Pola Struktural dan Kesenjangan Penilaian: Pemetaan Bibliometrik Model Argumentasi Toulmin (TAM) dalam Penulisan Akademik
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.52436/1.jpti.1560Keywords:
Analisis Bibliometrik, Asesmen Argumentasi, Model Argumentasi Toulmin (TAM), Penulisan Akademik, ScopusAbstract
Model argumentasi Toulmin (TAM) telah menjadi kerangka kerja dominan dalam instruksi penulisan akademik global. Namun, literatur saat ini mengindikasikan adanya ketimpangan fokus yang tajam antara masifnya inovasi pedagogis dan minimnya pengembangan instrumen penilaian yang valid. Penelitian ini bertujuan untuk memetakan struktur intelektual literatur global sekaligus memverifikasi kesenjangan penelitian tersebut melalui analisis bibliometrik. Tahapan penelitian mengikuti urutan pedoman PRISMA sehingga diperoleh dataset sebanyak 393 artikel jurnal yang terbit antara tahun 2000 hingga 2026 yang diekstraksi dari metadata Scopus, dianalisis dengan perangkat lunak Biblioshiny dan VOSviewer. Hasil penelitian mengungkap tren kenaikan publikasi yang eksponensial sejak 2019 dengan dominasi kontribusi Amerika Serikat, Inggris, serta kemunculan klaster baru dari Cina dan Indonesia. Secara tematik, terjadi evolusi topik yang signifikan dari logika pembuktian ke arah strategi penulisan argumentatif. Temuan paling fundamental adalah dengan teridentifikasinya “titik buta” penelitian melalui visualisasi jaringan; literatur mengalami saturasi pada klaster strategi pengajaran, tetapi menunjukkan kekosongan yang nyata pada klaster instrumen asesmen dan desain rubrik. Disparitas tersebut menegaskan bahwa komunitas akademik global hanya memprioritaskan metode pengajaran tanpa diimbangi dengan alat ukur yang terstandardisasi. Penelitian ini juga merekomendasikan reorientasi agenda riset masa depan guna memprioritaskan pengembangan dan validasi rubrik penilaian berbasis model Toulmin agar menjamin objektivitas evaluasi penalaran di lingkungan pendidikan tinggi.
Downloads
References
M. Beniche, “The Correlation between Critical Thinking Skills and Argumentative Writing Skills in Moroccan Higher Education: The Case of the Faculty of Languages, Letters and Arts Ibn Tofail University, Kenitra,” IJLLS Int. J. Lang. Lit. Stud., vol. 5, no. 1, pp. 212–229, 2023, doi: 10.36892/ijlls.v5i1.1226.
R. A. González, J. de la Hoz-Ruiz, and J. M. Gámez, “The 2030 Challenge in the Quality of Higher Education: Metacognitive, Motivational, and Structural Factors, Predictive of Written Argumentation, for the Dissemination of Sustainable Knowledge,” Sustainability, vol. 12, no. 8266, pp. 1–18, 2020, doi: 10.3390/su12198266.
J. Al Herz, “Developing Critical Thinking Skills Through English Writing Assignments at King Faisal University,” World J. English Lang., vol. 15, no. 8, pp. 350–357, 2025, doi: 10.5430/wjel.v15n8p350.
F. Murtadho, “Metacognitive and Critical Thinking Practices in Developing EFL Students’ Argumentative Writing Skills,” Indones. J. Appl. Linguist., vol. 10, no. 3, pp. 656–666, 2021, doi: 10.17509/ijal.v10i3.31752.
B. D. Wale and Y. F. Kassahun, “The Transformative Power of AI Writing Technologies: Enhancing EFL Writing Instruction through the Integrative Use of Writerly and Google Docs,” Hum. Behav. Emerg. Technol., vol. 2024, pp. 1–15, 2024, doi: 10.1155/2024/9221377.
