A Toulmin's Framework-Based Method for Design Argumentation of Cyber-Physical Systems

The design of cyber-physical systems (CPS) is a promising domain, where the data market is expected to soon penetrate. When engineers focus on only a particular part of data (whether intentionally or not) for establishing a design hypothesis, the design hypothesis may also be supported by data sets in the market. Therefore, the validity of such a design hypothesis cannot be evaluated by the data itself, and can only be accepted by the robustness of the logic behind the design argumentation. Although the validation of the design logic is significant, cognitive aspects (which people have spontaneously) disturb the design argumentation reasoning. Therefore, a design method that overcomes the cognitive aspects is indispensable for the CPS designers. This work proposes a CPS design method using the interaction between logic and data sets with a logic visualization tool, and applies the proposed method to the design of a diagnosis system for semiconductor manufacture. The capability of the proposed method is also discussed and analyzed in this paper

A Systematic Review of Argumentation Related to the Engineering-Designed World

Background Across academic disciplines, researchers have found that argumentation‐based pedagogies increase learners\u27 achievement and engagement. Engineering educational researchers and teachers of engineering may benefit from knowledge regarding how argumentation related to engineering has been practiced and studied. Purpose/Hypothesis Drawing from terms and concepts used in national standards for K‐12 education and accreditation requirements for undergraduate engineering education, this study was designed to identify how arguments and argumentation related to the engineering‐designed world were operationalized in relevant literature. Methodology Specified search terms and inclusion criteria were used to identify 117 empirical studies related to engineering argumentation and educational research. A qualitative content analysis was used to identify trends across these studies. Findings Overall, engineering‐related argumentation was associated with a variety of positive learner outcomes. Across many studies, arguments were operationalized in practice as statements regarding whether an existing technology should be adopted in a given context, usually with a limited number of supports (e.g., costs and ethics) provided for each claim. Relatively few studies mentioned empirical practices, such as tests. Most studies did not name the race/ethnicity of participants nor report engineering‐specific outcomes. Conclusions Engineering educators in K‐12 and undergraduate settings can create learning environments in which learners use a range of epistemic practices, including empirical practices, to support a range of claims. Researchers can study engineering‐specific outcomes while specifying relevant demographics of their research participants

Methodology on Trial: The Rhetorical Function of Toulminian Warrants in Expert Testimony

While providing expert testimony in jury trials, scientists face an array of conflicting legal requirements. Expert witnesses must demonstrate the soundness of their scientific methodology, but they must do so with little or no reference to the literature of their field. They must explain advanced scientific concepts while phrasing their explanations as a direct response to a lawyer\u27s question. This project examines the rhetorical strategies expert witnesses utilize as they negotiate these conflicting requirements. Previous studies have examined persuasive discourse created for and by members of an scientific academic discipline, but my study examines how scientists defend their knowledge making practices to public audiences in a highly pressurized, overtly agnostic setting. My study also features a distinctive emphasis on the portions of expert testimony in which expert witnesses describe and defend the scientific methodologies that under-gird the evidence they present to the jury. To analyze these statements, I combine a Toulminian coding system with one developed to analyze assertions of expertise made in non-academic contexts. I identify four distinct challenges expert witnesses face. I then trace the origins of these challenges to differences in the processes through which lawyers and scientists are professionalized. I elucidate the implications these challenges have for our justice system, for the scientific community, and for technical communication scholars

Requirements for IT Security Metrics - an Argumentation Theory Based Approach

The demand for measuring IT security performance is driven by regulatory, financial, and organizational factors. While several best practice metrics have been suggested, we observe a lack of consistent requirements against which IT security metrics can be evaluated. We address this research gap by adopting a methodological approach that is based on argumentation theory and an accompanying literature review. As a result, we derive five key requirements: IT security metrics should be (a) bounded, (b) metrically scaled, (c) reliable, valid and objective, (d) context-specific and (e) computed automatically. We illustrate and discuss the context-specific instantiation of requirements by using the practically used vulnerability scanning coverage and mean-time-to-incident discovery metrics as examples. Finally we summarize further implications of each requirement

2nd ACCESS 2020

2nd ACCESS 202

Reasoning in criminal intelligence analysis through an argumentation theory-based framework

