DEBATE 101

By Elvira a.k.a Elve

AGENDA

DEBATE IN GLANCE

ROLES OF SPEAKER

MOTION UNDERSTANDING
– CASE BUILDING
CONSTRUCTING ARGUMEN
AND REBUTTAL
01

DEBATE IN GLANCE
DEBATE INTRO

DEBATING IS
- A clash between government and
opposition team
- Developing communication skill
- Arranging, organizing and delivering
effective arguments
- The objective of debate is to convince
the adjudicators (and audience) that
your team is the most convincing
(through your reasoning, arguments
a n d ex p l a n at i o n s ) a n d t h e refo re
deserve to win the debate
- Debating requires sufficient knowledge,
skill, willingness and tireless practices!
DEBATE FORMATE

ASIAN AUSTRALS BRITISH WORLD

PARLIAMENTARY PARLIAMENTARY PARLIAMENTARY SCHOOL
Ø3 SPEAKERS PER Ø3 SPEAKERS PER Ø2 SPEAKERS PER TEAM Ø3 SPEAKERS BUT 1
TEAMS TEAM TEAM CONSISTS OF 5
Ø4 TEAMS DEBATING SPEAKERS
Ø7 MINUTES 20 Ø8 MINUTES 20 AROUND (OG, OO, CG
SECONDS SECONDS & CO) Ø8 MINUTES 20
SECONDS
ØWITH POI ØNO POI Ø7 MINUTES 20
SECONDS ØWITH POI
 MOTIONS
MOTION IS

- Issue or topic that you will debate upon

- Full propositional statement, not question or phrase
- Affirmative has to defend the motion
- Negative has to oppose the motion
- Types of motion:
a. Proposal Motion
• Concerned with practical problems. The motion asks
debaters to propose specific solvency to deal with the
problem
• Example: THW allow gay couples to adopt children.

b. Judgement Motion
• Concern with the question right or wrong. The motion asks
the debaters to prove general fact/statement.
• Example: THBT capitalism has failed.

c. Comparison Motion
• Concern with two values conflict. The motion ask debaters to
prefer a value over another value based on hierarchy
outlined in the motion.
• Example: THBT free trade is better than fair trade.
 want here
you can add anything what you like and what you

Add your text here

CASE

- A complete set of argumentation to defend or oppose the motion

- Anatomy of case:
• Set up : definition of a motion into a debate context
• Arguments : reasoning why your team is right
• Responses : reasoning why your opponent is wrong
 DEBATE ASSESSMENT

- Public speaking skills: MATTER (CONTENT) – 40%

vocal, style, use of Arguments (logic, use of
language, use of notes, evidence, relevance
eye contact, gesture,
stance, dress, impression
of sincerity and humor.
- Pe r s o n a l a t t a c k t o t h e
opponents reduce on
manner points.

MANNER (DELIVERY) – 40%

METHOD (STRUCTURE) – 20%
- Structure of individual speech and
team’s case
- Response to the dynamic of the
debate
01

ROLE OF SPEAKERS
ROLES – 1st AFFIRMATIVE/PRIME MINISTER

Define the motion

Presents affirmative’s theme line : GOAL

Explain about:
- Foundation of case (basic
justification/principle
- For proposal debate: provide the complete
model include urgency of proposal, model
feasibility, and how the model effectively
achieve the objective (Burden of
Proof/BOP)
- Trade off

Recaps/ summarizes own speech

 ROLES – 1st NEGATIVE/ LEADER OPPOSITION

ROLES
125
- Respond the definition (accept or reject)
- Provides negation (A-)
97
- Rebut PM briefly (usual l y focus on
objective and basic justification of
55 government’s stance
- Deliver:
38 • Foundation of the case (basic
justification/principle)
18 • Counterproposal if necessary (the model,
feasibility and brief model comparison)
• In what way affirmative idea is not
标题 标题 标题 标题 标题 accepted.
• Summarize/recaps own speech
ROLES - 2nd SPEAKER

