El debate académico como herramienta para desarrollar habilidades críticas
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.63688/k94m6w52Palabras clave:
debate académico, pensamiento crítico, argumentación, aprendizaje activoResumen
El presente estudio analiza el debate académico como herramienta pedagógica para el desarrollo de habilidades críticas en los estudiantes. La investigación se realizó mediante una revisión sistemática de literatura científica, con enfoque cualitativo y descriptivo-analítico, a partir del análisis de estudios sobre debate académico, pensamiento crítico, argumentación, aprendizaje activo y participación estudiantil. Esta metodología permitió identificar aportes teóricos y prácticos del debate en el proceso educativo, especialmente en la formación de estudiantes capaces de analizar información, construir argumentos, defender posturas con evidencias y valorar distintas perspectivas.
Los resultados evidencian que el debate académico favorece el pensamiento crítico, porque exige investigar, organizar ideas, evaluar fuentes, formular argumentos y responder de manera razonada ante opiniones contrarias. Además, fortalece habilidades comunicativas como la expresión oral, la escucha activa, la seguridad al hablar, la refutación y el respeto por la diversidad de opiniones. También contribuye al aprendizaje significativo al relacionar los contenidos académicos con situaciones reales, problemas sociales y contextos profesionales.
Se concluye que el debate académico es una metodología activa valiosa para transformar el aula en un espacio de diálogo, análisis y construcción colectiva del conocimiento. Su efectividad depende de una planificación docente adecuada, temas pertinentes, reglas claras y evaluación de la calidad argumentativa.
Referencias
Abrami, P. C., Bernard, R. M., Borokhovski, E., Waddington, D. I., Wade, C. A., & Persson, T. (2015). Strategies for teaching students to think critically: A meta-analysis. Review of Educational Research, 85(2), 275–314. https://doi.org/10.3102/0034654314551063
Alén, E., Domínguez, T., & de Carlos, P. (2015). University students’ perceptions of the use of academic debates as a teaching methodology. Journal of Hospitality, Leisure, Sport & Tourism Education, 16, 15–21. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhlste.2014.11.001
Ang, R. X., Chew, Q. H., Sum, M. Y., Sengupta, S., & Sim, K. (2019). Systematic review of the use of debates in health professions education—Does it work? GMS Journal for Medical Education, 36(4), Doc37. https://doi.org/10.3205/zma001245
Asterhan, C. S. C., & Schwarz, B. B. (2007). The effects of monological and dialogical argumentation on concept learning in evolutionary theory. Journal of Educational Psychology, 99(3), 626–639. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-0663.99.3.626
Budesheim, T. L., & Lundquist, A. R. (1999). Consider the opposite: Opening minds through in-class debates on course-related controversies. Teaching of Psychology, 26(2), 106–110. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15328023top2602_5
Camp, J. M., & Schnader, A. L. (2010). Using debate to enhance critical thinking in the accounting classroom: The Sarbanes-Oxley Act and U.S. tax policy. Issues in Accounting Education, 25(4), 655–675. https://doi.org/10.2308/iace.2010.25.4.655
Davies, M. (2011). Concept mapping, mind mapping and argument mapping: What are the differences and do they matter? Higher Education, 62(3), 279–301. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10734-010-9387-6
Dwyer, C. P., Hogan, M. J., & Stewart, I. (2014). An integrated critical thinking framework for the 21st century. Thinking Skills and Creativity, 12, 43–52. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tsc.2013.12.004
Erduran, S., Simon, S., & Osborne, J. (2004). TAPping into argumentation: Developments in the application of Toulmin’s argument pattern for studying science discourse. Science Education, 88(6), 915–933. https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.20012
Grant, M. J., & Booth, A. (2009). A typology of reviews: An analysis of 14 review types and associated methodologies. Health Information & Libraries Journal, 26(2), 91–108. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1471-1842.2009.00848.x
Holmes, N. G., Wieman, C. E., & Bonn, D. A. (2015). Teaching critical thinking. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 112(36), 11199–11204. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1505329112
