Luka: a Digital Game using Argumentation to Promote non-polarized Discourse in Brazilian Elementary School Students
- Selma Leitão Santos
, - Alisson Michel Silva Valença,
- Nathália Patrícia Teófilo Bezerra de Melo
Abstract
Transforming students into critical thinkers, pedagogically engaged, is one of the pillars of the National Common Curricular Base (Brazil, 2019). The game Luka pursues this goal through three mechanics, inspired by anti-bias strategies: Time Tablet Collection, Argument Board, and Debates. The aim was to identify if the Luka game favored non-polarized discourse among participants, through an unstructured debate on WhatsApp with eight students and one teacher from an eighth-grade class at a private school in Recife (Brazil). Micro and macrostructural analysis of the debate was conducted. It was observed that the game’s contents were consistently used and adapted by students throughout the debate. There was a low commitment from students to their viewpoints, indicating low discursive polarization. Two students made direct comments on the cogency of their peers’ arguments. The teacher, throughout the debate, developed discursive actions (pragmatic and argumentative) that initiated and maintained the argumentative process.
Keywords
argumentation, discourse polarization, digital games, games in education
References
- Brasil (2019). Base Nacional Comum Curricular (BNCC). Disponível em : http://basenacionalcomum. mec.gov.br/images/BNCC_EI_EF_110518_versaofinal_site.pdf
- Brasil. (2019). Base Nacional Comum Curricular (BNCC). http://basenacionalcomum.mec.gov.br/images/BNCC_EI_EF_110518_versaofinal_site.pdf
- Correia, V. (2014). Biased argumentation and critical thinking. In Advances in argumentation in artificial intelligence (pp. 13-28). https://doi.org/10.3726/978-3-0352-0271-7/13
- De Chiaro, S., & Leitão, S. (2005). O papel do professor na construção discursiva da argumentação em sala de aula. Psicologia: Reflexão e Crítica, 18(3), 350–357. https://doi.org/10.1590/S0102-79722005000300009
- Goldstein, M., Crowell, A., & Kuhn, D. (2009). What constitutes skilled argumentation and how does it develop Informal Logic, 29(4), 379-395. https://doi.org/10.22329/IL.V29I4.2905
- Lee, J. J., & Hammer, J. (2011). Gamification in education: What, how, why bother? Academic Exchange Quarterly, 15(2), 146. https://doi.org/10.1177/15554120231158625
- Leitão, S. (2000). The potential of argument in knowledge building. Human Development, 43(6), 332–360. https://www.jstor.org/stable/26763483
- Leitão, S. (2007). Processos de construção do conhecimento: A argumentação em foco. Pro-Posições, 18(3), 75-92. www.fe.unicamp.br
- Leitão, S. (2012). O trabalho com argumentação em ambientes de ensino-aprendizagem: Um desafio persistente. Uni-pluri/versidad, 12(3), 23-37. ID: 147230712
- Lord, C. G., Ross, L., & Lepper, M. R. (1979). Biased assimilation and attitude polarization: The effects of prior theories on subsequently considered evidence. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 37(11), 2098–2109. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.37.11.2098
- Ramírez, N. L. (2018). Efeito do debate crítico na redução da polarização do discurso argumentativo em sala de aula (Tese de doutorado, Universidade Federal de Pernambuco). https://repositorio.ufpe.br/handle/123456789/32405
- Sweller, J. (1988). Cognitive load during problem solving: Effects on learning. Cognitive Science, 12(2), 257–285. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15516709cog1202_4
- Song, Y., & Sparks, J. R. (2019). Building a game-enhanced formative assessment to gather evidence about middle school students’ argumentation skills. Educational Technology Research and Development, 67(5), 1175–1196. http://www.jstor.org/stable/45217356
- Taber, C. S., & Lodge, M. (2006). Motivated skepticism in the evaluation of political beliefs. American Journal of Political Science, 50(3), 755-769. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-5907.2006.00214.x
- Walton, D. (1996). Argumentation schemes for presumptive reasoning (1st ed.). Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203811160