Search results

This paper aims to describe the statistical arguments produced by third-grade students (8–9 years old) and to identify the teaching support for collective argumentation in a lesson based on data comparison. A Lesson Study Group researched and planned the lesson around a problem from the official mathematics textbook.

From an interpretative perspective, we have analysed the arguments produced by students in a situation where they should give reasons to support or refute some claims based on data analysis. We looked at how some teaching support strategies promoted collective argumentation.

The strategies outlined in the lesson plan enabled the teacher to foster collective argumentation, encouraging students to provide reasoning based on data analysis. The lesson plan served as a means of improving the context presented in the textbook, guiding the development of well-structured teaching, and promoting high-quality teaching practices.

One of the limitations, and future lines of research by the LSG is the deepening of teachers' understanding of the support required for CA in their classrooms so that they can distinguish the components of an argument and their role in and interpretation of the effectiveness of the arguments. In addition, the lesson plan did not consider in depth aspects such as the argumentative processes of the students, nor did it implement specific actions to promote argumentation. Addressing these limitations would be interesting and is necessary, considering that teachers still do not understand the key role of argumentation in learning and that the mastery of CA strategies is still a challenge for initial teacher training and for professional development programs for teachers.

For research purposes, evidence is presented of the types of teacher support in collective argumentation in a comparative task of two dot plots. For teaching purposes, these types of support can be pointed out within Lesson Study Groups and included in lesson plans, allowing discussions and base-data argumentation.

The research has social implications in civic development, educational inclusion, and adaptation to technological and pandemic changes, with a focus on inferential statistical reasoning and the crucial role of the teacher in facilitating collective argumentation in the online school classroom.

The study enriches knowledge about the potential of Lesson Study and the possibilities of planned online lessons to develop professional learning on collective argumentation with data, as exemplary teaching practices that should be widely shared.

This paper is intended as an original contribution to researching ESG from a PR perspective, as well as offering a case study of the use of letters as a mode of corporate communication.

The methodology is interdisciplinary but is centred on a critical discourse analysis of the organizational rhetoric on ESG in the annual letters of BlackRock CEO Larry Fink from 2018 to 2023. The article also considers the content of the BlackRock letters alongside the campaign rhetoric deployed by opponents to ESG over the same period.

The analysis of the letters showed up a difference in tempo and tone between the courteous, collaborative and somewhat “corporate” style of text in the Fink letters and the more urgent and confrontational tone of opponents that adopted a populist line of argumentation against ESG in general and Larry Fink and BlackRock in particular.

While advantages can accrue to CEOs and corporations for speaking out on issues, there are also perils awaiting in the contemporary environment for opinion. The findings suggest it is also important to gauge the intensity of cultural and political division in society when speaking out on contentious issues and make a judgement on whether to proceed based on that analysis. Moreover, in countries where the middle ground of public opinion has eroded, ideology and cultural affiliations can prevail instead of openness to argument and counter-argument on topics such as climate change.

The paper presents a fresh case study of a CEO who has been prominent in shaping the discourse on ESG, which has itself become is a matter of contemporary relevance to public relations. The findings offer original insights that are additive to existing guidance and criteria for CEOs deciding to speak out on issues on behalf of their organizations.

All four propositions, assumptions (A), presumptions (P), suppositions (S), and presuppositions (PS), are, in general, part of human language and its usage, usually studied under the domain of linguistics. Critical thinking, as we understand in these volumes, is critical analysis of human language and its linguistics and narratives and arguments, which freely or spontaneously use A, P, S, and PS. These in turn are composed of signs, symbols (e.g., the alphabet) that bear meanings (semantics), messages and information (informatics), and motivation and persuasion via argumentation (pragmatics). We elaborate on these in this appendix.

Our major thesis here is the epistemological quasi necessity of A, P, S, and PS, which we freely and spontaneously use in linguistics, informatics, semantics, semeiotics, and pragmatics in our day-to day discussions, dialog, research, teaching, conversations, and conventional rationalizations. These can be both good from the viewpoint of transparency and honesty, opacity, and human exchange information asymmetry. They are dangerous since such A, P, S, and PS could be based on false dichotomies of man/Nature, male/female, truth/falsehood, objectivity/subjectivity, riches/poverty, equality/inequality, and the like; most of the negative aspects of such dichotomies are being used for self-serving, profit-maximizing, wealth-accumulating, poverty-perpetuating, and socially polarizing purposes. Human Anthropocene history is dotted with them, especially in the developmental context of industrialization and economic infrastructure development.

