Identifying Kinds of Reasoning in Collective Argumentation
Identifying Kinds of Reasoning in Collective Argumentation
复制标题
识别集体论证中的推理类型
DOI：
10.1080/10986065.2014.921131
复制
发表时间：
2014
影响因子：
1.6
通讯作者：
Richard T. Francisco
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
AnnaMarie Conner;Laura Singletary;Ryan C. Smith;Patty Anne Wagner;Richard T. Francisco
我们结合联合收割机皮尔士的规则，情况下，和图尔明的数据，索赔，并保证区分演绎，归纳，溯因推理和类比推理集体论证。在这篇理论文章中，我们用一位教师的实践例子来说明集体论证中的这些推理。在集体论证中检查不同类型的推理可以告知学生如何使用归纳和溯因推理来生成和检查假设，并向证明所需的演绎推理迈进。数学教育工作者可以建立在他们对这些类型的推理的理解，以支持学生在推理的生产方式。
We combine Peirce’s rule, case, and result with Toulmin’s data, claim, and warrant to differentiate between deductive, inductive, abductive, and analogical reasoning within collective argumentation. In this theoretical article, we illustrate these kinds of reasoning in episodes of collective argumentation using examples from one teacher’s practice. Examining different kinds of reasoning in collective argumentation can inform how students engage in generating and examining hypotheses using inductive and abductive reasoning and move toward the deductive reasoning required for proof. Mathematics educators can build on their understanding of these kinds of reasoning to support students in reasoning in productive ways.