Synchronous Online Philosophy Courses: An Experiment in Progress

There are two main ways to teach a course online: synchronously or asynchronously. In an asynchronous course, students can log on at their convenience and do the course work. In a synchronous course, there is a requirement that all students be online at specific times, to allow for a shared course environment. In this article, the author discusses the strengths and weaknesses of synchronous online learning for the teaching of undergraduate philosophy courses. The author discusses specific strategies and technologies he uses in the teaching of online philosophy courses. In particular, the author discusses how he uses videoconferencing to create a classroom-like environment in an online class

ToolSHeD™: The development and evaluation of a decision support tool for health and safety in construction design

Purpose - The purpose of this paper is to describe an innovative information and decision support tool (ToolSHeD(TM)) developed to help construction designers to integrate the management of OHS risk into the design process. The underlying structure of the prototype web-based system and the process of knowledge acquisition and modelling are described. Design/methodology/approach - The ToolSHeD(TM) research and development project involved the capture of expert reasoning regarding design impacts upon occupational health and safety (OHS) risk. This knowledge was structured using an innovative method well-suited to modelling knowledge in the context of uncertainty and discretionary decision-making. Example "argument trees" are presented, representing the reasoning used by a panel of experts to assess the risk of falling from height during roof maintenance work. The advantage of using this method for modelling OHS knowledge, compared to the use of simplistic rules, is discussed. Findings - The ToolSHeD™ prototype development and testing reveals that argument trees can represent design safety risk knowledge effectively. Practical implications - The translation of argument trees into a web-based decision support tool is described and the potential impact of this tool in providing construction designers (architects and engineers) with easy and inexpensive access to expert OHS knowledge is discussed. Originality/value - The paper describes a new computer application, currently undergoing testing in the Australian building and construction industry. Its originality lies in the fact that ToolSHeD(TM) deploys argument trees to represent expert OHS reasoning, overcoming inherent limitations in rule-based expert systems

An Exploratory Study of the Factors That Impact on the Application of Online Learning at the Department of Planning and Infrastructure of Western Australia

There is a growing necessity in today\u27s globalised and dynamic business environments for learning systems to be capable of generating the continuous learning needs of the workforces within them. In adapting to their changing environments learning workers are not only required to continuously gather new information but also to transform it into understanding within their local contexts. Much praise has been placed on the capability of new learning technologies such as online learning in supporting organisations learning processes. However, relative limited research has been undertaken on how these new learning technologies support workers in learning processes, how these new learning technologies are implemented and operate within organisational contexts, and the nature of the learning subsequently generated. This study explores how workplace learning contexts mediate the processes of learning (Garrick, 1998 p.69) and improve understanding on how this affects the implementation of Online learning. Many organisations have promoted Online Learning for its capability in providing a seemingly unlimited information source; flexible access, cost effectiveness and functionality (Schreiber & Berge, 1998). This study suggests that leaning outcomes generated by online learning practices, rather than being primarily correlated with the capabilities of the technology, are mediated by organisations\u27 learning agendas, learning culture and learning context. This exploratory study acknowledges this view and focuses on how the active nature of learners\u27 constructs and the local context in which learning occurs affects the outcomes of learning generated. This study focuses upon a case study at the West Australian Department of Planning and Infrastructure of (DPI) and applies Jonassen\u27s (2000) principle, that the values and beliefs of the forces controlling the technology determines if it is used to transmit or to transform knowledge. The study\u27s parameters are guided by a theoretical framework adapted from McKenna\u27s (1999) Meta-Learning Process and a qualitative methodology protocol described by Yin (1994). The perceptions of a cross section of organisational members at the DPI are used to improve understanding of the mediating relationships involved in the dialects of learning at the DPI. The three main conclusions drawn from the research are that: first, despite the capabilities of the technology to facilitate a range of learning outcomes, the findings indicate that perceived online learning outcomes at the DPI mirror the learning goals imposed by its current organisational learning agenda. Secondly, the findings indicate that local discourses of leadership, culture, structure and strategy reinforce the learning values and beliefs imposed by the learning agenda. Thirdly, the findings indicate that the mediating relationship between learning agenda and the role of online learning technology has prioritised Compliance orientated organisational learning goals and Transmissive learning approaches. In conclusion, the study indicates that the current learning agenda is part of the cultural pattern and a prisoner of that pattern

Civil Procedure as a Critical Discussion

This Article develops a model for analyzing legal dispute resolution systems as systems for argumentation. Our model meshes two theories of argument conceived centuries apart: contemporary argumentation theory and classical stasis theory. In this Article, we apply the model to the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure as a proof of concept. Specifically, the model analyzes how the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure function as a staged argumentative critical discussion designed to permit judge and jury to rationally resolve litigants’ differences in a reasonable manner. At a high level, this critical discussion has three phases: a confrontation, an (extended) opening, and a concluding phase. Those phases are the umbrella under which discrete argumentation phases occur at points we call stases. Whenever litigants seek a ruling or judgment, they reach a stasis—a stopping or standing point for arguing procedural points of disagreement. During these stases, the parties make arguments that fall into predictable “commonplace” argument types. Taken together, these stock argument types form a taxonomy of arguments for all civil cases. Our claim that the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure function as a system for argumentation is novel, as is our claim that civil cases breed a taxonomy of argument types. These claims also mark the beginning of a broader project. Starting here with the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, we embark on a journey that we expect to follow for several years (and which we hope other scholars will join), exploring our model’s application across dispute resolution systems and using it to make normative claims about those systems. From a birds-eye view, this Article also represents a short modern trek in a much longer journey begun by advocates in city states in and near Greece nearly 2500 years ago

