- About
-
The Global ETD Search service is a free service for researchers
to find electronic theses and dissertations. This service is
provided by the
Networked Digital Library of Theses and Dissertations.
Our metadata is collected from universities around the world. If you manage a university/consortium/country archive and want to be added, details can be found on the NDLTD website.
Search results
Showing 1 to 4 of 4 (0.022 seconds)Spelling suggestions: "subject:"sätze"" "subject:"ätze""
| 1 |
Hauptsatzstellung in deutschen NebensätzenPettersson, Kent January 2012 (has links)
No description available.
|
| 2 |
Proofs and "Puzzles"Abramovitz, Buma, Berezina, Miryam, Berman, Abraham, Shvartsman, Ludmila 10 April 2012 (has links) (PDF)
It is well known that mathematics students have to be able to understand and prove
theorems. From our experience we know that engineering students should also be able to
do the same, since a good theoretical knowledge of mathematics is essential for solving
practical problems and constructing models.
Proving theorems gives students a much better understanding of the subject, and helps
them to develop mathematical thinking. The proof of a theorem consists of a logical
chain of steps. Students should understand the need and the legitimacy of every step.
Moreover, they have to comprehend the reasoning behind the order of the chain’s steps.
For our research students were provided with proofs whose steps were either written in a
random order or had missing parts. Students were asked to solve the \"puzzle\" – find the
correct logical chain or complete the proof.
These \"puzzles\" were meant to discourage students from simply memorizing the proof of
a theorem. By using our examples students were encouraged to think independently and
came to improve their understanding of the subject.
|
| 3 |
Proofs and "Puzzles"Abramovitz, Buma, Berezina, Miryam, Berman, Abraham, Shvartsman, Ludmila 10 April 2012 (has links)
It is well known that mathematics students have to be able to understand and prove
theorems. From our experience we know that engineering students should also be able to
do the same, since a good theoretical knowledge of mathematics is essential for solving
practical problems and constructing models.
Proving theorems gives students a much better understanding of the subject, and helps
them to develop mathematical thinking. The proof of a theorem consists of a logical
chain of steps. Students should understand the need and the legitimacy of every step.
Moreover, they have to comprehend the reasoning behind the order of the chain’s steps.
For our research students were provided with proofs whose steps were either written in a
random order or had missing parts. Students were asked to solve the \"puzzle\" – find the
correct logical chain or complete the proof.
These \"puzzles\" were meant to discourage students from simply memorizing the proof of
a theorem. By using our examples students were encouraged to think independently and
came to improve their understanding of the subject.
|
| 4 |
The Darwinian revolution as a knowledge reorganizationZacharias, Sebastian 24 February 2015 (has links)
Die Dissertation leistet drei Beiträge zur Forschung: (1) Sie entwickelt ein neuartiges vierstufiges Modell wissenschaftlicher Theorien. Dieses Modell kombiniert logisch-empiristische Ansätze (Carnap, Popper, Frege) mit Konzepten von Metaphern & Narrativen (Wittgenstein, Burke, Morgan), erlaubt so deutlich präzisiere Beschreibungen wissenschaftlicher Theorien bereit und löst/mildert Widersprüche in logisch-empiristischen Modellen. (Realismus vs. Empirismus, analytische vs. synthetische Aussagen, Unterdeterminiertheit/ Holismus, wissenschaftliche Erklärungen, Demarkation) (2) Mit diesem Modell gelingt ein Reihenvergleich sechs biologischer Theorien von Lamarck (1809), über Cuvier (1811), Geoffroy St. Hilaire (1835), Chambers (1844-60), Owen (1848-68), Wallace (1855/8) zu Darwin (1859-1872). Dieser Vergleich offenbart eine interessante Asymmetrie: Vergleicht man Darwin mit je einem Vorgänger, so bestehen zahlreiche wichtige Unterschiede. Vergleicht man ihn mit fünf Vorgängern, verschwinden diese fast völlig: Darwins originärer Beitrag zur Revolution in der Biologie des 19.Jh ist klein und seine Antwort nur eine aus einer kontinuierlichen Serie auf die empirischen Herausforderungen durch Paläontologie & Biogeographie seit Ende des 18. Jh. (3) Eine gestufte Rezeptionsanalyse zeigt, warum wir dennoch von einer Darwinschen Revolution sprechen. Zuerst zeigt eine quantitative Analyse der fast 2.000 biologischen Artikel in Britannien zwischen 1858 und 1876, dass Darwinsche Konzepte zwar wichtige Neuerungen brachten, jedoch nicht singulär herausragen. Verlässt man die Biologie und schaut sich die Rezeption bei anderen Wissenschaftlern und gebildeten Laien an, wechselt das Bild: Je weiter man aus der Biologie heraustritt, desto weniger Ebenen biologischen Wissens kennen die Rezipienten und desto sichtbarer wird Darwins Beitrag. Schließlich findet sich sein Beitrag in den abstraktesten Ebenen des biologischen Wissens: in Narrativ und Weltbild – den Ebenen die Laien rezipieren. / The dissertation makes three contributions to research: (1) It develops a novel 4-level-model of scientific theories which combines logical-empirical ideas (Carnap, Popper, Frege) with concepts of metaphors & narratives (Wittgenstein, Burke, Morgan), providing a new powerful toolbox for the analysis & comparison of scientific theories and overcoming/softening contradictions in logical-empirical models. (realism vs. empiricism, analytic vs. synthetic statements, holism, theory-laden observations, scientific explanations, demarcation) (2) Based on this model, the dissertation compares six biological theories from Lamarck (1809), via Cuvier (1811), Geoffroy St. Hilaire (1835), Chambers (1844-60), Owen (1848-68), Wallace (1855/8) to Darwin (1859-1872) and reveals an interesting asymmetry: Compared to any one of his predecessors, Darwins theory appears very original, however, compared to all five predecessor theories, many of these differences disappear and it remains but a small original contribution by Darwin. Thus, Darwin’s is but one in a continuous series of responses to the challenges posed to biology by paleontology and biogeography since the end of the 18th century. (3) A 3-level reception analysis, finally, demonstrates why we speak of a Darwinian revolution nevertheless. (i) A quantitative analysis of nearly 2.000 biological articles reveals that Darwinian concepts where indeed an important theoretical innovation – but definitely not the most important of the time. (ii) When leaving the circle of biology and moving to scientists from other disciplines or educated laymen, the landscape changes. The further outside the biological community, the shallower the audience’s knowledge – and the more visible Darwin’s original contribution. After all, most of Darwin’s contribution can be found in the narrative and worldview of 19th century biology: the only level of knowledge which laymen receive.
|
Page generated in 0.0378 seconds