Eytan Ayalon, President to Mr. Meredith (10 October 1962)

https://egrove.olemiss.edu/mercorr_pro/2115/thumbnail.jp

“Exactly as you see me” (Charmides 153b8): The Function of Narration in Plato's Charmides

Plato’s Charmides is a narrated dialogue. In this paper, I will argue that the literary device of narration plays an interesting and resourceful role in advancing the philosophical aims and ideas presented in the text. In particular, it exposes the inner workings of the souls of the dialogue’s characters, thus enabling us, the readers, to judge whether the inner and outer projections of each character cohere. One of the most important definitions of sophrosune suggested in the Charmides is that moderation is self-knowledge, which is expressed in a strong correlation between what one feels and thinks and their actions. I will argue that the narration of the dialogue aids and exemplifies the philosophical lesson it teaches about sophrosune, even if the suggested definition of the virtue is formally rejected

Can designed student responses support teachers to interact with students in a productive way?

This paper introduces the use of pre-designed student responses to unstructured mathematics problems as a possible resource for teachers to develop their capacity of acting contingently in the mathematics classroom in a productive way, whilst teaching. We frame our argument around the notion that contingent moments can be regarded as problem-situations that are, at times, too demanding for the teacher to effectively solve. We provide an unstructured mathematics problem and accompanying designed student responses to illustrate and explain our thinking, considering how this approach has the potential to help teachers flexibly and productively engage with students’ reasoning in-the-moment of instruction. We end the paper with a call for empirical studies to explore these ideas further

Emergent model for teachers' conceptions of argumentation for mathematics teaching

International audienceIn recent years, there has been a growing appreciation of the importance of incorporating argumentation into the mathematics classroom. Whereas considerable research has been done on argumentation, little has specifically focused on teachers’ conceptions. This paper presents an exploratory study as part of ongoing research into teachers’ conceptions of argumentation for teaching mathematics. Drawing on the literature on argumentation and empirical data, we propose an emergent model, presented as a 5-by-2 construct featuring five types of conceptions across two dimensions: structural and dialogic. This paper illustrates the emergent model at this initial stage of the research using an individual case study of a teacher. The overall aim of the research is to theorize a model that can be used to analyze and characterize teachers’ conceptions of argumentation for teaching mathematics

Crowdsourcing Privacy Design Critique: An Empirical Evaluation of Framing Effects

When designed incorrectly, information systems can thwart people’s expectations of privacy. An emerging technique for evaluating systems during the development stage is the crowdsourcing design critique, in which design evaluations are sourced using crowdsourcing platforms. However, we know that information framing has a serious effect on decision-making and can steer design critiques in one way or another. We investigate how the framing of design cases can influence the outcomes of privacy design critiques. Specifically, we test whether -˜Personas’, a central User-Centered Design tool for describing users, can inspire empathy in users while criticizing privacy designs. In an experiment on Amazon Mechanical Turk workers (n=456), we show that describing design cases by using personas causes intrusive designs to be criticized more harshly. We discuss how our results can be used to enhance privacy-by-design processes and encourage user-centered privacy engineering

Exploring change in secondary mathematics teachers' noticing of argumentation

This study examined changes in secondary mathematics teachers' noticing of argumentation through experiencing a peer assessment cycle. Sixty-one teachers participated in the cycle comprised of (a) analyzing a written argumentative classroom situation (ACS) by using a report format, (b) collaboratively assessing peers' ACS reports using an ACS rubric format, (c) providing feedback to peers, (d) receiving feedback from peers, (e) individually refining the initial ACS reports, and (f) reflecting on their experience. Analysis of teachers' initial and refined ACS reports revealed changes in teachers’ noticing of various dimensions associated with argumentation. The study provides evidence of the potential of the peer assessment process for teachers' learning to notice key aspects of argumentation