3/25/20103/25/2010 11

Doable Debate in the ESL/EFL ClassroomDoable Debate in the ESL/EFL Classroom

TESOL Boston TESOL Boston March 25, 2010March 25, 2010

WORKSHOPWORKSHOP

Harry HarrisHarry Harris

Hakuoh UniversityHakuoh University

3/25/20103/25/2010 22

OutlineOutline

Why debate?Why debate? IssuesIssues Judging Criteria Judging Criteria Score SheetScore Sheet Debate FallaciesDebate Fallacies

Student Student RemindersReminders

Sample Student Sample Student worksheetworksheet

Debate ScheduleDebate Schedule Suggested Suggested

ReadingReading

3/25/20103/25/2010 33

WHY DEBATE?WHY DEBATE?

Language usage:Language usage: improve vocabulary/other skillsimprove vocabulary/other skills

Critical thinking:Critical thinking: evaluate what read and hearevaluate what read and hear

Reasoned discourse:Reasoned discourse: speak logically & control speak logically & control emotionsemotions

Cooperative efforts:Cooperative efforts: improve social skillsimprove social skills

Research:Research: access/select informationaccess/select information

3/25/20103/25/2010 44

IssuesIssues

Debate structureDebate structure

Knowledge of topicKnowledge of topic

Language fluencyLanguage fluency

3/25/20103/25/2010 55

Judging CriteriaJudging CriteriaOrganizationOrganization Info presented clearly with Info presented clearly with

transitionstransitions

DefinitionsDefinitions ““DifficultDifficult”” words defined words defined

Consistency,Consistency,

RelevanceRelevanceArguments consistent/related to the Arguments consistent/related to the propositionproposition

Body LanguageBody Language Debaters sit up, use gestures, and Debaters sit up, use gestures, and make eye contact.make eye contact.

VoiceVoice Debaters speak clearly/audibly.Debaters speak clearly/audibly.

Example, Facts,Example, Facts,

Statistics, Statistics, SourcesSources

Support provided and/or serious Support provided and/or serious thought done on propositionthought done on proposition

EffectivenessEffectiveness Opponent ideas are used well in Opponent ideas are used well in refutation.refutation.

3/25/20103/25/2010 66

Score SheetScore Sheet PROPOSITION:PROPOSITION:

PROPRO 0-0-55

NOTESNOTES NOTESNOTES 0-50-5 CONCON

Org.Org. Org.Org.

Def.Def. Def.Def.

Cons./Cons./Rel.Rel.

Cons./Cons./Rel.Rel.

Body Body Lang.Lang.

Body Body Lang.Lang.

VoiceVoice VoiceVoice

Ex., etc.Ex., etc. Ex., etc.Ex., etc.

Effective.Effective. Effective.Effective.

TOTALTOTAL

3/25/20103/25/2010 77

DEBATE FALLACIESDEBATE FALLACIES

OVERGENERALIZATIONOVERGENERALIZATIONEx. Cell phones are useless and should be banned.Ex. Cell phones are useless and should be banned.

IGNORING THE ISSUEIGNORING THE ISSUE– AD HOMINEMAD HOMINEM– FALSE APPEALS TO AUTHORITY FALSE APPEALS TO AUTHORITY (Momma said(Momma said……))

– APPEALS TO IGNORANCEAPPEALS TO IGNORANCE

FALSE CAUSESFALSE CAUSES– AFTER THIS, THEREFORE, BECAUSE OF THISAFTER THIS, THEREFORE, BECAUSE OF THIS– EITHER/OREITHER/OR

3/25/20103/25/2010 88

Student RemindersStudent Reminders1. Team members take turns.1. Team members take turns.

2. Debates are timed.2. Debates are timed.

3. During argument periods, 3. During argument periods, opponents listen & take opponents listen & take notes.notes.

4. During question prep period, 4. During question prep period, prepare requests for prepare requests for explanations etc.explanations etc.

5. During question period, go on 5. During question period, go on to next request if opponents to next request if opponents are slow to respond.are slow to respond.

6. During refutation prep, teams 6. During refutation prep, teams work alone or with other work alone or with other PRO/CON teams.PRO/CON teams.

7. During refutation period, 7. During refutation period, opponents listen & take notes.opponents listen & take notes.

8. During final appeal period, 8. During final appeal period, review notes in prep for final review notes in prep for final speech to judge.speech to judge.

9. Final appeal points out own 9. Final appeal points out own strengths and opponent strengths and opponent weaknesses.weaknesses.