Huber, C. R., & Kuncel, N. R. (2016). Does college teach critical thinking? A meta-analysis. Review of Educational Research, 86(2), 431–468. https://doi.org/10.3102/0034654315605917
Kuhn, D. (1999). A developmental model of critical thinking. Educational Researcher, 28(2), 16–46. https://doi.org/10.3102/0013189X028002016
Mumtaz, S., & Latif, R. (2017). Learning through debate during problem-based learning: An active learning strategy. Advances in Physiology Education, 41(3), 390–394. https://doi.org/10.1152/advan.00157.2016
Nussbaum, E. M., & Sinatra, G. M. (2003). Argument and conceptual engagement. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 28(3), 384–395. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0361-476X(02)00038-3
Omelicheva, M. Y., & Avdeyeva, O. (2008). Teaching with lecture or debate? Testing the effectiveness of traditional versus active learning methods of instruction. PS: Political Science & Politics, 41(3), 603–607. https://doi.org/10.1017/S1049096508080815
Oros, A. L. (2007). Let’s debate: Active learning encourages student participation and critical thinking. Journal of Political Science Education, 3(3), 293–311. https://doi.org/10.1080/15512160701558273
Osborne, J. (2010). Arguing to learn in science: The role of collaborative, critical discourse. Science, 328(5977), 463–466. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1183944
Page, M. J., McKenzie, J. E., Bossuyt, P. M., Boutron, I., Hoffmann, T. C., Mulrow, C. D., Shamseer, L., Tetzlaff, J. M., Akl, E. A., Brennan, S. E., Chou, R., Glanville, J., Grimshaw, J. M., Hróbjartsson, A., Lalu, M. M., Li, T., Loder, E. W., Mayo-Wilson, E., McDonald, S., … Moher, D. (2021). The PRISMA 2020 statement: An updated guideline for reporting systematic reviews. BMJ, 372, n71. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.n71
Rapanta, C., & Felton, M. K. (2022). Learning to argue through dialogue: A review of instructional approaches. Educational Psychology Review, 34, 477–509. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-021-09637-2
Roy, A., & Macchiette, B. (2005). Debating the issues: A tool for augmenting critical thinking skills of marketing students. Journal of Marketing Education, 27(3), 264–276. https://doi.org/10.1177/0273475305280533
Sampson, V., & Clark, D. B. (2008). Assessment of the ways students generate arguments in science education: Current perspectives and recommendations for future directions. Science Education, 92(3), 447–472. https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.20276
Snyder, H. (2019). Literature review as a research methodology: An overview and guidelines. Journal of Business Research, 104, 333–339. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2019.07.039
Tao, Y., & Griffith, E. (2020). Making critical thinking skills training explicit, engaging, and effective through live debates on current political issues: A pilot pedagogical experiment. PS: Political Science & Politics, 53(1), 155–160. https://doi.org/10.1017/S104909651900115X
ten Dam, G. T. M., & Volman, M. L. L. (2004). Critical thinking as a citizenship competence: Teaching strategies. Learning and Instruction, 14(4), 359–379. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.learninstruc.2004.01.005
Tranfield, D., Denyer, D., & Smart, P. (2003). Towards a methodology for developing evidence-informed management knowledge by means of systematic review. British Journal of Management, 14(3), 207–222. https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-8551.00375
van Gelder, T. (2005). Teaching critical thinking: Some lessons from cognitive science. College Teaching, 53(1), 41–48. https://doi.org/10.3200/CTCH.53.1.41-48
Xiao, Y., & Watson, M. (2019). Guidance on conducting a systematic literature review. Journal of Planning Education and Research, 39(1), 93–112. https://doi.org/10.1177/0739456X17723971
Zohar, A., & Nemet, F. (2002). Fostering students’ knowledge and argumentation skills through dilemmas in human genetics. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 39(1), 35–62. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.10008
Publicado
Número
Sección
Licencia
Derechos de autor 2026 Anabel Lisbeth Naranjo Brito, Paula Beatriz Castro Guzmán, Sonia Guadalupe Suárez Castro, Jessica Adriana Calle Guallpa, María Isolina Calle Guallpa (Autor/a)
Esta obra está bajo una licencia internacional Creative Commons Atribución 4.0.
