Basic Debating Skills

CONCEPT: A DEBATE.
A debate is, basically, an argument. That is not to say that it is an undisciplined
shouting match between parties that passionately believe in a particular point of
view. In fact the opposite is true. Debating has strict rules of conduct and quite
sophisticated arguing techniques and you will often be in a position where you will
have to argue the opposite of what you believe in.

CONCEPT : THE TOPIC.
If a debate is a form of argument then it logically follows that there must be
something to argue about. This is called the TOPIC. The topic changes from debate to
debate. They are often about current issues of public importance ("That Canberra
should have self government") or about general philosophies or ideas ("That beauty
is better than brains"). All topics begin with the word "That". As in other arguments
there are two sides to any topic. The team that agrees with the topic is called the
AFFIRMATIVE (or the `government' in parliamentary debating) and the team that
disagrees with the topic is called the NEGATIVE (or the `opposition' in parliamentary
debating). When organising a debate it is important to select a topic that is
appropriate to the age and education of the debaters concerned. Often topics will
cover areas that the debaters have a specific interest in or, in the case of schools
debates, that have been covered in classes or are current news items.

CONCEPT: DEFINITION.
If a debate is going to take place then it must be agreed in advance what the
debate is going to be about. Thus it must be agreed what the topic means. This may
seem obvious in a topic like "That Canberra should have self government" but with
something like "That a cabbage is better than a rose" is might not be so clear.
Deciding and explaining what a topic means is called `defining the topic'. The job of
defining begins with the AFFIRMATIVE. The first speaker of the affirmative must
explain in clear terms what they believe the topic means. In deciding this the
affirmative team should always try to use the "person on the street" test. That is if
this topic were presented to the average person on the street - is this what they
would take it to mean. Where the topic is too obscure to allow this test then apply
the `reasonability' test. The affirmative team should ask themselves "Is this definition
reasonable ? Is it something the average person might expect ? Does it allow for both
sides of the debate ?". If you can answer yes to these questions then the definition is
probably reasonable, if not search for something more reasonable. Try to avoid the
dictionary, except in cases where you don't understand a word. In your definition
explain the meaning of the whole topic rather than each separate word.
The negative team may agree with or choose to challenge the definition
presented. The negative team should be very careful about challenging as it is
difficult to continue the debate with two definitions. Challenges may be made if the
definition given is unreasonable or if it defines the opposition out of the debate. If
the negative team chooses to challenge the definition it should be done by the first
speaker who should clearly outline why the negative is challenging and then propose
a better definition.

CONCEPT: TEAM LINE.
Because debating is a team event it is important that the three speakers work
together as a team. The TEAM LINE is the basic statement of "why the topic is true"
(for the affirmative) and "why the topic is false" (for the negative). It should be a
short sentence, presented by the first speaker of each team and used by the other
two speakers to enforce the idea of teamwork.

RULES : THE ROLES OF THE SPEAKERS.
In a debating team each speaker has specified roles that they must fulfil to
play their part in the team. They are laid out below in the order that the speakers will
speak.
1st Affirmative must:
- define the topic.
- present the affirmative's team line.
- outline briefly what each speaker in their team will talk about.
- present the first half of the affirmative case.
1st negative must:
- accept or reject the definition. If you don't do this it is assumed that you
accept the definition.
- present the negative team line.
- outline briefly what each of the negative speakers will say.
- rebut a few of the main points of the first affirmative speaker.
- the 1st negative should spend about one quarter of their time rebutting.
- present the first half of the negative team's case.