10. After debate, judge evaluates 10. After debate, judge evaluates and determines winner.and determines winner.

3/25/20103/25/2010 99

SAMPLE STUDENT SAMPLE STUDENT WORKSHEETWORKSHEET

Name: Taro KondoName: Taro Kondo Date: March 25, Date: March 25, 20102010

Proposition:Proposition: Cats make betters pets than Cats make betters pets than dogs.dogs.

PROPRO CONCON1. Cats are more 1. Cats are more

independent.independent.

2. Cats are generally 2. Cats are generally quieter.quieter.

3. Cats are cleaner and 3. Cats are cleaner and easier to take care of.easier to take care of.

1. Dogs can guard 1. Dogs can guard homes.homes.

2. Dogs offer closer 2. Dogs offer closer companionship.companionship.

3. Dogs can be taught 3. Dogs can be taught tricks.tricks.

3/25/20103/25/2010 1010

DEBATE SCHEDULE 1DEBATE SCHEDULE 1

PROPRO CONCON

11stst Affirmative Affirmative argumentargument

1 minute1 minute

22ndnd Affirmative Affirmative argument argument

1 minute1 minute

33rdrd Affirmative Affirmative argumentargument

1 minute1 minute

11stst Negative argument Negative argument

1 minute1 minute

22ndnd Negative argument Negative argument

1 minute1 minute

33rdrd Negative argument Negative argument

1 minute1 minute

3/25/20103/25/2010 1111

DEBATE SCHEDULE 2DEBATE SCHEDULE 2

PROPRO CONCON

5-MINUTE BREAK 5-MINUTE BREAK TOTO

PREPARE QUESTIONSPREPARE QUESTIONS

3-MINUTE QUESTION3-MINUTE QUESTION

PERIODPERIOD3-MINUTE QUESTION3-MINUTE QUESTION

PERIODPERIOD

5-MINUTE BREAK 5-MINUTE BREAK TOTO

PREPARE PREPARE REFUTATIONSREFUTATIONS

3/25/20103/25/2010 1212

DEBATE SCHEDULE 3DEBATE SCHEDULE 3

PROPRO CONCONRefutation of Con’s 1Refutation of Con’s 1stst argumentargument

1 minute1 minute

Refutation of Con’s 2Refutation of Con’s 2ndnd argumentargument

1 minute1 minute

Refutation of Con’s 3Refutation of Con’s 3rdrd argumentargument

1 minute1 minute

Refutation of Pro’s 1Refutation of Pro’s 1stst argumentargument

1 minute1 minute

Refutation of Pro’s 2Refutation of Pro’s 2ndnd argumentargument

1 minute1 minute

Refutation of Pro’s 3Refutation of Pro’s 3rdrd argumentargument

1 minute1 minute

3/25/20103/25/2010 1313

DEBATE SCHEDULE 4DEBATE SCHEDULE 4

PROPRO CONCON

2-MINUTE BREAK2-MINUTE BREAK TO PREPARE FINAL TO PREPARE FINAL SPEECHSPEECH

FINAL SPEECHFINAL SPEECH

1 minute1 minuteFINAL SPEECHFINAL SPEECH

1 minute1 minute

JUDGE ANNOUNCEMENTJUDGE ANNOUNCEMENT OF WINNERSOF WINNERS

3/25/20103/25/2010 1414

Suggested ReadingSuggested Reading

Hansen, J. (2007). Hansen, J. (2007). Teaching Debate in Japan: A Teaching Debate in Japan: A Review of Resources and Materials to Meet the Review of Resources and Materials to Meet the Demands of Teaching Japanese English LearnersDemands of Teaching Japanese English Learners..http://www.wilmina.ac.jp/ojc/edu/kiyo_2007/kiyo_37_PDF/05.pdf

Harris, H. (2006). English Debate in the Japanese Harris, H. (2006). English Debate in the Japanese Classroom: An Introductory Outline. Classroom: An Introductory Outline. Hakuoh Hakuoh University Ronshu, 21(1University Ronshu, 21(1), 47-74.), 47-74. http://ci.nii.ac.jp/vol_issue/nels/AN10016387/ISS0000365365_en.html

IDEA: International Debate Education Association.IDEA: International Debate Education Association. (n.d.).(n.d.). http://www.idebate.org/debatabase/topic_index.phphttp://www.idebate.org/debatabase/topic_index.php

Whitman, G. (2005). Whitman, G. (2005). DebateDebate. (n.d.).. (n.d.). http://www.csun.edu/~dgw61315/dgwdebate.htmlhttp://www.csun.edu/~dgw61315/dgwdebate.html

3/25/20103/25/2010 1515

Thank you for your Thank you for your participationparticipation