World School Debating Championship WSDC Australasian Parliamentary English

World School Debating Championship (WSDC) Australasian Parliamentary English Debate System PONPES ALMASTURIYAH, 19 -21 JUNI 2012 DINAS PENDIDIKAN KAB. SUKABUMI 2012

A formal method of interactive and representational argument. Consist of two teams debating over an issue, more commonly called a topic or proposition or motion Encouraged in high schools and colleges

A means of encouraging critical thinking. A means of personal expressions. Tolerance of others' opinions.

Chair Person Time Keeper Affirmative Negative Team Adjudicators

Affirmative: Negative: 1 st Speaker 2 nd Speaker 3 rd Speaker Reply Speaker

Substantive Speech: 1 st Speaker : 4 minutes 2 nd Speaker : 4 minutes 3 rd Speaker : 3 minutes Reply Speech: 2 minutes

Has the right to define the motion. Support it with constructive arguments.

Oppose the motion defined by the Affirmative. Build a counter-case against the Affirmative. Challenge the definition if invalid only.

Relevance Organization Consistency & internal logic Clarity Effective use of evidence

The process of proving that the opposing team’s arguments should be accorded less weight than its claim. Showing how & why the opposition’s arguments are invalid.

� Based on a wrong of facts/ interpretation of facts. � Irrelevant to the topic. � Illogical. � Involving unacceptable implications.

Affirmative: � Defines the motion. � Presents the team’s theme line why the case is logically correct. � Outlines the team split. � Delivers 1 st substantial argument. � Provide a brief summary of the case.

Negative: � Accepts/challenges the definition. � Rebut 1 st affirmative’s arguments. � Presents theme line. � Outlines theme split. � Delivers 1 st substantial arguments. � Provides a brief summary.

Affirmative: � Rebuts the 1 st negative’s arguments. � Restates the affirmative team’s case. � Delivers 2 nd substantial speech. � Provides a brief summary.

Negative: � Rebuts the two affirmative speakers. � Restates the team’s case. � Delivers the 2 nd substantial arguments. � Provides a brief summary.

Affirmative: � Rebuts the two negative speakers. � Restates theme line & the two speakers’ arguments. � Summarizes the issues of the debate.

Negative: � Rebuts all three affirmative speakers. � Restates theme line & the two speakers’ arguments. � Summarizes the issues of the debate

� Provide an overview of the debate. � Identify the issues by both sides. � Provide a biased adjudication of the debate.

The process of determining which team wins the debate. Matter: 40 Manner: 40 Method: 20

The matter category assesses the content of a speech and of the team’s case overall. It includes the arguments used to build up the team’s own case and prove their case line and the rebuttal of the opposing team’s case. Ideally a speaker should have a range of arguments that are not internally contradictory and each of these arguments should be illustrated and backed up by examples. A speaker should also demonstrate the ability to priorities material according to its strength.

A speaker who performs well in the matter category will usually: Have several arguments to support the team’s case and emphasis each argument in accordance with its strength and importance in the debate. Back the arguments up with examples that are NOT drawn from personal experience. Ensure that all arguments presented by the team are consistent, ie that there is no contradiction between different lines of argument used by the team. Avoid debating by listing a string of examples to prove your case. Display an understanding of what the team needs to establish in order to win the argument (eg is the debate a cost-benefit analysis? one where two different models must be compared? ) Demonstrate an ability to adapt and alter pre-prepared material to take into account the other team’s interpretation of the topic and the direction the debate takes as it progresses. Introduce or reinforce points that have been or will be made by other members of the team. Display good general knowledge of the topic area. Identify and rebut the major themes of the other team’s case. Attempt to attack the foundations of the other team’s arguments, as opposed to just rebutting by listing counterexamples. Defend the team’s case from attack by the opposition, ideally by contrasting the different approaches of the team to each issue and explaining why your team’s approach is superior.

� Points awarded under the heading of manner are designed to assess how effectively each speaker presented his or her speech and engages with the audience. Manner is therefore extremely important. Unfortunately, students often fail to appreciate its significance and weight in the marking scheme. There is no ‘right’ way of presenting a speech, as the manner category is deliberately flexible enough to encourage and reward individual style. Debaters are encouraged to experiment with different styles of presentation, including within a single speech. Some students may wish to use humour, passion, sincerity and alike to effectively communicate their speech. � Factors such as vocal style, eye contact, gestures and the use of palm cards are also relevant to manner.

Generally, speakers who score well in MANNER often: • Speak articulately so the audience can easily comprehend the speech. • Use palm cards (text) minimally. • Not use slang words too much, overly technical jargon or pompous language. • Vary the pace of delivery during their speech to add contrast between points. • Vary the tone of voice during their speech to create different moods. • Maintain steady eye contact with all members of the audience. • Use gestures, while not being overly repetitive. • Assume a standing position that is not distracting. For instance, continuous pacing may be distracting for the audience.

Method (20 out of 100 marks) The method category marks the way in which each speaker structures and organizes their speech. It also takes into account how a team performs as a whole in structuring and organizing their case. Introducing elements such as internal case structure and sensible time management aids the audience and the adjudicator to comprehend and follow each individual speech and team case as a whole. At the higher levels of competition it is expected that teams will take a thematic approach to the topic, rather than a mere collection of independent points. Teams that score well in the method category also respond adapt to the development of the debate. This may involve making strategic decisions, such as choosing to emphasize one point over a weaker point. It is also important that speakers who appear later in the debate reinforce points established earlier by their team.

A speaker who scores well in the METHOD category will usually: Define the topic of the debate (if affirmative). This may involve identifying the burden of proof or perhaps setting a test which the team must fulfill to establish their case. Refer back to a central theme that underpins their team case. Adhere to a case split provided by the first speaker. The division of substantial material between the first and second speakers should be sensible and effective. Logically and smoothly progress through each idea, taking care to introduce each new point. Make full use of the available time, while not exceeding the time limit by more than 30 seconds. Divide this time wisely between rebutting all major points of the opposing team's case and thoroughly establishing each substantial point. A firm conclusion of their speech and the team case as a whole. Keep within the parameters of the speaker's role.

SMA/SMK 1. Pada babak awal (pre-elemenary round) untuk babak kedua dengan sistem scoring (big sixteen) dengan single adjudicator 2. Pada babak ke-2 s. d. final, Big Sixteen akan dipertandingkan untuk mendapatkan Big Eight dengan sistim GUGUR; 3. Pengundian motion untuk babak 1 dilaksanakan pada saat Technical meeting, babak ke-2 sehari sebelum tampil, babak semifinal & final dilaksanakan 1 jam sebelum bertanding

WSDC Sistem menggunakan Po. I (Point of Information) Po. I dilakukan saat regu lawan sedang menyampaikan Subtantive Speech Waktu Po. I adalah : menit 2 -3 (untuk 1 st and 2 nd speaker Menit kedua untuk 3 rd speaker Peserta yang ingin Po. I harus minta izin pada regu lawan (dengan mengangkat tangan), dan boleh berbicara setelah dipersilahkan Regu yang di Po. I boleh menerima atau menolak Po. I memiliki nilai tersendiri dalam debat (kebijakan juri)

KLIK DISINI

CLICK HERE