Introduction
What Is Debate?
A debate is an organized argument or contest of ideas in which the participants discuss a topic from two opposing sides. Those who agree with this statement or idea are the "Pro" side. Those who will not agree with this statement or idea are the "Con" side. Each side will show in an organized and clever way why they believe to have the right answers. They will use examples and evidence to support their ideas while working towards a conclusion.
The aim of a debate is to convince the opposition that you are right. When the two sides agree on the subject or when one side's arguments are more convincing than the other side that is when the debate comes to a close. In a formal debate, a mediator (a person that has not agreed with the Pro or the Con) will decide who the winner should be. In an informal debate the argument can continue until the time when one side gives up.
But not everyone can do Debate. Sometimes Debate is being distinguished as Argument. So now, How can we differentiate Debate from Argument?
How can one win a Debate?
What are the procedures or processes to follow?
What are the rules and regulations before, during, and after Debate?
Task
1. The learners will be given a topic to research on.
2.The learners will be grouped and will be given 20 minutes each to present their work and defend their stand.
Process
1. The class will be divided and grouped accordingly.
2. Do a research.
3. Master the topic given.
4. The participants will present their work in their proper attire.
5. The group will be graded with the rubrics provided.
Evaluation
Levels of Performance for AFFIRMATIVE Team
|
Criteria |
4 |
3 |
2 |
1 |
Grade: |
|
1. Organization & Clarity: Main arguments and responses are outlined in a clear and orderly way. |
Completely clear and orderly presentation |
Mostly clear and orderly in all parts |
Clear in some parts but not overall |
Unclear and disorganized throughout |
|
|
2. Use of Argument: Reasons are given to support the resolution |
Very strong and persuasive arguments given throughout |
Many good arguments given, with only minor problems |
Some decent arguments, but some significant problems |
Few or no real arguments given, or all arguments given had significant problems |
|
|
3. Use of cross-examination and rebuttal: Identification of weakness in Negative team’s arguments and ability to defend itself against attack. |
Excellent cross-exam and defense against Negative team’s objections |
Good cross-exam and rebuttals, with only minor slip-ups |
Decent cross-exam and/or rebuttals, but with some significant problems |
Poor cross-exam or rebuttals, failure to point out problems in Negative team’s position or failure to defend itself against attack. |
|
|
4. Presentation Style: Tone of voice, clarity of expression, precision of arguments all contribute to keeping audience’s attention and persuading them of the team’s case. |
All style features were used convincingly |
Most style features were used convincingly |
Few style features were used convincingly |
Very few style features were used, none of them convincingly |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
TOTAL SCORE: _____ |
Levels of Performance for NEGATIVE Team
|
Criteria |
4 |
3 |
2 |
1 |
Grade: |
|
1. Organization & Clarity: Main arguments and responses are outlined in a clear and orderly way. |
Completely clear and orderly presentation |
Mostly clear and orderly in all parts |
Clear in some parts but not overall |
Unclear and disorganized throughout |
|
|
2. Use of Argument: Reasons are given against the resolution |
Very strong and persuasive arguments given throughout |
Many good arguments given, with only minor problems |
Some decent arguments, but some significant problems |
Few or no real arguments given, or all arguments given had significant problems |
|
|
3. Use of cross-examination and rebuttal: Identification of weakness in Affirmative team’s arguments and ability to defend itself against attack. |
Excellent cross-exam and defense against Affirmative team’s objections |
Good cross-exam and rebuttal, with only minor slip-ups |
Decent cross-exam and/or rebuttal, but with some significant problems |
Poor cross-exam or rebuttal, failure to point out problems in Affirmative team’s position or failure to defend itself against attack. |
|
|
4. Presentation Style: Tone of voice, clarity of expression, precision of arguments all contribute to keeping audience’s attention and persuading them of the team’s case. |
All style features were used convincingly |
Most style features were used convincingly |
Few style features were used convincingly |
Very few style features were used, none of them convincingly |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
TOTAL SCORE: _______ |
(Divide by 4)
AVERAGE FOR NEGATIVE TEAM: _______
Conclusion
Discussion:
1. Giving of general comments and suggestions to the student's performance.
2. The learners will now be given the chance to share their insights about DEBATE and also, teacher will discuss the lesson with the learners performances as basis.