- Clarifies/reminds the adjudicators what the room of debate is

and how previous speakers fulfill their burden of proof. Shows to
the adjudicators if your opponent case fall to engage properly.
- Briefly reiterates team’s case (in general) and shows how your
team still has upper hand.
- Defends your 1st speaker arguments (answer the rebuttals given
towards your 1st speaker)
- Attack previous speaker (rebuttals)
- Deliver your extention. It should be distinguish from your
foundation. It could be analysis of other point of view/other
actor involvrd, analysis in various scenario, deeper analysis on
wider perspective, or further implication that may happen.
WATCH FOR: CONTRADICTION. Your extension backstabbing
your argument) and additional burden of proof.
Summarizes/recaps own speech.
 ROLES – 3rd SPEAKERS
Identify the fulfillment of From each battle happen
the BOP from both teams, ensure the adjudicator to

S O
y o u r o p p o n e n t win your team on those
engagement, and battle battles by providing
during the debate. Explain holistic rebuttals for
t h a t yo u r te a m h a s s t i l l everything given by your
upper hand. opponent. Arrange your
rebuttals for each battle
• Yo u r m a i n d u t y i s a t t a c k . so the adjudicators easily
Since you are the last hope of understand how your
the team, attack everything rebuttal contribute.

T
given by your opponents.
• Be Structured! Always
Focus on the arguments or
use sign posting to help
responses that you consider
a d j u d i c a t o r s

W
essential and could determine
understand.
winner of that round.
• 3 r d affirmative/GW is
• Hinder unnecessary
discouraged from bring
repetition. Sometimes, you
n e w m a t t e r. 3 r d
need to be creative to extend
negative/OW is
the previous rebuttal (Tips:
prohibited from bring
use multilevel approach on
new matter.
developing your rebuttal).
Identify contradiction, hang NEW EXAMPLE IS
case, and new matter) NOT A NEW MATTER
 GAME ON
01 Add your text here
you can add anything what you like and what you want here
 MOTION UNDERSTANDING - CASE BUILDING

BRAINSTORMING STANCE

12
CONTEXTUALIZE THE GOAL AND
DEBATE MODEL (IF ANY)

BURDEN OF PROOF
DISCLAIMER 34 PRIORITIZE

WHICH ARGUMENT
SHOULD COME FIRST
 MOTION UNDERSTANDING – THW CRIMINALIZE FPI

WOULD
1. Does the motion require
mechanism?
2. D o w e h a v e c r e a t e a
c o m p l e t e l y n e w
mechanism or modify from
SQ?

FPI CRIMINALIZE FPI

1. Does this proposal apply to 1. Should the ‘criminalize’ be?
the organization as an • Government ban the existence of
entity? FPI.
2. Should we debate whether • Stop any activities and anything
FPI is a good organization related FPI and punish those who
or not? do not obey
• Restrict any such organization
(radical ones) to exist and grow
(but WAIT. We’re not going to
MOTION UNDERSTANDING IS HELPING YOU TO GET EARLY DEFINITION debate that far!)
BRAIN STORMING

Don’t be lazy!
Think! Analysis

Write down any Do this

relevant ideas and approximately 5-10
knowledge that you minutes individually
have
 ADD TITLE HERE