2nd affirmative must:
- reaffirm the affimative's team line.
- rebut the main points presented by the 1st negative.
- the 2nd affirmative should spend about one third of their time rebutting.
- present the second half of the affirmative's case.
2nd negative must:
- reaffirm the negative's team line.
- rebut some of the main points of the affirmative's case.
- the 2nd negative should spend about one third of their time rebutting.
- present the second half of the negative's case.
3rd affirmative must:
- reaffirm the affirmative's team line.
- rebut all the remaining points of the negative's case.
- the 3rd affirmative should spend about two thirds to three quarters of their
time rebutting.
- present a summary of the affirmative's case.
- round off the debate for the affirmative.
3rd negative must:
- reaffirm the negative's team line.
- rebut all the remaining points of the affirmative's case.
- the 3rd negative should spend about two thirds to three quarters of their
time rebutting.
- present a summary of the negative's case.
- round off the debate for the negative.
Neither third speaker may introduce any new parts of their team's cases.



CONCEPT: REBUTTAL.
In debating each team will present points in favour of their case. They will also
spend some time criticising the arguments presented by the other team. This is
called rebuttal. There are a few things to remember about rebuttal.
1. Logic - to say that the other side is wrong is not enough. You have to show why the
other side is wrong. This is best done by taking a main point of the other side's
argument and showing that it does not make sense. Because a lot of the thinking for
this needs to be done quickly this is one of the most challenging and enjoyable
aspects of debating.
2. Pick the important points - try to rebut the most important points of the other
side's case. You will find that after a while these are easier and easier to spot. One
obvious spot to find them is when the first speaker of the other team outlines briefly
what the rest of the team will say. But do not rebut those points until after they have
actually been presented by the other team.
3. `Play the ball' - do not criticise the individual speakers, criticise what they say. To
call someone fat, ugly or a nerd does not make what they say wrong and it will also
lose you marks.

TECHNIQUES : THE INDIVIDUAL SPEAKER.
There are many techniques that each speaker can use in their speech but
there are three main areas that you will be marked on and they are matter, method
and manner.

CONCEPT : MATTER.
Matter is what you say, it is the substance of your speech. You should divide
your matter into arguments and examples.
An argument is a statement "The topic is true (or false depending on which
side you are on) because of x", where the argument fills in for the x . For example in
the topic "That the zoos should be closed" an argument may be: "the zoos should be
closed because they confine the animals in an unnatural environment".
An example is a fact or piece of evidence which supports an argument. If our
argument is: "that zoos should be closed because they confine the animals in an
unnatural environment" then an example might be: "that in the lion cage at Taronga
Park Zoo in Sydney the animals only have about 200 square metres where in the wild
they would have 2000 square kilometres to roam in.".
Any examples that you use should be relevant to the topic at hand. Examples
which have very little or nothing to do with the topic only make a speech look weak
and lacking substance.
Matter cannot be just a long list of examples. You do not win a debate by
creating the biggest pile of facts. Facts are like bricks in a wall, if you don't use them,
cement them together properly then they are useless. Similarly you cannot win a
debate solely by proving that some of the facts of the opposition are wrong. It may
weaken their case a little, the same way that removing some of the bricks from a
wall will, but you really need to attack the main arguments that the other side
presents to bring the whole wall crashing down.
Many debates are on currently important issues so it is good for any debater
to keep themselves informed of what is happening in the world around them and
what are the issues involved. Watching the news helps (but watch a credible
broadcast like the ABC , you are hardly likely to get a topic on some heartwarming
story about a lost cat in western Sydney) as does reading a good paper or periodical
like the Canberra Times or the Sydney Morning Herald.

CONCEPT: METHOD.
Where matter is what you say method is how you organise what you say.
There are many delicious pieces of the method pie; here are a few tantalising
crumbs.......
1. TEAM. Good team method involves unity and logic. Unity is created by all
members being aware of the definition, what the other speakers have said and what
the team line is. Each member of the team needs to reinforce the team line and be
consistent with what has already been said and what will be said by the other
members of their team. You may as well shoot yourself in the foot as change the
team line mid debate just because you think it isn't working. Your team will look
poorly organised and will be severely penalised by the adjudicator.
2. INDIVIDUAL. You must structure your own speech well. The first step is to have a
clear idea of your own arguments and which examples you will be using to support
those arguments. As you speak make a clear division between arguments and let the
audience know when you are moving from one argument to the next, this is called
sign posting and is a very important debating tool. The key thing to remember is that
although you know exactly what you are saying the audience has never heard it
before and will only hear it once so you have to be very clear about it.
When you are presenting one particular argument make sure that the
argument is logical (makes sense) and that you make clear links between your team
line and the argument, and between the argument and the examples that you will
use to support it.
Rebuttal should be organised the same way. Attack each argument that the
opposition presents in turn. Spend a little while on each and then move on to the
next. That way the other team's case is completely demolished.

