CEFContemporary Education Frontiers3029-18793029-1860Bio-Byword Scientific Publishing Pty. Ltd.10.26689/CEF.v4i6.15593ArticleThe Theoretical Gap and Pedagogical Reconfiguration of Curriculum Ideological and Political Education in Informal Logic: A Perspective on the Localization of Argument Evaluationhttps://artdesignp.com/journal/CEF/4/6/10.26689/CEF.v4i6.15593GeMiao2026462026-06-26As an important course for cultivating critical thinking in university general education, informal logic focuses on the interpretation of natural-language arguments and the identification of logical fallacies. At present, the informal logic teaching system in Chinese universities largely draws on the argument evaluation paradigm established by the Windsor School in Canada. The RSA criteria (Relevance, Sufficiency, Acceptability) of this paradigm focus on procedural technical scrutiny of arguments and methodologically bracket the value dimension. This methodological feature creates a theoretical gap with the value guidance emphasized by China’s curriculum ideological and political education. This difference is not a matter of superiority or inferiority, but rather a natural divergence in pathways formed by informal logic within different educational traditions. To address this gap, this paper, grounded in the localized educational context, constructs a three-dimensional argument evaluation framework encompassing logical validity, contextual reasonableness, and value legitimacy. This framework does not reject the Windsor paradigm; rather, it expands the theoretical capacity while preserving the reasonable core of its procedural rationality, thereby offering an operationally feasible framework grounded in the discipline’s internal logic for the integration of ideological-political education into logic-oriented general education courses. Informal logic,Curriculum ideological and political education,Argument evaluation,Theoretical gap,Pedagogical reform

[1] Johnson RH, 2000, Manifest Rationality: A Pragmatic Theory of Argument. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates. [2] Ministry of Education of China, 2020, Notice of the Ministry of Education on Issuing the Guiding Outline for Curriculum Ideological and Political Education in Higher Education Institutions. Ministry of Education. [3] Wu HZ, Liu CJ, 2004, The Concept and Meaning of Informal Logic. Journal of Qinghai Normal University (Philosophy and Social Sciences Edition), 2004(6): 51–55. [4] Xiong MH, 2006, The Object and Development Trend of Informal Logic. Journal of Sun Yat-sen University (Social Science Edition), 2006(2): 71–75+126. [5] Jin RD, 2006, On the Modern Characteristics of Informal Logic. Journal of Yan’an University (Social Science Edition), 2006(3): 11–15. [6] Wu HZ, Zhou JW, 2010, Critical Thinking: An Argument-Logic Perspective. China Renmin University Press. [7] Dong Y, 2017, Principles and Methods of Critical Thinking. Higher Education Press. [8] Ouyang WC, 2022, The Current Situation and Future of Logic General Education: New Liberal Arts and Macro-Logic View. New Liberal Arts Education Research, 2022(4): 129–140+144. [9] Li YF, Cao WH, Yue H, 2021, On the Ideological-Political Dimension of Logic Education. Journal of Mudanjiang College of Education, 2021(12): 44–46. [10] van Eemeren FH, Grootendorst R, 2004, A Systematic Theory of Argumentation: The Pragma-Dialectical Approach. Cambridge University Press.