Personal epistemologies and debate in higher education: an interpretive study of international competitive debaters in the MENA region

University education is increasingly expected to foster advanced forms of identity, social, and professional development that address contemporary societal challenges. Among these are the limitations of traditional epistemological models, which Morin criticizes, and the growing diffusion of social polarization and radicalism. In this context, studying personal epistemologies—the beliefs individuals hold about the nature of knowledge and how it is acquired—offers a valuable lens for monitoring formative processes and responding to these challenges. Personal epistemologies shape whether knowledge is conceived, and their transformation involves not only cognitive change but also identity and relational dispositions. Crucially, their development is socio-cultural rather than biological, highlighting their relevance in higher education.
The relationship between personal epistemologies and academic practices, particularly competitive debate, has recently attracted scholarly interest. Debate is a ruled, argumentative confrontation between teams defending incompatible positions and occurs in both tournament and classroom settings. It is widely recognized for fostering critical-argumentative skills and civic competencies, closely associated with more advanced personal epistemologies.
Building on this premise, the study aims to provide a nuanced account of how academic debaters represent their personal epistemologies in international competitive debate. Grounded in a constructivist and interpretive epistemological framework, it employs a qualitative design combining thematic and discourse analysis, supported by cross-case matrix comparisons. Data are collected through in-depth interviews with 4–6 participants per country across 5–6 MENA countries, and with debate coaches to examine how epistemic orientations are transmitted through training and pedagogy. Three regional, multi-country focus groups further explore collective epistemic tensions and convergences. Supplementary materials—including training resources, university documents, and munāẓara texts—are analyzed to contextualize personal, public, and traditional epistemologies. Ultimately, this study examines the consistency between personal epistemologies and those fostered by debate practices, and their positioning relative to traditional and institutional epistemologies.