|
Field
Abstract
|
Before
This field experiment studies the impact of an introduction of academic debating aspects into high school curricula on the critical thinking of students. I hypothesize that the program improves general academic aptitudes such as reading or logical thinking skills, as measured by a standardized university entrance exam. I test for possible negative effects of debating in the domain of (hyper)competitiveness. Additionally, I hypothesize that by debating both sides of issues students increase their open-mindedness and become more trusting of people who hold different opinions from themselves.
|
After
This field experiment studies the impact of an introduction of academic debating aspects into high school curricula on the critical thinking of students. I hypothesize that the program improves general academic aptitudes such as reading or logical thinking skills, as measured by a standardized university entrance exam and a self-developed 'fake news test'. I test for possible negative effects of debating in the domain of (hyper)competitiveness. Additionally, I hypothesize that by debating both sides of issues students increase their open-mindedness and become more trusting of people who hold different opinions from themselves.
|
|
Field
Trial End Date
|
Before
September 01, 2019
|
After
January 01, 2019
|
|
Field
Last Published
|
Before
September 13, 2017 11:11 AM
|
After
October 16, 2018 04:46 PM
|
|
Field
Intervention (Public)
|
Before
I introduce compulsory argumentation/debating workshops into high school curricula. I include both academic and vocational high schools into this experiment.
In this intervention, students go through a pre-test, four workshops with experienced debate coaches, and a post-test. During the school year, in between workshops, teachers are encouraged to use debate exercises in the curriculum for the treated classes.
As part of evaluation, teachers will make a report at the end of the school year how often they used these exercises, and how they felt about the intervention.
This program runs for two years.
|
After
I introduce compulsory argumentation/debating workshops into high school curricula. I include both academic and vocational high schools into this experiment.
In this intervention, students go through a pre-test, four workshops with experienced debate coaches, and a post-test. During the school year, in between workshops, teachers are encouraged to use debate exercises in the curriculum for the treated classes.
As part of evaluation, students report on the debate coaches and workshops in general.
This program runs for one year and evaluation stretches for another semester.
|
|
Field
Intervention End Date
|
Before
July 01, 2019
|
After
January 01, 2019
|
|
Field
Primary Outcomes (Explanation)
|
Before
1. Critical thinking: percentile score from the GAP, a Czech standardized exam for high school students (as a refined measure, only percentile score from logical, argumentative, and verbal sections)
2. Willigness to enter competition; self-reported view of competition (European Values Survey question); hyper-competitiveness self-report
3. Amount contributed to a public good in a 2-person public goods game
|
After
1. Critical thinking: percentile score from the GAP, a Czech standardized exam for high school students (as a refined measure, only percentile score from logical, argumentative, and verbal sections), and score on fake news test
2. Willigness to enter competition; self-reported view of competition (European Values Survey question); hyper-competitiveness self-report
3. Amount contributed to a public good in a 2-person public goods game
|
|
Field
Power calculation: Minimum Detectable Effect Size for Main Outcomes
|
Before
Abstracting away from the fact that the program will be run for 2 years and many control classes in year 1 will be treated in year 2, the first year as a standalone has an MDES of approx. 0.47; assuming intraclass correlation of 0.25, percentage of variation explained by blocking 0.1 and by covariate 0.01, 4 clusters (classes) per school, and 25 students per class.
|
After
MDES of approx. 0.47; assuming intraclass correlation of 0.25, percentage of variation explained by blocking 0.1 and by covariate 0.01, 4 clusters (classes) per school, and 25 students per class.
|