Post by shona on Dec 13, 2012 21:42:42 GMT
Organisation and prioritisation encompasses the more ‘technical aspects’ of a debating speech but these aspects are incredibly important. It is vital that a debating team works like a team. It is crucial that your speech is properly timed and that you do not stop speaking a minute early or go over time.
Organisation and prioritisation also encompasses how you structure your speech. It cannot be stated strongly enough how important structuring your speech is. A well-structured speech is easy for the judges & audience to follow; helps you articulate your points; and actually helps you to deliver your speech.
This section covers numerous elements, which include: Teamwork, Timing, Structure, the importance of Positions in the Debate and the ability to identify key issues in the debate.
TEAMWORK
In any team competition, be it football, rugby or debating, co-ordination is vital. A good debating team will work together to provide a tightly argued case based on an agreed case line. For example, speaker 1 may deal with the first two main arguments while speaker 2 deals with the third main argument; or both speakers can use all the arguments, with a variety of material coalescing into one case. Either way it is crucial for a team to work together and it should be apparent to the judges and the audience that you are working closely together and the case has been thought out.
Considerable thought should be given to the allocation of arguments between speakers.
During the debate, you should be prepared to pass notes and inform each other about good lines of rebuttal; furthermore, if you have successfully made one or more Points Of Information, it is a good idea to pass on any further points to your colleague.
However, although it is ok to pass notes to each other and to whisper ideas, you must not disturb the debater who has the floor while doing this and you should always keep in mind that you should be listening to their speech.
TIMING
All speakers should use the full amount of time available. An inability to do this may indicate a weak strategy or ineffective division of arguments between two speakers. If you do not speak for the allotted time you cannot be giving the debate the same depth of analysis that speakers from other teams who do utilise the full 5 minutes can give. However, avoid going past your allotted time- speeches which continue past 5 minutes 30 seconds are likely to be penalised.
STRUCTURE
The substantive content of your speech is much easier to understand, and therefore more likely to be persuasive, if it is structured effectively. Basically, you should structure a speech like you would structure an essay. You start with an introduction and preview – introducing what you are going to say. From this you should develop your case by outlining what your key arguments are going to be and (depending on position) defining the motion or rebutting your opponents. You will then expand and work your way through your main arguments. Finally, you should conclude by recapping what you have told the adjudicators.This ensures that the audience is constantly reminded of the fundamental points of your case.
It is of course, essential that you think about your team’s case, rather than just your individual speech, when you are outlining the arguments you will use. In particular, the first speaker in a team should always outline, at the start of his/her speech, what they and their partner are going to do, while the second speaker in a team should remind the audience, in their summation, what their partner has done. Known as ‘signposting’, it is important because it helps the judges (and audience) follow your line of argument.
You should try to think of 3 or 4 distinct arguments on your side of the motion. Again, on the motion ‘This House Would Ban Animal Testing’ your arguments could be as follows:
Proposition
• A ban would help animal welfare.
• A ban would reinforce the notion that it is wrong to use animals as a means to an end.
• There are many other possible research techniques that could be utilised by drug companies and cosmetics companies that are more effective than animal testing.
• The claims put forward that medical science relies on animal testing are not true. Animal testing is not 100% safe, does not always show tangible benefits and there are substantive differences between species, which mean that findings may not be reliable.
Opposition
• Whilst animal welfare is important, the key principle to apply in this debate is that the reduction of human suffering is our first priority and the prevention of animal suffering or death is secondary to that.
• Although there are other methods, the most reliable and consistent way of finding out if new medicines and cosmetics are safe is via animal testing. The other methods are not as consistent, are less reliable and are more expensive.
• It would be wrong to put a product on the market that has not been adequately researched. The best way to see if a product is dangerous is to test it on a non-human animal.
• Animal testing helps animals as well as human beings. Many drugs that veterinary surgeons use to treat animals have been tested on animals as well. In many ways, therefore, to stop animal testing would actually hurt animal welfare.
The arguments should then be distributed between the two speakers and an appropriate amount of time committed to each.
It is generally helpful to include ‘signposts’ within your speech e.g. ‘And now on to my second argument, which is about why animals benefit from animal testing as well’. This may sound somewhat clunky and artificial but it can help the adjudicators and audience to remember your arguments, and to have a clear idea of where you are going in your speech. This will also help you to remember what you want to say.
Speeches should be a mixture of prepared arguments, evidence and rebuttal – answering the other side’s arguments. The only person in the debate who doesn’t need to rebut the opposing teams’ arguments is the first speaker for the first proposition team – because they won’t have heard any arguments! From then on in the debate, you have to listen to what the other team is saying, and respond to their points.