1. Tool selection strategy for software-based visualization in technical academic argument work Lawrie Hunter Kochi University of Technology http://www.core.kochi-tech.ac.jp/hunter/ 33

2. Please download this ppt from lawriehunter.com Many more are available at http:/lawriehunter.com/cv/presns/

3. Tool selection strategy for software-based visualization in technical academic argument work Lawrie Hunter, Kochi University of Technology, Japan Logic and argument have proven to be significant obstacles to second language English academic writing success, markedly so for research students from East Asian cultures. The technical research paper is a masked facsimile of an argument; thus novice technical academic writing tends to be formulaic, following document structure rather than argument structure. In this frame, novice writing of abstracts is problematic at the design level. Linear text is not a particularly supportive medium for technical academic argument work. Relations between concepts can be marked in text by rhetorical signals, but the conceptual load economies of visualization are not available. Mind maps, concept maps and rhetorical structure maps, which all embody a number of visual metaphors, are promising tools for the support of novice technical academic argument work. Software embodiments of the above mapping types are usually marketed without discussion of the information-structure related choices involved in the selection of map type and software. This paper, referring to Hunter's (2009) decision matrix, presents a negotiated strategic pathway to the selection of map type and software for technical academic writing task, taking the example of inferred argument of an informally reported study. Reference points in this pathway include Toulmin (1958), Cañas & Novak (2006) and Kowalski (2011). Cañas, A. J., & Novak, J.D. (2006) Re-examining the foundations for effective use of concept maps. In Cañas, A. J., & Novak, J.D. (Eds.), Concept Maps: Theory, Methodology, Technology. Proceedings of the Second International Conference on Concept Mapping. Hunter, L. (2009) A Decision Matrix for the Use of Mapping and Mapping Software. Presented at EuroCALL 2009. http://www.lawriehunter.com/presns/eurocall09/ Kowalski, R. (2011) Computational logic and human thinking. Cambridge UP. Toulmin, S. (1958) The Uses of Argument, Cambridge University Press.

5. Background Maths teacher trainer (Rabaul) Maths teacher Guidance counsellor ESL maths teacher (Vancouver) EFL teacher Technical editor Super translation ESP professor (Tokyo, Tokushima, Kochi) ESL maths teacher (Cairns)

7. Design Scenario ESP EAP EAP HUMANITIES TAW EX EY EZ English for specific purposes English for academic purposes Technical academic writing

8. TAW best practice Niche language acquisition to near-independence in TAW Writing work focusing on argument and info-structures Training in use of language models: Style Dossier Preparation for work with an editor Preparation for work with a mentor

9. grammar/surface features usage/convention document format argument supporting claim Possible approaches research design/results most TAW writers start writing here (simulacrum of argument) RP language generation should start here most TAW programs work here

10. Hunter, L. (2012) Technical Academic Writing. Minaminokaze Press. KUT design 2012

12. Logic and argument - significant obstacles to - second language English academic writing success - in East Asian cultures. The technical research paper - masked facsimile of an argument Novice technical academic writing – formulaic, following document structure -not argument structure Novice writing of abstracts - problematic at the design level. Argument

14. Linear text: Not a particularly supportive medium for technical academic argument work. TAW learners are predominantly -reading for information -in a genre structure Argument in linear text

16. Relations between concepts -can be marked in text by rhetorical signals. Text signalling of relations: -lacks the conceptual load economies of visualization. Marking relations in text

17. Tennis Players’ Grunts Slow Opponents Down Those loud grunts could give players an extra edge by slowing their opponents’ reaction time. The loud grunts tennis players make when hitting the ball could be distracting for their opponents. These noises can actually slow an opponent’s reaction time. Some players’ grunts register at 100 decibels. Players such as Maria Sharapova and Rafael Nadal are notorious for their grunting. Those loud grunts some tennis players make when hitting the ball could actually have a negative effect on their opponents by distracting them and slowing their reaction time, scientists said Friday. Players such as Maria Sharapova and Rafael Nadal are notorious for their grunting, a practice which often triggers complaints in professional tennis, said Scott Sinnett, lead author of the report that appeared in the journal Public Library of Science ONE . Researchers played 384 video clips of a tennis player hitting a ball to either the left or right of a video camera, to 33 students at the University of British Columbia in western Canada. The students were asked to quickly determine whether the ball was hit to the right or left. For some of the shots, a loud white noise was played as the racquet hit the ball. “ When an additional sound occurs at the same time as when the ball is struck, participants are significantly slower… and make significantly more decision errors,” said the study. A growing body of research shows that noise “distracts you from your ability to pay attention to what is going on,” said Sinnett in a telephone interview. “A grunt doesn’t allow you to place all your attention on what’s happening. It blocks the ability to pay attention to a multi-sensory event.” Grunting could cause a tennis player to perceive a ball traveling 50 miles (80 kilometers) per hour to be “two feet (60 centimeters) closer to the opponent than it actually is,” said Sinnett. “This could increase the likelihood that opponents are out of position and make returning the ball more difficult.” “ A lot of people have complained about grunting in the tennis world, that it’s distracting, and even some professionals have said it’s pretty much cheating,” said Sinnett, who conducted the research as a post-doctoral fellow at the University of British Columbia, and is now an assistant professor of psychology at the University of Hawaii at Mnoa. “ The study raises a number of interesting questions for tennis. For example, if Rafael Nadal is grunting and Roger Federer is not, is that fair?” he added. Scientifically regulating tennis-players’ grunts — some of which register at 100 decibels — “could be looked toward, because if it’s distracting to opponent, then it’s basically cheating,” he said. http://news.discovery.com/human/tennis-players-grunting-distraction.html Marking relations in text: example

