Faculty of Arts,
Chulalongkorn University
2202208
English Conversation and Discussion
Debate
Guidelines
Students get into two
groups of three members and two groups of four members to form a team
for the midterm debates in week 9 of classes. Representatives draw
motions, sides, and time on Wednesday, September 23, 2020. Teams e-mail
me your speaker order before October 5.
Debate Schedule
Monday, October 5
(MCS 401/18)
- Debate 1
- Resolution:
Survival skills should be included in the school curriculum.
- Chair:
Thanyachanok
- Proposition:
Pailin, Supriyathorn, Phoomin and Sarin
- First
speaker
- Second
speaker
- Third
speaker
- Fourth
speaker
- Opposition:
- Renuvajra
- Piengpaj
- Thunrada
- Warisa
- Adjudicators:
Artittaya, Mingkamol, Naruepanat, Nattacha, and Sasayamon
- Debate 2
- Resolution:
You should not trust news.
- Chair:
Thunrada
- Proposition:
- Thanyachanok
- Nattacha
- Sasayamon
- Opposition:
Artittaya, Mingkamol and Naruepanat
- First
speaker
- Second
speaker
- Third
speaker
- Adjudicators:
Pailin, Phoomin, Piengpaj, Renuvajra, Sarin, Supriyathorn, and
Warisa
Debate
Guidelines
Debating is an
exercise in research, critical and analytical thinking, rhetoric and
argument. The following chart outlines the roles of each speaker in
presenting the case for their team.
Proposition
Speaker 1 (3 minutes)
Open the case for the proposition.
- Opening statement (introduce the debate and topic and set up
the terms of the debate)
- Provide brief relevant context or introduction to the
motion.
- Define key terms and issues, what you are arguing for and
the scope of what you are supporting in a fair and reasonable
sense so that it is clear to the opposition and adjudicators.
- Outline the affirmative arguments
- List the main points your team will make ex. "There are
three main reasons we believe x..."
- Briefly state how this arc of arguments will make the case
in support of the motion.
- Make the first substantive argument
- Develop your constructive argument
- Connect your smaller arguments or sub-points to the larger
argument
- Provide substantiating evidence and examples
- Conclude your speech
|
→ |
Opposition Speaker 1 (3 minutes)
Open the case for the opposition.
- Opening statement (introduce the topic and context for your
side of the debate)
- Add any information omitted from the background/context
provided by the first affirmative speaker
- Define your stance or offer your counter-proposal/model
- Rebut the first affirmative speaker's arguments (no more than
1 minute)
- Point out what is wrong with the first speaker’s point(s)
- Briefly explain why
- Outline the opposition arguments
- List the main points your team will make ex. "There are
three strong reasons we disagree with the resolution…"
- Make the first substantive argument
- Develop your constructive argument
- Connect your smaller arguments or sub-points to the larger
argument
- Provide substantiating evidence and examples
- Conclude your speech
|
|
↙ |
|
Proposition Speaker 2 (3 minutes)
- Introduction (lead in to your speech)
- Rebuttal (no more than 1 minute)
- Respond to the the first opposition speaker, both to his/her
rebuttal and substantive arguments.
- Identify the questionable points and explain why they are
problematic.
- Rebuild/revalidate your case after attacks.
- Make the second substantive argument in support of your case.
- Give examples that support your case and explain them.
- Extend the team's analyses of the issue where possible.
- Conclude your speech.
|
→ |
Opposition Speaker 2 (3 minutes)
- Introduction (lead in to your speech)
- Rebuttal (no more than 1 minute)
- Respond to the second proposition speaker, both to his/her
rebuttal and substantive arguments.
- Identify the questionable points and explain why they are
problematic.
- Rebuild/revalidate your case after attacks.
- Make the second substantive argument in support of your case.
- Give examples that support your case and explain them.
- Extend the team's analyses of the issue where possible.
- Conclude your speech.
|
|
↙ |
|
Proposition Speaker 3 (3 minutes)
- Introduction (lead in to your speech)
- Rebuttal (no more than 40 seconds)
- Respond to the second opposition speaker, both to his/her
rebuttal and substantive arguments.
- Identify the questionable points and explain why they are
problematic.
- Rebuild/revalidate your case after attacks.
- Make the third substantive argument
- Give examples that support your case and explain them.
- Extend the team's analyses of the issue where possible.
