• Education of Primary School Mathematics
• /
• v.26 no.4
• /
• pp.257-275
• /
• 2023

In this study, we designed and implemented a instruction emphasizing mathematical argument for fifth-grade students and analyzed the teaching practices. Through a literature review related to instruction emphasizing mathematical argument, we organized a teaching model of five phases that explain why the general claim that the sum of consecutive odd numbers equals a square number is true: 1) noticing patterns, 2) articulating conjectures, 3) representing through visual model, 4) arguing based on representation, 5) comparing and contrasting. Then, we analyzed the argumentation stream by phases to observe how the instruction emphasizing mathematical argument is implemented in the elementary classroom. Based on the results of this study, we discuss the implications of teaching a mathematical argument in elementary school.

• Journal of The Korean Association For Science Education
• /
• v.32 no.5
• /
• pp.1007-1026
• /
• 2012

The purpose of this study was to develop analytic framework for dialogic argumentation to show the context and flow visualizing interactions of argumentation, to be able to present quality of argumentation specifically. For this, we formulated a method of the argumentation diagram using feature of diagram simple and structurally visualizing interrelation between argument components, and then quantified quality of argumentation to argument level score on this basis. We have developed the learning material for argumentation about a vertical circular motion and used the obtained translations from applying it in developing the framework. We chose argument statements among full transcript and then coded as Toulmin's argument components, and these codes was effectively arranged and linked to show argumentation diagram. Results by argumentation diagram could be useful understanding of interactive argumentation context and the flow and present frequency, the combination of argument elements, rough qualitative level of argumentation. To quantify argumentation quality, we gave different scores to different link lines reflecting indication of argumentation quality like that diversity of argument component, justification, presence or absence of rebuttals. The process of identification of argument level is very simple, qualitative level of argumentation represented as concrete score could present various and concrete argument level. Developed analytic framework might contribute to argumentation research field, because it can present effectively dialogic argumentation result. Also, various analysis cases might guide designing an effective argumentation practice and circular motion learning.

• Journal of The Korean Association For Science Education
• /
• v.32 no.7
• /
• pp.1099-1108
• /
• 2012

The purpose of this study was to examine the effects of argument structure on students' writing in implementation of argument-based inquiry using the Science Writing Heuristic (SWH) approach. Participants of this study were 108 8th grade students (three classes). Two classes (68 students) were assigned to an experimental group, and the other class (35 students) was assigned to a comparative group. The experimental group was taught argument-based inquiry using the Science Writing Heuristic (SWH) approach, while the comparative group was taught with the traditional teaching strategy. After implementing this program, the two groups were asked to write summaries using structured argumentation in their writing. The result of this study showed that the experimental group used better argument structure and multimodal representation such as pictures, graphs and examples in evidence than the comparative group. The quality of evidence used in the students' writing was different between two groups. Students of the comparative group only listed fragments of science concepts for evidence to support their claims, but students of the experimental group explained science concepts by giving specific examples. The findings show that argument-based inquiry using the SWH approach was effective on argument structure in students' writing.

• Journal of The Korean Association For Science Education
• /
• v.34 no.6
• /
• pp.583-592
• /
• 2014

The purpose of this study is to investigate the impact of argument-based modeling strategy using scientific writing on student's modeling ability. For this study, 66 students (three classes) from the 7th grade were selected and of these, 43 students (two classes) were assigned to two experimental groups while the other 23 students (one class) were assigned to comparative group. In the experimental groups, one group (22 students) was Argument-based multimodal Representation and Modeling (AbRM), and the other group (21 students) was Argument-based Modeling (AbM). Modeling ability consisted of identifying the problem, structuring of scientific concepts, adequacy of claim and evidence and index of multimodal representation. As for the modeling ability, AbRM group scored significantly higher than the other groups, AbM group was significantly higher than comparative group. The four sub-elements of modeling ability in the AbRM group was significantly higher than the other groups statistically and AbM group scored significantly higher than comparative group. From these results, the argument-based modeling strategy using scientific writing was effective on students' modeling ability. Students organized or expressed the model and evaluated or modified it through the process of argument-based modeling using scientific writing and the exchange of opinions with others by scientific language as argument and writing.

• Journal of Korean Philosophical Society
• /
• v.148
• /
• pp.129-156
• /
• 2018

Recently, a lot of articles and writings defending animal right and welfare are introduced into our society. For example, P. Singer's Animal Liberation, T. Regan's The Case for Animal Rights, and J. Rachels's Created From Animal are representative writings of animal ethics. In his books, P. Singer maintains that all animals are equal. T. Regan insisted that animals as a subject of a life have rights. J. Rachels's moral individualism is that how an individual may be treated is to be determined, not by considering his group membership, but by considering his own particular characteristics. Interestingly, they use common argument called 'argument from marginal cases' to justify their theoretical positions. If we can disclose the weakness of the argument, all kinds of animal ethics which defend animal right and welfare such as animal liberation theory, animal rights theory and moral individualism will collapse. In this paper, I will examine the concrete contexts in which Singer, Regan and Rachels make use of the argument. And I will critically examine the argument. Lastly I will show that the attempt to deny the difference of species is unsuccessful.