18. Marking relations in text: example 1. isolate argument content 2. infer procedure,observations, conclusions

19. Tennis Players’ Grunts Slow Opponents Down Those loud grunts could give players an extra edge by slowing their opponents’ reaction time. The loud grunts tennis players make when hitting the ball could be distracting for their opponents. These noises can actually slow an opponent’s reaction time. Some players’ grunts register at 100 decibels. Players such as Maria Sharapova and Rafael Nadal are notorious for their grunting. Those loud grunts some tennis players make when hitting the ball could actually have a negative effect on their opponents by distracting them and slowing their reaction time, scientists said Friday. Players such as Maria Sharapova and Rafael Nadal are notorious for their grunting, a practice which often triggers complaints in professional tennis, said Scott Sinnett, lead author of the report that appeared in the journal Public Library of Science ONE . Researchers played 384 video clips of a tennis player hitting a ball to either the left or right of a video camera, to 33 students at the University of British Columbia in western Canada. The students were asked to quickly determine whether the ball was hit to the right or left. For some of the shots, a loud white noise was played as the racquet hit the ball. “ When an additional sound occurs at the same time as when the ball is struck, participants are significantly slower… and make significantly more decision errors,” said the study. A growing body of research shows that noise “distracts you from your ability to pay attention to what is going on,” said Sinnett in a telephone interview. “A grunt doesn’t allow you to place all your attention on what’s happening. It blocks the ability to pay attention to a multi-sensory event.” Grunting could cause a tennis player to perceive a ball traveling 50 miles (80 kilometers) per hour to be “two feet (60 centimeters) closer to the opponent than it actually is,” said Sinnett. “This could increase the likelihood that opponents are out of position and make returning the ball more difficult.” “ A lot of people have complained about grunting in the tennis world, that it’s distracting, and even some professionals have said it’s pretty much cheating,” said Sinnett, who conducted the research as a post-doctoral fellow at the University of British Columbia, and is now an assistant professor of psychology at the University of Hawaii at Mnoa. “ The study raises a number of interesting questions for tennis. For example, if Rafael Nadal is grunting and Roger Federer is not, is that fair?” he added. Scientifically regulating tennis-players’ grunts — some of which register at 100 decibels — “could be looked toward, because if it’s distracting to opponent, then it’s basically cheating,” he said. http://news.discovery.com/human/tennis-players-grunting-distraction.html 1. isolate argument content

20. 1. isolate argument content

21. Researchers played 384 video clips of a tennis player hitting a ball to either the left or right of a video camera, to 33 students at the University of British Columbia in western Canada. The students were asked to quickly determine whether the ball was hit to the right or left. For some of the shots, a loud white noise was played as the racquet hit the ball. “ When an additional sound occurs at the same time as when the ball is struck, participants are significantly slower… and make significantly more decision errors,” said the study. 2. infer observations, conclusions

22. Scaffolding for inferred abstract writing: -use only these verbs as main clause subjects. Citation as subject Results as subject Claim as subject claims (that) proposes (that) implies (that) suggests (that) infers (that) observes (that) reveals (that) demonstrates (that) indicates (that) disproves proves (that) implies (that) is supported by is contradicted by is in agreement with is in opposition to assumes (that)

23. 2. infer observations, conclusions Learner inference of observations and conclusion: -slow -inarticulate -unstructured -text-based scaffolding ineffective

25. Mind maps Concept maps Rhetorical structure diagrams - embody a number of visual metaphors -promising tools for support of novice TAW* work. Map types *TAW = technical academic argument

26. Map types and relations

27. Mind mapping á la Tony Buzan Mindmap links are all associations -i.e. zero granularity

28. Mindmap links are all associations -i.e. zero granularity Mind mapping

29. FreeMind software http://freemind.sourceforge.net/

30. FreeMind software View online Mindmap links are all associations -i.e. zero granularity

31. Directed-link maps http://www.inspiration.com/

32. Textured-link * maps *graphically textured (here: Hunter’s Ismap system) boil NH3 Make steam Rotate turbines Generate electricity Boil a liquid older type plants OTEC plants boil H2O seawater heat fossil or N-heat steam 20C steam 500C low power high power zero energy cost high energy cost ! ! !

