2019Unpublished venueRequires access

논증 교육에서 전제의 재개념화 및 백워드 설계 기반 ‘전제 탐구’ 단원 개발

유상희

Open publisher page 0 citations

Abstract

The purpose of this study was to reconceptualize ‘warrant’ for the teaching and learning of argumentation and to develop a ‘warrant unit’ using a backward design model. Based on previous discussions about warrant in argumentation, this study conceptualizes warrant as underlying assumptions that an arguer uses to draw an argument (conclusion) from evidence. In particular, this study extends the element of warrant to include not only commonly shared principles but also possibly subjective values and beliefs. Drawing on the three steps of the backward design model, this study developed the warrant unit: confirming desired results, determining assessment evidence, and planing instruction. We expect the study to have the following effects. First, it contributes to rethinking the possibility and meaning of teaching and learning of warrant in argumentation education. In Korean education, warrant is often regarded as an element that is largely shared and can be easily omitted. Although this may be true, teaching the element of warrant could help students to examine logical connections between claim and evidence and explore possible disputes between different warrants. In addition, warrant instruction could help students to examine their own underlying assumptions and those of others and to interact with people who might have different assumptions. Considering our globalized society, which is filled with conflicting assumptions, the teaching and learning of warrants are remarkably valuable.

About this research paper

What this paper is about

The purpose of this study was to reconceptualize ‘warrant’ for the teaching and learning of argumentation and to develop a ‘warrant unit’ using a backward design model. Based on previous discussions about warrant in argumentation, this study conceptualizes warrant as underlying assumptions that an arguer uses to draw an argument (conclusion) from evidence. In particular, this study extends the element of warrant to include not only commonly shared principles but also possibly subjective values and beliefs. Drawing on the three steps of the backward design model, this study developed the warrant unit: confirming desired results, determining assessment evidence, and planing instruction. We expect the study to have the following effects. First, it contributes to rethinking the possibility and meaning of teaching and learning of warrant in argumentation education. In Korean education, warrant is often regarded as an element that is largely shared and can be easily omitted. Although this may be true, teaching the element of warrant could help students to examine logical connections between claim and evidence and explore possible disputes between different warrants. In addition, warrant instruction could help students to examine their own underlying assumptions and those of others and to interact with people who might have different assumptions. Considering our globalized society, which is filled with conflicting assumptions, the teaching and learning of warrants are remarkably valuable.

Why it matters

A significance statement is not available in the OpenAlex record.

Key contribution

A contribution statement is not available in the OpenAlex record.

Method / approach

Method details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Main findings

Findings are not separately available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Limitations

Limitations are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Applications

Application details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Available abstract

The purpose of this study was to reconceptualize ‘warrant’ for the teaching and learning of argumentation and to develop a ‘warrant unit’ using a backward design model. Based on previous discussions about warrant in argumentation, this study conceptualizes warrant as underlying assumptions that an arguer uses to draw an argument (conclusion) from evidence. In particular, this study extends the element of warrant to include not only commonly shared principles but also possibly subjective values and beliefs. Drawing on the three steps of the backward design model, this study developed the warrant unit: confirming desired results, determining assessment evidence, and planing instruction. We expect the study to have the following effects. First, it contributes to rethinking the possibility and meaning of teaching and learning of warrant in argumentation education. In Korean education, warrant is often regarded as an element that is largely shared and can be easily omitted. Although this may be true, teaching the element of warrant could help students to examine logical connections between claim and evidence and explore possible disputes between different warrants. In addition, warrant instruction could help students to examine their own underlying assumptions and those of others and to interact with people who might have different assumptions. Considering our globalized society, which is filled with conflicting assumptions, the teaching and learning of warrants are remarkably valuable.

Key concepts: Warrant, Argumentation theory, Element (criminal law), Meaning (existential), Argument (complex analysis), Epistemology, Psychology, Political science

Back to paper searchBrowse research topicsOriginal source
논증 교육에서 전제의 재개념화 및 백워드 설계 기반 ‘전제 탐구’ 단원 개발 — Research Paper | ScholarLens