Volume 30 Number 1, 2026 AI as a debate coach: A mixed-methods analysis of student self-efficacy and perceptions in an AI-assisted debate

AI as a debate coach: A mixed-methods analysis of student self-efficacy and perceptions in an AI-assisted debate

Repository record updated on:
Feb. 14, 2026, 12:48 a.m.
Database record updated on:
Feb. 17, 2026, 7:41 p.m.
Last Harvested on:
Feb. 17, 2026, 7:41 p.m.
access-status:
open.access
bitstream:
[['https://scholarspace.manoa.hawaii.edu/bitstreams/11035063-ecb3-43ce-a1f5-ce7c7cf09ba4/download', '30_01_10125-73668.pdf']]
bitstream_txt:
[['https://scholarspace.manoa.hawaii.edu/bitstreams/6d662318-c96b-49e8-af28-a480703b88d9/download', 'full_text']]
collection:
Volume 30 Number 1, 2026
contributor.author:
Huang, Joan Wan-Ting
date.accessioned:
2026-02-12T23:45:01Z
date.available:
2026-02-12T23:45:01Z
date.copyright:
2026
date.issued:
2026-02-17
description.abstract:
Debate is an effective pedagogical approach, yet it presents significant challenges for EFL learners. While Artificial Intelligence (AI) chatbots are increasingly integrated into education, their application in multi-skilled tasks like debate preparation remains underexplored. This study investigated the impact of a two-phase AI-assisted intervention on 48 EFL learners' debating self-efficacy and perceptions. Phase 1 involved traditional debate preparation without AI assistance, focusing on foundational skill development through instructor-led instruction. Phase 2 introduced AI chatbots for refinement of arguments, rebuttals, and delivery practice, allowing students to enhance their debates through AI-powered scaffolding. Data were collected via self-efficacy questionnaires at three time points (pre-intervention, post-Phase 1, and post-Phase 2), a post-intervention perceptions questionnaire, written reflections, and focus group interviews. Repeated-measures ANOVAs revealed significant stepwise increases in students’ debating self-efficacy across the three time points, with the most substantial gains observed in debate skills and language use. The perceptions questionnaire corroborated these findings, demonstrating that students rated AI as most effective for refining speeches, locating evidence, and developing arguments, while perceiving it as least helpful for oral delivery practice. Furthermore, qualitative analysis yielded nuanced and contextualized insights regarding both the benefits and limitations of AI-assisted debate preparation.
endingpage:
23
format.extent:
23
identifier.citation:
Huang, J. W. T. (2026). AI as a debate coach: A mixed-methods analysis of student self-efficacy and perceptions in an AI-assisted debate. Language Learning & Technology, 30(1), 1–23. https://doi.org/10.64152/10125/73668
identifier.issn:
1094-3501
identifier.uri:
https://hdl.handle.net/10125/73668
language:
eng
number:
1
publicationname:
Language Learning & Technology
publisher:
University of Hawaii National Foreign Language Resource Center Center for Language & Technology
rights.license:
Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License
rights.uri:
https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/
site_url:
/item/10125-73668/
startingpage:
1
subject:
debate pedagogy, AI chatbots, self-efficacy, argumentative skills
title:
AI as a debate coach: A mixed-methods analysis of student self-efficacy and perceptions in an AI-assisted debate
type:
Article Text
volume:
30