ArticlePDF Available

Students' Perspectives on Debate Exercises in Content Area Classes

Authors:

Abstract

The recent movement to promote debate across the curriculum presumes that debate-like activities in content-area classes can enhance disciplinary learning as well as core skills. Yet students in such classes may resist debate activities if they believe (1) debate promotes hostility; (2) debate disadvantages demographic groups preferring noncompetitwe communication styles; or (3) debate is too unfamiliar. The present study elicited end-of-term written evaluations of debate-like activities in a 70-student class on rhetorical traditions. Students in the class worked in small groups to prepare debates on issues arising from lectures and reading. Teams presented debates during weekly discussion section meetings; those not debating acted as judges and wrote explanations of their decisions. Thematic analysis of the student responses indicated that, while a few students expressed discomfort with the competitiveness of the activities, most were laudatory. Results point to the value of debate-across-the-curriculum for promoting small group communication and for fostering divergent perspectives on course topics.
Running head: STUDENTS’ PERSPECTIVES
Students' perspectives on debate exercises in content area classes.
Communication Education 52 (2003) 157-163.
Jean Goodwin
Iowa State University
Correspondence concerning this article should be addressed to Jean Goodwin (PhD where,
when), at the Department of English, Iowa State University, 223 Ross Hall, Ames, Iowa 50010.
Electronic mail may be sent via Internet to goodwin@iastate.edu. The author would like to offer
thanks to the students in the class reported here, and to Christopher Swift, who assisted in
teaching it. .
Students’ Perspectives
1
Abstract
The recent movement to promote debate across the curriculum presumes that debate-like
activities in content-area classes can enhance disciplinary learning as well as core skills. Yet
students in such classes may resist debate activities if they believe (1) debate promotes hostility,
(2) debate disadvantages demographic groups preferring noncompetitive communication styles,
or (3) debate is too unfamiliar. The present study elicited end-of-term written evaluations of
debate-like activities in a seventy-student class on rhetorical traditions. Students in the class
worked in small groups to prepare debates on issues arising from lectures and reading. Teams
presented debates during weekly discussion section meetings; those not debating acted as judges
and wrote explanations of their decisions. Thematic analysis of the student responses indicated
that, while a few students expressed discomfort with the competitiveness of the activities, most
were laudatory. Results point to the value of debate across the curriculum for promoting small
group communication and for fostering divergent perspectives on course topics.
Keywords: debate across the curriculum, collaborative learning, small group communication,
critical thinking
Students’ Perspectives
2
Students’ perspectives on debate exercises
Teaching experience as well as empirical research affirms that debating helps students
develop content mastery, as well as argumentation and communication skills (Allen, Berkowitz,
Hunt, & Louden, 1999; Bellon, 2000; Williams, McGee, & Worth 2001). I therefore build debate
exercises into most of my courses. But I am not the most important person in the classroom.
Students learn. Far from empty vessels waiting to be filled with instruction, they bring to class
theories, attitudes, skills and habits that shape the success or failure of the activities they will
pursue there (e.g., Bransford, Brown, & Cocking, 2000; Freire, 1970/2002). I've become curious,
therefore, to learn what students think about the debate exercises they undertake with me. Do
they find debating helps them learn? If so, what, in their experience, does it contribute?
In focusing these broad questions, my experience and the literature suggest three specific
concerns that warrant particular attention. These concerns pertain to three specific reasons
students may have for considering debate exercises unhelpful in content area classes:
First, since arguing requires open disagreement, students may associate it with negative
interpersonal or emotional qualities like hostility and fighting (Benoit, 1983; Tannen, 1998;
Trapp, 1986; Walker, 1991). In this case, some students would be understandably quite reluctant
to engage actively in debate exercises.
Second, some students may find the competitive nature of this specific form of
arguing–debate–to be intimidating or silencing. In particular, gender differences in argumentation
styles (Meyers, Brashers, Winston, & Grob, 1997) may mean that some women are
disadvantaged in debates. In this case, students could rightfully object that debate exercises are
unfair.
Students’ Perspectives
3
Finally, students may simply find debate exercises to be unfamiliar. In this case, they
may resist the innovation, preferring instead activities such as class discussion and group projects
in which they already know how to learn.
I raise these questions out of my own teaching practice; I also raise them from an interest
in debate across the curriculum. As long as debate was confined to co-curricular activities and
courses expressly devoted to argumentation, students who chose to become involved could be
presumed to endorse the value of the activity (Williams, et al, 2001). But now that debate is
spreading beyond these traditional homes, students will encounter it more involuntarily, and their
attitudes toward it will matter more. As Bellon has noted, "advocates of debate across the
curriculum must produce strong evidence demonstrating pedagogical benefits if such initiatives
are to succeed" (Bellon, 2000, p. 161). At least some of this evidence should come from student
voices, representing students' perspectives on debate across the curriculum.
