The global EdTech market, valued at nearly USD 250 billion, generates not only revenue but substantial ecological and planetary costs that the EdTech scholarly community has insufficiently examined. This article argues that those working in and around EdTech bear a moral responsibility to move beyond (non)performative engagement with sustainable development goals toward serious, structural inquiry into the environmental impacts of EdTech. Drawing on a postdigital transdisciplinary framework, we identify key scholarly fields and approaches—Critical EdTech Studies, AI and education research, postdigital-biodigital approaches, Education for Sustainable Development, degrowth theory, ecopedagogy, and studies of unequal planetary conditions—and examine their respective contributions to understanding relationships between EdTech and the environment. We outline an open research program grounded in ontological, epistemological, ethical, political, pedagogical, positional, and community commitments that resist technological solutionism and growth-dependent development models. Rather than offering definitive answers, this paper extends an invitation to transdisciplinary collaboration, recognising that planetary challenges require planetary responses from a coalition of scholars willing to work across—and beyond—disciplinary boundaries.

Argument-based pedagogies have the potential to help develop knowledge and 21st-century skills in university students. However, our knowledge of the processes and outcomes of argument-based pedagogies in higher education is scattered. To provide an overview of how argumentation is studied and promoted in higher education, a systematic scoping review was conducted across four databases. A total of 129 empirical articles published between 2008 and 2023 were analysed. The results show a growing interest in the field in recent years, with studies distributed around the world, although to a lesser degree in Latin America and Africa, and more studies focusing on “learning to argue” (LTA) than “arguing to learn” (ATL). In terms of activities promoting argumentation, a variety emerged, with a focus on active learning methodologies such as dialogic argumentation instruction, argumentative inquiry, and argument mapping. Other known active learning methods such as structured debate, role-playing, or game-based learning appeared less frequently in our corpus. Moreover, there were observable differences between the LTA and ATL studies, in particular when it comes to the field of study, with the former being more applied in social sciences and the latter more present in sciences. Implications for higher education practices and policies are discussed.

This empirical study explores a dialogic alternative to the conventional, fixed foreign language textbook by introducing the concept of a fluid manual—a pedagogical resource co-constructed dynamically through classroom interactions between teacher and adult learners. Grounded in Bakhtin’s theory of dialogism and heteroglossia, the fluid manual embraces the multiplicity of voices and meaning-making processes inherent in language use, positioning each lesson as a unique and collaborative event. Rejecting monologic, pre-determined content, this approach enables learners and teachers to shape the curriculum in real-time, using evolving questions, answers, and reflections as the core instructional material. Inspired by recent developments in digital collaborative logbooks, this intervention was implemented in two adult English language courses in Portugal, targeting absolute and advanced beginners. Through qualitative analysis of participant opinions and perceptions, the study reveals that the dialogic classes resulting in the fluid manual significantly enhanced learner motivation, autonomy, and engagement, while fostering a deeper connection to the learning process. Participants reported feeling more empowered and invested in their learning, attributing this to the co-authored nature of the content and the space for their voices to emerge and be transformed dialogically. The findings suggest that textbook-free teaching grounded in dialogism offers a viable and impactful alternative in language education, particularly for adult learners, by creating learning environments that are socially responsive, psychologically rich, and pedagogically inclusive. We do, however, acknowledge several constraints to the implementation of dialogism as a language teaching and learning approach, most of them related to the pre-established relationship between teacher and students in the conventional educational institutions and the objective oral expression limitations in the foreign language from the learners’ part. We conclude by affirming the educational potential of materials and methods that privilege interaction over transmission, and that recognize language learning as a fundamentally heteroglossic and co-authored process.

