ANUDouse Training 2003

8/9/2019 ANUDouse Training 2003

1/8

THE BASICS

Topic

A debate is a structured argument between two teams of speakers. The most common style of debatingfeatures three speakers on each team. Each speaker has a set time to discuss the topic. A topic is

provided for every debate. For example:

'That we should support a Heroin Trial in the ACT'

The affirmative team is required to defend the topic. In the above case they would argue in favor of aheroin trial. The negative team then has to argue against a heroin trial..

Roles of The Speakers

Team members speak in the following order,

1st Affirmative: The first speaker is required to define the topic. An affirmative team cannot define thetopic however they like. Rather, the definition must be reasonable - the test for a reasonable definition ishow would the ordinary person on the street define a topic.

For example in the debate 'That we should support a Heroin Trial'the 1st affirmative speaker coulddefine the topic as, 'The establishment of safe injecting rooms for heroin addicts. As it is a trial only a

few rooms would be established where small amounts of heroin are distributed and after a period of timethe success of the program would be reviewed'. Having provided a definition the first affirmative speakershould then discuss the arguments in favour of a Heroin Trial.

1st Negative: It is generally accepted that the first negative speaker should accept the affirmative'sdefinition, unless it is exceedingly unreasonable (how to and when to challenge a definition will be madeclear later). The speaker should then refute the affirmative's arguments (this is called rebuttal), and then

provide arguments of their own as to why they oppose a Heroin Trial.

2nd Affirmative: This speaker should start by rebutting their oppositions arguments, and should then

provide new arguments in favour of a Heroin Trial.

2nd Negative: Rebut the oppositions argument, and then provide new arguments against a Heroin trial.

3rd Affirmative: Should spend almost all of their speech rebutting the other teams argument, and thenconclude by summarizing their teams substantive arguments (see below).

3rd Negative: Same as 3rd Affirmative

Speaking times

Each speaker has 8 minutes to speak. They receive a bell at 1minute to allow Points of Information, and awarning bell at 7 followed by two bells at 8 minutes.

Substantive arguments and Rebuttal

Debating requires speakers to both refute their opposition's argument and construct their own. Asubstantive point is an argument your team has thought of in favour of your side of the topic. However,an equally important part of debating is to be able to rebut the opposition's arguments. This involveshighlighting the opposition's key points and explaining why they are wrong.

Result


2/8

In each debate there is an adjudicator whose job is to decide who wins and by what margin. The winnerof the debate will be the team that best argues their case.

METHOD

How to organise a team's case

Caseline/approach

The three speakers on a team need to work together to organise a case. Teams should summarize theiroverall argument in a case line. The case line should be introduced in the first speaker's speech andreferred to by all members of the team. An affirmative team's caseline in the heroin trial debate could be

"That we should support a heroin trial because it is the only way to save lives and reduce the costs tosociety of drug use"

Remember, your caseline should be simple and explain your Team's approach to the topic.

The Split

The first two speakers on each team have to deliver constructive points to prove their team's case.However, each speaker needs to provide a different angle on the subject. A 'case split' divides thesubstantive points into two categories. For example,

The 1st Affirmative Speaker could discuss how a heroin trial would benefit drug users by saving lives andbringing users into contact with social services. ("Benefits to the Individual")

The Second Speaker could discuss how in the long-term safe injecting rooms could reduce crime andsocial problems that harm the whole society. ("Benefits to Society")

A split provides each speaker with a broad theme to cover. Common types of splits used in debates areindividual/society, social/economic, moral/practical. These examples are a guide to help you understandhow a split works, remember, the kind of split you use will depend on the debate.

How to improve teamwork

A team will work together better when:* Each speaker makes an effort to refer back to the arguments made by their teammates.* Each speaker makes an effort to be consistent with their teammates.* Each speaker understands the caseline and split.

To improve your teamwork make sure all your team members help prepare the case.

How to organise a speech

A better organised speech helps speakers deliver ideas more clearly. If you're not yet fully confidentabout speaking in public, a well-structured approach can help tremendously.

Each speech should begin with rebuttal (except 1st affirmative) and move onto substantive arguments.The 1st negative speaker should limit rebuttal to 1/4 of their speech. 2nd Affirmative speakers, and 2ndNegative speakers should make sure rebuttal constitutes less than 1/2 of their speech. Third speakersshould rebut for most of their speech and summarize their other speaker's arguments at the end of thedebate.