This thesis provides an in-depth analysis of criminal intelligence analysts’ analytical reasoning process and offers an argumentation theory-based framework as a means to support that reasoning process in software applications. Researchers have extensively researched specific areas of criminal intelligence analysts’ sensemaking and reasoning processes over the decades. However, the research is fractured across different research studies and those research studies often have high-level descriptions of how criminal intelligence analysts formulate their rationale (argument). This thesis addresses this gap by offering low level descriptions on how the reasoning-formulation process takes place. It is presented as a single framework, with supporting templates, to inform the software implementation process. Knowledge from nine experienced criminal intelligence analysts from West Midlands Police and Belgium’s Local and Federal Police forces were elicited through a semi-structured interview for study 1 and the Critical Decision Method (CDM), as part of the Cognitive Task Analysis (CTA) approach, was used for study 2 and study 3. The data analysis for study 1 made use of the Qualitative Conventional Content Analysis approach. The data analysis for study 2 made use of a mixed method approach, consisting out of Qualitative Directed Content Analysis and the Emerging Theme Approach. The data analysis for study 3 made use of the Qualitative Directed Content Analysis approach. The results from the three studies along with the concepts from the existing literature informed the construction of the argumentation theory-based framework. The evaluation study for the framework’s components made use of Paper Prototype Testing as a participatory design method over an electronic medium. The low-fidelity prototype was constructed by turning the frameworks’ components into software widgets that resembled widgets on a software application’s toolbar. Eight experienced criminal intelligence analysts from West Midlands Police and Belgium’s Local and Federal Police forces took part in the evaluation study. Participants had to construct their rationale using the available components as part of a simulated robbery crime scenario, which used real anonymised crime data from West Midlands Police force. The evaluation study made use of a Likert scale questionnaire to capture the participant’s views on how the frameworks’ components aided participants with; understanding what was going on in the analysis, lines-of-enquiry and; the changes in their level of confidence pertaining to their rationale. A non-parametric, one sample z-test was used for reporting the statistical results. The significance is at 5% (α=0.05) against a median of 3 for the z-test, where μ =3 represents neutral. The participants reported a positive experience with the framework’s components and results show that the framework’s components aided them with formulating their rationale and understanding how confident they were during different phases of constructing their rationale

A study on digital-based argumentative writing in English of South Korean university students