H. Aljuaid, “The Impact of Artificial Intelligence Tools on Academic Writing Instruction in Higher Education: A Systematic Review,” AWEJ Arab World English J., vol. April 2024, pp. 26–55, 2024, doi: 10.24093/awej/ChatGPT.2.
F. Al Mahmud, “Academic Writing of Saudi Graduate Students: Issues and Improvements,” AWEJ Arab World English J., vol. 14, no. 1, pp. 409–427, 2023, doi: 10.24093/awej/vol14no1.26.
G. R. P. Hidayat, K. Kurniawan, and A. Sastromiharjo, “Analisis Struktur Argumentasi Model Toulmin dalam Karya Ilmiah Mahasiswa,” JPTI J. Pendidik. dan Teknol. Indones., vol. 6, no. 2, pp. 315–333, 2026, doi: https://doi.org/10.52436/1.jpti.1490.
D. D. Preiss, J. C. Castillo, P. Flotts, and E. S. Martín, “Assessment of Argumentative Writing and Critical Thinking in Higher Education: Educational Correlates and Gender Differences,” Learn. Individ. Differ., vol. 28, pp. 193–203, 2013, doi: 10.1016/j.lindif.2013.06.004.
R. Zabihi, M. Meharani-Rad, and A. Khodi, “Assessment of Authorial Voice Strength in L2 Argumentative Written Task Performances: Contributions of Voice Components to Text Quality,” J. Writ. Res., vol. 11, no. 2, pp. 331–352, 2019, doi: 10.172 239/jowr-2019.1 1.02.04.
F. Weber, T. Wambsganss, and M. Söllner, “Enhancing Legal Writing Skills: The Impact of Formative Feedback in a Hybrid Intelligence Learning Environment,” BERA Br. J. Educ. Technol., vol. 56, pp. 650–677, 2025, doi: 10.1111/bjet.13529.
E. Pohan, E. Emilia, and I. L. Damayanti, “Using Task-Based Learning to Teach Argumentative Writing and Critical Thinking in Higher Education,” English Rev. J. English Educ., vol. 13, no. 2, pp. 553–562, 2025, doi: 10.25134/erjee.v13i2.11839.
I. Y. Ziska, I. Yuliasri, J. Mujiyanto, and H. Pratama, “The Synergy of Critical Thinking and ICARE Learning Model in Writing Class: A Qualitative Analysis,” Multidiscip. Sci. J., pp. 1–10, 2026, doi: 10.31893/multiscience.2026280.
F. Su and D. Zou, “Group Concept Mapping Strategies for Collaborative Continuation Tasks,” Int. J. Appl. Linguist., pp. 991–1011, 2024, doi: 10.1111/ijal.12547.
S. Kaya, “One Intervention, Several Benefits: Deliberate Computer-Assisted Argument Mapping Practices in an Online Teacher Education Course,” J. Comput. Assist. Learn., vol. 40, pp. 3230–3248, 2024, doi: 10.1111/jcal.13067.
M. J. R. de Smet, S. Brand-gruwel, and P. A. Kirschner, “Learning to Use Electronic Outlining via Observational Learning: Effects on Students’ Argumentative Writing Performance,” J. Comput. Assist. Learn., vol. 39, pp. 1666–1689, 2023, doi: 10.1111/jcal.12825.
J. Zhang and L. J. Zhang, “Integrating Various Types of Feedback in L2 Writing Instruction: Teachers’ and Students’ Perspectives,” Int. J. Appl. Linguist., vol. 0, pp. 1–14, 2025, doi: 10.1111/ijal.12822.
R. Yang and H. Pan, “Whole-to-Part Argumentation Instruction: An Action Research Study Aimed at Improving Chinese College Students’ English Argumentative Writing Based on the Toulmin Model,” SAGE Open, pp. 1–15, 2023, doi: 10.1177/21582440231207738.
