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