Argumentative Writing to International Student Policies in Canada and Korea

This study investigates how Korean university students construct and justify their reasoning in English argumentative essays addressing two contrasting international student policies: Canada’s restriction on international student enrollment and Korea’s expansion initiative. Drawing on 175 essays written by undergraduate EFL students, the analysis identifies both the stances students take and the reasoning patterns underlying their arguments. The findings reveal systematic contrasts across policy contexts. In the Canadian case, students predominantly employed economic reasoning, focusing on domestic welfare, resource management, and the legitimacy of government responsibility. In contrast, essays on Korea’s expansion policy emphasized socio-cultural and educational reasoning, highlighting internationalization as a means of cultural exchange, institutional survival, and national development. These patterns suggest that students’ reasoning adapts to the perceived orientation and socio-political framing of each policy, demonstrating context-sensitive argumentation. The study argues that L2 argumentative writing tasks, when grounded in authentic policy debates, can serve as powerful instruments for examining learners’ critical thinking and social judgment, revealing how they use English not only to argue but also to reason about public issues.