How to organise constructive arguments

"Signposting" is a simple way to organise a speech. Signposting is labeling each of your arguments in aspeech. When you get to each point you announce that you are concluding one idea and moving onto


3/8

another. A speech should usually not have more than three constructive points. Numbering your points asyou make them "my second point is" is often useful but not essential.

For example the first affirmative speaker in the Heroin Trial Debate could use the following three points,

1. Why a heroin trial would save lives.2. How a heroin trial would allow social workers to have more contact with the addicts.

3. How a heroin trial would reduce the social appeal of the drug to young people by making peopleshoot-up in 'medical centres'

Rebuttal

When rebutting the opposition's arguments it's important not to try and deal with every argument theyraised. Instead try to select the key arguments in the oppositions case. Once again it is vital that yousignpost your rebuttal points so that the adjudicator can identify the arguments you're dealing with.

For example, suppose that an affirmative team presented the following arguments for the topic 'Thatphysical education should be an elective'.

1. Students have a right to choose other subjects so why not physical education?2. Students are exposed to unnecessary risk of physical injury.3. Students can get sporting involvement outside the school in extra curricular activities.4.There is poor funding within schools even for maths and science, let alone physical education.

These other subjects should have priority.5. There is a shortage of qualified physical education teachers

Rather than rebutting these arguments one by one, it is better to group them into two themes:

- The interests of the students (arguments 1, 2 and 3)- The concerns of the schools (arguments 4 and 5).

MATTER

Matter' refers to the arguments presented by the speaker. Good matter involves convincing, logical

arguments supported with clear, relevant facts and examples.

How to construct an argument

There's a simple formula that can be used to construct an individual argument/point within a speech,Introduce, Explain, Example, Tie in (IEET).

Let us suppose that you are negative team arguing that instead of a heroin trial we need a tough stands onheroin use.

Introduce your argument eg "tough drug laws reduce the amount of heroin in society."

Explain: Tough prison sentences for dealers would make it harder for addicts to obtain heroin. This isbecause if the people dealing drugs risk going to prison for ten to fifteen years they will start to demand

higher prices. As well as this, the incentive to deal in heroin would be reduced because of the risk ofgoing to jail. So heroin would be harder to get, it's price would rise, and drug use would fall .

Example: In New York City tough drug laws have been shown to be effective at reducing the availabilityand increasing the cost of drugs like cocaine.

Tie-in: This is one more reason our team believes that harsh sentencing rather than a heroin trial is thebest way to resolve the drug problem.

How to use examples


4/8

In debating, it is essential that you do not provide hundreds of examples in favor of your case. Instead,debaters should explain an argument and then provide an example or statistic to support that argumentRemember - examples don't prove anything unless you explain their relevance.

How to improve the quality of your argument.

Often debaters merely assert that something will happen, cite an example, and pretend that their case isproven. In a debate it is important that you prove your argument clearly. Let us suppose you are arguingthat 'the government should say sorry for the stolen generation because it will help reconciliation andreconciliation is a good thing'. Merely making this statement does not prove how saying sorry will helpwith reconciliation. Conversely, if you argued ' that saying sorry promotes reconciliation because it

shows the indigenous community that the government recognizes the suffering indigenous Australianshave endured and that the government was responsible for it. Such an apology could improve thedialogue between indigenous Australians and the government'.

To make sure you have constructed a good argument ask yourself, 'have I really proven my argument orhave a I just told the audience what it is'.

MANNER

Manner is how you present what you say and there are various aspects of manner that you need to beaware of. There is no one prescribed way of presenting your argument. The best advice you can get is todevelop a manner style that is natural to you. Here are some tips and pointers.

1. Cue cards: Debaters often write notes on palm cards to help them remember their speech. However it'simportant that you do not write your whole speech on the cards. Try and write just your key points andexamples on accounts. Also make sure you do not read from your cards. Ensure that you look up oftenand maintain eye contact with the audience.

2. Body: Avoid any nervous habits like rocking, hands in pockets, or standing on your head. Try and usehand gestures while speaking.

3. Voice: Varying your tone of voice is an excellent way to keep the audiences attention.

Dealing with nerves

Even the best speakers sometimes get nervous. The following tips won't necessarily cure the scaryness ofspeaking, but they might help a bit. It does get better with time and practice, we promise!

