ABILITY TO IDENTIFY ‘KEY ISSUES’ IN A DEBATE

[shona]

Speakers should show that they understand which important issues are at stake during a debate. For instance, in the debate ‘This House Would Ban Animal Testing’, a speaker might be rewarded for identifying that medical ethics is a key issue in the debate, then showing why their side has presented a more convincing case on this issue. If you rebut your opponents’ points randomly, it may appear that you have not fully understood the debate. The key issues in a debate are sometimes referred to as ‘the points of clash’ or ‘the key tenets’.

Adjudicators will reward you if:
You work as a team throughout, building a cogent case with which to take on your opponents and working together to present effective rebuttal and Points of Information.
You fill all the time available to you and give adequate time to each major issue.
You identify the key issues in the debate, and show that you have dealt with them more effectively than your opponents.
You fill your team and speaker role on the table e.g. if you are the first proposition speaker you give a clear and fair definition, or if you are the 3rd proposition speaker you bring new material to the debate.
You structure your speech clearly. Clear ‘signposted’ arguments are essential as is a concise introduction and strong summation.
You are able to present your arguments in the wider social or political context.

Adjudicators will mark you down if:

You fail to work as a team e.g. not following the same lines of argument, one team member does not offer any Points of Information or the arguments are not fairly divided between the speakers.
You speak for less than four minutes in a five minute speech, obviously struggle to fit all of your content into the time allowed or bring in new material in ‘protected time’.
You hit minor arguments rather than important ones or fail to grasp the main points or issues at stake in the debate.
Your team fails to fulfil their role on the table or if one of the speakers fails to fulfil their role on the table e.g. the final opposition speaker does not attempt to summate or brings in new material.
You provide arguments without a clear structure; do not signpost your arguments; or make obvious structural errors e.g. you do not introduce your arguments and jump straight into them or you do not summate your speech.
You do not attempt to link your arguments to relevant wider political, moral or social issues.