In a world in which everything is moved by artificial intelligence (AI), the development of critical thinking skills cannot be conceived without the use, if not the help, of AI. The term 'postdigital citizenship' describes the complexities of living and learning in societies in which the digital, non-digital, human, and non-human necessarily blend. In these same societies, argumentation, the core of democratic deliberation competencies, has acquired a new meaning, one that goes beyond the use of information as evidence to support one's ideas and actions: critically analyzing and selecting information has become a core skill in the fight against post-truth and fake news. Recognizing what is true and what is not, what is a valid source of information and what instead is an "alternative fact", has given place to a new set of critical thinking skills, now more necessary than before, to analyze the several social, political, economic, and technological views of reality. The purpose of this chapter is to demonstrate that educators are not alone in their efforts to critically analyze the new, postdigital reality of which AI is often part and that AI can be an important assistant in this process. To fulfil this purpose, I will first give some definitions of the terms 'postdigital', 'artificial intelligence', 'citizenship', 'argumentation', and 'critical literacy', to then propose a conceptual framework for defining AI as a postdigital agent who may be in close collaboration with human citizens in their (re)definition of argumentation skills and deliberative processes. I will then present examples of AI-supported technologies that can be used as educational tools aiming at the promotion of critical thinking skills. I will conclude with some limitations and suggestions for future work, from an AI-in-education integrative perspective.

This article examines how collaborative design practices in higher education are reshaped through postdigital entanglement with generative artificial intelligence (GenAI). We collectively explore how co-design, an inclusive, iterative, and relational approach to educational design and transformation, expands in meaning, practice, and ontology when GenAI is approached as a collaborator. The article brings together 19 authors and three open reviewers to engage with postdigital inquiry, structured in three parts: (1) a review of literature on co-design, GenAI, and postdigital theory; (2) 11 situated contributions from educators, researchers, and designers worldwide, each offering practice-based accounts of co-design with GenAI; and (3) an explorative discussion of implications for higher education designs and futures. Across these sections, we show how GenAI unsettles assumptions of collaboration, knowing, and agency, foregrounding co-design as a site of ongoing material, ethical, and epistemic negotiation. We argue that postdigital co-design with GenAI reframes educational design as a collective practice of imagining, contesting, and shaping futures that extend beyond human knowing.

Artificial Intelligence (AI) is reshaping education, learning, and instruction, yet current research in this area is fragmented, often tool-specific, and dominated by short-term perspectives. This article develops a broader research agenda for AI and Education (AI ED), bringing together Artificial Intelligence in Education (AIED) and AI literacy within an educational ecology framing. Using a collective writing methodology, an expert panel of eleven internationally recognised scholars from various disciplines within computer and learning sciences contributed ten standalone reflections on the challenges, opportunities, and transformations of AI ED. Two additional leading scholars provided critical commentaries to strengthen the analysis. A thematic analysis of the contributions identifies five main challenges (learning and instructional practices and curricula, access and ethics, assessment and evaluation, research capacity, and stakeholder readiness), five areas of opportunity (enhanced pedagogies, innovation in design and research, support for learning processes, critical skills, and hybrid knowledge), and four transformational themes (AI technologies and the design of education, human-AI interplay, lifelong learning, and organisation of AI ED research). The article proposes an educational ecology research agenda across macro (policy, research ecosystem, society), meso (curricula, institutions, leadership), and micro (instructors, learners, learning processes) levels. We argue for a future-oriented, critical, and inter- or multidisciplinary approach that recognises AI as a socio-technical assemblage and sustains educational values such as equity, democracy, and human dignity in postdigital societies.

Critical Generative Artificial Intelligence (GenAI) literacy cannot be reduced to a universal framework. Rather, it must be understood as a constellation of situated literacies, shaped by disciplinary perspectives, socio-political contexts, and technological affordances. This multi-authored article explores the emerging concept of critical GenAI literacy and its postdigital configurations. Fourteen authors contributed with different sections, followed by five author-reviewers who examined the article as a whole. The objective was to invite diverse perspectives, constructive critique, and promote collaborative efforts to develop a clearer and more inclusive understanding of critical GenAI literacy. The introduction focuses on establishing some initial assumptions about what we mean by ‘critical’ in general, and for GenAI literacy in particular, and why a conjunction of postdigital configurations of the construct emerges as an adequate methodological solution. In the main part of the article, some authors focus on the concept of ‘literacies’ as a starting point for their reflection, while others directly examine critical GenAI literacy through a postdigital perspective. We conclude that critical GenAI literacy requires moving beyond technical skills to engage with AI’s epistemological, ethical, and relational dimensions, ensuring learners critically interrogate its role in knowledge production. Future inquiry should focus on integrating this literacy into education in ways that promote social justice, epistemic diversity, and democratic participation.