Instructional Context of this Study
In the spirit of classroom assessment propounded by Angelo and Cross (1993) I decided
to simply ask students what they thought of debate-like activities in one content-area class. The
class in which I collected these data was one that I was leading a and that incorporated some
features of debate across the curriculum. This 70-student, sophomore level course was intended
primarily to introduce communication majors to the rhetorical tradition stretching from the
sophists to the postmoderns. I focused each weekly unit on one enduring question in rhetorical
theory–for example, "Is science rhetorical?" and "Are emotions bad reasons?" Lectures and
whole-class exercises on Monday and Wednesday introduced the week's issue and reviewed the
readings.
Students’ Perspectives
4
Students also participated in smaller discussion sections of about 20 students meeting on
Fridays. Within the discussion sections, students were organized into four- or five-person work
groups. Each week of instruction culminated in a Friday debate between two of the work groups
in each discussion section. Assessment standards developed with the class encouraged the
debaters to organize their presentations clearly and to draw support from the course readings as
well as from their own experience. The students not directly participating in the day’s debate
were given the opportunity to question the advocates. They then decided the issue by majority
vote, and over the weekend these judge/audience members wrote two-page position papers
defending their decisions.
This class provides one model for "debate across the curriculum," since it focused
primarily on content mastery and used debate exercises only as a means to pursue that end. The
sort of material covered was not significantly different than that which might be found in any
humanities course with a theoretical bent—philosophy, or historiography, or literary theory. The
course had no prerequisites; in particular, no previous exposure to debate was required. And
there was no extensive instruction in debate. The teaching assistant and I simply enacted the first
debate ourselves, and then worked with the students to develop assessment criteria.
Data Collection
To find out what the students thought about the debate exercises, I asked them on the
final Friday of the term. This query was conducted as part of a broader review and assessment
of the course’s impact on their learning. An instructor began the data collection by leading each
section through a de-briefing in which students were invited to consider the strengths and
weaknesses of three ways of learning: "ordinary" discussion sections, debates, and small-group
Students’ Perspectives
5
projects. In particular, the instructor asked whether the competitive nature of the debates might
intimidate or silence students who might prefer more cooperative modes of communication. After
ten to fifteen minutes of whole group discussion, students were invited to take ten minutes and
write, anonymously, a brief essay articulating their views on the questions of whether, and (if so)
how, the debate format helped them learn. They were also invited to suggest specific changes to
the debate exercises. These written responses constitute the data upon which this report is
predicated.
Fifty-two students, representing 73% of the class, submitted usable responses. I
performed a thematic content analysis of the essays, compiling phrases that related to the guiding
questions for this study.
Results
Debate and negative interpersonal or emotional qualities. Only four students (8% of those
responding) voiced a concern about hostility, fighting, anger or other negative interpersonal or
emotional consequences of debate exercises. One explained, for example, that "once you have a
set position any attack on that position tends to be upsetting." Another commented on the
"tension" of debating. Each of the four nonetheless went on to express a positive overall
evaluation of their experiences.
Debate and competition. Despite the explicit prompt that directed students to consider
the competitive nature of debate activities, only 7 students (13%) mentioned competition or
intimidation. Four of these thought that competition was actually a good thing, "because it forced
people to prepare extensively." Another student denied being intimidated by debates. Only two
mentioned competition negatively, explaining that debating encouraged teams to "say anything to
Students’ Perspectives
6
win" or "to take extreme viewpoints." Even these students, however, did not express a feeling of
being personally disadvantaged or silenced by the debate format.
Debate and unfamiliarity. Only three students noted that the debates had initially been
unfamiliar; each went on to explain that "in retrospect it was a key element" in their learning.
More students, by contrast, took up the explicit prompt and commented on the relationship of
debate to other learning activities–class discussion and small group work.
The relative advantages of debate in contrast with "ordinary" class discussion received
comment from 17 students (33%). The bulk of the responses took debates to be equal to,
complementary with, or better than discussion for the following reasons. (1) Debates require all
students to contribute. (2) Debates bring forward a variety of different points of view. (3)
Debates require "rational format" (perhaps as opposed to mere expression of opinions). (4)
Debates force participants to know what they're talking about (as opposed to "BS"). One
student confessed,
Although I admittedly hated preparing for the debates and would have rather just had a
discussion section every week (to avoid doing the work), I certainly learned a lot more as
a result of the debates. When I have discussion sections in other classes, I simply reword
statements made by other members of the class so it looks like I actually know what I’m
talking about, when in fact I am completely unprepared. . . . The debate and the small
group preparation that preceded it was an extremely effective way to facilitate me
actually doing the work.
