1705133665
1705133666
5.3 Responsibilities for Speakers in Worlds-Style Debate
1705133667
1705133668
5.4 Summary
1705133669
1705133670
5.5 Terms and Concepts from Chapter 5
1705133671
1705133672
5.6 Discussion Questions for Chapter 5
1705133673
1705133674
5.7 Exercise for Chapter 5
1705133675
1705133676
思辨精英：英语辩论-构筑全球视角 [:1705132347]
1705133677
5.1 Parliamentary Systems and Worlds-Style Debate
1705133678
1705133679
Educational debate is usually modeled on some legislative system such as a congress or a parliament. In some cases, it is based on a legal model. The format of educational debate on which this book will focus is modeled on debate in parliamentary systems of government and is called Worlds-Style debate and sometimes, not surprisingly, British Parliamentary debate. This format is the most popular form of educational debate in the world. Beyond its popularity, it has been chosen as the format for this book for a variety of reasons. First, Worlds-Style debate is a lively and energetic format involving four teams of two people not only giving persuasive speeches, but also interacting with each other through questions and comments throughout the debate.1 Second, Worlds-Style debate is a format in which students can practice a variety of advocacy skills ranging from argument construction to refutation to organization to delivery. Third, because each Worlds-Style debate involves four two-person teams, eight people have the opportunity to actively participate in each debate. Eight participants stand in contrast to the two to four people who participate in other forms of debate. So, for educational and practical reasons, Worlds-Style debate provides an excellent format for educational debating and for that reason, is the focus of this book.
1705133680
1705133681
The Parliament of the United Kingdom, on which Worlds-Style debate is most closely modeled, consists of members of various political parties. Currently the major parties in the British Parliament are the Conservative Party, the Liberal Democrats, and the Labour Party. Sometimes, one party or the other will hold a majority of seats and, therefore, will be able to better control the outcome of debates and of policy in general. In other situations, no party may hold a majority, and a coalition may arise wherein two or more parties agree to cooperate in order to achieve a majority of the seats in the Parliament. The most recent coalition was after the 2010 general election. The Conservatives, led by David Cameron, which had won the largest number of seats, formed a coalition with the Liberal Democrats in order to gain a parliamentary majority. The coalition has not been particularly cooperative, but they have formed a majority to control the government.
1705133682
1705133683
In the British Parliament, the party or parties that command a majority of seats (whether a single party or a coalition) are generally referred to as the Government. The party or parties in the minority are referred to as the Loyal Opposition. As stated earlier, the parliamentary form of government including both the Government and the Loyal Opposition is the model on which the educational style of debate called Worlds-Style debate is based.
1705133684
1705133685
A Worlds-Style debate consists of four teams arguing two different sides of a motion2. The motion is ordinarily presented to the four teams between fifteen and thirty minutes prior to the beginning of the debate. That time is referred to as preparation time. During that time, each team needs to think about how they will approach the debate.
1705133686
1705133687
Two of the four teams are assigned to represent the Government and the other two teams are assigned to represent the Opposition. Whatever the motion, both Government Teams are expected to support the motion, making sure that the two Government Teams’ arguments are consistent with one another even though the arguments may be different. In other words, the two Government Teams are expected to support a similar position even though their reasons for doing so may differ. Similarly, the two Opposition teams are expected to argue against the motion in ways that are consistent with one another although their arguments also may be different.
1705133688
1705133689
To extend the analogy between the kind of debate that actually occurs in the British Parliament and the kind of educational debate called Worlds-Style debate, assume that the two teams from the Government side consist of persons from a coalition government consisting of, say, the Conservative and the Liberal Democrats. In our analogy, those two parties have formed a coalition in order to maintain a majority. Other parties might be a part of the loyal opposition, say, the Labour Party along with the Democratic Unionist Party. Imagine that a bill is being proposed in the Parliament and that the Government, in this case a coalition of Conservative and Liberal Democrats, supports the bill. Those two parties may both support the bill, but they may do so for different reasons. Similarly, the Labour Party and the Democratic Unionist Party may oppose the bill although for different reasons. In this situation, the two Government parties remain loyal to one another by providing support for the bill. Similarly, the two opposition parties are loyal to one another in opposing the bill.
