What if we offer a protected context to dissent? Elaboration of controversies about epistemological beliefs when participating in debate and serius-game devices

Abstract

Developing epistemological beliefs and beliefs about learning is a pending challenge in teacher training. A potential resource to deal with it is argumentation with peers since it enables critical examination of different perspectives and evaluating our own. Educational devices designed for this must both maximize the controversy and minimize potential social and reputational threats since these beliefs gravitate on identity and resist being subjected to examination.
Two types of devices that can contribute to these ends are debate and games. Debate legitimizes polarization but can limit engagement by accentuating dispute dynamics. Games, thanks to their rules and the fictional world they generate, can offer novel conversational
contexts, and enable safe spaces to rehearse new arguments. This article presents a case study that analyses discussions of two groups of Primary School
teacher students who participated in debate or game devices. During 10-minute discussion rounds, participants assumed designated roles and discussed topics related to knowledge and learning. The results present the controversies raised and how the participants managed them. We describe what characterized the argumentative activity that was configured in each device, focusing on aspects of socio-affective regulation. In both groups, the participants used the discursive resources offered by the device itself to comment on the activity and manage their participation. In doing so, they regulated the controversies and relational tensions that arose – which sometimes favoured the discussion and sometimes seemed to dilute it. The use of the playful narrative of the game to refer to the activity itself and regulate the distance or involvement in it when necessary is salient.