The relationship between debate and another form of classroom communication–group
work–was mentioned by more students (25; 48%). Again, all considered debate to be equal to,
complementary with, or better than small group discussion; only one student suggested that
group work replace some debates. A number of students spontaneously elaborated on the way
that small group discussion and whole-class debate had reinforced each other. Students explained
Students’ Perspectives
7
that group work facilitated the debates for many reasons. Their responsibility to other group
members encouraged them to prepare and to practice prior to the debate. The small group
meetings were a comfortable place to brainstorm, ask questions and "bring different thoughts
together." Group work enabled students "to expand our limited capacities," allowing them to do
better work together than any could have done alone.
Other students commented on the reverse effect, noting that the debates helped promote
good group discussion because "fear of shame and desire for a good grade" in the debate required
the group to "remain focused" and cooperate and because the debate allowed responsibilities to
be given to "everyone," as opposed to projects where "one person [is] helping others along." One
student articulated the correlation between the debates and the small group work thus:
I think that while the debates were certainly valuable to learning about the course
material, what made them so was the small group discussions that my group had
every week. During the debate, we tended to focus simply on one side as a
debater. We would often ignore or negate very valid points the other side/group
made. However, during the small group discussion, there was no need to do this.
We threw out ideas on both sides of the argument in order to help us prepare for
the debate and/or paper. We learned from each other because we were listening to
each other. I do not think that listening necessarily occurred when we were
involved in the debate. . . . Since the small group discussions happened because of
the debates, we should keep the debates. But the real learning happened in the
discussions.
Students’ Perspectives
8
Debate and learning. All but one of the 52 students responding expressed positive
assessments of their debate experiences. Despite some drawbacks, the debates were described as
"fun,” “enjoyable,” “the most/very/helpful,” “very/useful,” “worthwhile,” “critical,” “essential,”
“the best option,” “excellent,” ‘good," and "a good idea." Moreover, students were able to
observe the value of the debate activities for the learning of disciplinary knowledge, that is, from
the perspective of debate-across-the-curriculum.
As to communication skills, nine students (17%) commented that debates provided a
valuable opportunity and incentive to develop their public speaking abilities. For example, one
student said,
Fridays were the best part of this class. . . . Not only does the debate format force
you to know your material it also helps you better your public speaking skills.
Clarity and eloquence help win an argument so while presenting the facts forced
you to discover the most effective delivery method.
Ten students (19%) thought the course had helped them become better at supporting their own
arguments and analyzing those of others. One of these reported gains on an even more
fundamental skill. In his words, "the debates were the main reason I learned that it is possible to
argue both sides of a question. This taught me that I shouldn't be narrow-minded and should hear
things out until I make a final decision."
The great majority of students (79%), however, focused on how the debates had
encouraged or indeed "forced" them to better learn course content. Three broad themes emerged in
these discussions.
Students’ Perspectives
9
First, students thought that the need to debate motivated them to engage the course
content deeply. "By having debates at the end of every week," one student commented, "we
would be thinking about the material all week long." Others echoed this view; debates encouraged
students to go "much deeper into the issues," to "really delve into the topic more," and "to take a
deep, detailed, and extensive view of the readings." This meant not only that everyone would do
the homework–"more importantly, for the most part, everyone enjoys doing the homework."
Second, students thought that the debates, or (as above) the debates in conjunction with
the group work, exposed them to a wide range of viewpoints and thus helped them engage the
course content broadly. Some students reported that this broad engagement happened as they
listened to the different sides during a debate. By the end, one said, "I’d often changed my mind
several times AND had been forced to think about things I hadn’t considered." Others explained
that they had to grapple with alternative views as part of preparing for debate, in order to be able
to meet the opposing arguments. For example,
The info that we would need to know would have to be that of both sides. This enforces
us to not be so close-minded about things. Having knowledge about both sides also made
our point much stronger, because we knew how to counterstrike when asked questions.
Still others reported that "it helped me think about things from a different perspective" in
particular "if I was debating [on] a side that I didn’t agree with."
Finally, students thought that the debates allowed them to engage the course content
personally. As one student admitted, "The debates helped me by forcing me to take a stance on
something and create argument(s) to support it. Had I not been forced to do this, I probably
would have taken a more passive role in the class." Other students echoed this view, noting the
Students’ Perspectives
"personal involvement" that debates promoted, which allowed students "to become intimately
involved with the material" and to "learn for him/herself." Further, since students were
encouraged to draw support for their arguments not only from the readings but from their
personal experiences, the debates also helped them "relate rhetoric to other areas of life," and
made what "we learned in class feel more applicable to our own lives."
Perhaps applying what they had learned about the value of competing viewpoints, 25
students (48%) articulated some negative features of debate in addition to their positive views.