In memoriam Douglas N. Walton: the influence of Doug Walton on AI and law

Doug Walton, who died in January 2020, was a prolific author whose work in informal logic and argumentation had a profound influence on Artificial Intelligence, including Artificial Intelligence and Law. He was also very interested in interdisciplinary work, and a frequent and generous collaborator. In this paper seven leading researchers in AI and Law, all past programme chairs of the International Conference on AI and Law who have worked with him, describe his influence on their work

Should Britain leave the EU? An exploration of online argument through a Toulmin perspective

The paper shows how a framework adapted from Toulmin (1958) was valuable in exploring the force of online argument in an educational setting. In past research of online discussions there has been a focus on interaction patterns at the expense of exploring questions of content. In seeking to address this imbalance, we used Toulmin’s key terms of claim, data, warrant, rebuttal and backing in an analysis of an educational network for young learners (13-18) in which a debate on whether Britain should leave the EU was carried out. Drawing on these key terms, a framework was constructed in order to categorise messages as: claims with no force; insufficient argument; constructed argument; forceful argument. This framework was used to unpack the claims and warrants put forward in the course of the debate. The paper shows that Toulmin’s approach can be adapted to provide a feasible and useful framework for assessing the force of argument within forums. However, it is recognised that there are also challenges and limitations in using such an approach

Seeking Harmony over Punishment: Restorative Justice Approaches to Domestic Violence in Islamic and Indonesian Legal Frameworks

Domestic violence in its various forms occured, yet often victims of violence are reluctant to separate from their perpetrators. Reasons such as social, economic, and religious considerations to maintain the household make some victims of domestic violence withdraw their reports and forgive the perpetrators for the sake of household continuity. This research aims to answer what is the perspective of restorarive jastice in Islam and Indonesian national law in domestic violence cases? This research was conducted using a literature research method that explores relevant data in relation to this topic. This research used juridical-normative approach, which then analyzes the data using the concept of restorative justice in Islam and Indonesian national law.The results show that based on the restorative justice system, both in Islam and Indonesian national law, both provide opportunities for perpetrators and victims to restore conflict. The difference is that the concept of restorative justice in Islam emphasizes God's rights and human rights.So that the output can be in the form of victim forgiveness, as well as diyat (fine) sanctions for the perpetrator. Meanwhile, in the restorative justice system of Indonesian state law, it no longer focuses on the concept of imprisonment. Furthermore, this regulation aims for preventive, protective, repressive, and consolidative efforts. This article is limited to an overview of the comparison of restorative justice systems in Islam and Indonesian national law in handling domestic violence cases theoretically.[Kekerasan Dalam Rumah Tangga (KDRT) dalam berbagai bentuknya sering terjadi, namun seringkali korban kekerasan enggan untuk berpisah dengan pelaku. Alasan seperti kebutuhan sosial, ekonomi, dan pertimbangan agama untuk mempertahankan rumah tangga membuat beberapa korban KDRT mencabut laporan mereka dan memaafkan pelaku demi kelangsungan rumah tangga. Penelitian ini bertujuan untuk menjawab bagaimana perspektif restorarive jastice dalam Islam dan hukum nasional Indonesia dalam kasus kekerasan domestik?. Penelitian ini dilakukan dengan menggunakan metode penelitian pustaka yang menggali data relevan sehubungan dengan topik ini. Penelitian ini mengadopsi pendekatan yuridis-normatif secara umum, yang kemudian menganalisis data dengan menggunakan konsep restorative justice dalam Islam dan hukum nasional Indonesia. Hasil penelitian menunjukkan bahwa berdasarkan sistem restorative justice, baik dalam Islam dan hukum nasional Indonesia, sama-sama memberikan kesempatan bagi pelaku dan korban untuk memulihkan konflik. Bedanya, dalam konsep restorative justice Islam lebih menekankan pada hak Tuhan dan Hak manusia. Sehingga outputnya dapat berupa pemaafan korban, maupun sanksi diyat (denda) bagi pelaku. Sedangkan dalam sistem restorative justice hukum negara Indonesia, tidak lagi fokus pada konsep pemenjaraan. Lebih jauh, peraturan ini bertujuan untuk upaya prefentif, protektif, represif, dan konsolidatif. Artikel ini terbatas pada gambaran mengenai perbandingan restorative justice sistem dalam Islam dan hukum nasional Indonesia dalam menangani perkara kekerasan domestik secara teoretis.

