Computer-assisted argument mapping: a rationale approach

Abstract

Computer-Assisted Argument Mapping (CAAM) is a new way of understanding arguments. While still embryonic in its development and application, CAAM is being used increasingly as a training and development tool in the professions and government. Inroads are also being made in its application within education. CAAM claims to be helpful in an educational context, as a tool for students in responding to assessment tasks. However, to date there is little evidence from students that this is the case. This paper outlines the use of CAAM as an educational tool within an Economics and Commerce Faculty in a major Australian research university. Evaluation results are provided from students from a CAAM pilot within an upper-level Economics subject. Results indicate promising support for the use of CAAM and its potential for transferability within the disciplines. If shown to be valuable with further studies, CAAM could be included in capstone subjects, allowing computer technology to be utilised in the service of generic skill development.

Developing Misinformation Immunity: How to Reason-Check Fallacious News in a Human–Computer Interaction Environment

“…Although not addressing the fake news phenomenon, digital tools have been built by the scholarly community to enhance critical thinking through argumentation. More specifically, various computer software packages (e.g., Araucaria , Reed & Rowe, 2004; iLogos , Harrell, 2008; Rationale , Martin Davies, 2009; ter Berg et al, 2013) have been created to support argument mapping through visualizations. The educational efficacy of the argument mapping software Rationale has been tested across domains ranging from English as a Foreign Language Context (Eftekhari et al, 2016) to business education (Kunsch et al, 2014).…”

Digital Tools for Written Argumentation

“…Though the justification of the design and prescribed uses of Rationale are explicitly founded on research on the benefits of computer-aided argument mapping (Davies, 2009;van Gelder, 2007), much of the research using Rationale does not aim to look at the particular mediating effects of Rationale's specific devices and their affordances. Rather, it exploits artifacts and traces to examine the effects of computer-aided argument mapping in general on thinking and writing (Lengbeyer, 2014;Maftoon et al, 2014).…”