G. E. Newell, M. D. Kuehnle, K. Fulton, and T.-J. Lin, “Contextualized Response to Dialogic Argumentative Writing in a Culturally and Linguistically Diverse High School English Language Arts Classroom,” J. Adolesc. Adult Lit., vol. 69, pp. 1–10, 2025, doi: 10.1002/jaal.70011.
D. E. Pereira, D. T. S. Gomes, L. L. Vasconcelos, and C. E. C. Campelo, “A Comprehensive Survey of Argument Mining in the Educational Domain: Techniques, Applications, and Future Directions,” Wiley Interdiscip. Rev. Data Min. Knowl. Discov., vol. 3, pp. 1–14, 2025, doi: 10.1002/widm.70041.
T. S. Nguyen and H. B. Nguyen, “Unravelling Vietnamese Students’ Critical Thinking and Its Relationship with Argumentative Writing,” Univers. J. Educ. Res., vol. 8, no. 11B, pp. 5972–5985, 2021, doi: 10.13189/ujer.2020.082233.
M. Gijsen, T. van Daal, M. Lesterhuis, D. Gijbels, and S. De Maeyer, “The Complexity of Comparative Judgments in Assessing Argumentative Writing: An Eye Tracking Study,” Front. Educ., vol. 5, pp. 1–11, 2021, doi: 10.3389/feduc.2020.582800.
C. Rapanta and F. Macagno, “Evaluation and Promotion of Argumentative Reasoning Among University Students: The Case of Academic Writing,” Rev. Lusófona Educ., vol. 45, pp. 125–142, 2019, doi: 10.24140/issn.1645-7250.rle45.09.
Y. Backman, A. Reznitskaya, V. Gardelli, and I. A. G. Wilkinson, “Beyond Structure: Using the Rational Force Model to Assess Argumentative Writing,” Writ. Commun., vol. 40, no. 2, pp. 555–585, 2023, doi: 10.1177/07410883221148664.
R. Zribi and C. Smaoui, “The Effects of Narrative and Argumentative Modes on Assessing Learners’ Written Performances Based on the Analytic Rating Scale,” LLT J. A J. Lang. Lang. Teach., vol. 24, no. 1, pp. 412–427, 2021, doi: 10.24071/llt.v24i1.2986.
M. Rahimivand, S. Ahangari, and N. H. Tamjid, “Scenario-Based Assessment Design: An Implementation and Analysis of Iranian EFL Learners’ Writing Performance,” Lang. Test. Asia, vol. 15, no. 14, pp. 1–17, 2025, doi: 10.1186/s40468-025-00350-3.
E. Akib, M. A. Muhsin, S. M. Hamid, and N. Irawan, “Critical Thinking in Authentic Assessment: An Exploration into Argumentative Writing Non-English Department in Higher Education,” Int. J. Lang. Educ., vol. 8, no. 4, pp. 854–869, 2024, doi: 10.26858/ijole.v8i4.70051.
F. Nazidah, M. S. Kafii, and S. Admoko, “Analisis Bibliometrik Penelitian Argumentasi Ilmiah dalam Pembelajaran Sains di Era Revolusi Industri 4.0 Society 5.0,” JIPP J. Ilmu Pendidik. dan Pembelajaran, vol. 1, no. 1, pp. 7–14, 2022, doi: 10.58706/jipp.v1n1.p7-14.
H. Ashel, I. Hamidah, S. Anwar, and M. Muslim, “Research Trends and Opportunities of Argumentation Based Learning for Solving Problems in Physics Learning: A Bibliometric Analysis,” JEP J. Eksakta Pendidik., vol. 8, no. 2, pp. 99–114, 2024, doi: 10.24036/jep/vol8-iss2/941.
M. Estaji and F. Safari, “Learning-Oriented Assessment and its Effects on the Perceptions and Argumentative Writing Performance of Impulsive vs. Reflective Learners,” Lang. Test. Asia, vol. 13, no. 31, pp. 1–18, 2023, doi: 10.1186/s40468-023-00248-y.
