Academia.edu no longer supports Internet Explorer.
To browse Academia.edu and the wider internet faster and more securely, please take a few seconds to upgrade your browser.
More and more we hear the complaint that the gap between research and instruction is widening and a vital sense of motivation is falling between the cracks. It is our vision that intelligent computing systems will become a partner in the reintegration of discovery and learning within the inquiry process. We will address certain issues that must be faced if computer media are to have the characteristics necessary to support this integration. The development of the computer to date has required a careful attention to the syntax and semantics of the rather limited symbol systems we have induced them to use. A capacity for communicating in multiple modalities with non-uniform communities of symbol users — for sharing in the discovery of a pluralistic universe — will demand a quantum leap in our understanding of the pragmatic dimensions of symbol use. In the future the capacity for inquiry must permeate the living architecture of the computer system. A computer program that begins to embody these ideas will be discussed.
If computer programs were smarter, they would, like people, recognize sequences of events, form models of their environment, and formulate rules based on experience. This paper describes the development of a program designed to address the difficult computational problems involved in integrating the inductive and deductive reasoning necessary to perform such tasks. “Theme One” is a prototype program composed of “Index”, a learning algorithm for sequential data, and “Study”, an algorithm for building logical models. The project goal is an interactive research tool that assists students and investigators in the exploration of qualitative data using artificial intelligence.
" Knowing what the students know " recently has become the guiding principle of cognitive-based assessment. In the past, the process of assessment was built around a form of quasi-deductive reasoning, in which test developers deduced items from certain premises, the blue print or the objective list. In this paper, the author(s) discuss how abductive reasoning contributes to cognitive-based assessment in three routes. First, knowing alternative explanations is essential in understanding different levels of conceptions and misconceptions in order to develop the constructs being measured. Second, converse reasoning or reverse engineering applied in an abductive fashion is employed to retrospectively build the student's mental model based on the end product. Third, analogical reasoning in the abductive reasoning mode is indispensable for cognitive modeling. ÖZ. Geçmite eitsel deerlendirme süreci yarı-tümdengelim uslamlaması (quasi-deductive reasoning) yaklaımına dayanmakta iken, günümüzde, özellikle eitsel deerlendirmenin geleceine ilikin olarak, " örencilerin ne bildiklerini örenmek " olgusu bilisel temelli deerlendirmeye yön vermektedir. Bu makalede, bilisel temelli deerlendirmeye çıkarımsal uslamlama (abductive reasoning) yaklaımının üç temel açıdan nasıl kaktı saladıı tartıılacaktır. lk olarak, ölçülen yapıları tam olarak anlamak için farklı düzeylerdeki doru ve yanlı algılamaları ortaya koymada alternatif açıklamalar göz önüne alınacaktır. kincisi, çıkarımsal uslamlama (abductive reasoning) yaklaımına uygulanan tersine uslamlama açıklanacak ve üçüncüsü, çıkarımsal uslamlama (abductive reasoning) yaklaımında analojik çıkarsama (analogical reasoning) tartıılacaktır. Anahtar Sözcükler: Eitsel deerlendirme, çıkarımsal uslamlama, bilisel temelli deerlendirme Since the National Research Council (NRC; 2004) released its report regarding the future of educational assessment, the phrase " knowing what the students know " has become the guiding principle of cognitive-based assessment. In the past, the process of assessment was built around a form of quasi-deductive reasoning, in which test developers " deduced " items from certain " premises, " namely, the blueprint or the objective list. This kind of assessment is a " top-down " approach in the sense that it emphasizes mostly on what the test developers think students should know. One of the common criticisms against exam-based assessment is that exam items are often irrelevant to practical applications in the real world. This problem is especially clear with exams that stress memorization of details and rote learning. Another common pitfall of exam-based assessment is that teachers are interested in using test scores as a screening tool, or a " showroom " of performance. On the student side, the objective of test-taking is gaining a good grade, rather than obtaining feedback for improvement. At the teacher end, the curriculum is tailored to conform to testing requirements. This phenomenon is often known as teaching to the test. In some extreme cases, teaching to the test can become teaching the test, where teachers learn the specific test items that assess various objectives, and teach those test items only (Ladner & Stone, 2007). This type of top-down approach, which draws teachers' attention to map objectives to exam items, has been questioned by many psychometrcians, such as Robert Mislevy.