Background It is generally admitted that ideas are negotiated, misunderstandings solved, and higher-thinking outcomes fulfilled at the “meta-level” of discourse. Different types of meta-level behaviour have been examined so far such as metatalk, metadiscourse, and metalanguage. Less attention has been paid to metadialogue, defined as dialogue about dialogue, as a central aspect of students’ metacognitive behaviour. Aims This exploratory study aims at identifying students’ metadialogical moves as emerging in a large multi-country and multi-age corpus. It also aims at looking at possible relations between these types of moves, on one hand, and the dialogue setting (whole-class or small-group discussion) and students’ age, on the other. Finally, it compares students’ to teachers’ metadialogical behaviour. Sample The data collection involved audio and video recording of 111 lessons across five countries and three age groups, namely preprimary, primary, and secondary school students. Methods A coding scheme of six types of metadialogical moves was devised, based on literature, and checked for its reliability. We then applied it to the whole corpus. Results The metadialogical moves aiming at common ground construction appeared to be more present among preprimary and primary school students, whereas the ones aiming at pragmatic interpretation and meta-argumentation were more present among adolescents. Whole-class discussion was found to encourage metadialogical exchanges, except for the ones aimed at sharing knowledge and negotiating presuppositions, which were more frequent in small-group discussions. Students performed more meta-argumentation moves when compared to teachers. Conclusion This study opens the way for more empirical research on learning activities explicitly focusing on metadialogue as part of learners’ interaction.

This commentary describes the author’s auto-ethnographical journey as part of her experience using ChatGPT’s latest version (GPT4) as an assistant for writing scholarly research. Much has been said about students using ChatGPT to write their essays and several concerns have been raised regarding academic integrity and assessment. However, existing literature is limited when it comes to the unleashing potential of using AI generative chatbots effectively, when this is done in a critical, cautious and ethical manner for research purposes. This reflective report aims to shed some initial light towards this direction.

21st-century teachers are required to embrace new, student-centred pedagogical practices that lead to direct student benefits as critical and democratic citizens. One of these pedagogies is argument-based teaching. This theoretical paper provides an overview of argument-based teaching and its main applications and benefits. A relation with 21st-century teaching is established through the concept of critical literacy, a metaliteracy competence promoted by argument-based teaching and learning. After an overview of national and international initiatives, recommendations for teacher education are provided, considering the complexity of argument pedagogical content knowledge.

Extensive research has focused on analysing teacher-student discourse within whole-class dialogic interactions, and several descriptive tools have been proposed so far to cover possible variations. However, what still remains unanswered is what types of teacher questions are ' better' than others. To answer this question, I propose a pragmatic analysis of teacherstudent interaction based on the criteria of authenticity and dialogicity. The analysis focuses on two types of dialogue moves, 'information-seeking' and 'inquiry' moves and their subtypes, as assessed on the basis of their degree of dialogicity, emerging from the dialogue sequence in which the moves are situated. The discussion focuses on how such a normative analysis of interaction can help teachers guide more productive dialogues with their students.

It is broadly admitted that social contexts of reasoning may prompt children and adolescents to improve the quality of their reasoning. However, it is not clear how this quality may be assessed when it comes to arguments expressed within oral interactions in diverse settings (whole-class or small-group discussions) by students of different ages and cultural backgrounds. This study aims to offer a methodological contribution to the issue of oral argument assessment of children and adolescents, by looking at a large, annotated corpus of dialogic discussions during 111 lessons taking place in five countries. Our analysis combines a structural (Toulmin Argument Pattern) and functional (Walton’s argumentation schemes) approach to argumentative reasoning. Our findings show significant variations across age groups and social settings. The discussion points out the importance of sociocultural framing of argument reasoning development and the continuation of research in argument assessment methods able to grasp important developmental and cultural variations.

This entry provides some prevalent considerations, as emerging from the literature, towards (re)defining citizenship under a postdigital view. These considerations include the definition of a postdigital city, the challenge of (re)defining civic rights, duties, and identities, the centrality of social participation and action, as well as the definition and importance of digital justice. The entry concludes with a reflection on the social and digital interdependence of human and non-human agents, and the role of postdigital civic identities and performativity towards making such interdependence a positive and productive enterprise.

