Academic debate Lecturer: Lutsenko Olena IMPRESS Project Soft Skills Team Improving the Efficiency of Student Services                              530534-TEMPUS-1-2012-1-UK-TEMPUS-SMGR Lecturer: Lutsenko Olena Associate professor of Applied Psychology Department

Learning outcomes Know about academic debate as a form of controlled and constructive discussion; Become acquainted with effective debate format; Be able to correctly formulate debate theme; Understand behavioral debate norms; Can use debate assessment criteria.

Academic Debate Definition Debate is the process of inquiry and advocacy, a way of arriving at a reasoned judgment on a proposition. (Freeley, A., Steinberg, D., 2008) 3

The effective debate format should: promote the orderly development of arguments, include equal and alternating speaking time, provide the first opportunity to the side supporting the proposition, include variety. (Broda-Bahm, K., Kempf, D., 2004) 4

The elements of debate theme • An identified controversy. • One central idea. • A single, simple declarative sentence. • Phrasing that includes a conclusion only, not reasons. • Neutral terminology. • Avoidance of ambiguity. (Broda-Bahm, K., Kempf, D., 2004) 5

Activity 5. Possible debate topics Choose / propose one debate theme for your group work (by short free discussion): 1) The death penalty should not exist as capital punishment. 2) Medications may be advertised in all media. 3) Civil servants should not be allowed to criticize the current government. 4) Plastic bags must be prohibited for consumer use. 5) …

In debates there are two sides: 1. The affirmative team, which supports (affirms) the proposition 2. The negative team, which rejects (negates) the proposition 7

Debate stages Position Construction. At the beginning, the position of each team should be outlined. Controversial terms should be clarified, principal statements should be expressed, and positions should be explained based on quoted evidence. Refutation. Once your opponent’s arguments are heard, you have a responsibility to provide a reaction. Refutation— the act of evaluating the reasoning, the support, or the implications of an adversary’s argument. Rebuttal. The act of defending the argument after it has been refuted is called “rebuttal.” Questioning (cross-examination). This is the best way for you to clarify information, to expose flaws and to lay the groundwork for the argument and to ask a question directly to the other team.

Debate Formats Policy Debate (Cross-Examination) – 72 min. Academic Parliamentary Format – 55 min. Lincoln–Douglas Format – 32 min. Karl Popper Format – 44 min. Public Forum Format – 29 min. The “Town Hall” Format – 47 min. A “Quick Debate” Format – 10 min. 9

Public Forum (also called Ted Turner Debate or Controversy) Format Public Forum is one of the newest formats. Affirmative and negative teams choose two representative persons (Speaker 1, Speaker 2). Instead of cross-examination speeches, Public Forum has crossfire. During this time, the debaters who just finished speaking can ask and answer questions of each other. The summary speeches allow the debaters to recap the best arguments for their side. This is a chance for more refutation but not new arguments. In the last shot, each team will reprise the one argument that they believe will win the debate for them. (Rybold, G., 2006)

Timing of the Public Forum Debate 4 min. Team A Speaker 1 4 min. Team B Speaker 1 3 min. Crossfire (between Team A Speaker 1 & Team B Speaker 1) 4 min. Team A Speaker 2 4 min. Team B Speaker 2 3 min. Crossfire (between Team A Speaker 2 & Team B Speaker 2) Summary 2 min. Team A Speaker 1 Summary 2 min. Team B Speaker 1 3 min. Grand Crossfire (all speakers)

Task for group self-work Now we will choose the teams – affirmative and negative; After the lessons you should get together and select the speakers of your team; All the team need to prepare the arguments for the speakers and questions for the controversial team; The speakers with their teams may rehearse the speeches and presentations skills for the debate.

Behavioral debate norms 1. Refer Respectfully to Your Opponent. 2. Make Positive Reference to the Other Side’s Argument. 3. Be Attentive and Respectful Even When You Are not Speaking. 4. Avoid Personal Attacks. 5. Keep to topic of the debate and time limits. 13

Debate assessment training 1) Let’s become acquainted with debate assessment criteria; 2) View the part of Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump 1st debate and try to assess them.

Description of assessment criteria Excellent (2 scores) Average (1 score) Fail (0 score) 1 Respect to others All statements/gestures /responses were respectful. Nobody interrupts, not raising voice, do not abuse the emotions. Several times it was used inappropriate statements or gestures or responses. Sometimes participants interrupt, raising voice or abuse the emotions. Consistently not respectful behavior. Participants often interrupt, raising voice or abuse the emotions. 2 Public speaking skills Kept in touch with the audience. Good diction. Body Language. Clarity of expression. Appropriate appearance. Absence one or two good public speaking skills (from second column). Absence most of good public speaking skills (from second column).

N Criteria Excellent (2 scores) Average (1 score) Fail (0 score) 3 Arguments and facts Strong and persuasive argument. Facts Strong support with source. Validity of evidence. Accordance/relevance to the topic. Mostly persuasive argument with only minor problems in one of the statements. No real argument given with problems in all of the statements. 4 Organization Self-presentation. Appropriate timings. Group coordination. Anybody did not give self-presentation. Breaking time limits. Weak group coordination. Absence of self-presentation and group coordination. Breaking time limits.

N Criteria Excellent (2 scores) Average (1 score) Fail (0 score) 5 Quality of questions All questions were: accurate, relevant, strong. Some questions were weak and irrelevant. All questions were not: accurate and/or relevant and/or 6 Quality of answers All responses were: Some responses were weak and irrelevant. All responses were not:

Thanks for your attention and activity!