33. Textured-link * maps *textually textured

35. Software embodiments of Mind maps Concept maps Rhetorical structure diagrams are usually marketed without discussion of the information-structure related choices involved in the selection of map type and software. Mapping software: design

38. Sample argument map

39. ISmaps with rhetorical frames: argument in Sinnett (2010) Background complaints about grunting in pro tennis study of response time in tennis hunter systems Target behavior? Findings of Vancouver study reaction time decision errors reaction to video of tennis strokes reaction to video of tennis strokes random noise at time of stroke < Vancouver study play video clips tennis strokes to right or left tennis strokes to right or left subjects quickly decide measure reaction time, correctness random noise with stroke

40. Grounds Modality Claim Warrant Backing since on account of Toulmin model of argument Target behavior?

41. Grounds Modality Claim Warrant Backing Rebuttal since on account of unless Enhanced Toulmin model of argument Target behavior?

42. Toulmin model of argument in Sinnett (2010) Target behavior? Receiver makes more errors and is slower since because unless White noise in video caused reaction error and slowness Server grunts during stroke in tennis Video reaction is not equivalent to tennis reaction White noise has the same effect as grunting It is highly likely that

44. Exploratory constraint: use only these links in your argument map Citation as subject Results as subject Claim as subject claims (that) proposes (that) implies (that) suggests (that) infers (that) observes (that) reveals (that) demonstrates (that) indicates (that) disproves proves (that) implies (that) is supported by is contradicted by is in agreement with is in opposition to assumes (that)

45. Traditional Pest Control W S-U Technical Writing II HW 6.0 May 22, 2008 Is in agreement with Chikaku Niiho The ineffectiveness of wrapping pine tree during winter Effective for trapping harmful insects 55 Percent of beneficial insects 4 Percent of harmful insects Spiders Assassin bugs Implies A pine wilt tree decease Reveals Wrapping of pine tree during winter Burning straw mats after beneficial insects leave Demonstrates Is supported by Is supported by Implies Infers that Suggests that Implies Implies Himeji Castle officers Moth Caterpillars Long-horn Beetles Nematodes inhibition in trunk Is supported by Is supported by reveals reveals

46. Sinnett (2010) claims that is supported by assumes that White noise is equivalent to grunts Server grunts during stroke in tennis cause receiver slowness and error Video reaction is equivalent to tennis reaction Subject error and slowness in video response with white noise bursts Novakian rhetoric map of argument in Sinnett (2010) Target behavior

48. Rhetorical mapping Information structure mapping Syntactic mapping Grammatical mapping (pseudo) Association mapping Types of maps, info structures Degree of abstraction in mapping

49. Hunter’s framework for text analysis Key content Background Persuasion Rhetorical structure Information organization Information structures

50. Hunter ’s framework subsets Rhetorical analysis Structure analysis Key content Background Persuasion Rhetorical structure Information organization Information structures

51. A negotiated strategic pathway to the selection of map type and software for technical academic writing task. Design choices: mapping types Design choices: mapping tools

52. Design choices: mapping types Design choices: mapping tools *RST: rhetorical structure theory diagram Node content  Link content  Noun / noun phrase Clause Ø Mind map Verb Cmap Cmap Constrained verb Hunter’s argument maps Horne’s argument maps Hunter’s argument maps Logic link ISmaps: Description /Classification /Comparison ISmaps: Sequence / Cause-effect Rhetorical signal Argument map RST* diagram

55. Thank you for your attention. You can download this .ppt from http://www.lawriehunter.com/ It will be archived at http://www.lawriehunter.com/cv/presns/ Lawrie Hunter Kochi University of Technology http://www.core.kochi-tech.ac.jp/hunter/

56. Lawrie Hunter is a professor at Kochi University of Technology. His infostructure maps provide the underlying structure of &quot;Critical Thinking&quot; (Greene & Hunter, Asahi Press 2002) and &quot;Thinking in English&quot; (Hunter, Cengage 2008). His recent work with task constraint caused disarray at the 3rd Concept Mapping Conference in Tallinn/Helsinki. http://www.lawriehunter.com