- Conclude your speech.
|
→ |
Opposition Speaker 3 (3 minutes)
- Introduction (lead in to your speech)
- Rebuttal (no more than 40 seconds)
- Respond to the second proposition speaker, both to his/her
rebuttal and substantive arguments.
- Identify the questionable points and explain why they are
problematic.
- Rebuild/revalidate your case after attacks.
- Make the third substantive argument
- Give examples that support your case and explain them.
- Extend the team's analyses of the issue where possible.
- Conclude your speech.
|
|
↙ |
|
Proposition Speaker 4 (3 minutes)
Conclude the case for the proposition, wrapping up and evaluating
the arguments made.
- Evaluate main contested issue(s).
- Point out one or two key issues of disagreement ("point of
clash") between the sides.
- Explain how your team has argued it, providing further
examples or analyses that convince adjudicators why it is
important and confirms your position in support of the motion.
- Evaluate rebuttals and your responses to them.
- Deal with any rebuttals for the arguments made by the third
opposition speaker in his/her speech.
- Mention one or two key rebuttals by the opposition and
explain how your response to it/them support your arguments.
- Point out to the adjudicators if the opposition has made
very few or weak rebuttals.
- Closing statement
- Show how the opposition's arguments are weakened or debunked
by your team's points.
- Comment on and analyze your team's arguments in the context
of the debate that has happened and show how your points are
still valid, are the strongest and most important to convince
the adjudicators that the proposition's case wins.
|
→ |
Opposition
Speaker 4 (3 minutes)
Conclude the case for the opposition, wrapping up and evaluating the
arguments made
- Evaluate main contested issue(s).
- Point out one or two key issues of disagreement ("point of
clash") between the sides.
- Explain how your team has argued it, providing further
examples or extended analyses that convince adjudicators why
it is important and how it confirms your opposition of the
motion.
- Evaluate rebuttals and your responses to them.
- Mention one or two key rebuttals made by the proposition and
explain how your response to it/them support your arguments
against the motion.
- Remind adjudicators if the proposition has made very few or
weak rebuttals.
- Closing statement
- Show how the proposition's arguments are weakened or
debunked by your team's points.
- Comment on and analyze your side's arguments in the context
of the debate that has happened and show how your points are
still valid, are the most compelling and important to convince
the adjudicators that the opposition's case wins.
|
Other
Roles
Chair
- Welcomes
everyone to the debate you are chairing.
- Introduces each
speaker.
- Announces speakers
and the order in which they will speak at their turn.
- Keeps time and
give signals to inform speakers how they are using their allotted
time.
- Announces the
results of the adjudication.
- Thanks everybody
and closes the debate session you are chairing.
Adjudicators
- Listen to the debate carefully and evaluate the speakers in the
scoring sheets given (
).
Consider the persuasiveness of each speaker in these three areas:
- Content (What speakers say)
- Does the speaker address issues that need to be addressed?
- What arguments are used? Are they well-thought out, logical,
relevant? Do they show a perceptive understanding of the topic and
issues? Are there contradictions in the case made or unsubstantiated
claims?
- What evidence or examples are used? Do they come from appropriate
sources? Is the information accurate/authoritative/reliable? How
clearly do the ideas connect to the topic? How strongly does the
evidence support the argument?
- What points or ideas are being used to rebut the substantive
points of the other team? Are they compelling?
- Style (How speakers say it)
- How are the ideas delivered?
- How effective is the language and tone or volume of voice used?
- How appropriate is pace, eye contact, gestures, posture, grooming,
note use?
- Strategy/method (How speakers organize it)
- How well is the material structured and divided among team members
and within each speaker's speech?
- How effectively does the speaker (and the team) engage with the
topic and with other speakers' arguments?
- Has the speaker chosen which arguments should be refuted
appropriately and wisely?
- Are appropriate signposts used so that the audience can see
the structure of the case presented and follow the relationships
between ideas and arguments?
- Tally up your marks and combine your results with that of the other
adjudicators judging your debate.
- Give your final results to your debate chair to announce to the class.
- Give oral feedback:
- Congratulate speakers on their performance.
- Comment on the standard of the opening, closing, argument, examples,
analyses, or rebuttal if it was done well.
- Make recommendations for improvement in appropriate areas.
Resources and Guides
The following are guides provided
by various debate organizations to help you with terms and preparation for
your various roles. Our course debate does not have POIs (points of
information) mentioned in World Schools style debates. Our team divisions
and times are also adapted to fit student numbers and class period times.
Home
Last updated October 5, 2020