- How can we differentiate Debate from Argument? A debate is a formal contest wherein speakers from the opposing sides do their best to establish the affirmative and negative sides of a proposition. In short it can be said that a debate is a mere deliberation. An argument on the other hand is a process of reasoning. In short it can be said that an argument is a statement against a point.
- How can one win a Debate?1. Think as if you were your judge, not yourself. Remember, the only person whose opinion matters at the end of the round is the judge’s, not yours! A common mistake everyone in public speaking makes is assuming that because you understand the argument that your audience does as well. Take into account the judge’s debate experience before using a lot of debate lingo, and make sure you look up at your judge while making a key point. This will both reinforce your argument because of the eye contact you will make, and it will allow you to look for signals from the judge (ie, shaking her head) that she understands you. Always think comparatively. Every argument that you make, at the end of the round, will be compared against something the other team said. If you’re affirmative, for example, you should always be thinking in the mindset of “how does my plan compare to the status quo?” [i.e., doing nothing, what the negative frequently advocates]. For both sides, the most effective way to do this is through impact calculus. You should always be weighing the relative importance of arguments, especially ultimate impact claims against each other. A nuclear attack by terrorists because of the collapse of the Pakistani state is undoubtedly extremely bad, but is the spread of nuclear weapons to many more states even worse? If you make comparative claims about why your arguments matter more than the other teams, you can win the debate round even if the other team wins their arguments! A good flow will help you keep track of the arguments. Here is a sample flow chart. Always act like you’re winning, even if you’re not. Composure, poise, ethos, whatever you want to call it is an essential skill in public speaking and in life in general. This does not mean be arrogant! Rather, it means that you should always display confidence in the arguments that your team is making. Think about it this way – if the judge doesn’t think you believe in your own arguments, why should he be inclined believe them himself? Refer to your evidence whenever possible. Even though your own arguments are the most important, far too many debaters discount the importance of referring to evidence, especially that read in the early speeches. The 1AC isn’t just a way to fill up 8 minutes, it contains valuable warrants by qualified authors that supports the arguments that you will be making in the 2AR. If you are making a point that one of your authors makes in one of your cards, saying so will give your argument credence over that of your opponents. If you’re not planning to refer to a piece of evidence in a later speech, why would you be reading it in the first place. Remember that debate is a team activity. Even if you are stronger than your partner, you shouldn’t take over their speech or answer all of their questions in cross-examination. When that happens, your judge is more inclined to give both of the members lower speaker points, and one debater doesn’t learn the skills necessary to get better. Instead, make sure that you and your partner are going over arguments together so that you can teach each other the best arguments to make.
- What are the procedures or processes to follow?
Rules of Debate (condensed from Competitive Debate: Rules and Techniques, by George McCoy Musgrave. New York: H.W. Wilson, 1957)
1. There are two teams, each consisting of two or three speakers.
2. Each team has two or three constructive speeches, and two to three rebuttal speeches. The affirmative gives the first constructive speech, and the rebuttals alternate: negative, affirmative, negative, affirmative. The affirmative has both the first and last speeches of the debate.
3. When worded as a proposition of policy, the topic requires the affirmative to support some specified action by some particular individual or group. The affirmative has the right to make any reasonable definition of each of the terms of the proposition. If the negative challenges the reasonableness of a definition by the affirmative, the judge must accept the definition of the team that shows better grounds for its interpretation of the term.
4. The affirmative must advocate everything required by the topic itself. No revision of position of a team is permitted during the debate.
5. He who asserts must prove. In order to establish an assertion, the team must support it with enough evidence and logic to convince an intelligent but previously uninformed person that it is more reasonable to believe the assertion than to disbelieve it. Facts must be accurate. Visual materials are permissible, and once introduced, they become available for the opponents' use if desired.
6. In the questioning period, the questioner may ask any fair, clear question that has a direct bearing on the debate. The questioner may use the period to build up any part of his own case, to tear down any part of his opposition's case, or to ascertain facts, such as the opposition's position on a certain issue, that can be used later in the debate. The questioner must confine himself to questions and not make statements, comments, or ask rhetorical questions.
7. Each speaker is questioned as soon as he concludes his constructive speech. The witness must answer the questions without consulting his colleagues.
8. No new constructive arguments may be introduced in the rebuttal period. The affirmative must, if possible, reply to the major negative arguments before the last rebuttal.
9. The judge must base his decision entirely on the material presented, without regard for other material which he may happen to possess.
10. Any gains made outside of the established procedure are disallowed.