1 / 31

Australasian Parliamentary English Debate System

Australasian Parliamentary English Debate System. Johanes Leonardi T., S.Pd, M.Sc English Education Study Program Faculty of Teacher Training & Education WIDYA MANDALA CATHOLIC UNIVERSITY - SURABAYA. Definition. A formal method of interactive and representational argument.

uta
Download Presentation

Australasian Parliamentary English Debate System

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript


  1. Australasian Parliamentary English Debate System Johanes Leonardi T., S.Pd, M.Sc English Education Study Program Faculty of Teacher Training & Education WIDYA MANDALA CATHOLIC UNIVERSITY - SURABAYA

  2. Definition • A formal method of interactive and representational argument. • Consist of two teams debating over an issue, more commonly called a topic or proposition. • Encouraged in high schools and colleges

  3. The Advantages • A means of encouraging critical thinking. • A means of personal expressions. • Tolerance of others' opinions.

  4. Formation Chair Person Time Keeper Negative Team Affirmative Team Adjudicators

  5. Affirmative: 1st Speaker 2nd Speaker 3rd Speaker Reply Speaker Negative: 1st Speaker 2nd Speaker 3rd Speaker Reply Speaker Australasian Debating

  6. Speech Delivery • Substantive Speech: 5-8 minutes • Reply Speech: 3-5 minutes

  7. Affirmative (“The Government”) • Has the right to define the motion. • Support it with constructive arguments.

  8. Negative (“The Opposition”) • Oppose the motion defined by the Affirmative. • Build a counter-case against the Affirmative. • Challenge the definition if invalid only.

  9. Motion (Topic) • A prepositional statement that determines what a debate shall be about: • That we should give President SBY a chance. • That American pop culture is a threat to civilization.

  10. Defining the Motion • Must be debatable. • Must not a bizarre distortion of the motion.

  11. Defining the Motion • That what goes up must come down. • what  being the President of RI. • goes up  takes power • come down step down from the power • “That the Indonesian presidency should be limited to 2 terms”

  12. Challenging the Definition • Truistic • Tautological/ Circular • Squirreling • Time & Place Setting

  13. Truistic Definition • It is ‘true’ by nature thus make the arguments unarguable. • That we should eat, drink, and be merry. • That we should eat because otherwise we starve to death; drink because otherwise we would die; and be merry because we are alive.

  14. Tautological/Circular Definition • The given definition is circling to the motion. • That technology is killing our work ethic. • That all scientific advancements that make life easier and therefore kill our work ethic are killing our work ethic.

  15. Squirreling Definition • It isn’t tied down to the spirit of the motion & doesn’t have a proper logical link to the motion. • That the USA is opening up to the PRC. • USA: Untidy Students of Asia • PRC: Pretty Room Cleaners

  16. Time & Place Setting Definition • The subject matter of the debate cannot be confined to a very particular time & place. • Limiting the subject matter to only the economic development of Japan during the specific period of the Meiji restoration.

  17. Theme Line • It is the underlying logic of a team’s case. • Used to prove a team’s stand on the motion. • Key question: Why is it true? • Indonesia’s presidency should be limited to 2 terms in respect to democracy, balance of power, and adapting to the world changes.

  18. Team Split Distribution of arguments to the 1st, 2nd, 3rd speaker.

  19. Argumentation • The process of explaining why a point of view should be accepted. • Valid by its supporting logic & facts.

  20. Good argumentation • Relevance • Organization • Consistency & internal logic • Clarity • Effective use of evidence

  21. Rebuttal • The process of proving that the opposing team’s arguments should be accorded less weight than its claim. • Showing how & why the opposition’s arguments are invalid.

  22. Rebuttal: The arguments are… • Based on a wrong of facts/ interpretation of facts. • Irrelevant to the topic. • Illogical. • Involving unacceptable implications.

  23. Role of the First Speaker Affirmative: • Defines the motion. • Presents the team’s theme line  why the case is logically correct. • Outlines the team split. • Delivers 1st substantial argument. • Provide a brief summary of the case.

  24. Role of the First Speaker Negative: • Accepts/challenges the definition. • Rebut 1st affirmative’s arguments. • Presents the theme line. • Outlines the theme split. • Delivers 1st substantial arguments. • Provides a brief summary.

  25. Role of the Second Speaker Affirmative: • Rebuts the 1st negative’s arguments. • Restates the affirmative team’s case. • Delivers 2nd substantial speech. • Provides a brief summary.

  26. Role of the Second Speaker Negative: • Rebuts the two affirmative speakers. • Restates the team’s case. • Delivers the 2nd substantial arguments. • Provides a brief summary.

  27. Role of the Third Speaker Affirmative: • Rebuts the two negative speakers. • Restates the theme line & the two speakers’ arguments. • Summarizes the issues of the debate.

  28. Role of the Third Speaker Negative: • Rebuts all three affirmative speakers. • Restates the theme line & the two speakers’ arguments. • Summarizes the issues of the debate

  29. Reply Speakers • Provide an overview of the debate. • Identify the issues by both sides. • Provide a biased adjudication of the debate.

  30. Adjudication • The process of determining which team wins the debate. • Matter: 40 • Manner: 40 • Method: 20

  31. HAPPY DEBATING!!!

More Related