Hence, the vital necessity of critical thinking for critical self-examination, especially in current MBA curricula. All the three volumes of this book on critical thinking are expressly designed for this purpose.

This study aims to explore scientific discourses on vaccination in YouTube comments using the Connectivism theory as a foundational guide in the inquiry of understanding knowledge seeking and sharing. The authors sought to understand how individuals share and seek information by using external sources through URL links to validate their arguments.

Using content analysis, the authors extracted and analysed 584 random comments with URL links from eight YouTube videos scientifically addressing the purpose of vaccines. The comments were coded by stance (pro, anti, and neutral) and the type of resource to observe how their links were used.

The results showed that URL links were composed of quotes, questions, and opinions. Many sources came from research papers, conspiracy websites, or other videos. Some of the comments did not accurately reflect the information from research papers and showed little scientific reasoning. This suggests the need for critical evaluation among individuals when finding information online.

The findings can be expanded to explore different types of information literacy practices in the comment section of social media for both informal and formal environments.

YouTube is useful in fostering scientific discourse and information-seeking/sharing practices among individuals. However, considering the inaccuracy of content deliverance, educators and individuals will need to consider how to teach/conduct information literacy skills when implementing social media for educational purposes.

Only a few studies have conducted research on comments using URL links, the originality of sources and how the sources were used in argumentation.

In recent years, the acronym VUCA has gained traction in strategic communication (SC) as an umbrella term that summarizes the recurrent challenges (volatility, uncertainty, complexity and ambiguity) of digital communication environments. However, an integrated reflection on how the VUCA dimensions facilitate a deeper understanding of specific digitalization challenges and how to navigate through these challenges is lacking. This article aims to explore and substantiate the descriptive (how) and prescriptive (how to) potential of VUCA for SC under digitalization conditions.

We first provide a systematic discussion of the four VUCA dimensions based on the general strategy literature. While their descriptive value is undisputed, prescriptive advice on how to respond to these challenges is contradictory. We substantiate this observation in a second empirical step based on problem-centered interviews with strategic communicators at the agency and corporate levels.

Our findings reveal that VUCA facilitates a systematic mapping of digitalization challenges consistently identified by professionals. The proposed strategic responses, however, remain contradictory at the theoretical and empirical levels. Hence, we propose the VUCA radar as a comprehensive descriptive and prescriptive framework.

The radar provides (a) a systematic overview of recurrent digitalization challenges to SC at the industry and practice levels and (b) prescriptive advice on how to navigate through these challenges by balancing contradictory strategic responses at the levels of vision, understanding, clarity and agility.

In today’s digital economy, it is very important to cultivate digital professionals with advanced interdisciplinary skills. The purpose of this paper is that universities play a vital role in this effort, and research teams need to use the synergistic effect of various educational methods to improve the quality and efficiency of personnel training. For these teams, a powerful evaluation mechanism is very important to improve their innovation ability and the overall level of talents they cultivate. The policy of “selecting the best through public bidding” not only meets the multi-dimensional evaluation needs of contemporary research, but also conforms to the current atmosphere of evaluating scientific and technological talents.

Nonetheless, since its adoption, several challenges have emerged, including flawed project management systems, a mismatch between listed needs and actual core technological needs and a low rate of conversion of scientific achievements into practical outcomes. These issues are often traced back to overly simplistic evaluation methods for research teams. This paper reviews the literature on the “Open Bidding for Selecting the Best Candidates” policy and related evaluation mechanisms for research teams, identifying methodological shortcomings, a gap in exploring team collaboration and an oversight in team selection criteria.

It proposes a theoretical framework for the evaluation and selection mechanisms of research teams under the “Open Bidding for Selecting the Best Candidates” model, offering a solid foundation for further in-depth studies in this area.

Research progress on the Evaluation Mechanism of Scientific Research Teams in the Digital Economy Era from the Perspective of “Open Bidding for Selecting the Best Candidates.”