1705133690
1705133691
The two parties that constitute the Government may support the bill for different reasons, as do the two parties that combine to be the Loyal Opposition. In fact, sometimes speakers from one Government party may be motivated to use a different argument for supporting a bill because that argument appeals more to the party’s constituents. The same is true for speakers from each of the parties. Thus, we may find a situation where members of parliament from different parties support a bill for different reasons because those reasons are more persuasive to their particular constituencies.
1705133692
1705133693
思辨精英：英语辩论-构筑全球视角 [:1705132348]
1705133694
5.2 Worlds-Style Debate Format
1705133695
1705133696
An analogical situation is created in the educational debate format called Worlds-Style debate. Two teams of two persons each, assigned to the Government side, will support the motion though the teams may not support the motion for the same reason. Similarly, the two Opposition Teams will oppose the motion perhaps using different reasons to do so. While in an actual parliament, speakers from the same side may choose different reasons to appeal to their constituents, in the Worlds-Style debate format, different teams may choose to support (or oppose) the motions for different reasons in order to make sure their particular team appeals positively to the adjudicator.
1705133697
1705133698
Worlds-Style debaters try to distinguish themselves from the other team on the same side in a manner similar to the way the Liberal Democrats and the Conservative party try do distinguish themselves from one another. The Conservative and Liberal Democrats support one another by being members of the Government Coalition but, at the same time, have interests in distinguishing themselves to their audience of voters. Another reason for creating this distinction involves a practical reason that stems from the convention of how a Worlds-Style debate is judged. At the end of the debate, the judges are asked to rank each of the teams from first (best) to fourth (worst). So, while the Government Teams are primarily competing with the Opposition Teams, each Government and Opposition Team is subtly competing against the other team on their own side. This internal competition is set because of the forced rankings that a judge is expected to deliver.
1705133699
1705133700
The Worlds-Style debate format used in educational debate differs from an actual debate in the Parliament because the Worlds-Style debate format maintains very strict speaking times for each speaker. A debate format consists of a description of the teams in the debate, and the order and times for the speeches that make up that debate. The Worlds-Style debate format differs from many other educational debate formats because it involves four teams rather than two. As already stated, the choice of four teams is consistent with the kinds of debate that we might envision in a Parliament involving a coalition government.
1705133701
1705133702
Each of the four teams in a Worlds-Style debate is assigned to one of four “positions.” These positions are: First Government, First Opposition, Second Government, and Second Opposition. The First Government and Second Government Teams are charged with the responsibility of supporting the motion while the First Opposition and Second Opposition Teams are charged with opposing it. Two speakers represent each of the four teams and each speaker gives a speech of seven minutes. Usually a debate tournament consists of at least four “rounds” of debate. In the first round, teams are assigned to the four positions at random, and then are rotated through the other positions until each team has had the opportunity to debate in each of the four positions.
1705133703
1705133704
Each team consists of two persons, each with a unique title. The chart below shows the title that is given to each speaker, the team of which that speaker is a member, and the time limits for the speech. The members of each team can decide which of the team members will fill each role. For instance, the members of the First Government Team can decide who will be the Prime Minister and who will be the Deputy Prime Minister.
1705133705
1705133706
Worlds-Style Debate Format
1705133707
1705133708
1705133709
1705133710
1705133711
As can be seen from the above chart, the First Government and the First Opposition Teams deliver the first four speeches, then, the Second Government and Second Opposition Teams deliver the last four speeches. Therefore, the First Government and First Opposition Teams, sometimes called the “Upper House,” generally are responsible for the first half of the debate, and the Second Government and Second Opposition Teams, sometimes called the “Lower House,” have the responsibility for the second half.
1705133712
1705133713
The table above describes all of the formal speeches but it does not describe one of the most important and dynamic parts of the debate: points of information. Points of information provide opportunities for members of each team to interact with members of the teams defending the opposite side of the motion. Points of information can be questions to the opposing speaker, brief arguments in refutation of the speaker’s position, brief arguments directed against the motion in general, or any other kind of statement that the person making the point of information wishes to make. For instance, if the Prime Minister is speaking, any member of either Opposition Team may request a point of information. Similarly, if a member of the Opposition Team is speaking, any member of either Government Team may offer a point. Points of information can be offered after the first minute of a speech and before the last minute of the speech. The first and last minute of each speech is “protected” against interruption. The point of information can last no more than fifteen seconds and may take the form of a question, a statement, or an argument. The speaker’s time continues during the point of information, so the fifteen seconds becomes a part of the speaker’s seven-minute speech.
1705133714