1. Academic debate (2) Lecturer: Lutsenko Olena
IMPRESS Project Soft Skills Team
Improving the Efficiency of Student Services                             
TEMPUS UK-TEMPUS-SMGR
Lecturer: Lutsenko Olena
Associate professor of Applied Psychology Department

2. Learning outcomes
Work in team or lead the team during implementation of learning tasks.
Discuss effectively in a certain debate format.
Reflect on and react to constructive criticism provided by others.
Can use debate assessment criteria.

3. 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)

4. “The death penalty should not exist as capital punishment”
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 members – L.O.)

5. 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).

6. 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.

7. 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:

8. Activity. Peer-to-peer assessment of debate using video and criteria
Every student assess debates of two teams (affirmative and negative) during video watch with these criteria. Then all group account general marks for both teams and define the winner. Teacher give the feedback to the participants. #
Criteria
Excellent (2 scores)
Average (1 score)
Fail (0 score) 1
Respect to others 2
Public speaking skills 3
Arguments and facts 4
Organization 5
Quality of questions 6
Quality of answers

9. Thanks for your attention and activity!