These features were diverse, with none raised by more than four students. Some found that
listening to the debates was passive and uninformative. Several commented that some of the
questions being debated were poorly formulated—either unclear or unfairly favoring one side.
Several wanted more feedback. Two found the debates too highly structured; another, too
unstructured. While students did not find the competitiveness of the debate intimidating, they did
occasionally think that the element of competition prodded them to ignore the alternate point of
view, to become polarized, or to "artificially dichotomize an issue." And some voiced a sense of
frustration. During the debates, the issues often got lost, irrelevant points were made, and no
clear decisions were reached. As one student commented,
[S]ometimes the debates got confusing and the arguments got smeared with each other,
you didn’t know what was right or wrong or anything like that. Overall, I think debates
are good, but I think some course of action should be taken when arguments get
‘muddled.’
Reflections
Students’ Perspectives
I came away from the study with a keener enthusiasm for deploying debate exercises in
this and other courses. In particular, the students’ comments largely relieved my three concerns
about the usefulness of debates. The debate exercises seem largely to have taken an end run
around the ordinary equation of arguing with fighting, to have avoided disadvantage to any large
segment of the class (i.e., women), and to have overcome any resistance to unfamiliar learning
activities. Among these three concerns, I am left with some residual uneasiness regarding negative
reactions to competitiveness. While some students did make negative remarks about
competition, there was no evidence that competition affected any one group of students
unequally. In other student cultures, perhaps ones in which females are less ardent advocates for
equity, the disadvantaging of some students might be more conspicuous. In any case, I am
determined to monitor student reactions to competition in classes where they debate.
Overall, this study warrants efforts to foster debate exercises in courses beyond
communication departments. The student voices articulated in this study highlighted two themes
of particular relevance to the cross-disciplinary value of debate. The first theme pertains to the
relationship between debating and group work. One reason I had originally organized the
discussion sections into teams was the logistical restriction that limited class time imposed on
individual debating. .I also was committed to the value of peer learning. As it turned out,
preparing for debates proved an excellent small group task, in that each individual conspicuously
benefited from the equal contributions of her peers (Cohen, 1994). In addition to their direct
effects on student learning, therefore, debate exercises seem to be an excellent way of
incorporating group work into courses.
Students’ Perspectives
The second novel theme pertains to generating diverse points of view on a subject.
Traditional teaching techniques like textbooks, lectures, and tests with right answers insulate
students from the open questions and competing answers that so often drive our own interest in
our subjects. Debates do not, and in fact invite scrutiny of the widest possible range of
alternative views on a subject. Students' comments about the value of disagreement also
offer an interesting perspective on the nature of the thinking skills we want to foster. The
previous research reviewed by Allen et al. (1999) has largely focused on the way debate can help
students better master the principles of correct reasoning. Although some students did echo this
finding, many more emphasized the importance of debate in helping them to recognize and deal
with a diversity of viewpoints. Students here seem to be articulating a perspective on critical
thinking surprisingly like that proposed by Deanna Kuhn (1991). As Kuhn pointed out, we only
begin to seek reasons at all when we understand that a proposition can be doubted–that is, when
we realize that others think differently about it. Kuhn's work documented that even college-
educated individuals can have trouble imagining, constructing arguments for, and refuting
positions other than their own. If this is so, then debate exercises may be an excellent way of
leading students to experience the central aspect of truly critical thinking.
References
Angelo, T. A., & Cross, K. P. (1993). Classroom assessment techniques: A handbook for college
teachers (2nd ed.). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Allen, M., Berkowitz, S., Hunt, S., & Louden, A. (1999). A meta-analysis of the impact of
forensics and communication education on critical thinking. Communication Education,
48, 18-30.
Students’ Perspectives
Bellon, J. (2001). A research-based justification for debate across the curriculum. Argumentation
and Advocacy, 36, 161-175.
Benoit, P. J. (1983). Characteristics of arguing from a social actor's perspective. In D. Zarefsky,
M. O. Sillars, & J. Rhodes (Eds.), Argument in transition: Proceedings of the third
summer conference on argumentation (pp. 544-549). Annandale: SCA.
Bransford, J. D., Brown, A. L., & Cocking, R. R. (Eds.). (2000). How people learn: Brain, mind,
experience and school (Expanded ed.). Washington, DC: National Academy Press.
Cohen, E. G. (1994). Restructuring the classroom: Conditions for productive small groups.
Review of Educational Research, 64, 1-35.
Freire, P. (1970/2002). Pedagogy of the oppressed (30th Anniversary ed.). New York:
Continuum. [originally published 1970]
Kuhn, D. (1991). The skills of argument. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Meyers, R. A., Brashers, D. E., Winston, L., & Grob, L. (1997). Sex differences and group
argument: A theoretical framework and empirical investigation. Communication Studies,
48, 19-41.
