Difference between revisions of "Nokes - Dialectical Interaction and Robust Learning"
| Line 27: | Line 27: | ||
==Glossary== | ==Glossary== | ||
==Research questions== | ==Research questions== | ||
| − | How do students learn when engaged in a debate? Do they integrate their own viewpoint with that of their opponent, or focus only on their own side? | + | How do students learn when engaged in a debate? Do they integrate their own viewpoint with that of their opponent, or focus only on their own side? Does the format of the debate affect this? Also, what motivational and affective factors play into this? How do student goals (like performance or mastery goals) influence what information gets processed? Do different affective experiences lead to different patterns of learning? |
==Independent Variables== | ==Independent Variables== | ||
| + | Our first study has a 2 x 2 design. | ||
| + | Factor 1: Debate Format - Alternating Turns or Free-Form | ||
| + | Factor 2: Debate Criterion - Substance or Rhetoric | ||
==Dependent Variables== | ==Dependent Variables== | ||
==Hypothesis== | ==Hypothesis== | ||
Revision as of 21:38, 5 December 2009
Dialectical Interaction and Robust Learning
Contents
Summary Table
| PIs | Timothy Nokes, John Levine |
| Other Contributers | Daniel Belenky, Soniya Gadgil |
| Study Start Date | Sep. 1, 2009 |
| Study End Date | May. 31, 2010 |
| Site | University of Pittsburgh |
| Number of Students | N = ~180 |
| Total Participant Hours | ~360. |
| DataShop | no data yet |
Abstract
This work, which lies at the intersection of motivation, affect, social interaction and conceptual learning, studies the role of affect in a learning situation in which it is hypothesized to play a particularly prominent role. We focus on dialectical interaction, in which two or more people with roughly equal status but alternative viewpoints work together to solve a problem, perform a task, or reach agreement on an issue. The term “alternative viewpoints” is used broadly to include different stances on a controversial issue and different strategies for solving a problem. We assume that dialectical interaction affects participants’ cognitive activity in large part through its impact on their motivational states / goals and affective responses during discussion.
Background & Significance
Glossary
Research questions
How do students learn when engaged in a debate? Do they integrate their own viewpoint with that of their opponent, or focus only on their own side? Does the format of the debate affect this? Also, what motivational and affective factors play into this? How do student goals (like performance or mastery goals) influence what information gets processed? Do different affective experiences lead to different patterns of learning?
Independent Variables
Our first study has a 2 x 2 design. Factor 1: Debate Format - Alternating Turns or Free-Form Factor 2: Debate Criterion - Substance or Rhetoric
