Instructors know that disciplinary and professional expertise requires facility with multiple theoretical, experiential and practical perspectives. One cannot fully understand the material relevant to any field without following the many roads, encountering the many roadblocks and experiencing the many paths through them that previous generations of scholars and practitioners have discovered.
In the field of Communication Studies, there remains significant disagreement about how to persuade audiences effectively and ethically. Teaching students about persuasion thus requires attention to multiple perspectives that students will need to integrate to be effective practitioners. This is a pathway to robust engagement with their learning. But experiencing different perspectives and finding ways to integrate them into a knowledge base and professional practice is no easy task. How do we train students to encounter different perspectives, investigate them, compare them and make decisions about how to think and act in their own lives?
Take a SIP of this
Enter debate, an educational paradigm that goes back at least to the ancient Greeks but has a more modern trajectory in the U.S. university system. Throughout its history, debate has been as much a competitive game as a method for effective teaching across disciplines. This combination of competitiveness with a powerful pursuit for knowledge produces an alchemical reaction that inspires students and faculty members alike (Bartanen & Littlefield, 2014).
As a learning enterprise, debate implies the existence of at least two sides represented by at least one perspective/individual each. It also involves the iterative encounter of perspectives across multiple opportunities for speaking and posing critical questions. It assumes that comparing and contrasting perspectives with the use of evidence offers opportunities for shared discovery. In short, it opens up the possibility for students and faculty members to challenge and transform the assumptions, practices and evidence that form the basis of a human life in a profession, community and nation (Bartanen & Littlefield, 2014; Hogan, Kurr, Bergmaier, & Johnson, 2017; Snider & Schnurer, 2006).
What’s more, debate enhances skills specifically relevant to success in the 21st-century workplace. For example, to work effectively in a team-based economy, students will need to cultivate skills in group collaboration. These skills include listening to alternative points of view, integrating them into shared perspectives and implementing these perspectives as solutions to problems that their profession, business or industry may be facing. Offering students access to debate as a learning activity thus opens the door to being a more effective professional. It also contributes to their formation as innovative leaders who can chart a path through disagreement to productive action in a world that demands fast results (for more on the learning outcomes and professional-development benefits of debate, see Broda-Bahm, Kempf, & Driscoll, 2004; Hogan, Kurr, Bergmaier, & Johnson, 2017; Rogers, Freeman, & Rennels, 2017; Snider & Schnurer, 2006).
As Alfred Snider and Maxwell Schnurer (2006) noted in their highly influential text “Many Sides: Debate Across the Curriculum,” debate can find a home in any professional or disciplinary setting as a powerful catalyst for advancing high-impact learning and high-level application of concepts. They note that as long as you have at least two sides with opportunities to equally present their views followed by some strategy for rendering a decision, you have a debate (see Snider & Schnurer, 2006, p. 6). Crucially, all of these terms and elements are themselves open to numerous interpretive and design possibilities, including the length of speeches, the number of speeches and what a decision means. Just take the decision issue, for instance – a decision in a debate might mean saying one side won. But it might also mean integrating views from different sides in the debate into an overall perspective that has been revealed through the process. However a debate is structured and used in any given instance, the activity offers students and faculty members an opportunity to encounter knowledge as an always-unsettled but ever-relevant aspect of daily decision-making in personal, professional and public life (Snider & Schnurer, 2006).
Try one assignment focused on debate*:
Introduce students to debate with a simple in-class exercise. Pick a topic with at least two sides and assign students to work in teams of two. Each student will give two speeches and ask one series of questions. The debate will look something like this:
Speaker 1 (for the topic) 1- to 3-minute speech
Speaker 2 asks Speaker 1 questions about their arguments 1-3 minutes
Speaker 2 (against the topic) 1- to 3-minute speech
Speaker 1 asks Speaker 2 questions about their arguments 1-3 minutes
Speaker 1 Rebuttal 1- to 3-minute speech
Speaker 2 Rebuttal 1- to 3-minute speech
Decision: Talk about the arguments and render a final decision about who won and/or what action seems warranted by integrating or synthesizing various viewpoints from both sides. This can be done by students or faculty members or both. It can include the speakers in the debate or just members of the audience.
