In the context of academic and professional training, effectively constructing arguments is a fundamental skill for chemists. In this way, educational practices that promote this skill are a constant target of attention, as is the analysis of the quality of arguments produced by students. Models capable of supporting this analysis gain importance, among which stand out those of the domain-general used to analyze arguments generated inside or outside the field of science. On the other hand, only a limited number of recurring studies examine arguments using domain-specific models built upon criteria that exclusively pertain to scientific arguments. Based on a domain-specific model, the quality of arguments in oral presentations by undergraduate chemistry students, designed with the purpose of showing the audience the solution found for interrupted case studies on the effects of mining on water resources, was assessed. The results allowed comparisons to be made regarding their quality and the identification of the way in which each group resorted to the inscriptions provided in the case narratives to support their main conclusions.