FPI COUNTRY’S RULE SOCIETY GOVERNMENT

- A religious - All organization/entity - Majority of Indonesian - Government has
organization should follow the = Muslim responsibility to protect
- Has been existing in country’s rule - FPI wants to keep the society
Indonesia - Country’s rule = society in ‘Muslim’ - Government has obligation
- All organizations don’t create values and tracks not to limit the society’s
want to their value to destruction, don’t - Society is okay with freedom of expression
attract follower force! Muslim's values - There’s no special
- But is society ok with mechanism dealing with FPI
what FPI does?
 CONTEXTUALIZE THE DEBATE
DESCRIBE THE SQ
- Focus on matter that become
the issue of the motion
- Where and what happen
(NOTICE: the setting element
(Liberal Democratic Country
- Pay attention to specific term
IDENTIFY THE DECLARE YOUR IDENTIFY BOP
CONTROVERSY STANCE - Identify what should you
prove to make your stance
- Controversy is usually - Declare your position to the stands
happened when a certain controversy - Show your opponent BOP
actor is violated - Clear! No room for multi • Add disclaimer to dismiss
- Controversy usually interpretation possible unimportant harm
happens when some value • How, who, when - ELABORATE! ELABORATE!
are conflicting • Sometimes all, but sometimes
not
- E xp l ai n you r p os i t i o n w i t h
simple elaboration or
mechanism
• Mechanism is also necessary
to avoid unnecessary harm
- Beware of creating soft stance
Disclaimer
CONSTRUCTING ARGUMENT

IDEA/ASSERTION
50% The point you’re trying to make that you believe to be true

ANALYSIS
75% The logical and analytical explanation to prove your idea. Reason

EVIDENCE
50% Something like a statistic, a survey a case study, or an analogy to
give greater credibility to your idea and analysis

LINK BACK
25% The conclusion. So What.
01
PPT模板下载：www.1ppt.com/moban/
节日PPT模板：www.1ppt.com/jieri/
PPT背景图片：www.1ppt.com/beijing/
优秀PPT下载：www.1ppt.com/xiazai/
Word教程： www.1ppt.com/word/
资料下载：www.1ppt.com/ziliao/
范文下载：www.1ppt.com/fanwen/
教案下载：www.1ppt.com/jiaoan/
字体下载：www.1ppt.com/ziti/
CONSTRUCTING
REBUTTAL
行业PPT模板：www.1ppt.com/hangye/
PPT素材下载：www.1ppt.com/sucai/
PPT图表下载：www.1ppt.com/tubiao/
PPT教程： www.1ppt.com/powerpoint/
Excel教程：www.1ppt.com/excel/
PPT课件下载：www.1ppt.com/kejian/
试卷下载：www.1ppt.com/shiti/
 CONSTRUCTING REBUTTAL

Rebuttal is a process of proving how your opponent are

01
wrong
You need to prove otherwise: A- theory
• A rebuttal should not contradict an argument
• A rebuttal should not give asymmetric rebuttal to the
government

02
Never mix rebuttal with argument. Argument explain why your
team is right, rebuttal explain your opponent wrong.
An effective rebuttal is not “pre-prepared’ rebuttal. A good
rebuttal is about effectively attacking you’re opponent
argument as they were presented. You should pay attention to
your opponent’s argument.

03
A good rebuttal consists of layer of rebuttal that could answer
every possible scenario from your opponent’s argument:
Even if rebuttal
- Even if rebuttal: proving that, although your opponent
maybe right, we can still rebut that point
WHAT DO WE TALK ON DEBATES?

Government LAW
- Social contract - Criminal Justice System
- Democracy - Retributive Justice
- Dictatorship - Restorative Justice
- etc - etc

Environment RELIGION
- Eco-technology - Priests, bishop, sins
- Eco terrorism - Prostitution
- Dark green vs Bright green - LGBT etc
- etc
 WHAT DO WE TALK ON DEBATES? (CONT’D

BUSINESS Politics FEMINISM ECONOMICS

- Investment - Liberalism - Gender equality - Moral hazards
- Shares - Secularism - Social movement - Inflation
- Bargaining Power - Majority vs Minority - Racism - Tax system
- etc - etc - etc - etc
 ADD TITLE HERE

MORALITY
IR - Right
- Regionalism - Utilitarianism
- Soft vs Hard Power - Libertarianism
- Multilateralism - etc
- etc
SCIENCE ART
- Technology - Hi-brow and Low-brow
- Space - Copyright
- Research - etc
- etc
SECURITY AND….
- Just War Principle Many other things!
- Refugee
- Terrorism
- etc
THANK YOU
IN GOD WE TRUST, IN DEBATE WE CRUSH