An introduction to argumentation for UTS:CIC PhD students (with some Learning Analytics examples, but potentially of wider interest to students/researchers)
Just over 10 years ago, Educational Review published an article “Reconceiving argument” by Richard Andrews. In the article, Andrews traced some of the changes in the conception of argument that had taken place within educational contexts (primarily within the UK) over the previous few years. An important aim of the authors’ article is to consider whether there is any evidence that the (re)conceptualization of argument discussed in Andrews’ article has permeated educational theory and practice in the last 10 years. Specifically they will consider his invocation of new metaphors to conceive of the argumentation process as more akin to a dialogic exchange in contrast to adversarial combat. They question whether such a framing diminishes the value of conflict and confrontation in the argumentation process.
Ich glaube, dass der Begriff des Urheberrechts-Extremismus ziemlich genau einen der Gründe beschreibt, warum selbst moderate Reformen des Urheberrechts so schwer zu realisieren sind.
In the face of fierce opposition to its plan to enshrine far-reaching rights for foreign investors in the EU-US trade deal, the Commission is trying to appease the critics with a ‘reform’ agenda for investor-state arbitration. The reforms are remarkable in line with the big business lobby agenda.
H. Wachsmuth, B. Stein, and Y. Ajjour. 15th Conference of the European Chapter of the Association for Computational Linguistics (EACL 2017), page 1116-1126. Association for Computational Linguistics, (April 2017)
R. Calegari, G. Contissa, F. Lagioia, A. Omicini, and G. Sartor. Legal Knowledge and Information Systems. JURIX 2019: The Thirty-second Annual Conference, volume 322 of Frontiers in Artificial Intelligence and Applications, IOS Press, (2019)
R. von Behren, J. Condit, and E. Brewer. Proceedings of the 9th conference on Hot Topics in Operating Systems - Volume 9, page 4. Berkeley, CA, USA, USENIX Association, (2003)
H. Evens, and J. Houssart. Educational Research, 46 (3):
269-282(2004)This paper utilizes Toulmin's original framework to analyse over 400 answers given by 11-year-olds to a question on a written mathematics test. The question required children to say whether a given statement is true and give a written explanation. Categorizations of answers are developed from the data and examined, suggesting that many children appeared to understand the mathematics but were not able to give adequate explanations. Findings are also compared with other researchers' findings. In contrast to other studies, a large category of non-valid answers appear mathematical, but are largely restatement of the information the children were given. Although only a minority provided explanations deemed worthy of a mark, further analysis demonstrates greater degrees of comprehension than this suggests. Teaching strategies for building children's expressive and specifying skills are identified..
B. Schwarz, T. Dreyfus, N. Hadas, and R. Hershkowitz. the 28th international conference for the psychology of mathematics education, 4, Bergen, Norway, Bergen University College., (2004)
C. Haley, J. Moffett, R. Laney, and B. Nuseibeh. Third Symposium on Requirements Engineering for Information Security (SREIS'05) held in conjunction with the 13th International Requirements Engineering Conference (RE'05), Paris, (August 2005)
A. Maclean, R. Young, and T. Moran. CHI '89: Proceedings of the SIGCHI conference on Human factors in computing systems, page 247--252. New York, NY, USA, ACM Press, (1989)