Debate Pointers A debate Exhibition Case n n

Debate Pointers A debate Exhibition

Case n n n case: set of arguments supported by evidences anatomy of a case: definition: clarifies the motion/limits debate scope theme line: core argumentation/basic idea team split: distribution of arguments and rebuttals

Roles of Speakers Roles: 1 st Affirmative n defines the motion n presents Affirmative’s theme line n outlines Affirmative’s team split n delivers first part of split n summarizes/recaps own speech

Roles of Speakers Roles: 1 st Negative n responds to the definition (accept/reject) n rebutts 1 st Affirmative (briefly) n presents Negative’s theme line n outlines Negative’s team split n delivers first part of split n summarizes/recaps own speech

Roles of Speakers Roles: 2 nd speakers n rebutts previous speakers (briefly) n briefly reiterates team’s case (in general) n delivers 2 nd part of split (bulk of case) n summarizes/recaps own speech

Roles of Speakers Roles: 3 rd speakers n rebutts previous speakers - levels of rebuttal: n teamwise/global (theme line) n speechwise/detailed (arguments) n summarizes team’s case n 3 rd Neg may not give new matter n new examples in rebuttal is not new matter n 3 rd Aff is discouraged from giving new matter

Roles of Speakers Roles: Reply speakers n provides an overview of the debate n what is the clash/point of contention n what our side has given n what the other side has tried to give n why we should win (biased adjudication) n may be delivered by 1 st or 2 nd speaker n reply speakers may not bring new matter n reply speech is not rebuttal, either

Argument a good argument should have A-R-E: n Assertion - statement of the argument n Reasoning - explanation of the argument n Evidence - facts, statistics, etc. n a good argument should be linked back into the motion/theme line n adjudicators want: logic and relevance n

Rebuttal n n n n argument attacking the opposing team’s argument, e. g. by showing that it: is based on an error of fact is irrelevant to the proof of the topic is illogical involves unacceptable implications should be accorded little weight doesn’t have to be point-by-point rebutt theme line or main arguments

n n n n n Assessing Matter the matter presented by a speaker must be logical and relevant to the topic under debate logic is the chain of reasoning used to prove an argument; this involves stating, explaining and illustrating the argument (A-R-E: Assertion, Reasoning, Evidence) relevance is established by tying the argument into the topic under debate distinguish a strong argument from a weak argument examples support an argument, they cannot substitute the argument itself watch for invalid case (debating besides the point, not proving what is required by topic) watch for hung case (a case that is proven only if 1 st and 2 nd speech are combined) 3 rd Negative is not allowed to give new matter (new examples are OK) rebuttal: argument attacking the opposing team’s argument, e. g. by showing that it: is based on an error of fact, is irrelevant to the proof of the topic, is illogical, involves unacceptable implications, should be accorded little weight

Assessing Method n n n n structure and organization of individual speech; e. g. a well structured speech will have: an interesting opening which captures the attention of the audience a reasonably clear statement of the purpose and general direction of the speech a logical sequence of ideas which shows a clear development of the speaker’s argument a proportional allocation of time to the speech as a whole, and to each major point, which enables the objective of the speech to be accomplished (overtime/undertime reduces points) a conclusion or summary of the major points made in the speech structure and organization of entire team's case; e. g. a thematic approach is preferable to a mere collection of independent arguments response to the dynamics of the debate

Assessing Manner n n n manner: the mechanics of public speaking and presentation of the debating case key question: “was it effective? ” elements of manner: vocal style, use of language, use of notes, eye contact, gesture, stance, dress, impression of sincerity, humor personal attacks on opponents reduce manner points manner is assessed as the total impact of all its various elements