Construction Of Arguments Research Articles

Concurrent non-malleable zero-knowledge and simultaneous resettable non-malleable zero-knowledge in constant rounds

Concurrent non-malleable zero-knowledge (CNMZK) considers the concurrent execution of zero-knowledge protocols in a setting even when adversaries can simultaneously corrupt multiple provers and verifiers. As far as we know, the round complexity of all the constructions of CNMZK arguments for NP is at least ω(logn). In this paper, we provide the first construction of a constant-round concurrent non-malleable zero-knowledge argument for every language in NP. Our protocol relies on the existence of families of collision-resistant hash functions, one-way permutations and indistinguishability obfuscators. As an additional contribution, we study the composition of two central notions in zero knowledge, the simultaneously resettable zero-knowledge and non-malleable zero-knowledge, which seemingly have stronger proved security guarantees. We give the first construction of a constant-round simultaneously-resettable non-malleable zero-knowledge. To the best of our knowledge, this is the first study to combine the two security concepts described above together in the zero-knowledge protocols.

La revisión bibliográfica en el doctorado en Administración

El objetivo del artículo es contribuir a la valoración de la revisión bibliográfica como medio para mejorar el aporte de las tesis doctorales en la disciplina.
 Para ello se identifican los distintos públicos a los que está dirigida, se articulan aportes para ilustrar los momentos de la revisión bibliográfica y se sugieren los pasos para llevarla adelante, así como también se brindan ejemplificaciones orientadoras.
 El artículo también alerta sobre la abundancia de fuentes en internet y cómo la relación con el director, consejero de estudios, puede contribuir positivamente a las tareas.
 Finalmente, se concluye que una sólida construcción argumental descansa en una apropiada revisión de fuentes documentales y que tal tarea se debe reconocer en el marco de la maduración doctoral, de allí el valor de las distintas instancias de acompañamiento que se le ofrezca en el programa al doctorando.

Challenges concerning argumentative writing in a second language context

The current study is based on parts of the data collected in a quasi-experiment conducted in four English classes of Norwegian upper secondary school students. The purpose of the quasi-experiment was to explore whether a teaching intervention based on systemic functional linguistics and genre-pedagogy would support students in improving their competence in writing argumentative texts in English. The improvement was measured by comparing evaluations of pre-and post-tests. The current study investigates what seemed to be the main challenges for Norwegian students concerning this type of genre in a second language context based on the pre-tests and the evaluations of the pre-tests. The most challenging aspect seems to be how to write thorough argumentation and discussion and to use sources in an independent and correct manner. Other challenging features seem to be how to structure texts and how to adjust the language to appropriate levels of formality and modality. To meet these challenges, this article advocates introducing genre-pedagogy as a teaching approach in ESL-contexts (English as a second language). This would ensure a focus on how to construct arguments through detailed instruction and to adjust the writing to purpose and situation.

Korsgaard\u2019s Other Argument for Interpersonal Morality: the Argument from the Sufficiency of Agency

Christine Korsgaard’s (1996, 2009) argument for the claim that one should not only value one’s own humanity but also the humanity of all other persons, ‘the publicity of reasons argument’, has been heavily criticized and I believe rightly so. However, both in an early paper (1986) and in her most recent work (forthcoming), Korsgaard does not rely on controversial, Wittgensteinian ideas regarding the publicity of reasons, but instead she uses a different argument to justify interpersonal morality, which I will refer to as ‘the argument from the sufficiency of agency’. The goal of this paper is to evaluate whether the argument from the sufficiency of agency can succeed where the publicity of reasons argument fails. I will argue that although the argument from the sufficiency of agency is potentially more promising, it fails to justify a categorical and universal principle of interpersonal morality. I argue, however, that this failure has less to do with the argument from the sufficiency of agency itself and more with Korsgaard’s specific version of it. This leaves open the possibility that other Kantian constructivist arguments from the sufficiency of agency might be more successful.

