Debate Structure & Format

 WHY DEBATE ?
    I have chosen the debate format for this course for several reasons.

• First, in a debate, you are not expressing your opinion; rather, you are assigned an affirmative or negative position on the question. Your task is to find the pertinent data and assemble it into a set of logical arguments that will support or refute the statement, depending on the side to which you have been assigned.   The formality of the debate will focus our attention on the scientific information that underlies each of the issues we will address, not on our opinions.
• Second, each debate will have two teams, with two individuals on each team.  This format will encourage each person to work as a part of the team, and the discussion that will be required to form your strategy should also sharpen your skills and logic.  Each team will debate two topics, once as the affirmative team and once as the negative.
• Third, each debate will be judged by the others in the group, so both the debate teams and the audience will need to be actively engaged in the process.

     Dr. Amanda Schivell and Dr. Sibley will present a debate in the second week of the course, to give you some idea what the format should be.  Each debate will have a specific topic at issue.  For example, the first debate question is

       Resolved: Farming of transgenic salmon should be allowed in Washington State .

    Students will begin their debates at the beginning of week three.  We will assign students to their topics and to the affirmative or negative side during the first week of class. The topics are listed below.

DEBATE 1: Use of antibiotics as growth promoters in agriculture should be allowed. students 1-2, aff, 3-4, negative

DEBATE2: Reproductive cloning of cattle should be allowed 5-6 AFF, 7-8 NEG

DEBATE 3: Using "race" as surrogate for ethnic origin should be allowed in medical practice. 9-10 affirmative, 11-12, negative

DEBATE 4: Newborn infants should be screened for the 20 most common metabolic diseases for which assays exist. 3-4, aff, 1-2 negative

DEBATE 5: Planting and sale of genetically modified non-food crops be allowed. 7-8 aff,5-6 neg

DEBATE 6: Planting and sale of genetically modified food crops should be allowed. 11-12 aff,9-10 neg

DEBATE BASICS

A basic format is outlined below

There are two key sets of players in these debates:
    the two teams who are debating and
    the rest of the group who will be judging the debate.

• Because these debates focus on scientific issues, the first step will be for each team to define the terms that will be used in their argument.  Each team will have no more than 3 minutes to accomplish this, and the definitions need to be agreed between the teams
• Because many scientific arguments depend on quantitative data, presentation of graphs and diagrams will be allowed, using an overhead projector.  No extra time will be allowed for this.  It must fit within the allowed time.

THE DEBATE STRUCTURE

• The first member of the affirmative team speaks first for no more than 8minutes.
• S/he must present a set of points that support this idea.  This is the chance to set up both the logic and the data that support the thesis.
• All points should be supported by data, and the source should be identified.
• Establish affirmatives advocacy of resolution.
• There is a problem that could be solved -
• The status quo isn't going to solve this problem without change
• Here is our specific proposal of what ought to be done
• Our plan will solve the problem/harm
  
• The negative team then can cross-examine for no more than 3 minutes
• This is a chance to clarify questions on the points made by the affirmative team.
• Ask question to help you understand their arguments. GET INFORMATION
• Ask questions to set up your arguments to come. USE ANSWERS AGAINST THEM LATER
• Show the judge what a wonderful person you are. ACT LIKE A POLITE, FRIENDLY PERSON.

• The first member of the negative team then presents its rebuttal to the points made by the affirmative team.  The team will have  3 minutes to confer with one another and then no more than 8 minutes to present the case.
• An effective rebuttal addresses each point made by the affirmative team.
• Here, too, data should be cited and the source of the information cited.
• You could....
• Attack affirmative arguments and begin laying out additional issues in the negative.
• Make arguments against the specifics of the affirmative case. CASE ARGUMENTS.
• Argue that if the plan is adopted, bad things will happen. DISADVANTAGES.
• Argue that the fundamental assumptions of the affirmative are flawed/incorrect. CRITIQUE.
• Argue that the plan is not a representation of the topic.
• Argue that there would be a better alternative to the plan.

• The affirmative team then can cross-examine for no more than 3 minutes
   
• The affirmative team can confer for up to 3 minutes.
• Then, the second member of the affirmative team  can respond to the rebuttal. No more than 5 minutes
• No new points can be raised here.  This is the place to provide additional sources and information to support the plan that was outlined at the outset.

• The negative team can confer for up to 3 minutes and then the second member of the team responds. No more than 5 minutes.
• No new points can be raised here.  This is the place to provide additional sources and information to support the plan that was outlined at the outset.

• Each team can then confer for up to 3 minutes and then
• Each team presents their closing arguments. no more than 3 minutes.
• No new points here, either. This is your chance to summarize, emphasize your strongest points and  convince the judges that your arguments have carried the day.

    THE JUDGING FORMAT
        WHO WON?

• Your judging sheet will be turned in with your name on it; you will be judged on the thoroughness of your judging! (but not on your decision about who won)
• Your assessment should depend only how persuasive were the arguments presented.  Based on the evidence, which side best supported or refuted the thesis? Your opinion on the thesis is not a relevant part of the decision!
• Take notes as the debate proceeds.  List the points that the affirmative team makes, and then keep track of whether the rebuttal addresses each point or not.
• Notice the sources of evidence used.
• Are you more convinced by evidence from the scientific journal Science or Nature than by an article in the National Inquirer?
• Is a point supported by evidence from more than one source?
• Write your decision, and explain why you made that choice, citing arguments that persuaded you. and what the other side could have presented that might have changed your mind.

  JUDGING THE PARTICIPANTS

• Each debater will be judged on his/her preparation of evidence.
• The affirmative debaters will be judged on the clarity and presentation of their plan.
• The negative team members will be judged on the logic of their rebuttal, and the clarity of their presentation.
• Comment both on what the debaters did well, and make constructive suggestions for improvement.
• These assessments will passed on to the debaters by us, but they will be anonymous.  Everyone will participate in two debates, so these suggestions can be extremely useful for improving for the second debate.
• Scoring rubrics: (ways of judging the debaters)
• 4: No flaws; powerful presentation; mastery of knowledge, logic and sources
• 3: Good sources, logical presentation; appropriate response to counter arguments
• 2: Had some sources, but gaps in knowledge or logic that reduced the force of the arguments
• 1: Participated with some information, but planning and source information was minimal

There are many web sites that contain similar information, and these can certainly be consulted for much more detailed formats and suggestions.  One is listed below because it includes some helpful suggestions.