Debating Methods
Document | General Resource
Myth 1: That debating is only for ‘smart kids’
It is a common misunderstanding that debating, and other speaking activities, are only for gifted and talented students. Like a great many academic activities, the process of learning critical thinking can come easier to high achievers, however that does NOT mean that speaking activities should be taught exclusively to those of higher base-level intelligence, nor does it mean that those students will be more successful in the long term. A truer statement is that learning debating requires a student to be curious—passion, dedication and an inquisitive mind are more important than mechanical intelligence.
Success in all speaking activities requires a combination of both logic and perceptiveness in order to do justice to a topic, create engagement with an audience and make sense to an adjudicator. This is because almost all debates (and speeches) ask students to:
Provide an assessment of human behaviour and society
Put that assessment through a filter of logic
Draw some kind of conclusion from the result
The behavioural element of this equation means that perception about the world, as well as examples of real human experience, are essential to creating arguments that hold to be true. Without a grounding in the real world, arguments are less realistic and tangible, and an assessment of the real world requires awareness and empathy.
Some students may be readily attuned with working through a problem in simple logical steps. Others—this is often particularly true of younger students—are naturally empathetic people who can be more perceptive than logical, and can therefore offer a balance of thought for the task at hand.This means that a mix of student abilities and backgrounds can provide a better team dynamic for debating, both during preparation, as well as during a debate itself.
Myth 2: That it’s ‘natural speakers’ who are the best debaters
While the most common mistake that is made in deciding the composition of a team lies in selecting only the ‘smart kids’, it’s also important to make sure you don’t just pick ‘natural speakers’ on the misguided belief that debating is all about talking in front of an audience. In fact, only about 20 percent of what actually occurs in a debate is the presentation and delivery, with the hard work being done behind the scenes during preparation.
That is not to say that you should be biased AGAINST including the chatterbox types—they are super valuable! Just remember that a student who might not be the loudest contributor in the classroom environment could still be an incredible asset in terms of constructing measured arguments.
In beginner teams, the role of adviser is often given to the student perceived to be the least articulate or most nervous. While it is true that advisers don’t have to speak, it’s a mistake to undervalue their role. Having an adviser who is an organised, good listener with some knowledge of current events and an ability to work with others is of great benefit to a team (more on this later!). This is another aspect of debating that may suit the less chatty but thoughtful kids in a group.
The three speaker roles tend to suit different sorts of kids, too.
First speakers have to do less off-the-cuff responding in debates (obviously, first affirmative can’t respond to anything actually said in the debate!) So, the first speaker role can be better suited to deliberate thinkers who prefer to prepare in detail (and write down more of their case—a habit we encourage students to grow past, if possible).
Second speakers need to be far more responsive and able to absorb, analyse and answer what they hear. This suits students who are good listeners and who can think on their feet.
Third speakers aim to respond to everything that remains strong in the opposition’s case—they need to be excellent, ongoing listeners who can distinguish what has been defused from what is still potent in the debate. The role of third speaker suits good listeners who can think holistically on their feet.
Keep in mind that there is a huge degree of overlap in all of these roles! Ideally, all speakers will learn how to speak successfully in every role throughout their learning.
Myth 3: That nerves are a barrier to debating
As people who have spoken in front of large audiences, from running corporate training sessions and speaking to festival audiences, to trivia nights and intimate gatherings, we can say unequivocally that nerves are an unavoidable aspect of speaking in public. We still get nervous, too! In fact, we would argue that feeling totally in control is likely to leave a speaker thinking and sounding flat. Being a bit nervous brings energy and focus, and it is only when nervousness is so unsettling that it overwhelms you that it becomes a problem. Fortunately, there are simple techniques that can be practised in order to reduce the effect that nerves have on a speaker, to the point where most people wouldn’t notice the signs in the slightest. These techniques can both be taught and learnt.
The most obvious and simple technique is practice! Getting up to speak in a non-threatening environment where your classmates are assisting you and testing their skills too, goes a long way to defuse the problem. Concentrating on the ideas that need to be expressed rather than how they are being expressed can also help. Tjhis approach removes attention from performance nerves to thinking well—and, afterall, that’s also what really matters.
It is a relatively rare thing to find a student who takes to speaking in public on their first try like a proverbial duck to water. It’s great if you find one, but you shouldn’t spend too much time searching, it’s a sisyphean task, particularly when compared to the rewards that can be gained from the process of working with a student to improve their speaking ability and manage their nerves. Your role as a debating teacher is not to find the students who are the most naturally confident speakers. In fact, we've found that this kind of student is often harder to teach due to their strong- minded attitudes. Instead, you should try to find the most interested thinkers—it will pay dividends in the long term.
Myth 4: That kids should take to debating quickly
As people who have spoken in front of large audiences, from running corporate training sessions and speaking to festival audiences, to trivia nights and intimate gatherings, we can say unequivocally that nerves are an unavoidable aspect of speaking in public. We still get nervous, too! In fact, we would argue that feeling totally in control is likely to leave a speaker thinking and sounding flat. Being a bit nervous brings energy and focus, and it is only when nervousness is so unsettling that it overwhelms you that it becomes a problem. Fortunately, there are simple techniques that can be practised in order to reduce the effect that nerves have on a speaker, to the point where most people wouldn’t notice the signs in the slightest. These techniques can both be taught and learnt.
The most obvious and simple technique is practice! Getting up to speak in a non-threatening environment where your classmates are assisting you and testing their skills too, goes a long way to defuse the problem. Concentrating on the ideas that need to be expressed rather than how they are being expressed can also help. Tjhis approach removes attention from performance nerves to thinking well—and, afterall, that’s also what really matters.
It is a relatively rare thing to find a student who takes to speaking in public on their first try like a proverbial duck to water. It’s great if you find one, but you shouldn’t spend too much time searching, it’s a sisyphean task, particularly when compared to the rewards that can be gained from the process of working with a student to improve their speaking ability and manage their nerves. Your role as a debating teacher is not to find the students who are the most naturally confident speakers. In fact, we've found that this kind of student is often harder to teach due to their strong- minded attitudes. Instead, you should try to find the most interested thinkers—it will pay dividends in the long term.