Also organise your speech well in terms of time. Adjudicators can pick up
when you are waffling just to fill in time .... and can see when you've spent too long
on one point and then have to rush through all your other points and rebuttal just to
finish your speech in time. Whew!! You will probably make a few mistakes with this
early on but practice makes perfect.
CONCEPT: MANNER.
Manner is how you present what you say and there are various aspects of
manner that you need to be aware of. There is no one prescribed way of presenting
your argument. It is not true, no matter what Paul Keating thinks, that the best way
of being convincing is to shout and thump on the table. The best advice you can get
is to develop a manner style that is natural to you. Here are some tips and pointers.
1. CUE CARDS. Do not write out your speech on cue cards. There is even a current,
and indeed deplorable, trend towards computer generated cue cards. Debating is an
exercise in lively interaction between two teams and between the teams and the
audience, not in reading a speech. Use cue cards the same way you would use a
prompt it a play, they are there for reference if you lose your spot. You can tell when
someone is reading.. remember the television announcements by the politicians in
the recent ACT elections?
2 EYE CONTACT. Is very closely related to cue cards. If you look at the audience you
will hold their attention. If you spend your time reading from cue cards or looking at
a point just above the audience's head they will lose concentration very quickly.
When you've got them by the eyeballs their hearts and minds will follow.
3 VOICE. There are many things you can do with your voice to make it effective. You
must project so that you can be heard but 4 minutes of constant shouting will
become very annoying very quickly. ( Like a butcher shouting out the daily specials ).
Use volume, pitch and speed to emphasise important points in your speech. A
sudden loud burst will grab your audience's attention while a period of quiet
speaking can draw your audience in and make them listen carefully.
4. BODY. "Work it baby, work it!". ( Although any other links between the movie
Pretty Woman and debating end here ! Your body is a tool for you to use. Make hand
gestures deliberately and with confidence (a fine example of someone who can't is
that idiot on the Canberra Toyota ads at the moment). Move your head and upper
body to maintain eye contact with all members of the audience (although
automatically moving your head from side to side makes the adjudicator want to pop
a ping-pong ball in there). If you want to walk up and down do so but move with
effect and deliberately, don't wear worry lines into the carpet. If you are going to
stand still, stand with confidence. Don't let your body apologise for your presence by
appearing nervous.


5 NERVOUS HABITS. Avoid them like the plague. Playing with your cue cards, pulling
on a stray strand of hair, fiddling with your watch, bouncing up and down on the
balls of your feet or bouncing your cue cards off the nose of the nearest audience
member as you are finished with them only distracts from your presentation. Use
your whole person to effect, don't let any one thing detract from your ability to
persuade the audience.
6 ELOCUTION AND OTHER BIG WORDS. This is not an exercise in grammar or
elocution. Try to avoid being too informal but don't go overboard the other way.
There are no marks to be gained from trying to use big words you don't understand
or can't pronounce. In the same way it is a huge mistake to let someone else write
your speech. People that do that aren't entering the spirit or developing the skills of
debating and end up looking really silly getting stuck on a word they just can't say.

CONCEPT: THE MARKING SCHEME.
Every adjudicator marks to a standard. You will get a mark out of 40 for
matter, 40 for manner and 20 for method, a mark out of 100 total. The average for
any speaker is 75 and most marks won't go much outside 6 or 7 marks either side of
that. Don't spend your debating life worrying about numbers, like most statistics
they are meaningless unless you understand the reasons behind them. Adjudicators
are friendly people who will happily speak with you after the debate and tell you
about your individual performance.