- New
-
Topics
- All Categories
- Metaphysics and Epistemology
- Value Theory
- Science, Logic, and Mathematics
- Science, Logic, and Mathematics
- Logic and Philosophy of Logic
- Philosophy of Biology
- Philosophy of Cognitive Science
- Philosophy of Computing and Information
- Philosophy of Mathematics
- Philosophy of Physical Science
- Philosophy of Social Science
- Philosophy of Probability
- General Philosophy of Science
- Philosophy of Science, Misc
- History of Western Philosophy
- Philosophical Traditions
- Philosophy, Misc
- Other Academic Areas
- Journals
- Submit material
- More
Using Argument Diagramming Software in the Classroom
Teaching Philosophy 28 (2):163-177 (2005)
Abstract
Many undergraduates, philosophy majors included, read philosophical texts similar to the way they read stories. One method for teaching students how to discern the argumentative structure of a philosophy text is through argument diagrams (text boxes used to represent claims with arrows and lines used to represent connections between these claims). This paper provides criteria for an ideal argument diagramming software and then reviews the strengths and weaknesses of such software currently available, e.g. Araucaria, Argutect, Athena Standard, Inspiration, and Reason!Able.Author's Profile
Links
PhilArchive
External links
(no proxy)
Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server
Through your library
- Sign in / register and customize your OpenURL resolver
- Configure custom resolver
My notes
Similar books and articles
Using Argument Diagramming Software to Teach Critical Thinking Skills.Maralee Harrell - 2007 - Proceedings of the 5th International Conference on Education and Information Systems, Technologies and Applications 5.
Assessing the Efficacy of Argument Diagramming to Teach Critical Thinking Skills in Introduction to Philosophy.Maralee Harrell - 2012 - Inquiry: Critical Thinking Across the Disciplines 27 (2):31-39.
Free software and the economics of information justice.S. Chopra & S. Dexter - 2011 - Ethics and Information Technology 13 (3):173-184.
Toward a profile of student software piraters.Ronald R. Sims, Hsing K. Cheng & Hildy Teegen - 1996 - Journal of Business Ethics 15 (8):839 - 849.
Dialectics and the macrostructure of arguments: a theory of argument structure.James B. Freeman - 1991 - Berlin ; New York: Foris Publications.
Not all codes are created equal: The software engineering code of ethics, a success story. [REVIEW]Don Gotterbarn - 1999 - Journal of Business Ethics 22 (1):81 - 89.
A bundle of software rights and duties.David M. Douglas - 2011 - Ethics and Information Technology 13 (3):185-197.
Returning students' right to access, choice and notice: a proposed code of ethics for instructors using Turnitin. [REVIEW]Bastiaan Vanacker - 2011 - Ethics and Information Technology 13 (4):327-338.
The Social Disutility of Software Ownership.David M. Douglas - 2011 - Science and Engineering Ethics 17 (3):485-502.
Analytics
Added to PP
2011-01-09
Downloads
415 (#44,922)
6 months
129 (#24,657)
2011-01-09
Downloads
415 (#44,922)
6 months
129 (#24,657)
Historical graph of downloads
Author's Profile
Citations of this work
Araucaria as a Tool for Diagramming Arguments in Teaching and Studying Philosophy .F. Macagno, D. Walton, G. Rowe & C. Reed - 2006 - Teaching Philosophy 29 (2):111-124,.
Teaching Critical Thinking with the Personalized System of Instruction.Javier Hidalgo - forthcoming - Teaching Philosophy.
The Argument Web: an Online Ecosystem of Tools, Systems and Services for Argumentation.Mark Snaith, Alison Pease, John Lawrence, Barbara Konat, Mathilde Janier, Rory Duthie, Katarzyna Budzynska & Chris Reed - 2017 - Philosophy and Technology 30 (2):137-160.
No computer program required: Even pencil-and-paper argument mapping improves critical thinking skills.Mara Harrell - 2008 - Teaching Philosophy 31 (4):351-374.
References found in this work
PhilPapers logo by Andrea Andrews and Meghan Driscoll.
This site uses cookies and Google Analytics (see our terms & conditions for details regarding the privacy implications). Use of this site is subject to terms & conditions.
All rights reserved by The PhilPapers Foundation
Server: philpapers-web-6d9b7f7c4c-sqt28 uwo