Tannen, D. (1998). The argument culture: Moving from debate to dialogue. New York: Random
House.
Trapp, R. (1986). The role of disagreement in interactive argument. Journal of the American
Forensic Association, 23, 23-41.
Walker, G. B. (1991). Argument and conflict: Conceptual and empirical perspectives. In D.
Parson (Ed.), Argument in controversy: Proceedings of the seventh SCA/AFA conference
on argumentation (pp. 182-187). Annandale: SCA.
Students’ Perspectives
Williams, D. E., McGee, B. R., & Worth, D. S. (2001). University student perceptions of the
efficacy of debate participation: An empirical investigation. Argumentation and
Advocacy, 37, 198-209.
... A fim de superar os limites da configuração triangular, Pimenta ( , 2011 propõe considerar a prática como práxis pedagógica, incorporando a pesquisa tanto na formação do professor quanto na sua ação de ensinar. Na aproximação entre "pesquisa e ensino e pesquisa e aprendizagem", surgem papéis diferenciados "professor-pesquisador e aluno-pesquisador" (Pimenta, 2011, p (Morin, 1999) e modelam quer a produção de conhecimento (Nowotny et al, 2001), quer as instituições encarregues de o produzir e transmitir (Andrews, 2008;Felten, 2016 (Kennedy, 2007(Kennedy, , 2009Brown, 2015) para preparar os argumentos pró ou contra (ambos em alguns casos) o tema ou questão em análise -por vezes complementado com a participação em grupos de discussão (Goodwin, 2003 "Claro que acaba por fazer também o aprofundamento das questões porque é inevitável, são assuntos que estão intrinsecamente relacionados e portanto as matérias acabam por ser, de um modo informal, debatidas, conversadas"(E4). "Muitas vezes o que sucede neste debate é que até os alunos vão com um conhecimento da matéria, imaginem um nível 5, e depois através de troca da comunicação, digamos assim do passar de um lado para outro, vamos subindo progressivamente ao nível de reflexão do pensamento abstrato e da aplicação" (E2). ...
... Aclan e Aziz (2015) (Goodwin, 2003;Kennedy, 2003 and "Eu acho que não há muito uma cultura de debate acho que não há, acho que os meus estudantes, (…) uma grande parte, estão à espera que eu chegue lá e diga as coisas, (...) gostam de tirar o apontamento, tenho isso ali no mestrado, e portanto as aulas que é para discutirmos um (assunto) são aulas que eu acho que eles não consideram que são aulas verdadeiras, portanto não tiram muitos apontamentos, não escrevem muito.// Eles gostam quando (apresento) o PowerPoint com a síntese, (…) que fiz a partir de aquilo que eles disseram, não só mas também, isso torna a aula verdadeira."(E 6). ...
... Desde há décadas que é posto em prática em sala de aula. Nos Estados Unidos da América (USA), para além dos debates competitivos em que se inscrevem equipas de alunos de diferentes escolas e universidades, existe um amplo movimento pró debate em todo o currículo (debate cross-curriculum,Goodwin, 2003), no âmbito do qual a estratégia pedagógica vem sendo objeto de reflexão e análise em diversas publicações. A título de exemplo veja-se o recente artigo deDy-Boarmana et al. (2018).O termo debate é muitas vezes utilizado, tanto na oralidade como na escrita, para designar uma discussão, estratégia mais conhecida e vulgarizada que lhe anda muitas vezes associada no Ensino Superior. ...
Chapter
Este capítulo hace referencia a la evolución experimentada por la universidad española en las últimas décadas, a las funciones y dimensiones de la profesión docente y a aquellas tendencias que, emergentes en la actualidad, delimitan los desafíos a los que necesitará responder en los próximos años.
... Debate according to studies of Goodwin (2003), Hajhashemi (2012), Seto & Hicks, (2016) is an activity that develops public speaking skills, critical thinking, research and teamwork skills. It provides pedagogical structure for oral component of curricula, and give opportunity to point out issues, resolve issues, and articulate points of view. ...
... The students also learned self-confidence, teamwork, cooperation, substantial information, trust, self-preparation, critical thinking, logical reasoning, listening carefully, and teamwork. The studies according to Goodwin (2003), Hajhashemi (2012), and Seto and Hicks (2016) that debate is an activity to develop public speaking skills, critical thinking skills, research skills, and teamwork skills support these results. It also provides opportunity to point out issues, resolve them, and articulate points of view. ...