1. StructureStructure is the most amazing tool in debating, because it can both stop you rambling overtime, andhelp to pad out a matter light speech. If youre new to speaking, and 8 minutes seems like eternity,the easiest way to fill time is to signpost well, and prove all the links in your argument (see thesection on constructing an argument, above.) A well structured speech means youll never be stuckfor something to say, because if you run out of points you can always summarize, in a logical andeasy to follow order, the things youve already gone over. Adjudicators will love you.2. Preparation

If you know stuff about a topic, chances are youll speak better. A little general knowledge goes avery long way in debating. Preparation isnt just about reading lots of stuff for prepared topics,though, how you work with your team has a huge influence on how you speak. Make sure youunderstand the case, and all the arguments you have to talk about. Talk with your team. Try andfeelready to speak.3. Attitude

Much more important than actual preparation work is attitude. If you feel confident, youll speak better.Its that simple. Dont be put off by a scary opposition. Getting into a good mindset for a debate isdifferent for everyone, but it sometimes helps to not try to scribble down facts and examples right up tothe last minute of preparation time, give yourself a bit of mental breathing space just before you speak.


5/8

Write your opening line out in full if you feel nervous. Smile. Youll probably be fine. And if youoccasionally deliver a shocking speech (again, it happens to everyone) dont let it deter you. Keeping onspeaking is the only way to improve, and in all seriousness, you probably didnt speak as badly as youthought you did. And youll improve fast. Honestly.

POINTS OF INFORMATION

Points of Information (POIs) may be delivered any time between the 1 minute and 5 minute bells. Adebater may stand up in the middle of another debates speech and say 'point of information'. A speakermay reject or accept a point of information. If it is accepted the debater can deliver a brief (10 seconds,maximum) point.

POIs should be brief, and clear. They should last no longer than 10 seconds.

Points of information can be delivered in three basic ways, (note: this is not an exhaustive list nor arethese rules on POIs. These are just some basic guidelines).

1. An Argument (sometimes phrased as a question.)This format is basically delivering an argument as a question. For example in the death penalty debate a

POI could be phrased as, "Don't you think that the death penalty actually deters murder by increasing theconsequences?"or" What do you say to the argument that the death penalty deters crime by increasingthe consequences of crime?"This type of POI is essentially an attack on the speaker's case.

2. A factual POI.Often a team may be relying on a certain example or factual piece of information to support theirarguments. If you have information that would stop them in their tracks this is worth delivering. Forexample if a speaker was arguing that "That most asylum seekers are possible terrorists and criminalsand thus we cannot open our borders"a POI stating that, '80% of asylum are genuine immigrants andthere is no statistical evidence that terrorists come to Australia via boats according to immigration stats'would be devestating.

3. Exposing a weakness in their case.POIs are useful to expose where a team's argument is lacking, where their arguments are contradictory, or

where they have failed to rebut a key argument. Suppose a team is debating that we should invade Iraq,and they are talking about all the benefits of having the UN administering Iraq after the invasion. A POImay point out that, "You're talking about all these benefits of having democracy in Iraq but have failed torebut our arguments about how invasion will not be possible."

Things not to do when delivering POIs: Do not use POIs to 'nitpick' minor examples, unless the example is very important to their case

and you have matter that will destroy them. Do not use POIs to clarify what you said. That is if you feel that someone is misrepresenting you

do not use a POI to defend yourself - the adjudicator already knows. Do not 'badger' a debater, by offering too many POIs or offering them one after they have said

something along the lines of "I'm not going to take one for a minute", it's rude.

How to Deal with Points of Information.

Firstly, you should only accept 2-3 points in your speech. Accept more if you can or if you are short ontime. However, remember it is important to keep control of your speech - don't waste valuable speakingtime by taking POIs.

Also don't let someone delivering a POI push you around. They have 10-15 seconds to deliver their point.If they don't do it in that time tell them to sit down. Further, don't let them have a conversation with you,once they've made their point they are not allowed to speak.

There are three techniques to deal with POIs once they've been made.


6/8

1. Respond to it: - This is the best option. If you are confident in your case just refute the point andmove on. The quicker you can do this, the better.2. Say I'll cover it later: - If you have a section in your speech that relates to the point tell them youwill cover it later.3. Dodge: - Sometimes you are going to be stumped by a POI - it happens to everyone. If you arestumped don't waffle for 30 seconds. You can, restate your caseline, provide token refutation, or

pretend you're going to cover it later. The most important point is that you shouldn't allow a POI to

make you lose your concentration.

TECHNICAL DEBATING ISSUES

This section covers some technical facets of debating. If you find these difficult to understand don'tworry them much easier to understand once you've done a few debates.

How to define the topicIt is up to the affirmative team to define the topic in a debate. The test for a reasonable definition is whatwould the ordinary person on the street think the topic means. Further, when defining a topic anaffirmative should absolutely avoid defining 'words' in the topic, and instead that affirmative team shouldmerely explain what the topic means overall.