Aplicabilidade dos ciclos investigativos nos anos iniciais do ensino fundamental

Neste artigo, apresenta-se uma pesquisa que teve como objetivo avaliar as possibilidades da aplicação de um ciclo investigativo nos Anos Iniciais do Ensino Fundamental. Entende-se por ciclo investigativo uma sequência de situações de aprendizagem que permite aos estudantes a definição de um problema de pesquisa, a elaboração de hipóteses, a construção de argumentos que garantem a sustentação das pressuposições e a comunicação dos resultados. O estudo caracteriza-se por ser uma pesquisa-ação, em que o corpus foi decorrente da documentação pedagógica produzida por um professor dos Anos Iniciais de uma escola pública localizada no Vale do Taquari/RS, considerando a análise por meio de uma abordagem reflexiva. Percebeu-se que a proposição do ciclo investigativo foi profícua, uma vez que favoreceu a realização de situações de aprendizagem que primam pela busca autônoma de informações, exploração e experimentação, bem como contempla no planejamento pedagógico temas que são do interesse das crianças.

Classical logic, argument and dialectic

A well studied instantiation of Dung's abstract theory of argumentation yields argumentation-based characterisations of non-monotonic inference over possibly inconsistent sets of classical formulae. This provides for single-agent reasoning in terms of argument and counter-argument, and distributed non-monotonic reasoning in the form of dialogues between computational and/or human agents. However, features of existing formalisations of classical logic argumentation (Cl-Arg) that ensure satisfaction of rationality postulates, preclude applications of Cl-Arg that account for real-world dialectical uses of arguments by resource-bounded agents. This paper formalises dialectical classical logic argumentation that both satisfies these practical desiderata and is provably rational. In contrast to standard approaches to Cl-Arg we: 1) draw an epistemic distinction between an argument's premises accepted as true, and those assumed true for the sake of argument, so formalising the dialectical move whereby arguments' premises are shown to be inconsistent, and avoiding the foreign commitment problem that arises in dialogical applications; 2) provide an account of Cl-Arg suitable for real-world use by eschewing the need to check that an argument's premises are subset minimal and consistent, and identifying a minimal set of assumptions as to the arguments that must be constructed from a set of formulae in order to ensure that the outcome of evaluation is rational. We then illustrate our approach with a natural deduction proof theory for propositional classical logic that allows measurement of the ‘depth’ of an argument, such that the construction of depth-bounded arguments is a tractable problem, and each increase in depth naturally equates with an increase in the inferential capabilities of real-world agents. We also provide a resource-bounded argumentative characterisation of non-monotonic inference as defined by Brewka's Preferred Subtheories.

Identidade, ideias e normas na construção dos interesses em política externa: o caso português

This article develops an eclectic constructivist argument about the role of identity, ideas, and norms in the definition of Portugal’s foreign policy interests. It begins by exposing the limitations of the excessively materialistic and static way of rationalizing states’ interests. Then it discusses the importance of the social construction of identities and interests and their interrelation with the social and normative structure of the international order. Lastly, it advocates the need for a socio-cultural approach regarding interests, and presents a new model for foreign policy analysis that applies to the Portuguese case.

La retórica de lo extremo en la ultraderecha chilena

Este artículo pretende caracterizar la ideología de la extrema derecha chilena a través de su historia. Se realizó un análisis del discurso de los manifiestos y declaraciones de principios de cuatro formaciones de ultraderecha de distintos momentos de la historia de Chile: el Movimiento Nacional Socialista, el Movimiento Revolucionario Nacional Sindicalista, el Frente Nacionalista Patria y Libertad, así como Patria Nueva Sociedad. El enfoque retórico de la ideología ultraderechista permite reconstruir las autodescripciones ideológicas, las articulaciones del autoritarismo, los marcos figurativos y las principales construcciones argumentativas de la extrema derecha chilena.

