试论艺术设计学科的设计素描

从设计素描的概念分析出发,通过对绘画素描和设计素描的比较,阐述了结构素描和装饰意味素描的造型规律及所具有的理性化和应用性的特征。     

Conditional inference and advanced mathematical study

Many mathematicians and curriculum bodies have argued in favour of the theory of formal discipline: that studying advanced mathematics develops one’s ability to reason logically. In this paper we explore this view by directly comparing the inferences drawn from abstract conditional statements by advanced mathematics students and well-educated arts students. The mathematics students in the study were found to endorse fewer invalid conditional inferences than the arts students, but they did not endorse significantly more valid inferences. We establish that both groups tended to endorse more inferences which led to negated conclusions than inferences which led to affirmative conclusions (a phenomenon known as the negative conclusion effect). In contrast, however, we demonstrate that, unlike the arts students, the mathematics students did not exhibit the affirmative premise effect: the tendency to endorse more inferences with affirmative premises than with negated premises. We speculate that this latter result may be due to an increased ability for successful mathematics students to be able to ‘see through’ opaque representations. Overall, our data are consistent with a version of the formal discipline view. However, there are important caveats; in particular, we demonstrate that there is no simplistic relationship between the study of advanced mathematics and conditional inference behaviour.

试析亚里士多德对法律推理的贡献

法律推理的产生和发展离不开历代逻辑学家、法学家的努力,其中贡献较多者应数亚里士多德。其形式逻辑为形式法律推理提供了必不可少的工具。同时,他也论及实质法律推理的动因和方法论,并为法律推理提供一个重要的检验标准———公正。     

From social interaction to individual reasoning: an empirical investigation of a possible socio-cultural model of cognitive development

This study explores the theory that individual reasoning ability, as measured using standard reasoning tests, has part of its origin in dialogue with others. In the study, 64 eight- and nine-year-old children were taught the use of ‘exploratory talk’, a type of talk in which joint reasoning is made explicit. The relationship between the talk of the children and the solving of Raven's test problems was studied using discourse analysis of groups working together. The findings of the study support four claims: that use of exploratory talk can improve group reasoning, that exploratory talk can be taught, that the teaching of exploratory talk can successfully transfer between educational contexts and that individual results on a standard non-verbal reasoning test significantly improved as a result of the intervention teaching exploratory talk. Our results offer support for the hypothesis that experience of social reasoning can improve scores on measures of individual reasoning. The stronger hypothesis that general cognitive development is a product of induction into social reasoning remains in doubt.     

基于知识密集型的CBR构件检索方法研究与实现

传统的构件检索方法假定用户的查询需求是清晰且准确的,然而用户往往并不能准确地定义自己的查询需求。本文提出了一种基于知识密集型会话式案例推理的构件检索方法,并重点阐述如何以主动的“询问一应答”方式通过基于知识密集型会话式案例推理方法帮助用户构造增量式查询。实验结果表明：该方法是行之有效的,能够大幅度提高构件的检索效率。     

基于Protege的高考志愿填报本体构建及应用研究

通过分析高考志愿填报难度大、风险大的原因,提出了通过对考生信息的采集、高考成绩标准化处理,使用Prot~g6建立高考志愿填报本体,Jena推理后可以得到匹配考生的高校、专业以及录取概率等信息,不仅缩小了考生主观选择的范围,而且提高了高校及专业志愿选择的针对性。     

Can we measure practical wisdom?

ABSTRACT

Wisdom, long a topic of interest to moral philosophers, is increasingly the focus of social science research. Philosophers have historically been concerned to develop a rationally defensible account of the nature of wisdom and its role in the moral life, often inspired in various ways by virtue theoretical accounts of practical wisdom (phronesis). Wisdom scientists seek to, among other things, define wisdom and its components so that we can measure them. Are the measures used by wisdom scientists actually measuring what philosophers have in mind when they discuss practical wisdom? I argue that they are not. Contemporary measures of wisdom and its components may pick out some necessary prerequisites of practical wisdom, but they do not measure a philosophically plausible practical wisdom or its components. After explaining the argument and defending it against objections, I consider its implications. Should wisdom scientists ignore the philosophical conception of practical wisdom in favor of other conceptions, revise their methods to try to measure it, or continue the interdisciplinary study of practical wisdom without expecting to measure it? I make a preliminary argument for the third option.     

Using the Science Writing Heuristic to Improve Undergraduate Writing in Biology

Our objective was to investigate the impact of the Science Writing Heuristic (SWH) on undergraduates’ ability to express logical conclusions and include appropriate evidence in formal writing assignments. Students in three laboratory sections were randomly allocated to the SWH treatment (n?=?51 students) with another three sections serving as a control (n?=?47 students). All sections received an identical formal writing assignment to report results of laboratory activities. Four blinded raters used a 6-point rating scheme to evaluate the quality of students’ writing performance. Raters’ independent scoring agreement was evaluated using Cronbach's α. Paper scores were compared using a t-test, then papers were combined into low-scoring (3.5 of 6 points) or high-scoring (>3.5 of 6 points) sets and SWH and control cohorts were compared using Pearson's chi-square test. Papers from the SWH cohort were significantly (P?=?0.02) more likely to receive a high score than those from the control cohort. Overall scores of SWH cohort papers tended to be higher (P?=?0.07) than those from the control cohort. Gains in student conceptual understanding elicited by the SWH approach improved student ability to express logical conclusions about their data and include appropriate evidence to support those conclusions in formal research reports. Extending the writing tasks of the SWH to formal writing assignments can improve the ability of undergraduates to argue effectively for their research findings.     

Students' Argumentative Writing Skills in Science and First-Language Education: Commonalities and differences

The ability to build arguments is a crucial skill and a central educational goal in all school subjects including science as it enables students to formulate reasoned opinions and thus to cope with the increasing complexity of knowledge. In the present cross-sectional study, we examined the domain-specificity of argumentative writing in science by comparing it with a rather general type of argumentation as promoted in first-language education and with formal reasoning to gain insight into different forms of argumentation on theoretical and empirical levels. Using a paper-and-pencil test, we analyzed written argumentations and the reasoning abilities of 3,274 Grade-10 students in German secondary schools. Correlation and multiple regression analyses as well as a qualitative analysis of students' answers to a subset of tasks in the domains of science and first-language education were conducted. Results showed moderate relations between argumentation in science, argumentation in first-language education, and reasoning. Half of the variance in argumentation in science was explained by individual differences in argumentation in first-language education and reasoning. Furthermore, the examination of written arguments revealed differences, for example, in students' weighing of pros and cons. We assume that the familiarity of the underlying scientific information may play an essential role in the argumentation process and posit that it needs to be investigated in more detail. Overall, the study indicates that investigating the argumentational abilities of learners in first-language education and reasoning abilities can help to shed light on the domain-specificity of argumentation in science.