Ontological Foundations for Scholarly Debate Mapping Technology

Mapping scholarly debates is an important genre of what can be called Knowledge Domain Analytics (KDA) technology – i.e. technology which combines both quantitative and qualitative methods of analysing specialist knowledge domains. However, current KDA technology research has emerged from diverse traditions and thus lacks a common conceptual foundation. This paper reports on the design of a KDA ontology that aims to provide this foundation. The paper then describes the argumentation extensions to the ontology for supporting scholarly debate mapping as a special form of KDA and demonstrates its expressive capabilities using a case study debate

Knowledge Cartography for Controversies: The Iraq Debate

In analysing controversies and debates—which would include reviewing a literature in order to plan research, or assessing intelligence to formulate policy—there is no one worldview which can be mapped, for instance as a single, coherent concept map. The cartographic challenge is to show which facts are agreed and contested, and the different kinds of narrative links that use facts as evidence to define the nature of the problem, what to do about it, and why. We will use the debate around the invasion of Iraq to demonstrate the methodology of using a knowledge mapping tool to extract key ideas from source materials, in order to classify and connect them within and across a set of perspectives of interest to the analyst. We reflect on the value that this approach adds, and how it relates to other argument mapping approaches

Research on the reasoning, teaching and learning of probability and uncertainty

In this editorial, we set out the aims in the call to publish papers on informal statistical inference, randomness, modelling and risk. We discuss how the papers published in this issue have responded to those aims. In particular, we note how the nine papers contribute to some of the major debates in mathematics and statistics education, often taking contrasting positions. Such debates range across: (1) whether knowledge is fractured or takes the form of mental models; (2) heuristic or intuitive thinking versus operational thinking as for example in dual process theory; (3) the role of different epistemic resources, such as perceptions, modelling, imagery, in the development of probabilistic reasoning; (4) how design and situation impact upon probabilistic learning

+SPACES: Serious Games for Role-Playing Government Policies

The paper explores how role-play simulations can be used to support policy discussion and refinement in virtual worlds. Although the work described is set primarily within the context of policy formulation for government, the lessons learnt are applicable to online learning and collaboration within virtual environments. The paper describes how the +Spaces project is using both 2D and 3D virtual spaces to engage with citizens to explore issues relevant to new government policies. It also focuses on the most challenging part of the project, which is to provide environments that can simulate some of the complexities of real life. Some examples of different approaches to simulation in virtual spaces are provided and the issues associated with them are further examined. We conclude that the use of role-play simulations seem to offer the most benefits in terms of providing a generalizable framework for citizens to engage with real issues arising from future policy decisions. Role-plays have also been shown to be a useful tool for engaging learners in the complexities of real-world issues, often generating insights which would not be possible using more conventional techniques