Argumentative Knowledge Construction in an Online Graduate Mathematics Course

The authors report on three students' argumentative knowledge construction in an asynchronous online graduate level geometry course designed for in-service secondary mathematics (ISM) teachers. Using Weinberger and Fischer's framework, they analyzed the ISM teachers' a) geometry autobiography and b) discussion board posts (both comments and attached work including solutions to assigned problems and Geometric Sketchpad explorations) throughout an 8-week summer course. The goal was to better understand the key similarities and differences in the nature of their interaction with each other and the course content that may have contributed to the differences in their knowledge construction. Findings led researchers to re-conceptualize a rubric to (1) assist instructors in facilitating productive interaction among students, (2) prepare students to better utilize the discussion board with a critical eye, and (3) provide specific guidelines for a more productive engagement among students, using the framework as a guide.

Introducing Argumentation About Climate Change Socioscientific Issues in a Disadvantaged School

Improving the ability of young people to construct arguments about controversial science topics is a desired outcome of science education. The purpose of this research was to evaluate the impact of an argumentation intervention on the socioscientific issue of climate change with Year 10 students in a disadvantaged Australian school. After participation in a professional development workshop on climate change science, socioscientific issues and argumentation, an early career teacher explicitly taught argumentation over four non-consecutive lessons as part of a 4 week (16 lesson) topic on Earth science. Thirty students completed a pre- and post-test questionnaire to determine their understanding of climate change science and their ability to construct an argument about a climate change socioscientific issue. Students’ understanding of climate change improved significantly (p < .001) with a large effect size. There was also a significant increase (p < .05) in the number of categories provided in written arguments about a climate change issue. Qualitative data, comprising classroom observation field notes, lesson transcripts, work samples, and teacher and student interviews, were analysed for the extent to which the students’ argumentation skills improved. At the end of the intervention, students became aware of the need to justify their decisions with scientific evidence. It is concluded that introducing argumentation about climate change socioscientific issues to students in a disadvantaged school can improve their argumentation skills.

Promoting productive argumentation through students' questions

Questions are important in facilitating the thinking process that leads to learning. There are many research studies examining the use of students’ questions as scaffolds to facilitate argument construction but more needs to be done to understand how these questions are used in generating productive arguments. As such, in this research, we investigate (1) the types of students’ questions generated within a group and how these questions are used in generating productive arguments and (2) strategies used by groups of students who are deemed more successful in generating convincing arguments. Adopting a social constructivist perspective, we examined students’ talk about science within their groups and between groups. We worked with a group of 24 secondary three Biology students to complete a total of seven days of crime scene investigation tasks that required them to make evidence-based decisions to determine the cause of death and solve the crime. The data collected and analyzed included transcripts from students’ oral discourse and written artefacts. We found that asking hypothetical questions promotes the construction of quality arguments. Groups that were more successful in generating quality arguments adopted strategies such as using visible schema constructed from their own questions, testing the strengths of their claims and choosing claims that have the highest number of propositions.

Talking with Our Hands

In the elementary mathematics classroom, the pursuit of meaning may take many forms, including how we communicate with our physical movements. Often, mathematical communication is organized around verbalization. For example, teachers are often encouraged to facilitate productive mathematical discourse among students (CCSSI 2010; Stein et al. 2008). Similarly, the spoken words of the teacher carry great importance as she or he elects to revoice certain strategies as stated and perhaps verbally modify the language of others to enhance their clarity for the entire class. Such verbal interactions are, indeed, quite important regarding the construction of meaning; but we cannot neglect the nonverbal, physical manner in which we communicate with students. As we will see in subsequent examples, such nonverbal communication plays a role in students' construction of mathematical arguments and critiquing the reasoning of others—the third of the Common Core's (CCSSI 2010, pp. 6-7) Standards for Mathematical Practice (SMP 3)—as well as teachers' facilitation of meaningful mathematical discourse—the fourth of NCTM's Mathematics Teaching Practices (NCTM 2014, p. 10). To put it succinctly, it is well worth our while to consider how we, as a learning community, talk with our hands.