Inquiry: Critical Thinking Across the Disciplines, 1995
“We hope you will find these thoughts of ours both interesting and useful.” These are words spoken to express an intention, a bearing in the mind of a person toward an object which is yet to be achieved. The readiest moment of human life involves the interplay of signs, ideas, and objects — more explicitly, the interrelation of signifying expressions, states and dispositions of the mind or person, and objects or objectives either actual or potential. Our work designing instruments to enhance the play of inquiry has attuned us to the themes of interpretation and intentionality which every inquiry seems to involve. We hear what sounds like familiar strains reaching us from the hermeneutic quarter. The purpose of this essay is to trace to their sources a few of these potentially common themes, to draw out one line of their historical development, and to gather what consequences they inspire for educational practice and continued inquiry.
Evaluation is afflicted by a number of ethical and methodological problems. A major problem is the difficulty evaluation has in maintaining itself as an independent, autonomous discipline. An answer to these problems is often sought by recourse to the more structured field of research, even though the canonical logic of research and its criteria are not suitable for most work in which evaluation as a discipline is required. A possible solution for this dilemma can be found in the work of the American philosopher Charles Sanders Peirce. According to Peirce, the decision to adopt a new hypothesis by a scientist, researcher or, for our purposes, evaluator is as logical a process as deduction or induction. Peirce calls this process ‘abduction’. The evaluator, much like the scientist working through a process of discovery, raises hypotheses that stem from the field being evaluated. By adopting Peirce’s methods we can build a logical methodological framework for the process of evaluation. Such a methodology can then provide criteria similar to those used for research, but without losing the unique approach provided by the discipline of evaluation. KEYWORDS: program evaluation; deduction; evaluation hypotheses; induction; retroduction; validity
Harvard Law Review, 1996
Reasoning by analogy is one of the most frequently used techniques of legal argument. In this Article, Professor Brewer presents a detailed model of that reasoning process. With its focus on the special features of analogies that are offered as justificatory arguments, Professor Brewer's model provides clear criteria that lawyers, judges, students, and scholars can use critically to assess any given argument by analogy. Moreover, challenging a widely held view, Professor Brewer uses this model to argue that legal reasoning by analogy, like analogical argument in logic, mathematics, and the natural sciences, can have a great deal of rational force when properly executed. He explains that reasoning by analogy is a three-step rule-guided process that legal reasoners typically deploy when they are in doubt about the scope of a legal concept or rule and want to use an analysis of examples to help resolve that doubt. The three-step process consists of an inference (of the type known as "abduction") from chosen examples to a rule that could resolve the doubt; confirmation or disconfirmation, by a process of reflective adjustment, of the rule thus inferred; and application of the confirmed rule to the case that occasioned the doubt. Professor Brewer also highlights the interpretive criteria that readers of analogical arguments should use in trying to understand their exact structure and content. He maintains, for example, that analogical arguments offered by judges who endorse certain widely shared rule of law values should presumptively be interpreted as relying in a special way on deductively applicable rules within the broader three-step analogical reasoning process. His discussion locates issues regarding the proper interpretation of legal analogies within broader jurisprudential debates over the extent to which legal arguments can, do, and should satisfy rule of law values.
New ICMI Study Series, 2011
This book is a revised and edited version of my doctoral dissertation from 2006. The dissertation has not been easily available (except for the introductory part), which is one reason for the republication. Besides that, I have updated and made additions, which hopefully have improved the book. The first three chapters of this book (Introduction, and Chapters 1 and 2) are modified on the basis of the “Introductory essay” of my dissertation. Even though I was myself quite convinced that I had covered the main literature on the history of Peircean abduction already there, in fact since 2006 new material on abduction is appearing all the time. New remarks on the history of abduction have been added to these introductory chapters. Besides classics (like R. K. Merton, and G. Bateson), additions deal especially with methodological perspectives on abduction in relation to issues like grounded theory, or the role of abduction inbetween theory and data, or remarks on Darwin’s abductive methodology. Chapters 3 till 8 are journal articles published in my dissertation. I have added two new chapters (Chapters 9 and 10) which supplement my initial interpretations of abduction. A subject index and a name index have also been inserted. See: https://www.morebooks.de/store/gb/book/on-the-origin-of-ideas/isbn/978-3-8484-0703-3
Electronic Journal of Business …, 2010
Poznań Reasoning Week 2016, 2016
PRE WORKSHOP PROCEEDINGS, 2009
Acis 2012 Location Location Location Proceedings of the 23rd Australasian Conference on Information Systems 2012, 2012
HOPOS: The Journal of the International Society for the History and Philosophy of Science, 2011
Mind & Society, 2002
in Epistemology, Knowledge, and the Impact of Interaction, ed. by Juan Redmond, Angel Nepomuceno Fernàndez and Olga Pombo
Minds and Machines, 2004
Pharmaceutical Research, 2009
Sociological Theory, 2012
Semiotics and Intelligent Systems Development, 2007
Decision Sciences, 2009
Contemporary Pragmatism, 2013
World Futures, 2009
The Journal of Mathematical Behavior, 2007