• Korean Journal of Logic
• /
• v.22 no.2
• /
• pp.233-251
• /
• 2019

In this paper, I raise objections to Sungsu Kim's argument that Sartorio's hard-line reply to the manipulation argument fails. In attacking Sartorio's argument, Sungsu Kim claims that there are two problems with Sartorio's. I argue that Sungsu Kim's argument fails by responding to these two problems. With respect to the first problem, I provide a new example of dilution of responsibility. With respect to the second problem, I argue that, contrary to what Sungsu Kim assumes, for Sartorio's argument to succeed, our intuition that Ernie is responsible in the Lightning Strike Scenario does not have to be as strong as our intuition that Ernie is not responsible in the Diana scenario.

• The Korean Journal of Archival Studies
• /
• no.52
• /
• pp.59-117
• /
• 2017

This study aims to logically investigate the changing interpretation and implementation of the principle of provenance by using an argument model for discourse analysis. First, it divides the history of discourses on the principle from the Dutch Manual publication of 1989 up to the present into four areas, which includes establishing, diffusing, transforming, and expanding or deconstructing, and articulates the core discourses of each. Second, it designs the argument model for analyzing the discourses on the principle by applying Toulmin's argument model and Dunn's policy argument model. Third, it selects the articles and books that cover the core discourses of the principle, and analyzes their contents in consideration of the argument model. Fourth and finally, it presents four argument models corresponding to each area of the discourses.

• Journal of The Korean Association For Science Education
• /
• v.39 no.3
• /
• pp.337-348
• /
• 2019

The purpose of this study is to examine epistemic thinking in middle school students in an argument-based inquiry science class. Participants of the study were 93 9th grade students from four classes of a middle school in a metropolitan city. Observations were made over one semester during which argument-based inquiry lessons on five subjects were conducted. Data was collected from argument-based inquiry activity worksheets and student questionnaires. After analysis of epistemic thinking in the written reflections, students were found to have the highest frequency of epistemic metacognitive skills, followed by epistemic cognition, epistemic metacognitive experience, and epistemic metacognitive knowledge. While investigating the effects of an argument-based inquiry science class on student epistemic thinking and after analysis of the reflections written for the first ABI activity and the fifth ABI activity, we found that all of the sub-elements of epistemic thinking have increased. The rate of growth for epistemic cognition is greatest, followed by epistemic metacognitive knowledge and epistemic metacognitive skills. Assessed for epistemic thinking, the level of epistemic thinking improved over the course of the argument-based inquiry science class. The results of the survey show that students actively participating and being recognized for their active participation in the argument-based inquiry science class are helpful in understanding scientific knowledge. Therefore, an argument-based inquiry science class is a teaching and learning program that allows students to understand and experience the epistemic nature of scientific knowledge and its construction through collaboration and agreement.

• The Journal of Korean Philosophical History
• /
• no.59
• /
• pp.89-120
• /
• 2018

This paper is a study of the beginning pattern of simseul argument in the 19th century, based on the letter written by Hanju(1818~1886) and Mangu(1837~ 1902). In the text, I analyzed the theoretical differences between Mangu and Hanju that inherited from the study of Jungjae, is to expand the scope of the dispute between the Hanju and Mangu which to provide the beginning pattern of simseul argument. By revealing the theoretical difference between Hanju and Mangu, in the opposite direction, the content of the simseul argument between the Hanju and Jungjae's developed could be clearer. In the Hanjujip, there are nine letters to Mangu, there are also three letters to the Mangujip. These letters show a certain difference in the learning of the two people. So the text focuses on the content of these letters and reveals their theoretical differences, eventually it is confirmed that their theoretical differences lead to the beginning pattern of simseul argument. In particular, interpretation of LiKi leads to interpretation of Sim. Sim interpretation centers on the interpretation of the Zhuxi's 'Ki of Jungsang' meaning, while Hanju emphasizes to see as Lee, Mangu emphasizes that as the sum of Liki. 'Ki of Jungsang' is an interpretation of Zhuxi' Sim, and in the end, interpretation of 'Ki of Jungsang' means interpretation of Sim. Thus, while Hanju tried to see of Li, Mangu wanted to see at the sum of LiKi. This is simseul argument between Hanju and Man-gu, which was unfolded in the extension of the 19th century's simseul argument of erection. Through their argument, they are going to use it as an opportunity to review details of how the debate started in the Toegye school.

• Journal of the Korea Academia-Industrial cooperation Society
• /
• v.4 no.3
• /
• pp.134-138
• /
• 2003

The purpose of this study is to analyse the argument alternations in terms of semantic perspective. Argument alternation has long been an interesting topic for the linguists regardless of their linguistic schools. Semantic analysis of argument alternation is attempted by Dowty(2001) based on the Levin(1993)'s classification. The study is focused on the phenomenon where meaning changes with argument alternations even though those sentences look the same syntactically and lineally. 1 tried not only to classify verbs according to the meaning changes but to explain the alternations in semantic point of view. The verbs are divided into 4 types- Touch type, Hit type, Cut type, and Break type. Each type of verbs are tested if they show special characteristics with three alternations-Middle alternation, Body-part possessor Ascension, and Conative Alternation. And semantic analysis is tried based on that classification.