Prospective Middle School Mathematics Teachers’ Global Argumentation Structures

The aim of the present study was to investigate the nature of global argumentation structures of prospective middle school mathematics teachers in a technology enhanced environment. A qualitative case study was conducted with 8 participants from an Elementary Mathematics Education undergraduate program of one of the public universities in Ankara. Two implementations, 1 of which included 2 geometry tasks on triangles and another which included 2 geometry tasks based on circles, were conducted. Subsequently, global argumentation structures were revealed via data analysis. The findings indicated that the prospective middle school mathematics teachers resort frequently to simple global argumentation structures since their mathematical reasoning was insufficient. On the other hand, technology had a positive impact on argument construction and global argumentation structures of prospective middle school mathematics teachers. However, it was deduced that prospective middle school mathematics teachers need to be challenged on argumentation and about how to facilitate argumentation effectively in their future classroom experiences.

Argue like a scientist with technology: the effect of within-gender versus cross-gender team argumentation on science knowledge and argumentation skills among middle-level students

The purpose of this mixed-methods study was to explore the effect of within-gender and cross-gender team argumentation on seventh graders’ science knowledge and argumentation skills in a computer-assisted learning environment in the United States. A total of 58 students were engaged in the collaborative within-gender team argumentation process (the treatment condition), while 46 students were engaged in the collaborative cross-gender team argumentation process (the control condition). Verbal collaborative argumentation was recorded and the students’ post essays were collected. There were no statistically significant differences in science knowledge between the treatment and control conditions either for the combined set of students, or for females and males considered separately. For the combined set of male and female students, MANOVA indicated no statistically significant within-gender/cross-gender team argumentation differences in argumentation skills. Similarly, no significant within-gender/cross-gender team argumentation differences were observed among females. However, this study found a marginally significant difference in argumentation skills between male students in the within-gender team argumentation (treatment condition) and male students in the cross-gender team argumentation (control condition). A qualitative analysis was conducted to examine how the computer-assisted application supported students’ development of argumentation skills in within-gender and cross-gender team argumentation. Female teams, regardless of within-gender or cross-gender team argumentation, demonstrated balanced participation in the construction of argumentation maps in the application. Male teams in within-gender team argumentation (the treatment condition) demonstrated unbalanced participation in the construction of argumentation maps in the application.

Online memories of 1980s–2000s lifestyle and consumption politics in Greece during the current economic crisis (2009–2015)

Lifestyle media very successfully promoted (conspicuous) consumption as a major referent in the social and cultural convergence between Greece and Western Europe between the mid-1980s and the late 2000s. Perceiving the Internet as a crucial component of the contemporary public sphere where testimonial cultures abound, this article explores how during the current economic crisis particular communities of web users dealt with the breakdown of previous consumer certainties, placing emphasis on the downfall of the lifestyle media industry and on how and why publisher Petros Kostopoulos is discussed as a metonym of this media field. Using comments published below articles about the collapse of lifestyle in popular media and posts in a popular men’s forum, the article examines the uses of contemporary history in the construction of arguments about the origins of the current crisis and explores how the dismantlement of recent consumer utopias echoed questions of Europeanization and often carried traumatic loads.

Validation of Automated Scoring for a Formative Assessment that Employs Scientific Argumentation

ABSTRACTScientific argumentation is one of the core practices for teachers to implement in science classrooms. We developed a computer-based formative assessment to support students’ construction and revision of scientific arguments. The assessment is built upon automated scoring of students’ arguments and provides feedback to students and teachers. Preliminary validity evidence was collected in this study to support the use of automated scoring in this formative assessment. The results showed satisfactory psychometric properties related to this formative assessment. The automated scores showed satisfactory agreement with human scores, but small discrepancies still existed. Automated scores and feedback encouraged students to revise their answers. Students’ scientific argumentation skills improved during the revision process. These findings provided preliminary evident to support the use of automated scoring in the formative assessment to diagnose and enhance students’ argumentation skills in the context of climate change in secondary school science classrooms.