M.-H. Lee, E. E. Jang, and L. Hannah, “Automated Diagnostic Feedback vs. Self-Assessment: Rethinking Feedback Mechanisms on Academic Writing Development,” TESOL Q., vol. 59, no. S1, pp. 280–317, 2025, doi: 10.1002/tesq.70032.
N. Donthu, W. Reinartz, S. Kumar, and D. Pattnaik, “A Retrospective Review of the First 35 Years of the International Journal of Research in Marketing,” IJRM Int. J. Res. Mark., vol. 38, no. 1, pp. 232–269, 2021, doi: 10.1016/j.ijresmar.2020.10.006.
N. Donthu, S. Kumar, N. Pandey, and P. Gupta, “Forty Years of the International Journal of Information Management: A Bibliometric Analysis,” Int. J. Inf. Manage., vol. 57, pp. 1–22, 2021, doi: 10.1016/j.ijinfomgt.2020.102307.
M. S. Kurdi and M. S. Kurdi, “Analisis Bibliometrik dalam Penelitian Bidang Pendidikan: Teori dan Implementasi,” J. Educ., vol. 03, no. 04, pp. 518–537, 2021.
X. Chen, J. Chen, D. Wu, Y. Xie, and J. Li, “Mapping the Research Trends by Co-Word Analysis Based on Keywords from Funded Project,” Procedia Comput. Sci., vol. 91, no. Itqm, pp. 547–555, 2016, doi: 10.1016/j.procs.2016.07.140.
N. Donthu, S. Kumar, D. Mukherjee, N. Pandey, and W. M. Lim, “How to Conduct a Bibliometric Analysis: An Overview and Guidelines,” J. Bus. Res., vol. 133, pp. 285–296, 2021, doi: 10.1016/j.jbusres.2021.04.070.
R. Ball, An Introduction to Bibliometrics: New Developments and Trends, First Edit. United Kingdom: Chandos Publishing, 2018.
I. Passas, “Bibliometric analysis: The main steps,” Encyclopedia, vol. 4, pp. 1014–1025, 2024, doi: 10.3390/encyclopedia4020065.
N. J. van Eck and L. Waltman, “Software Survey: VOSviewer, a Computer Program for Bibliometric Mapping,” Scientometrics, vol. 84, no. 2, pp. 523–538, 2010, doi: 10.1007/s11192-009-0146-3.
M. Aria and C. Cuccurullo, “Bibliometrix: An R-tool for Comprehensive Science Mapping Analysis,” J. Informetr., vol. 11, no. 4, pp. 959–975, 2017, doi: 10.1016/j.joi.2017.08.007.
J. W. Creswell and J. D. Creswell, Research Design: Qualitative, Quantitative, and Mixed Methods Approaches, 6th Ed. California: Sage Publications, 2023.
I. Muhammad and E. Elmawati, Panduan Lengkap VOSviewer: Menguasai VOSviewer dengan Cepat dan Tepat, Edisi Pert. Indramayu: Adab Indonesia Grup, 2024.
P. Mongeon and A. Paul-Hus, “The Journal Coverage of Web of Science and Scopus: a Comparative Analysis,” Scientometrics, vol. 106, no. 1, pp. 213–228, 2016.
R. Pranckut?, “Web of Science (WoS) and Scopus: The Titans of Bibliographic Information in Today’s Academic World,” Publications, vol. 9, no. 1, p. 12, 2021, doi: 10.3390/publications9010012.
M. J. Page et al., “The PRISMA 2020 Statement: An Updated Guideline for Reporting Systematic Reviews,” BMJ, vol. 372, no. 71, pp. 1–9, 2021, doi: 10.1136/bmj.n71.
S. E. Toulmin, The Uses of Argument, Updated Ed. New York: Cambridge University Press, 2003. doi: 10.1017/CBO9780511840005.
