Staff Publications

Staff Publications

  • external user (warningwarning)
  • Log in as
  • language uk
  • About

    'Staff publications' is the digital repository of Wageningen University & Research

    'Staff publications' contains references to publications authored by Wageningen University staff from 1976 onward.

    Publications authored by the staff of the Research Institutes are available from 1995 onwards.

    Full text documents are added when available. The database is updated daily and currently holds about 240,000 items, of which 72,000 in open access.

    We have a manual that explains all the features 

    Current refinement(s):

    Records 1 - 5 / 5

    • help
    • print

      Print search results

    • export

      Export search results

    Check title to add to marked list
    A systematic review on the impacts of game-based learning on argumentation skills
    Noroozi, Omid ; Dehghanzadeh, Hojjat ; Talaee, Ebrahim - \ 2020
    Entertainment Computing 35 (2020). - ISSN 1875-9521
    Argumentation - Game-based learning - Instructional support - Learning outcomes

    This study maps instructional support and learning outcomes of argumentation game-based learning. For this systematic review, 29 publications dating from 2000 through 2019 were studied to highlight the foci of this field of research. Although these studies reported effects of game-based learning on learning outcomes and instructional supports on argumentation skills, none of the publications reported specific instructional support and game elements associated with the learning outcomes. Modeling, reflection and feedback were the most commonly reported instructional support of argumentation game-based learning. Feedback, challenge, and collaboration were the most commonly reported game elements of argumentation game-based learning. In addition, high level of argumentation skills and engagement were the most commonly reported positive learning outcomes of argumentation game-based learning. The results of this study provide suggestions on how to design argumentation game-based learning.

    The effects of online peer feedback and epistemic beliefs on students’ argumentation-based learning
    Noroozi, Omid ; Hatami, Javad - \ 2019
    Innovations in Education and Teaching International 56 (2019)5. - ISSN 1470-3297 - p. 548 - 557.
    Argumentation - epistemic beliefs - essay writing - learning - peer feedback
    Although the importance of students’ argumentative peer feedback for learning is undeniable, there is a need for further empirical evidence on whether and how it is related to various aspects of argumentation-based learning namely argumentative essay writing, domain-specific learning, and attitudinal change while considering their epistemic beliefs which are known to be related to argumentation. In this study, a pre-test–post-test design was conducted with 42 higher education students who were asked to write an argumentative essay on the GMOs, engage in argumentative feedback, and revise their essay. The results showed that argumentative peer feedback improves students’ argumentative essay writing and domain-specific learning. Furthermore, argumentative peer feedback caused attitudinal change. However, findings did not prove any impact of students’ epistemic beliefs on argumentation-based learning. This is against broadly shared theoretical assumption that argumentation-based learning is related to students’ epistemic beliefs. We discuss these results and provide an agenda for future work.
    Considering students’ epistemic beliefs to facilitate their argumentative discourse and attitudinal change with a digital dialogue game
    Noroozi, Omid - \ 2018
    Innovations in Education and Teaching International 55 (2018)3. - ISSN 1470-3297 - p. 357 - 365.
    Argumentation - attitudinal change - dialogue - digital game - epistemic beliefs

    This study explores whether and how higher education students with various epistemic beliefs engage in argumentative discourse and shift their attitude within a digital dialogue game. Students were assigned to groups of four or five and asked to argue and explore various perspectives of four controversial issues of environmental education in four consecutive weeks that each lasted 90 min. The results showed the digital dialogue game can guide students towards a desired mode of interaction and argumentative discourse. Students’ epistemic beliefs were seen to be an important factor for their attitudinal change. Furthermore, students’ epistemic beliefs contributed to their style and frequency of particular types of argumentative discourse. Multiplists engaged in argumentative discourse activities differently than Evaluativists during the argumentative discourse. Explanations for these results, implications, limitations and suggestions for future work are provided.

    Relations between scripted online peer feedback processes and quality of written argumentative essay
    Noroozi, Omid ; Biemans, Harm ; Mulder, Martin - \ 2016
    The Internet and Higher Education 31 (2016). - ISSN 1096-7516 - p. 20 - 31.
    Argumentation - Biotechnology - Learning - Scripting - Writing

    Teachers often complain about the quality of students' written essays in higher education. This study explores the relations between scripted online peer feedback processes and quality of written argumentative essay as they occur in an authentic learning situation with direct practical relevance. Furthermore, the effects of the online argumentative peer feedback script on students' written argumentative essay are studied. A pre-test, post-test design was used with 189 undergraduate students who were assigned to groups of three. They were asked to explore various perspectives, and the 'pros and cons' on the topic of 'Genetically Modified Organisms (GMOs)' in order to write an argumentative essay in the field of biotechnology. The findings reveal that successful students and groups differ in terms of their feedback quality than less-successful students and groups. This implies that when students engage in high-quality, elaborated and justified peer feedback processes, they write high-quality argumentative essays. Furthermore, the results show that the online argumentative peer feedback script enhances the quality of students' written argumentative essay. Explanations for these results, limitations, and recommendations for further research are provided.

    Factors influencing Argumentative Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning (ACSCL) in higher education
    Noroozi, Omid ; Mulder, Martin ; Biemans, Harm ; Chizari, Mohammad - \ 2009
    In: 4th International Conference on e-Learning, ICEL 2009. - Academic Conferences Limited (Proceedings of the International Conference on e-Learning, ICEL ) - ISBN 9781906638375 - p. 394 - 402.
    ACSCL - Argumentation - Collaborative Learning - CSCL - Higher education

    In the information and communication era, Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning (CSCL) is becoming prominent in higher education, and universities are gradually bringing argumentation in CSCL environments into the mainstream of their educational programs. The study proposed here is designed to identify the factors influencing ACSCL environments in order to promote the quality of the learning process and results. A comprehensive model for the factors influencing ACSCLearning is not yet available. So, the relevant literature has been reviewed to construct and develop a theoretical framework of factors which could influence the effectiveness of ACSCLearning. A preliminary model of ACSCL is proposed by identifying factors including student/peer, learning environment, learning processes and activities combined with possible sub-skills of argumentation thinking.

    Check title to add to marked list

    Show 20 50 100 records per page

     
    Please log in to use this service. Login as Wageningen University & Research user or guest user in upper right hand corner of this page.