, studies on this topic in undergraduate mathematics courses remain relatively scarce, especially in the Brazilian context. This article presents a theoretical study aimed at constructing a theoretical-argumentative model to be used as a framework in the teaching of a mathematics teacher education course and as an instrument for analyzing students’ arguments. The theoretical contributions of Toulmin and Perelman, along with articles from the field of Mathematics Education that investigate argumentation in undergraduate settings, served as data sources for the construction of the model. The model proposes argumentative strategies applicable in undergraduate mathematics courses: the construction of justificatory arguments in line with an argumentative structure, the recognition of types of arguments, and the use of techniques that foster discussion and persuasion regarding mathematical topics. Moreover, it may serve as an analytical framework for studies on students’ arguments in this educational context. The model enables the categorization of arguments at different levels of quality, based on criteria that integrate elements from both logical and rhetorical perspectives. The findings suggest that the model has the potential for deepening the analysis of argumentation in undergraduate Mathematics Education.

Keywords:
Argumentation; Higher Education; Analytical Framework; Theoretical-Argumentative Model; Mathematics Education