Impacts of a Digital Dialogue Game and Epistemic Beliefs on Argumentative Discourse and Willingness to Argue
The goal of this study was to explore how students debate with their peers within a designed context using a digital dialogue game, and whether their epistemic beliefs are significant to the outcomes. Epistemic beliefs are known to colour student interactions within argumentative discourse, leading...
| Main Authors: | , , |
|---|---|
| Format: | Article |
| Language: | English |
| Published: |
Athabasca University Press
2016-05-01
|
| Series: | International Review of Research in Open and Distributed Learning |
| Subjects: | |
| Online Access: | http://www.irrodl.org/index.php/irrodl/article/view/2297 |
| _version_ | 1818367129241518080 |
|---|---|
| author | Omid Noroozi Simon McAlister Martin Mulder |
| author_facet | Omid Noroozi Simon McAlister Martin Mulder |
| author_sort | Omid Noroozi |
| collection | DOAJ |
| description | The goal of this study was to explore how students debate with their peers within a designed context using a digital dialogue game, and whether their epistemic beliefs are significant to the outcomes. Epistemic beliefs are known to colour student interactions within argumentative discourse, leading some students to hold back from interactions. By designing an online small group activity based around an issue both important and controversial to the students, with multiple viewpoints in each group and with the scaffolding provided by a dialogue game, it was examined whether these epistemic effects were still evident within their argumentative discourse. Furthermore, the study examined whether the activity design improves students' willingness to argue with each other, and their openness to attitudinal change. A pretest, posttest design was used with students who were assigned to groups of four or five and asked to argue on a controversial topic. Their aim was to explore various perspectives and to debate the pros and cons of the use of Genetically Modified Organisms (GMOs). While previous research has shown that some epistemic beliefs lead to less critical engagement with peers, the results presented here demonstrate that activity design is also an important factor in successful engagement within argumentative discourse. |
| first_indexed | 2024-12-13T22:47:08Z |
| format | Article |
| id | doaj.art-ef2af0365bb748fda4ddc10de1617590 |
| institution | Directory Open Access Journal |
| issn | 1492-3831 |
| language | English |
| last_indexed | 2024-12-13T22:47:08Z |
| publishDate | 2016-05-01 |
| publisher | Athabasca University Press |
| record_format | Article |
| series | International Review of Research in Open and Distributed Learning |
| spelling | doaj.art-ef2af0365bb748fda4ddc10de16175902022-12-21T23:28:43ZengAthabasca University PressInternational Review of Research in Open and Distributed Learning1492-38312016-05-0117310.19173/irrodl.v17i3.2297Impacts of a Digital Dialogue Game and Epistemic Beliefs on Argumentative Discourse and Willingness to ArgueOmid Noroozi0Simon McAlister1Martin Mulder2Wageningen UniversityUniversity of East LondonWageningen UniversityThe goal of this study was to explore how students debate with their peers within a designed context using a digital dialogue game, and whether their epistemic beliefs are significant to the outcomes. Epistemic beliefs are known to colour student interactions within argumentative discourse, leading some students to hold back from interactions. By designing an online small group activity based around an issue both important and controversial to the students, with multiple viewpoints in each group and with the scaffolding provided by a dialogue game, it was examined whether these epistemic effects were still evident within their argumentative discourse. Furthermore, the study examined whether the activity design improves students' willingness to argue with each other, and their openness to attitudinal change. A pretest, posttest design was used with students who were assigned to groups of four or five and asked to argue on a controversial topic. Their aim was to explore various perspectives and to debate the pros and cons of the use of Genetically Modified Organisms (GMOs). While previous research has shown that some epistemic beliefs lead to less critical engagement with peers, the results presented here demonstrate that activity design is also an important factor in successful engagement within argumentative discourse.http://www.irrodl.org/index.php/irrodl/article/view/2297argumentationattitudinal changeepistemic beliefsdialoguedigital game |
| spellingShingle | Omid Noroozi Simon McAlister Martin Mulder Impacts of a Digital Dialogue Game and Epistemic Beliefs on Argumentative Discourse and Willingness to Argue International Review of Research in Open and Distributed Learning argumentation attitudinal change epistemic beliefs dialogue digital game |
| title | Impacts of a Digital Dialogue Game and Epistemic Beliefs on Argumentative Discourse and Willingness to Argue |
| title_full | Impacts of a Digital Dialogue Game and Epistemic Beliefs on Argumentative Discourse and Willingness to Argue |
| title_fullStr | Impacts of a Digital Dialogue Game and Epistemic Beliefs on Argumentative Discourse and Willingness to Argue |
| title_full_unstemmed | Impacts of a Digital Dialogue Game and Epistemic Beliefs on Argumentative Discourse and Willingness to Argue |
| title_short | Impacts of a Digital Dialogue Game and Epistemic Beliefs on Argumentative Discourse and Willingness to Argue |
| title_sort | impacts of a digital dialogue game and epistemic beliefs on argumentative discourse and willingness to argue |
| topic | argumentation attitudinal change epistemic beliefs dialogue digital game |
| url | http://www.irrodl.org/index.php/irrodl/article/view/2297 |
| work_keys_str_mv | AT omidnoroozi impactsofadigitaldialoguegameandepistemicbeliefsonargumentativediscourseandwillingnesstoargue AT simonmcalister impactsofadigitaldialoguegameandepistemicbeliefsonargumentativediscourseandwillingnesstoargue AT martinmulder impactsofadigitaldialoguegameandepistemicbeliefsonargumentativediscourseandwillingnesstoargue |