Search

Debate, which originated in ancient Greece, originally appeared in the form of disputatio at medieval universities. Recently, Italian school have introduced the methodology as well. The Ministry of Education, University and Research (MIUR) and the National Institute for Documentation, Innovation and Educational Research (INDIRE) promote starting debate in primary school, but universities often overlook it (with some rare exceptions). Barring these exceptions, universities do not integrate debate into their didactics as a teaching methodology. This article examines the most characteristic aspects of debate, stressing its adoption in university pedagogy. It explores various ideas and options for adopting debate in lectures, all of which could help expand the set of available alternatives for achieving didactic goals. L’adozione del Debate nella didattica universitaria Il Debate, benché affondi le sue origini nell’antica Grecia, e sia stato impiegato nella forma di disputatio nelle università medievali, è una metodologia di recente introduzione nel panorama scolastico italiano. Promosso dal Ministero dell’Istruzione dell’Università e della Ricerca (MIUR) e dall’Istituto Nazionale di Documentazione, Innovazione e Ricerca Educativa (INDIRE) già a partire dalla scuola primaria, il Debate non trova, se non in qualche raro caso, applicazione in ambito universitario. E soprattutto, quando ciò avviene, il Debate non sembra venire integrato nella didattica universitaria come metodologia didattica tout court. In questo articolo, il Debate sarà presentato nei suoi aspetti peculiari ponendo l’accento sul suo impiego nella didattica universitaria. Particolare attenzione sarà dedicata alle idee e alle varie opzioni per la sua adozione in aula perché capaci di ampliare l’insieme di alternative percorribili dal docente per raggiungere i propri obiettivi didattici., Form@re - Open Journal per la formazione in rete, Vol. 19 No. 1 (2019): Robotics, AR, virtual worlds, to support cognitive development, learning outcomes, social interaction, and inclusion

The present paper’s aim is to outline a definition of “analyticity” through assuming a framework whose basic concepts are taken from rhetoric. Thus, assuming particular examples from the history of analytic philosophy – i.e. philosophers that are commonly considered “analytic” - the author shows how many shared patterns are recognisable within their argumentations, explanations, beginnings and conclusions. A previous extensional definition of “analytical philosophy” is not assumed; hence the concluded remarks can be taken as features of any analytic philosopher., Rivista Italiana di Filosofia Analitica - Junior, Vol 2, N° 1 (2011): Metodo o contenuto? Note a margine della Filosofia Analitica

Competitive debate is an argumentative confrontation about controversial issues in which parties try to convince a jury of the validity of their position. Even if its practice is quite a novelty among Italian educational methods it is used by educational institutions around the world to help students acquire skills such as social competence. However, researchers have found that competitive debates often create contradictory effects to those they are supposed to have. These include systematic hostility or competitive behavior, which are expressions of polarization and conflict rather than of empathy and perspective. Therefore, the purpose of this research is to inquire, through three empirical surveys, whether competitive debate is an effective method for acquiring conflicts and disagreements competence. With exploratory research, it will be determined whether (a) defending a believed position leads to polarization, (b) defending a disbelieved position leads to de-polarization, and (c) victory or defeat influences polarization or de-polarization. The second survey, with a quasi-experimental design, aims to verify if and how participants in competitive debate tournaments alter attitudes toward communication strategies in conflict situations. Finally, a pre-experiment aims to consider whether (d) debating improves student ability to identify argumentative fallacies. The results analysis proved that some tournament participants polarized, but that neither victory nor defeat affected this phenomenon. Additionally, the students became less inclined to use controversial communication strategies and more in favor of cooperative communication strategies, even if their ability to identify argumentative fallacies did not improve. These results, therefore, conclude that competitive debate projects promote useful attitudes toward conflict management, and that the didactics of argumentation must be rethought so it can affect the ability to identify major fallacies and thus, become competent in managing disagreements

Using debate as an effective educational tool means choosing a suitable debate format for accomplishing the pedagogical aims we have in mind. Thus, the aim of this paper is to understand how each debate format relates to the competen- cies it promotes. It is only through knowing how competencies are stimulated by specific rules of debate formats that we are able to make a reasoned and ef- fective choice., Studi sulla Formazione, Anno XVI, I-2013