Given the rising complexities around organizational resilience, this study identifies and explains the critical enablers of developing organizational resilience (OR). It offers logical reasoning into the interactions and interdependencies among the identified elements with the help of a hierarchical model of the antecedents of OR.

This paper deployed a mixed methodology research design. Firstly, critical enablers of OR are identified from the literature review. Second, contextual relationships and interactions between the enablers are examined using modified total interpretive structural modeling to derive a hierarchical model among the antecedents that characterize OR. Lastly, a survey study including industry experts is used to statistically verify the model links.

Developing resilience lies at the intersection of organization science and strategic management, involving the interaction of factors within an organization’s strategic behaviors, organizational practices, and people processes. The study identifies twelve antecedents of OR. The resultant interpretive hierarchical model helped decipher internal relationships among the antecedents. The proposed model helps determine how organizations move through different phases (before, during, and after) of turbulences and how organizational resilience helps overcome negative spirals.

This research is original and refreshing in its attempt to necessitate resilience as a processual characteristic needed to survive, thrive, and transform amidst business tensions. The hierarchical model of antecedents garners a better understanding of how their interactions and interdependencies help organizations enhance their capacity to adapt and build resilience in organizational systems and processes. It answers questions of “what,” “how,” and “why” relevant to theory building in OR.

The rule of law has been tried in many countries under the state of exception during COVID-19. This chapter focusses on the case of Finland, the only Nordic country to declare a state of exception during the pandemic. Drawing from theoretical accounts on the state of exception, it analyses to what extent the Finnish democratic Rechtsstaat has coped in the state of exception.

The authors propose the concepts of a radical and restrained state of exception and argue that while the Finnish states of exception were rather restrained than radical, there are risks involved in the fact that powers granted by the Emergency Powers Act to be used during a state of exception are moved to normal legislation. Indeed, as Giorgio Agamben, among others, has warned, the state of exception may become permanent and undermine democracy and the rule of law. The chapter provides a dialogue between theory and empirics related to a state of exception, applying theoretical insights on the case of Finland during COVID-19.

The study aims to identify the practical borders of AI legal personality and accountability in human-centric services.

Using a framework tailored for AI studies, this research analyses structured interview data collected from auditors based in Poland.

The study identified new constructs to complement the taxonomy of arguments for AI legal personality: cognitive strain, consciousness, cyborg paradox, reasoning replicability, relativism, AI misuse, excessive human effort and substitution.

The insights presented herein are primarily derived from the perspectives of Polish auditors. There is a need for further exploration into the viewpoints of other key stakeholders, such as lawyers, judges and policymakers, across various global contexts.

The findings of this study hold significant potential to guide the formulation of regulatory frameworks tailored to AI applications in human-centric services. The proposed sui generis AI personality institution offers a dynamic and adaptable alternative to conventional legal personality models.

The outcomes of this research contribute to the ongoing public discourse on AI’s societal impact. It encourages a balanced assessment of the potential advantages and challenges associated with granting legal personality to AI systems.

This paper advocates for establishing a sui generis AI personality institution alongside a joint accountability model. This dual framework addresses the current uncertainties surrounding human, general AI and super AI characteristics and facilitates the joint accountability of responsible AI entities and their ultimate beneficiaries.

This study aims to examine the connection between biophilic workplace design and its effect on Gen Z employees’ mental well-being and job contentment. The aim is to provide insights for the top management to acknowledge and implement biophilic workplaces to create a more productive and fulfilling work environment.

The research study is supported by a literature review of 45 peer-reviewed papers. The research involved a comprehensive review of databases such as Scopus, EBSCO, Elsevier, Jstor and Google Scholar using relevant keywords and Boolean operators. The inclusion criteria for the study are limited to articles published between 2013 and 2024. The review results provide insights into the current state of research on biophilic office spaces and their impact on Gen Z employees’ mental well-being and productivity.

The findings of this study reveal how biophilic office design positively impacts the mental well-being and job contentment of Gen Z employees, leading to increased productivity. It demonstrates that being around elements of nature at work can reduce stress and enhance cognitive function, leading to increased job contentment.

Few studies have been done on the impact of biophilic-designed offices on Gen Z employees, a cohort increasingly becoming the dominant workforce. The conceptual model proposed in the study has defined the positive aspects of biophilic design for Gen Z employees.