Example: On the topic 'That we should support a Heroin Trial' instead of defining individual words theaffirmative could define the topic clearly by saying, 'The Topic refers to the establishment of safe-injecting rooms for Heroin'.

What to do with an unreasonable definitionIt is up to the negative to agree or disagree with a definition. If a definition is unreasonable they maychallenge it. For example if an affirmative team defined theHeroin Trialdebate as 'That we need tohave more female super heroes'the negative could challenge the definition. A 1st negative speakershould challenge a definition by first stating why the definition is unreasonable and then say, 'Eventhough your definition is wrong here is why your arguments are wrong.' However, PLEASE AVOIDCHALLENGING DEFINITIONS AS MUCH AS POSSIBLE. DEFINITIONAL CHALLENGES RUINDEBATES.

Models and Tests

Sometimes 1st affirmative speakers need to introduce a model or test. Below is a description of the topicswhere this is relevant.

Models/Should debates

In a debate where you have to 'do' something you have to produce a model. These debates are usuallycalled should debates. The 1st speaker of the team needs to outline the model. For example in the debate"That we should abolish Medicare", the Affirmative should produce a model that sets out how they willabolish medicare. Similarly, the negative team would need an alternative model on which to base theiranalysis (most likely the status quo).

Other debates where a model is required, That we should invade Iraq (Model of invasion + Model of how you would Rebuild the Nation).

That we should institute an ICC (Model of what the ICC would do/be).

A model should be clear but not excessively detailed.

Is Debates/Tests

A different type of debate is what we call an "is" debate. For example, the topic 'That multiculturalismhas failed'requires the teams to discuss the current state of multiculturalism, without necessarily arguingthat multiculturalism is good or bad, or whether in the future things will be different. On paper this looksobvious, but in a debate it is often easy to forget! "Is" topics often require the affirmative team to


7/8

produce a test. A test is effectively a yardstick to evaluate the topic. For instance when evaluatingwhether multiculturalism has failed, the affirmative team test could state that multiculturalism will havefailed if,

* People of different races do not have equal opportunity.* There is minimal integration between races.* Racial resentment persists in Australia.

The affirmative would then need to prove that these circumstances actually exist.

Tests & models are one of the most difficult aspects of debating. If a topic that uses the word 'is' or 'has'the affirmative will usually need a test. If a topic uses the word 'should' or requires you do something, theaffirmative team needs to explain what they're going to do, usually through a model. These are not rules,it's up to you to decide whether an individual topic needs a test or a model. Remember some topicsrequire neither, eg

We should say sorry for the stolen generation. America should leave the Middle-East alone.

In both these topics, and many others, the affirmative's model is built into the topic. It is perfectlyacceptable for the negative team to have a counter model.

ADJUDICATION

Adjudicators will award the debate to the team that better argues their case. Several criteria are used todecide a debate:- Method: How well organised was each team's case and individual speeches?- Matter: How well did each team argue their points? Did they really prove their arguments? Did theyhave relevant examples to support their argument? Did they successfully rebut the other teamsarguments.- Manner: How well did the two teams speak.

Each speech is scored out of 100. An average score is 75, a score less than this indicates you couldimprove a few things in your speech, an excellentscore is 78/79. Adjudicators make their decision first,

then fiddle speaker scores to ensure that the total score for each team gives the right result. Thus scoresoften dont exactly reflect how well you spoke. If you want better feedback make sure you talk to theadjudicator afterwards. Adjudicators love to be talked to. And they REALLY love being asked questions,so if you are even the slightest bit confused, ask them to clarify things. Its their job to make sure youleave the room satisfied that you learned something that will help your debating. They dont bite, we

promise.

WEBSITES

Debating is all about discussing public issues. Thus, it is worth keeping your general knowledge up todate. Below are some websites that can help.

http://www.debatabase.org/debatabase/index.asp - Has lots of good summaries of debating Topics.http://www.aph.gov.au/library/intguide/hotissues.htm - The parliamentary library is an excellent source

of information. The E-briefs in particular are excellent.http://www.smh.com.au/ - The Sydney Morning Herald.CNN.com - Has excellent international news.http://www.news.bbc.co.uk/ - Good international newswww.economist.com - theres excellent information here, but its fairly tough going.www.guardian.co.uk - again, heres great coverage of all kinds of current events, in depth.


8/8

Documents

ANUDouse Training 2003