Debate as a pedagogical tool Advantages & Disadvantages Nature of Debate Components of Debating Constructing Propositions Designing Formats Preparing Students to Debate

Debate as a pedagogical tool Advantages Promotes critical thinking Promotes communication skills Safe space for encountering controversy Motivation: competition, anonymity Disadvantages Distributive model of conflict resolution Requires public speaking

Nature of debate Structured conflict: Clear expectations about roles and obligations Explicit proposition: Clearly defined point of controversy Specified mode of resolution: Clear end point for the dispute Audience centered: Focus of persuasive efforts is not the opposition

Components of Debating Development: Complete (prima facie) arguments (claim & support) offered in support of or in opposition to an agreed-upon point of dispute (proposition) Clash: Engagement of the opposing side’s constructive material (refutation) on issues relevant to the proposition (stases) Extension: Defense of arguments against refutation (rebuttal) Perspective: Individual arguments of both/either side related to the support of or opposition to the proposition.

Constructing Propositions Determining the Focus of the Proposition Types of Propositions Criteria for Successful Propositions

Constructing Propositions Determining the Focus of the Proposition “America’s energy policy should not be based on fossil fuels.” “ANWR should opened to oil exploration and development.” “The environmental risks of opening ANWR to oil exploration and development are too great.” “Opening ANWR to oil exploration and development will harm the Porcupine caribou herd”

Constructing Propositions Types of Propositions Descriptive: concern the nature and definition of things “Video games depict realistic violence.” Relational: concern the relationships between things “Mediated violence causes consumers to behave violently.” Evaluative: assess the value of things “Violent video games should be banned.”

Constructing Propositions Criteria for Successful Propositions Controversiality: the issue should be in dispute and should engage the audience. Clarity: the proposition should be focused appropriately and should express a single concept as a declarative claim to be proved or disproved. Balance: the proposition should be phrased in a way that present opportunities for both affirmative and negative arguments. Challenge: the proposition should be phrased in a way that confronts the prevailing presumption.

Designing Formats Objective: provide opportunities for constructive and deconstructive argumentation Elements Constructive Speeches Rebuttal Speeches Exchange

Designing Formats Constructive Speeches At least one per side / speaker Longer than rebuttals Satisfy burden of proof and burden of rejoinder

Designing Formats Rebuttal Speeches Focus, rather than expand, the information under consideration No new lines of argument Perspective: places arguments in context relative to the proposition

Designing Formats Exchange Cross Examination Points of Information Discussion Floor Speeches

Designing Formats Cross Examination (two debaters per side) 1st Affirmative Constructive 8 minutes CX of 1st Aff by 2nd Neg 3 minutes 1st Negative Constructive 8 minutes CX of 1st Neg by 1st Aff 3 minutes 2nd Affirmative Constructive 8 minutes CX of 2nd Aff by 1st Neb 3 minutes 2nd Negative Constructive 8 minutes CX of 2nd Neg by 2nd Aff 3 minutes 1st Negative Rebuttal 5 minutes 1st Affirmative Rebuttal 5 minutes 2nd Negative Rebuttal 5 minutes 2nd Affirmative Rebuttal 5 minutes Prep time per side : 10 minutes

Designing Formats Parliamentary Debate (two debaters per side) 1st Proposition Constructive 7 minutes 1st Opposition Constructive 8 minutes 2nd Proposition Constructive 8 minutes 2nd Opposition Constructive 8 minutes (Points of Information allowed after the first and before the last minute of each constructive speech) Opposition Rebuttal 4 minutes Proposition Rebuttal 5 minutes Prep time: none

Designing Formats Lincoln/Douglas Debate (one debater per side) Affirmative Constructive 6 minutes CX of Aff by Neg 3 minutes Negative Constructive 7 minutes CX of Neg by Aff 3 minutes 1st Affirmative Rebuttal 4 minutes Negative Rebuttal 6 minutes 2nd Affirmative Rebuttal 3 minutes Prep time per side : 5 minutes

Preparing Students to Debate Agreement is key to a successful debate Agreement on Proposition Agreement on Stases

Preparing Students to Debate Assign partners / propositions / sides Assign preliminary research Negotiate Stases (stock issues or generic stases) Write briefs Debate!

Negotiating Stases Policy Stock Issues Policy Proposition Problem Solution Significance Cause Solvency Advantages/ Disadvantages

Policy Stock Issues Should violent videogames be banned? Is a ban desirable? Does a problem of violence exist? Is the problem Significant? Do videogames contribute to violence? Will a ban significantly reduce violence? Will the advs of a ban outweigh the disadvantages?

Feasibility / Solvency Negotiating Stases Generic Stases Political Economic Social Cultural Environmental Individual Rights Human Rights Ethical Legal Technical Feasibility / Solvency