Research
Full-text available
The Challenges of the Application of the Productive University’s Philosophy In Jordanian Universities and Ways of Developing Them from The Perspective of Academic Leaders Habes Mohammad Hatamleh Jadara University of Excellence, Jordan Najwa Abdel Hamid Darawsha Jadara University of Excellence, Jordan ABSTRACT The study aims at identifying the challenges of applying the productive university's philosophy in Jordanian universities and ways of developing them from the point of view of the academic leaders. The analytical descriptive method is used. The study sample consisted of 150 academic leaders, and the questionnaire was used as an instrument for study. The results of the study shows that the challenges of applying the productive university philosophy in the Jordanian universities comes to a great degree of appreciation. The results also show statistically significant differences due to the impact of the universities and came to the benefit of the public universities and the college variable. While the results show that there are no differences due to the impact of the academic rank. As for the proposals for developing the university's productive philosophy, they came as follows: , the proposal "that the university administration seeks to re-establish its budget in achieving the balance between the revenues generated by the investments" accounts for (15.89%), while the proposal "to strengthen the management of universities private sector participation in providing the necessary support for the activation of technology institutions of higher education", ranks last by (6.62%). The study recommends that the cooperation between the productive university and the local community within the university should change. In addition, the university should provide facilitation and support to the research grants that seek to strengthen cooperation between universities and local communities and contribute to solving their problems. The productive university should benefit from the experiences of developed nations which have adopted the university's productive philosophy, as well as making the best use of the available resources.
... Debate according to studies of Goodwin (2003), Hajhashemi (2012), Seto & Hicks, (2016) is an activity that develops public speaking skills, critical thinking, research and teamwork skills. It provides pedagogical structure for oral component of curricula, and give opportunity to point out issues, resolve issues, and articulate points of view. ...
... The students also learned self-confidence, teamwork, cooperation, substantial information, trust, self-preparation, critical thinking, logical reasoning, listening carefully, and teamwork. The studies according to Goodwin (2003), Hajhashemi (2012), and Seto and Hicks (2016) that debate is an activity to develop public speaking skills, critical thinking skills, research skills, and teamwork skills support these results. It also provides opportunity to point out issues, resolve them, and articulate points of view. ...
... Debate according to studies of Goodwin (2003), Hajhashemi (2012), Seto & Hicks, (2016) is an activity that develops public speaking skills, critical thinking, research and teamwork skills. It provides pedagogical structure for oral component of curricula, and give opportunity to point out issues, resolve issues, and articulate points of view. ...
... The students also learned self-confidence, teamwork, cooperation, substantial information, trust, self-preparation, critical thinking, logical reasoning, listening carefully, and teamwork. The studies according to Goodwin (2003), Hajhashemi (2012), and Seto and Hicks (2016) that debate is an activity to develop public speaking skills, critical thinking skills, research skills, and teamwork skills support these results. It also provides opportunity to point out issues, resolve them, and articulate points of view. ...
... A 'healthy' dose of competition and stress may improve the learning experience in debates by guaranteeing preparation (Schroeder and Ebert, 1983;Saito and Fujinami, 2011). However, the competitive and confrontational nature, not to mention pre-debate and oral presentation anxieties, can hinder socially anxious students and those who are uncomfortable with conflict (Goodwin, 2003, Tumposky, 2004, Hartin et al., 2017. Hence, we designed our framework to reduce pre-debate anxiety & competitiveness. ...
... They are ideally suited for preparing learners to be well-rounded healthcare professionals who can advocate for patients and lead change in healthcare policies (Faust and Paulson, 1998;Hall, 2011). Unfortunately, unfamiliarity with using debates for learning and over-estimating the difficulty of implementation turns away students (Goodwin, 2003) as well as educators (Omelicheva, 2006). We hope this paper will motivate and guide others in adopting and adapting the powerful and ancient but neglected adult learning practice of educational debates. ...
... Interaction enhanced students' communication and other social skills. Previous researchers also reported similar findings: Hanna et al [20] talked about students' enhanced ability to communicate and share information with others, Mumtaz & Latif [32] stressed the development of listening skills, being open to different points of view and able to answer questions to larger groups of people, Goodwin [36] pointed on the learning of effective communication strategies and group work, Onen [21] reported enhancement of oral communication skills, while Williams, Mc Gee & Worth [22] found that the social skills acquired during the debate led to students' selfesteem and self-confidence. Even shy students had the chance to engage in the discussion and overcome their shyness, as the whole procedure was based on democratic values and was carried out in a civilized way. ...
... Though there were minor negative comments and/or criticism in this study-mostly due to personal traits and reservations and similar to those depicted in some of the previous studies-, the participants used strong adjectival language to describe their perceptions and the benefits they gained through the debate process. In previous research, respondents' criticism towards the debate were somehow different and included negative comments about competitiveness [36], [33], lack of preparation, timeconsumption, stress, and frustration associated with final assessment and lower marks, discrepancies during the process itself, participants' sex and beliefs [37], [32], [31], [38]. ...