Despite the emphasis on dialogue and argumentation in educational settings, still not much is known about how best we can support learners in their interthinking, reasoning, and metadialogic understanding. The goal of this classroom intervention study is to explore the degree of students' dialogicity and its possible increase during a learning programme implementing dialogic and argument-based teaching goals and principles. In particular, we focus on how students from 5 to 15 years old engage with each other's ideas, and whether/how this engagement is influenced by lesson and classroom setting factors. The participants were 4208 students distributed in preprimary, primary, and secondary classrooms of five countries (UK, Portugal, Germany, Spain, and Cyprus). Findings suggest that there is a consistent increase with age for some high-dialogicity moves, and students behave more dialogically in whole-class discussions rather than small-group activities.

Aim: The aim of this chapter is to theoretically substantiate the relationship between argumentation and critical thinking and to summarize empirical evidence of how the former supports the assessment and development of the latter. Main concepts: To fulfill the above we use concepts from informal logic theory as well as reasoning development. In particular, the argument assessment criteria of reasonableness, relevance, sufficiency, and acceptability are discussed, to show how they contribute to both argument generation and assessment, taking into consideration the dialogic context of argumentation. It is this dialogic practice of argumentation that brings to the surface, and helps develop, not only basic generative and inferential abilities but also more complex meta-strategic and epistemological skills and reasoning dispositions. Conclusions and outlook: We conclude that argumentation, together with inquiry, are two practices that help make critical thinking skills and dispositions visible, accessible, and assessable in practice, through constructing arguments, counterarguments, and rebuttals in authentic contexts of thinking together with others.

Educational and psychological research on argumentative interactions has identified several challenges in young people's argumentation, as well as early manifestations of some (hybrid) reasoning mechanisms that children and adolescents are able to put into service when necessary. The purpose of this short article/commentary is to inquire into some of these mechanisms, as presented in the articles published in the special issue “Interpersonal argument”, through: (a) framing them from a psychopedagogical perspective; and (b) questioning whether they represent genuine participation in argumentation dialogues or just some isolated manifestations of skills that may lead or not to such participation. It is argued that participation in genuine argumentation requires the sharing of a mutual dialogical goal among participants, and such sharing requires some degree of intersubjectivity, not available in the early years of life. It is also argued that group work is not a guarantee for having sophisticated argumentation among peers, as it requires a high degree of collaboration, which does not always and spontaneously emerge. Therefore, collaborative work may be considered more as a design principle rather than an outcome of engaging in interpersonal argument. Lastly, the challenge of arguing with a virtual rather than a physical other is also discussed.

Goal. The problem of the authenticity of teacher questions has not received sufficient attention from educational researchers interested in the intersection between dialogue and argumentation. In this paper, we adopt a definition of authentic questions as dialogical units that prompt teacher-student interactions that are both productive (i.e., several students participating) and constructive (i.e., students produce arguments of high complexity). Our goal is to analyze whether and how specific types of dialogue prompts can encourage students' engagement in more sophisticated argumentative interactions, as manifested through the construction of high-complexity arguments. Method. We describe the implementation of our analytical approach to a large corpus of classroom interactions from five European countries. The corpus was segmented into dialogical sequences, which were then coded according to the argumentation dialogue goal expressed in the sequence. We also coded students' arguments according to Toulmin's elements and distinguished between low- and high-complexity arguments from a structural point of view. Findings. Our findings show the predominance of the so-called Discovery questions as prompts that are both productive and constructive and Inquiry questions as prompts of argumentative constructive interactions. We discuss the importance of these findings for teacher professional development purposes.

Dialogue and argumentation are two processes that complement and mutually influence each other. However, this essential relationship is not sufficiently acknowledged by current educational research. This neglected relation is also mirrored by the lack of sufficient dialogue between two fields that are defined by the dialogical approach to education and argumentation, namely dialogic pedagogy and educational argumentation. In this Special Issue, we argue that dialogue pedagogies and argumentation theory and practice should communicate more, bridging their somehow different perspectives for the common goal of engaging learners in productive and constructive discussions.

Douglas Walton, perhaps the most prolific author in Argumentation theory, has been of a great influence in the fields of Informal logic, Artificial intelligence, and Law. His contributions in the field of educational research, in particular in the field of argumentation and education, are less known. This review paper aims at shedding light on those aspects of Walton's theory that have received educational researchers' attention thus far, as well identifying existing lacks of consideration and open paths for future research.