On the other side of argumentative competence, that is usually high-lightened in the European framework of Higher Education, there are the argumentative disabilities encountered even between ‘educated’ adults. The main ‘guilty’ for this problem seems to be the low epistemological level of a great adult popularity, globally speaking, also including University students and professors. What we propose is an exploratory tool of the argumentation level of the learners, with the aim to define which epistemological difficulties are hidden behind and affect the quality of learning. More precisely, we propose a framework that classifies and combines three aspects of transformative learning: language structures, thinking models and epistemological functions and dysfunctions of each level. Methodologically speaking, it is a constructivist model of explaining the teaching-learning process as a continuous conceptual change. The study is based on a quite representative literature review, that takes into consideration important studies in Argumentation from one side (such as the ones carried out by Kuhn D., Perkins D.N., Perret-Clemont A.N., van Eemeren F.H., Rigotti E. etc.) and on Epistemological Awareness from the other (such as the works offered by Hofer B.K., Pintrich P.R., King P.M., Kitchener K.S. etc.). We consider that the value of this theoretical study relies on its connection with learning as a cognitive, communicative and self-awareness process. Our goal is to explain and describe the triple relationship between Epistemological Level, Argumentative competence and Quality of Learning. As a future application, we consider the use of the framework constructed as a rubric for assessing the quality of design and product in the field of eLearning.