Article
Full-text available
The purpose of this study is to examine post-graduate students’ perceptions, feelings, attitudes and evaluation comments of a debate process they experienced in an Educational Policy, Management and Leadership module during their M.A.(Ed.) studies at a well-known Greek university. Furthermore, it aspires to share the perspective of broadening the teaching methodology in Higher Education using level-appropriate and widely appreciated teaching tools. The study was based on a qualitative design. Findings indicated the benefits gained through the learner-centered structured debate approach emphasized on the development of students’ critical, analytical and communicational skills and stressed their gradual transformation of attitudes. Respondents also stressed active learning and self-driven study, as opposed to the passive learning attained during lectures. Participants’ positive feelings constitute the vehicle to the formation and/or transformation of attitudes and the implications of these transformations for their personal and professional life.
... Namun dari segala kekuatan debat, ada sisi lain yang tidak dapat dihindari dari sistem kompetisi intelektual ini. Debat memiliki konsekuensi menurunnya kualitas emosional yang mengarah pada pertikaian peserta didik (Goodwin, 2003). Lebih lanjut Goodwin mengidentifikasi beberapa peserta didik lebih memilih diskusi daripada debat. ...
Article
Full-text available
Era globalisasi menggerus nilai dan jati diri bangsa Indonesia. Salah satu nilai yang dimiliki oleh bangsa Indonesia itu adalah Hibualamo. Oleh karena itu, penelitian ini akan fokus membahas proses revitalisasi karakter bangsa melalui pembelajaran bahasa Indonesia berbasis nilai kearifan lokal. Metode penelitian yang digunakan adalah kualitatif dengan memanfaatkan studi pustaka sebagai strateginya. Hasilnya, nilai Hibualamo yaitu O dora, O Hayangi, O baliara, O adili, dan O adiai dapat diintegrasikan dalam materi debat bahasa Indonesia dan berpotensi besar dalam materi pembelajaran yang lain. Nilai-nilai tersebut dapat masuk dalam setiap sintak pembelajaran, khususnya pada materi debat. Hal ini juga akan menjaga esensi debat sebagai pembelajaran kolaboratif. Artinya, esensi debat tidak sebatas pada kompetitif, tetapi pada proses pemecahan masalah secara bersama. Simpulan yang dapat dirumuskan dari penelitian ini yaitu, guru harus lebih inovatif dalam mengambangkan model pembelajaran dalam K-13. K-13 memungkinkan guru untuk menginternalisasi nilai budaya lokal sebagai wujud kontekstualisasi dalam kegiatan pembelajaran.
... Initially, Littlefield (2001) Besides, Goodwin (2003) examined students" views regarding the debate instruction in one content area class. 70 students who were in sophomore level course exposed to the debate and then they were invited to write brief essays in order to know their views about the debate instruction. ...
Thesis
Full-text available
The overarching aim of the study is to figure out the effects of debate instruction on Turkish EFL students‟ L2 speaking anxiety, L2 speaking performance, and L2 writing performance and also to determine the differences between A1 and A2 students exposed to the debate instruction regarding their L2 speaking anxiety, L2 speaking performance, and L2 writing performance. The study also aimed to explore students‟ perceptions regarding the classroom debate instruction and to list the challenges experienced during conducting the classroom debate instruction. The participants included 26 A1 and 24 A2 high school students exposed to the debate instruction for eight sessions. The data were collected by means of a Turkish version of Foreign Language Speaking Anxiety Questionnaire (T-FLSAQ), L2 speaking tests, L2 writing tests, field notes of the researcher, and semi-structured interviews with the students. The findings from the quantitative data revealed that students‟ L2 speaking anxiety decreased statistically significant after using the debate instruction and students‟ L2 speaking performance and L2 writing performance improved statistically significant after exposing to the debate instruction. The findings also revealed that there were not statistically significant differences between A1 and A2 students‟ L2 speaking anxiety, L2 speaking performance, and L2 writing performance. The findings from the qualitative data showed that students have positive perceptions towards the classroom debate instruction and the findings also reported that time limitation, students‟ motivation, students‟ satisfaction and v students‟ proficiency levels were the biggest challenges that L2 teacher faced in implementing the classroom debate instruction. Keywords: Debate Instruction, L2 Speaking Anxiety, L2 Speaking Performance and L2 Writing Performance
... Aiming to measure the students' perception about educational debates, it has been found (Goodwin, 2003) that while few students reported distress and anxiety about the competitive nature of debates, the majority expressed positive feelings claiming that the debate encouraged them to explore the content of the course deeply and that it promoted independent learning for themselves. ...
