Preparing the books to read every day is enjoyable for many people. However, there are still many people who also don't like reading. This is a problem. But, when you can support others to start reading, it will be better. One of the books that can be recommended for new readers is experience and education. This book is not kind of difficult book to read. It can be read and understand by the new readers.

Experience and Education.

Critical Thinking and Education

http://www.fitelson.org/few/few_08/lombrozo_reading.pdf

The structure and function of explanations.

Theoretical and empirical research on argument and argumentation in science education has intensified over the last two decades. The term “argument” in this review refers to the artifacts that a student or a group of students create when asked to articulate and justify claims or explanations whereas the term “argumentation” refers to the process of constructing these artifacts. The intent of this review is to provide an overview of several analytic frameworks that science educators use to assess and characterize the nature of or quality of scientific arguments in terms of three focal issues: structure, justification, and content. To highlight the foci, affordances, and constraints of these different analytic methods, the review of each framework includes an analysis of a sample argument. The review concludes with a synthesis of the three focal issues and outlines several recommendations for future work. Ultimately, this examination and synthesis of these frameworks in terms of how each conceptualizes argument structure, justification, and content is intended to provide a theoretical foundation for future research on argument in science education. © 2008 Wiley Periodicals, Inc. Sci Ed92:447–472, 2008

https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/pdf/10.1002/sce.20276

Assessment of the ways students generate arguments in science education: Current perspectives and recommendations for future directions

The flipped classroom has been recognized by educators as an innovative and effective instructional approach. It totally overthrows traditional instruction by switching in-class instruction time with at-home practicing time. While the effectiveness of the flipped room has been identified, the challenges of applying it to school settings have also been pointed out, such as the need for effective in-class learning designs and the necessity of helping students learn across at-home and in-school contexts. In this paper, the challenges as well as the definition, characteristics, and educational objectives of flipped learning are introduced; moreover, the seamless flipped learning model is proposed by integrating the features of mobile and wireless communication technologies into the flipped classroom model to provide a guide for researchers and educators to develop effective flipped learning activities and plans for helping students learn seamlessly across contexts.

/pdf/seamless-flipped-learning-a-mobile-technology-enhanced-mdwizun6gi.pdf

Seamless flipped learning: a mobile technology-enhanced flipped classroom with effective learning strategies

Informal reasoning fallacies are violations of critical discussion norms. As epistemological understanding of knowledge justification appears to underlie the informal reasoning skills of argument construction and evaluation, it was hypothesized that adolescents with greater epistemological sophistication would be more able to identify informal reasoning fallacies. It was hypothesized that 11th graders would be more epistemologically sophisticated than 7th or 9th graders and, thus, would more likely identify fallacies. Students responded to questions regarding argument scenarios that did or did not contain fallacies. More 11th graders identified fallacies. Epistemological level predicted only identification of one type of fallacy that might be described as epistemological in nature. Cognitive ability also seemed to contribute to the increased ability with grade to identify fallacies.

Identification of Informal Reasoning Fallacies as a Function of Epistemological Level, Grade Level, and Cognitive Ability.

Argumentative activity has been found beneficial for knowledge building and evaluation of information in some conditions. Many CSCL theorists have suggested that graphical representations may help in this endeavor. In the present study we examine effects of a graphical representation of synchronous discussions. 54 Grade 7 students from 2 classes participated. The study tested the effects of: (a) the use of shapes representing some argumentative functions in discussions and the use of arrows representing support/challenge between utterances; (b) the use of floor control to monitor turn taking during discussion. It appears that the combination of use of shapes and arrows and of the control over turn taking invites students to express more relevant claims and arguments, and less chat expressions.

The role of floor control and of ontology in argumentative activities with discussion-based tools

Background. Studies on argument have found that participants tend to prefer explanations to evidence. This apparent bias toward explanation has been qualified recently by research that has found it to diminish with the availability of evidence.



Aim. This study examines the use of explanation versus evidence in the context of argumentation with reference to the goals of particular argument situations.



Sample. Seventy-nine eighth-grade pupils at a regular, urban middle school.



Method. The pupils read argumentation scenarios, each having the stated goal of either explaining or proving a claim. The pupils rated the degree to which each of two provided assertions (one a theoretical explanation, and the other evidence-based) helped achieve the goal of the argument. On a second task, the pupils chose which of the two assertions should be more effective in achieving the argument goal. On the third task, the pupils generated either an explanation or evidence for each of the argumentation scenarios.



Results. Pupils demonstrated sensitivity to the relative epistemic strength of explanation and evidence. They rated explanations as more advantageous in achieving the explanation goal, and evidence as more advantageous in achieving the proof goal. Conversely, however, when asked to generate or recall an explanation or evidence, pupils produced more explanations than evidence independent of the argumentation goal.



Conclusions. The study refines the definition of argumentation context to include specific goals. Pupils were sensitive to the context of the argumentation situation (e.g. goals, availability of evidence). However, they appeared to have a disposition toward explanation when asked to produce an explanation or evidence-based justification.

Pupils' evaluation and generation of evidence and explanation in argumentation.

What stands and develops between creative and critical thinking? Argumentation?

Traditionally, we define a literate person as somebody who knows how to read, write and calculate. In other words, the literate person is able to handle the signs and symbols used by the society in which she lives. However, this definition is fuzzy. What do we mean by knowing how to read? Do we mean knowing how to decipher the meaning of canonical texts that teachers have themselves constructed or accepted from people who have been invested the authority to give the exact meaning of texts (writers of teaching materials for example)? Indeed, teachers’ written guides often give pedagogical advice how to analyze texts, to extract the main idea: the role of the reader is then to reconstruct a meaning (see Kintsch’s situation model, 1986). Also, when students analyze a text, their objective is generally not more than to comply with the demands of a curriculum, that is (in general) to master skills. However, while literacy definitely involves analytical skills, confining it to a series of skills is far too restricted, and puts aside contextual factors in literacy. As noticed by Olson (1994), in opposition to children’s oral propensity to identify speech acts in conversation, when interpreting written signs they have difficulties to identify their illocutionary force. In other words, children may have difficulties in reading partly because they don’t know for which purpose the texts with which they are presented with were written. The approach to literacy we adopt here conveys the versatility that any literate human must exhibit, to be able to communicate actions through different modes and to negotiate them. This practically means that the literate human should express actions in various modes such as reading or writing, with flexible motives such as clarifying an issue, presenting, demonstrating, defending, or convincing.

Amnon Glassner

Papers

Identification of Informal Reasoning Fallacies as a Function of Epistemological Level, Grade Level, and Cognitive Ability.

The role of floor control and of ontology in argumentative activities with discussion-based tools

Pupils' evaluation and generation of evidence and explanation in argumentation.

What stands and develops between creative and critical thinking? Argumentation?

The Blind and the Paralytic: Supporting argumentation in Everyday and Scientific Issues