The DOI matches its Crossref record.
The Ethnography of Argumentation
Abstract
In this chapter the main issue is the analysis of argumentation in the project class. An attempt is made to approach this both from a microethnographical description of classroom processes and by discussing several theories concerning argumentation.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cited by
A research framework for creative and imitative reasoning
Lithner, J. (2008) · Educational Studies in Mathematics · doi:10.1007/s10649-007-9104-2 · Cited by 508
Students' argumentation in decision-making on a socio-scientific issue: implications for teaching
Patronis, T., Potari, D., & Spiliotopoulou, V. (1999) · International Journal of Science Education · doi:10.1080/095006999290408 · Cited by 274
Prospective elementary teachers’ claiming in responses to false generalizations
Yopp, D. A. (2015) · The Journal of Mathematical Behavior · doi:10.1016/j.jmathb.2015.06.003 · Cited by 16
Edson, A. J., Rogers, D. R., & Browning, C. A. (2020) · Learning and Performance Assessment · doi:10.4018/978-1-7998-0420-8.ch018
Edson, A. J., Rogers, D. R., & Browning, C. A. (2016) · Advances in Higher Education and Professional Development · doi:10.4018/978-1-5225-0120-6.ch012
Metadata
- Venue
- The Emergence of Mathematical Meaning
- Publisher
- Routledge
- Published
- 2012-12-06
- Pages
- 236-276
- OpenAlex
- W2958523560
- Cited by
- 266
- References
- 0
- FWCI
- 85.18
- Type
- book chapter
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: The Ethnography of Argumentation. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.4324/9780203053140-11
- The paper
- The Ethnography of Argumentation. (2012). The Emergence of Mathematical Meaning. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203053140-11
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.