Conference Paper
Full-text available
Findings of the 2019 UK & Ireland Engineering Education Research Network Annual Conference. ISBN 978-0-9934245-1
Article
This case study documents the effort to prototype a media literacy curriculum based on Herman and Chomsky (2010)'s Propaganda Model as well as the target students’ environment and need analysis. The course is implemented under a Content and Language Integrated Learning program for 30 first-year undergraduate students in Sophia University, Japan. The objective is to develop students’ awareness of issues facing society they live in, along with the capacity to think critically about media information, deliberate in public discourse via expression of individual opinions, and exchange with others. Evaluation study is conducted upon completion of the course to examine whether, or to what extent, that objective is realized, using qualitative method. Results show positive impacts on students’ learning, providing valuable inputs for further iterations of curriculum design in citizenship and media literacy education.
Article
Full-text available
This meta‐analysis considers the impact of various methods of improving public communication skills on critical thinking. The results indicate that communication instruction improves the critical thinking ability of the participants (longitudinal designs r= .18, cross‐sectional designs r= .20). Forensic participation demonstrated the largest positive impact on critical thinking improvement, but all communication skill experiences demonstrated significant improvement. The cumulative evidence indicates that communication skill instruction generates, using the Binomial Effect Size Display (BESD), a 44% increase in critical thinking ability. These results provide important evidence to support the maintenance of forensics programs in an era of increased educational accountability, downsizing, and budgetary cutbacks.
Article
Moving beyond the general question of effectiveness of small group learning, this conceptual review proposes conditions under which the use of small groups in classrooms can be productive. Included in the review is recent research that manipulates various features of cooperative learning as well as studies of the relationship of interaction in small groups to outcomes. The analysis develops propositions concerning the kinds of discourse that are productive of different types of learning as well as propositions concerning how desirable kinds of interaction may be fostered. Whereas limited exchange of information and explanation are adequate for routine learning in collaborative seatwork, more open exchange and elaborated discussion are necessary for conceptual learning with group tasks and ill-structured problems. Moreover, task instructions, student preparation, and the nature of the teacher role that are eminently suitable for supporting interaction in more routine learning tasks may result in unduly constraining the discussion in less structured tasks where the objective is conceptual learning. The research reviewed also suggests that it is necessary to treat problems of status within small groups engaged in group tasks with ill-structured problems. With a focus on task and interaction, the analysis attempts to move away from the debates about intrinsic and extrinsic rewards and goal and resource interdependence that have characterized research in cooperative learning.
Article
The author syntheses scholarship from the fields of competitive forensics, communication pedagogy, and educational psychology into a research-based justification for “debate across the curriculum” (DAC) programs in college and universities. Although relatively little specific research has been conducted concerning DAC, the author finds ample evidence in the existing literature that DAC represents an effective way to expand the number of undergraduates who benefit from debate training.
Article
This is a review of the book written by Thomas A. Angelo and K. Patricia Cross entitled Classroom Assessment Techniques: A Handbook for College Teachers, 2nd Edition, published in 1993 by Jossey-Bass.
Book
The Skills of Argument presents a comprehensive empirical study of informal reasoning as argument, involving subjects across the life span. Subjects ranging in age from adolescence to late adulthood were asked to describe their views on social problems that people have occasion to think and talk about in everyday life, such as crime and unemployment. In addition to providing supporting evidence for their theories, subjects were asked to contemplate alternative theories and counterarguments and to evaluate new evidence on the topics. This is the first major study of informal reasoning across the life span. Highlighting the importance of argumentive reasoning in everyday thought, the book offers a theoretical framework for conceptualizing and studying thinking as argument. The findings address issues of major importance to cognitive and developmental psychologists, as well as educators concerned with improving the quality of people's thinking. The work is also relevant to philosophers, political scientists, and linguists interested in informal reasoning and argumentive discourse.
Article
This paper offers a synthesis of research on cooperative learning in small groups. The main challenge for teachers who utilize cooperative learning is to stimulate the type of interaction desired according to their teaching objective. A generalization regarding student interactions is that if students are not taught differently, they will tend to operate at the most concrete level. Student participation in a task group that is structured to foster resource- or goal-interdependence appears to increase student motivation and performance. The effectiveness of the group structure depends on the task's complexity and uncertainty and on the extent to which the instructions attempt to micromanage the interaction process. Information is also offered on ensuring equity in interaction, managing the interaction, and unsettled issues, such as special curricula and assessment. Successful implementation of cooperative learning also requires staff development and principals who demonstrate effective managerial skills and instructional leadership. (LMI)
Article
This essay reports the findings of a national survey of collegiate debaters that dealt in part with their perceptions of the efficacy of debate participation. Respondents (N = 286) answered two open-ended questions on the benefits and disadvantages of debate involvement, and their responses were sorted into thematic categories. Despite the fragmentation of intercollegiate debate into multiple formats and debate-sponsoring organizations, students generally reported the same benefits and disadvantages of debate participation. Implications are suggested for the future development and health of intercollegiate debate programs.