In higher education in South Korea, English proficiency has been specifically emphasised by the government (Kang, 2015; Kang, 2018; Kim, 2017; Shim & Park, 2008; Williams, 2015). However, writing skills have had little attention in education settings, including higher education institutions (Kim, 2018; Shin, 2018; Park, 2020; Shin & Hyun, 2020; Yu, 2019), despite a series of educational reforms. Students in South Korean higher education are now facing practical and specific needs for argumentative writing in English (Shim, 2016; Shin, 2018). However, the overall context of English education does not fully reflect their real needs (Kim, 2018; Kwon, 2012; Kwak, 2017; Shim, 2016). South Korean universities require their students to reach a specific level at one of the English proficiency tests (Kim, 2018; Ma, 2018; Shim, 2016), most of which include at least one argumentative writing task. Additionally, the certificate of English proficiency test is widely used as the basic skills reference for their career (Kim, 2018). In the meantime, writing proficiency has increasingly gained its own weight in English language tests (Kim, 2018; Ma, 2018; Shin, 2018), adding to the burden on students to develop their writing proficiency (Kim, 2018; Ma, 2018). Despite students’ need for improvement in English writing proficiency, including English argumentative writing, writing courses given by South Korean higher education institutions are still rare (Kim, 2018; Ma, 2018; Shin, 2018; Yu, 2019) and often allow little room for reviewing tasks (Kim, 2018; Ma, 2018; Shim, 2018), even though they commonly use a process-based approach. Furthermore, in immediate response to their needs, higher education institutions in both the public and private sectors have maintained narrow academic attention, focusing on test specific writing skills (Kim, 2018; Shin, 2018). All these situations have resulted in a lack of educational opportunities for students to receive theoretically and systematically well designed instruction in developing their argumentation skills (Shin, 2018). For South Korean students learning English as a foreign language (EFL), argumentative writing in English includes acquiring an understanding of and the skills for both critical thinking and English-specific conventions for the target genre of writing (Ahn & Park, 2019; Choi, 2008; Shim, 2016). To promote a fast and concrete understanding of argumentation in English, representative organisational structures are often used in instructional practices. While many of the courses for English argumentative writing in South Korea are limited to the delivery of instructions, or creating a rough claim-evidence link in a paragraph, this simple formula-based approach may have a limited influence on the level of argumentation that university students in South Korea are able to develop (Choi, 2008). To enhance students’ in-depth knowledge of and skills for making arguments in English, a systematic and effective instructional model is necessary, targeting argumentation development and investigated by rigorous research. However, with a traditionally narrow focus on writing in English education, studies on English writing itself, including argumentative writing, have been limited, despite the importance of this area. As a way of introducing systematically presented models into instruction in English argumentative writing, the Toulmin model can be an effective option. It suggests a detailed, sequenced, intensively explained process for the logical framework for writing in English. In this sense, it is necessary to explore how to modify and apply Toulmin’s components into the courses for English argumentative writing in South Korean higher education. In addition to the practical applicability of the Toulmin model, it is necessary to consider the common context in which writing courses in South Korean higher education institutions provide some phases for drafting and revision/editing, which are broadly anchored in the process-based writing approach. Considering the practical challenge caused by a lack of time for drafting in writing courses (Kim, 2018; Ma, 2018; Shim, 2018), online based classes can be a better option, enabling more flexibility in time and space. Even before the Covid-19 outbreak, diverse synchronous and asynchronous digital writing environments have been utilised in the field of higher education in South Korea to enhance students’ writing performance and also increase the connectivity between learners and teachers. However, the digital environments for English writing in South Korea are still based on a lack of rigour in terms of research evidence, which signals the need for more research into how best to develop digital writing platforms and incorporate necessary support for users. With the two main areas of English argumentative writing and digital learning environments for writing combined, this study explores the effectiveness of a digital-based argumentative writing course in South Korea, as well as the pedagogical implications. To investigate the effects of digital course development for instruction in English argumentative writing for university students in South Korea and derive insights in digital course design for English argumentative writing for university students in South Korea, this study used a sequential mixed-methods design: quantitative phase followed by qualitative phase for collection and analysis of data sets. The English argumentative writing course in this study applies the Toulmin model (1958; 2003) as a specific teaching strategy, with a cycle of drafting and exchanging feedback using the process-based writing approach. To provide the online group with a digital-based collaborative writing1 environment for feedback exchanges, the writing platform, Scholar, was used. In this study, 43 undergraduate students in South Korea participated in a writing course for one semester, 22 participants in a control group (offline course) and 21 participants in an intervention group (online course). They participated in pre- and post-writing tests, two sessions of interviews, and narrative writing for reflection. Also, ten university teaching staff and e-developers took part in one individual interview session each, to provide professional views on the online instructional design that is implemented in the English argumentative writing of this study. In terms of the effectiveness of the online writing course for developing argumentation skills in English, the findings from the quantitative analysis show both online and offline courses had a positive impact on improvement and retention. Although the statistical results present no indication that the online class had higher learning gains than the offline group by any significant difference, this result is supported by the findings from the qualitative analysis, which indicates that the online group performed better in terms of the quality and the quantity of peer feedback. In addition, the findings from the qualitative analysis suggest that the writing course in this study helped students to develop their knowledge and sensitivity in argumentation in English, and the online course facilitated enhanced engagement in feedback tasks. Moreover, despite recognising the value of face-to-face interaction for English argumentative writing, the qualitative findings suggest that the anonymity and convenience of the online writing course in this study encouraged participation in feedback. Finally, the findings from teaching staff and e-developer interviews reveal generally positive perceptions of and evaluations of the usefulness and applicability of the Toulmin model for English argumentation development, and the collaborative writing environment of Scholar. ( 1. In this study, the term, ‘collaborative writing,’ means individual student’s essay writing supported by external feedback, including peer and teacher feedback, not co-authorship in writing one shared essay together.

Unravelling the Influence of Online Social Context on Consumer Health Information Technology (CHIT) Implementations

While health information technology research has examined a variety of topics (e.g., adoption and assimilation of technology within healthcare organizations, critical success factors), it has remained unclear how the uniqueness of the online context (e.g., users connecting with strangers for social and emotional support) influences consumer health information technology (CHIT) implementations. Towards this goal, this dissertation examines the influence of online social context on CHIT implementations and outcomes. Using theories from social psychology, this dissertation encompasses two empirical research essays. The first essay draws on the environmental enrichment concept to examine the influential role of the online social context of a gamified CHIT on its success. By surveying existing fitness technology users, we demonstrate the influence of the social context enabled by CHITs on behavioral adherence to exercise. The second essay draws on construal level theory to examine the influence of textual information (such as race, geographic location) in online patient communities on a user’s trust of the community and the system as well as their intentions to participate in them. Using randomized experiments, we identify some of the propinquity-related factors that influence a user’s trust in online patient communities. The key contribution of this dissertation is the advancement of our understanding of the important role played by the social context enabled by the CHITs