Assessing Confidence with Assurance 2.0

An assurance case is intended to provide justifiable confidence in the truth of its top claim, which typically concerns safety or security. A natural question is then "how much" confidence does the case provide? In this report, we explore issues in assessing confidence for assurance cases developed using the rigorous approach we call Assurance 2.0. We argue that confidence cannot be reduced to a single attribute or measurement. Instead, we suggest it should be based on attributes that draw on three different perspectives: positive, negative, and residual doubts. Positive Perspectives consider the extent to which the evidence and overall argument of the case combine to make a positive statement justifying belief in its claims. We set a high bar for justification, requiring it to be indefeasible. The primary positive measure for this is soundness, which interprets the argument as a logical proof and delivers a yes/no measurement. The interior steps of an Assurance 2.0 case can be evaluated as logical axioms, but the evidential steps at the leaves derive logical claims epistemically---from observations or measurements about the system and its environment---and must be treated as premises. Confidence in these can be expressed probabilistically and we use confirmation measures to ensure that the probabilistic "weight" of evidence crosses some threshold. In addition, probabilities can be aggregated from evidence through the steps of the argument using probability logics to yield what we call probabilistic valuations for the claims (in contrast to soundness, which is a logical valuation). The aggregated probability attached to the top claim can be interpreted as a numerical measure of confidence. We apply probabilistic valuations only to sound cases, and this avoids some of the difficulties that attend probabilistic methods that stand alone. The primary uses for probabilistic valuations are with less critical systems, where we trade assurance effort against confidence, and in assessing residual doubts. Negative Perspectives record doubts and challenges to the case, typically expressed as defeaters, and their exploration and resolution. Assurance developers must guard against confirmation bias and should vigorously explore potential defeaters as they develop the case, and should record them and their resolution to avoid rework and to aid reviewers. Residual Doubts: the world is uncertain so not all potential defeaters can be resolved. For example, we may design a system to tolerate two faults and have good reasons and evidence to suppose that is sufficient to cover the exposure on any expected mission. But doubts remain: what if more than two faults do arrive? Here we can explore consequences and likelihoods and thereby assess risk (their product). Some of these residual risks may be unacceptable and thereby prompt a review, but others may be considered acceptable or unavoidable. It is crucial however that these judgments are conscious ones and that they are recorded in the assurance case. This report examines each of these three perspectives in detail and indicates how Clarissa, our prototype toolset for Assurance 2.0, assists in their evaluation

Layers of Dissent: The Meaning of Time Appropriation

Within Critical Management Theory as well as Critical Theory the possibility of individuals resisting taken for granted power asymmetries remains a highly debated subject. Intensified corporate culture programs seem to imply that within the sphere of labor, worker dissent is loosing ground. Based on a large interview material of critical cases, this notion is challenged. The interviewees mainly represent white-collar employees who spend more than half of their working hours on private activities. Studying the objectives and political ambitions behind their extensive recalcitrance reveals a range of intentional structures that result in the same activity: time appropriation. First, time appropriation may be the effect of framed dissent; a dissent intertwined with politically framed indignation. Second, the recalcitrance may spring from direct dissent in which personal indignation is the driving force whereas political formulations are not as prominent. Third, the activity of not doing your work while at work can be the effect of withdrawal in which case there is no motive other than avoiding work. Fourth, time appropriation may also be a (sometimes involuntary) consequence of adjustment: This occurs when the employee does not receive enough work assignments to fill the working day. I conclude by suggesting that the processes and leaps between these layers of dissent should be further studied

A Meta-Analytic Review of Cooperative Learning Practices in Higher Education: A Human Communication Perspective

The phrase cooperative learning refers to a pedagogical learning and teaching technique in use in schools from kindergarten through higher education. The technique involves the structuring of an active classroom environment with students working in groups to discover, solve, and at its basic, provide a framework for dialogue and conversation. Cooperative learning is grounded in the development of a theory of social interdependence (Morton Deutsch) which states that individuals, working in groups, can in most cases provide for greater productivity and ideas than individuals working alone. The development of cooperative learning was greatly expanded in the late 1960’s and early 1970’s with the invention of specific group learning techniques led by researchers David and Robert Johnson (Learning Together), Elliot Aronson (Jigsaw), and Robert Slavin (STAD). These researchers established guidelines (rules) and taxonomies that provided a basis for research in the area of cooperative learning. At the center of all of these techniques is an element of human communication, most often through the oral/aural communication channel, where group learning and discovery takes place. Cooperative learning and collaborative learning techniques differ in the amount and implementation of teaching guidelines required in the methodology. This study (a metaanalysis) weaves through more than 14-hundred published pieces of literature in a variety of disciplines, narrowing it down to 19 published articles which investigate (through experiments) the effectiveness through learning outcomes of cooperative learning in higher education (college and university level). With studies including more than 2-thousand student-participants in the research, data indicates no significant difference between those classrooms utilizing a cooperative learning format, and those using a traditional lecture/discussion format (d =0.05, 95%, C1:-05 to .14, p\u3e.05, k = 21, N = 2,052). Though there is no statistical difference between the two teaching techniques, researchers do offer a list of positive classroom observations/variables, which provides a launching point for future research into the use of cooperative learning techniques in higher education