The effects of computerized inquiry‐stage‐dependent argumentation assistance on elementary students' science process and argument construction skills

AbstractThis study proposed a computerized inquiry‐stage‐dependent argumentation assistance and investigated whether this can help improve elementary students' performance in science processes and the construction of quality arguments. Various argumentation assistances were developed and incorporated into each stage of scientific inquiry in a computer‐supported scientific inquiry system. A nonequivalent quasi‐experimental design was adopted to evaluate the effectiveness of this approach. Two intact sixth grade classes (N = 55) participated in this study, and each student used a tablet computer to accomplish the designated inquiry activities. One class of students was arranged to use the stage‐dependent argumentation assistance, and the other used a generic text‐based interface. The findings indicate that students who used the stage‐dependent argumentation assistance could acquire significantly better science process and argument construction skills than those using the generic text‐based interface.

Language as Power: Literary Interpretations of the Qur'an in Early Islam

AbstractHow did pre-modern Muslim exegetes view the mediating role of language in accessing the Qur'an's meaning? What conception of language undergirded their arguments? And what sources of normative authority informed their interpretive canvas? By pursuing this cluster of questions, this essay aims to sketch a picture of the relationship between language and revelation in pre-modern traditions of Qur'an exegesis. More specifically, I conduct a close reading of the Qur'an commentary authored by the prominent Twelver Shi‘i theologian, poet, and historian, al-Sharif al-Radi (d.1015ce). Al-Radi's commentary is a literary exegesis of the Qur'an; in it he presents his concern with ambiguity in the Qur'an and presents language as the hermeneutical key to resolving it. I argue that al-Radi's invocation of varied grammatical rules and his construction of literary arguments were embedded in a particular epistemological and theological conception of the normative relationship between language and revelation. Further, I also interrogate the historically specific conditions and the variety of intellectual currents and vectors (other than sectarian affiliation) that informed al-Radi's hermeneutical choices. By paying close attention to describing the multivalent interpretive traditions that informed al-Radi's Qur'an hermeneutic, this article highlights the conceptual problems attached to the very category of a “Shi‘i Qur'an hermeneutic,” a category that stands authorised through the unsound assumption that sectarian identity and hermeneutical horizons readily correspond in a predictable and seamless fashion. It is precisely this assumption of neat correspondence between sectarian identity and hermeneutical temperament that this essay seeks to challenge and disrupt.

Online Incivility: Exploring from Malaysian Academic Perspective

In the evolving globalization in Malaysia, many organizations employ online communication platform for faster decision making, easier collaboration on assignments and greater recognition of employees for achievement and rewards. However, this additional medium of communication posts a risk of uncivil online comments that can lead to lower unproductively among employees that reduces employees’ well-being and increases organizations costs. Therefore, this paper aims to explore the negative consequences of online incivility, in particular in Malaysia, considering aspect of negative moods as possible mediator in the relationship. In addition, problem solving conflict management styles is also discussed as a social support that may decrease the negative consequences of online incivility based from sound literature review. Plausible hypotheses are also then derived from the constructive arguments. This study is consistent with the objectives of Eleventh Malaysian Plan (2016-2020) and Transformasi Nasional 2050 (TN50) to improve the nations’ well being and productivity from perceiving the positive and work harmony created. In practical, the study can help shape policies and guidelines involving human-technology interaction for the decision makers by incorporating aspects of human psychological well-being that can be affected by technology through the online paradigm.

Derrota y defensa en argumentación rebatible

Los sistemas argumentativos formalizan razonamiento de sentido común mediante la construcción, comparación y evaluación de argumentos a favor o en contra de ciertas afirmaciones. En tales sistemas existen dos nociones centrales: derrota y defensa. En el presente trabajo caracterizan ambas nociones y se discuten algunos desafíos para las caracterizaciones propuestas. Además, se realizan algunos comentarios al respecto.