Some additional elements to consider:
The topic in a debate is an organizing statement that will frame research and argument development for both sides. For instance, you might have a debate on this topic: All students should receive a free college education. Speaker 1 might reference evidence that a program making college education free would enhance access for many who are unable to afford it, thus giving them the tools to advance their professional lives. Speaker 2 might reference evidence that there is simply not enough money to support such a program or argue that there are more fundamental barriers to accessing a college education that must be addressed first (for more on debating this specific topic, see Snider & Schnurer, 2006, pp. 59-60). In the first two speeches, the speakers would establish their primary arguments for and against the topic. They would ask each other questions after each of the first two speeches. Then, both speakers would give a rebuttal speech in which they make the final case for their side.
Debate speeches should be simple. Have the students write a brief introduction in which they summarize their view and three main points in support of it. Then, have them walk through each main point, offering reasoning and evidence in support of each. They should also respond to any points made by the other side before offering a brief conclusion in which they recap their arguments and offer a reason to vote for their perspective.
Everyone should get plenty of time to research and write arguments. While this can be done in the space of one class, it might be better in at least two sessions, one for introducing the assignment and assigning speakers and one for the actual debate(s).
Debates can be graded in numerous ways, and the final grade should not necessarily be based on who wins. Telling students they are involved in a high-stakes competition in a classroom setting can create unneeded anxiety and unhealthy competitive tactics. Instead, grade each student based on the quality of the arguments they have offered and the degree to which they have used evidence to back up their views.
You could take the simple debating model introduced above and expand it into longer debates with more advocates on each side and more iterative speaking and question/answer periods. You may want to pick a number of topics that each group of students (four or even eight) takes on as a team.
If you would like to establish departmentwide debates, you could have students in different sections of the same course debate each other. This would require finding times that will work for all students in each section. These debates could also be done in a tournament format in which you have iterative rounds of competition, the winners advancing until only one team is left: the champion. This is a great way to cultivate a departmental academic community and invite camaraderie among faculty members and majors.
*For more on the design issues noted in this section, see Snider and Schnurer (2006) and Broda-Bahm, Kempf, and Driscoll (2004), from which many of them have been adapted.
Still thirsty? Take another SIP
- Contact MSU Denver Debate to schedule time to discuss planning and implementing a public debate for an audience from MSU Denver, the broader Denver area or beyond.
- Bartanen, M.D., & Littlefield, R.S. (2014). Forensics in America: A history. Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield. Bartanen and Littlefield provide a thorough and wide-ranging account of the history of academic debate at U.S. institutions of higher learning. This is an interesting read not only for those who want to incorporate debate into their teaching practices but also for those interested in the overall development of higher education in this country over the past century.
- Broda-Bahm, K., Kempf, D., & Driscoll, W. (2004). Argument and audience: Presenting debates in public settings. New York, NY: International Debate Education Association. Broda-Bahm et al. offer great ideas about how to design and implement debates for public audiences.
- Hogan, J.M., Kurr, J.A., Bergmaier, M.J., & Johnson, J.D. (Eds.). (2017). Speech and debate as civic education. University Park, PA: The Pennsylvania State University Press. Hogan et al. offer numerous chapters by leading experts on the role debate can play in enhancing student civic engagement.
- Rogers, J.E., Freeman, N.P.M., & Rennels, A.R. (2017). Where are they now? Two decades of longitudinal outcome assessment data linking positive student, graduate student, career and life trajectory decisions to participation in intercollegiate competitive debate. National Forensic Journal, 35(1), 10-28. Rogers et al. provide extensive evidence in support of the major impact debate can have on participants’ long-term life and career prospects.
- Snider, A., & Schnurer, M. (2006). Many sides: Debate across the curriculum (Rev. Ed.). New York, NY: International Debate Education Association. Snider and Schnurer offer the most robust account available of debate as a tool that can cross disciplines, fields, and professions. Here, you will find chapters that explain how debate can be translated into just about any classroom setting.
Visit the Well for more great ideas and resources for Strong Instructional Practices in your higher–education classroom.