This is the continuation of my coding vs. argumentation debate. Argumentation requires that those involved consider more than their own positions. The capacity to recognize the reasons and rationale for competing positions is required and represents a developmental advance in reasoning/critical thinking.
Argumentation requires that those involved consider more than their own positions. The capacity to recognize the reasons and rationale for competing positions is required and represents a developmental advance in reasoning/critical thinking.
Reasons:
Reasons to support coding
- Programming is an important vocational skill
- Coding is a way to gain greater insight into how technology works
- Computational thinking transfers
Reasons to support argumentation
- Capacity to analyze reasons and evidence essential when multiple information sources must be evaluated
- Process of science involves reasoning from evidence
- Argumentation is a productive social process increasing understanding when positions differ
The identification of reasons is just the beginning. While reasons are not always identified, the validity of a reason must be established.
As my example advances and I try to do my best to take both competing positions, things get even more challenging. This would not typically be a requirement of a classroom exercise, but I am taking on this challenge to provide a more realistic example. I do have a personal opinion regarding the strength of these two positions (given my challenge that schools take on one addition to the curriculum or the other). I would certainly welcome additions if you feel your own position has been slighted.
What must be established:
Is there evidence to support a reason? What is the evidence?
When is one reason superior to another? What can be claimed to dispute the weight of a reason?
More to come.
