structure (asian parliamentary debate)springboard4society.org/download/4debating...
TRANSCRIPT
Structure (Asian Parliamentary Debate)
CHAPTER 1
Asian Parliamentary
Teams
3 Debaters (per team)
2 Teams (per debate)
At least 1 Adjudicator (per room)
Structure: Room Setup
Structure: Room Setup
Structure: Room Setup
Structure: Room Setup
Structure:
Speaking
Order
Structure: Timing
Substantives
PROTECTED TIME: NO POIs ALLOWED
UNPROTECTED TIME: POIs ALLOWED
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 7.20
1 2 3 4
Reply Speeches
4.20
RULEs to remember
Electronic Devices
No phones
No Computers
Only Dictionaries
Printed Material
Allowed During Prep Time
Not During Speech
Help from coach or teacher
When preparation begins you are on your own.
NO ONE is allowed to help you.
What do you do if you don’t understand the motion?
Ask a member of the adjudication core, and we will
explain to you
Time Management
Debate Preparation 30 mins
Adjudicator Decision: 15 mins
Oral Adjudicator: 7 mins each
*** Timing is strictly controlled***
Penalty: You could get disqualified from the tournament
The debate
CHAPTER 2
The Debate: Motion
The Theme
Every round has a theme.
Debaters are expected to follow the theme when discussing the
motion.
The debate must have a direct link not only to the motion, but
also to the theme of the round
Example
If the motions is “This house would fight fire with fire” , and
the theme is International Relations defining the motion to
talk about military action on cross boarder conflicts makes
more sense than talking about death penalty for murderers
The Debate: Motion
What is a motion?
A clearly worded statement that announces the topic to be
debated in the round
Types Of Motions
1. THBT (This House Believes That)
2. THW (This House Would)
3. TH (This House)
The Debate: Team Roles
Proposition
• Support the motion & give a definition
• Realize the problem and propose a solution/change
• Provide model or mechanism (the detailed implementation process)
• Engage with Opp side
Opposition
• Go against the motion
• Realize the problem, but go against PROP’s proposal
• Provide counter-model or alternative
• Stick with status quo
• Engage with Pro. side
The Debate: Point of Information (POI)
1. STRICTLY no longer than 20 seconds
2. POIs (point of interests) are
1. Points of clarification
2. Points of Contention
3. Stand up
4. No hackling
5. Chair controls the room
Chapter 3:
Judging a debate
Judging: Who is an Adjudicator?
Is an average reasonable person
At least university degree
Has no specific knowledge on issues
A fairly logical person, and listens to reason
Does not have a personal attachment to the motion
Is politically correct (penalizes hate speech or any
personal attacks by debaters)
Judging: Who is an adjudicator?
Avoid Entering Debates
Your specific knowledge about an issue should not
influence your decision
Your personal biases is not a reason to base your
judgment on
Judging: Assessment of clashes
Adjudicators listen to material presented in the
debate, and the debate alone
Ignores personal opinion towards and issue, and
judges the debate objectively
What do you do when you notice factual errors
What about debates against your own moral
values?
Judging: Entering a debate
In judging don’t use:
Specific Knowledge you have about an issue
Personal values as a basis for judgment
***Judge debates ONLY based on what is being presented
to you***
Judging: Elements of debate
Matter
Manner
Method
Matter
Facts
Logical reasoning
Analysis
Case studies
Responsiveness
Up to date information
Manner
Persuasiveness
Clarity
Body language
Eye contact
Method
Technicality of debate
Timing / Time allocation
Role fulfillment
Discipline
Judging: Weighing and Prioritizing clashes
1. What is the most important clash in the debate?
1. Who presented it and how well?
2. What are the burdens of proof?
3. Which side responded better to the
developments through the debate
Judging: New Matter & Late Development
of Matter
Constructive Speeches
PM, DPM, LO, DLO
Substantive speeches
Whip Speakers
Reply Speeches
No new ideas
Judging: Marking Guide & Margin
What are the range?
Total Meaning
68-70 Poor
71-73 Below Average
74 Average or Expected Standard
75-77 Above Average
78-80 Excellent
Margin
Margins Meaning
0.5-3.5 A very close debate with only minor differences separating the teams
4-7 A relatively clear debate with one team having an obvious advantage
7.5-16 Trashing. A very clear win with the losing team failing on one or more fundamental aspects of its argument or presentation
Q & A?