1 / 25

The Power of Debate

The Power of Debate. Champaign NOLA Debaters New Optimistic Legacy of Achievers Champaign Central High School Champaign, Illinois. Welcome and Introductions. DaNaya Burnett : founding member of NOLA Debate Team; freshman @ SIU-E

alexis
Download Presentation

The Power of Debate

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript


  1. The Power of Debate Champaign NOLA Debaters New Optimistic Legacy of Achievers Champaign Central High School Champaign, Illinois

  2. Welcome and Introductions • DaNayaBurnett: founding member of NOLA Debate Team; freshman @ SIU-E • KeyonteCobb:founding member of NOLA Debate Team; CDL Adjudicator of the Year; CDF Freedom School Servant-Leader • VernessaGipson, MSW: former 21stCCLC Director; NOLA Debate Team founder and co-coach • Charles Rosentel:head coach; Social Studies and Composition teacher

  3. Workshop Objectives Participants will understand: • the benefits of competitive academic debate. • Social-emotional skill development • Connection to learning standards • Post-secondary readiness skills • the basic format for policy debate. • strategies for implementing debate-related activities. • how to organize a debate team and prepare for tournaments. • how to provide other debate-related activities.

  4. Research About Effective Afterschool Programs • When programs or activities include a competitive component, increased engagement may also vary according to how successful a student is at the activity (Feldman & Matjasko, 2005). • Adolescence is characterized by reward-seeking behavior (Galvan, 2010) and the development of higher-level thinking and reasoning skills (Sternberg & Downing, 1982). • Programs that utilize these developing skills may improve educational attainment via increased school engagement.

  5. Participating in a policy debate program and academic achievement among at-risk adolescents in an urban public school district: 1997–2007 Primary finding from this study: • Students who participated in the Chicago Debate League were more likely to graduate from high school and less likely to drop out than students who did not participate in debate. Debaters were significantly more likely to graduate than non-debaters in every risk group. • Debate participation may be an effective tool for maintaining or increasing school engagement even among students most at-risk for dropping out of high school. • Students who participated in debate had significantly higher scores on all sections of the ACT after adjusting for demographic and risk variables. • Debaters were also more likely to reach the college-readiness benchmark on the English, Reading, and Science sections of the ACT even among at-risk students. • More intense participation was associated with better academic performance. Anderson, S., & Mezuk, B., Participating in a policy debate program and academic achievement among at-risk adolescents in an urban public school district: 1997–2007, Journal of Adolescence (2012), doi:10.1016/ j.adolescence.2012.04.005

  6. Why Urban Policy Debateand why is it good for today’s youth? • Today, 19 urban debate leagues provide competitive policy debate programs to high school and middle school students across the United States, in school districts where 87% of students are minority and 78% are low income. • Urban Debate Leagues have proven to increase literacy scores by 25%, to improve grade-point averages by 8 to 10%, to achieve high school graduation rates of nearly 100%, and to produce college matriculation rates of 71 to 91%.

  7. Common Core Standards and Debate • The 2010 CCS aim to refocus literary education on analysis and evaluation of non-fiction texts and oral communication (i.e., listening, speaking, and presenting) (Porter et al., 2011). • Appendix A, titled “The Special Place of Argument in the Standards,” notes that the Common Core places “particular emphasis on students’ ability to write sound arguments on substantive issues, as this ability is critical to college and career readiness.” • On face, competitive policy debate programs appear to match well with many of the English-language arts and reading objectives outlined in the CCS.

  8. Why In Champaign? • City demographics • Consent decree • School demographics • Student performance (report card data) • AYP • Graduation rates • Afterschool participation

  9. Why Debate and Why Chicago? • Needed to provide academic enrichment services in a nontraditional format • More than cooking, dance, and sports • Opportunity to travel out of the community • Motivation to join was NOT academically based • Opportunity to meet other “minority” peers who are academically talented • They have to see to believe

  10. What is Policy Debate? • In competitive academic debate (also called “policy debate”), teams of 2argue for or against a resolution. • The affirmative team presents a plan that supports the resolution and the negative team argues for the status quo. • When debate teams arrive at tournaments, they must be prepared for any possibility, as they may argue either the affirmative or negative and, by the end of each tournament, will have argued both sides multiple times.

  11. Let’s See How it Works! • http://www.urbandebate.org/video_cpsnow.shtml

  12. The Format

  13. The Preparation Process • Practice • Research • Discussion and Dialogues • Sparring

  14. Year 1: The Connection to Their Reality • Resolution • Resolved: The United States federal government should substantially increase social services for persons living in poverty in the United States. • Cases • Katrina • Single Stop • Dream Act • Housing Vouchers

  15. Year 2: Extending Their Worldview • Resolution • Resolved: The United States federal government should substantially reduce its military and/or police presence in one or more of the following: South Korea, Japan, Afghanistan, Kuwait, Iraq, Turkey. • Cases • Afghanistan/Counter-Terrorism • Japan/Okinawa • South Korea/Ground Troops in ROK • Turkey/Tactical Nuclear Weapons

  16. Year 3: Going Above and Beyond (the Mesosphere) • Resolution • Resolved: The United States federal government should substantially increase its exploration and/or development of space beyond the Earth’s mesosphere. • Cases • Lunar Mining • Space-Based Missile Defense • Space Colonization • China Cooperation

  17. Essential Life SkillsEnhanced through Debate or Debate Games • Reading • Writing • Critical thinkingand questioning • Public speaking • Social-emotional learning • Note taking • Teamwork • Advocacy

  18. Let’s Practice: Activity 1 • Storyteller is a game designed to help students think on their feet, speak fluently, use transitions and avoid verbalized pauses (e.g. um, uh, like, you know). • Roles • Storyteller: Tells ad-lib story according to words the Wordsmith calls • Wordsmith: Directs the story by calling out words • Buzzer: Buzzes when Storyteller has verbalized pause

  19. Let’s Practice: Activity 1 • SPAR (SPontaneousARgumentation) debating introduces students to academic debate and helps them refine argumentation skills they already possess while motivating them to participate in debate. • Brainstorm resolutions • Resolved: That all public schools should extend their school day by at least 1 hour • Resolved: That social media websites (including Facebook and YouTube) should be allowed in school for educational purposes • Resolved: That the Internet has made people lazy and stupid. • Roles • 1A: Affirmative Case and Affirmative Closing Statement  • 2A: Affirmative Rebuttal  • 1N: Negative Case and Negative Closing Statement  • 2N: Negative Rebuttal 

  20. How SPAR Debating Works • The Case should consist of 3 main arguments, distinct from each other, that are supported by whatever reasoning (or "warrants"), evidence, data, and analysis that you candevise. • The Rebuttal should be refutations of the other team's Case and should include a point-by-point refutation of their 3 arguments.  • The Closing Statement should be an extension of the 1 or 2 strongest arguments from your Constructive, with a final rebuttal of your opponent's arguments, concise and synthesized. 

  21. SPAR Debating Structure • Affirmative Constructive (1A): 2.5 minutes  • Negative Constructive (1N): 2.5 minutes  • Negative Rebuttal (2N): 2.5 minutes  • Affirmative Rebuttal (2A): 2.5 minutes  • Negative Closing Statement (1N): 2 minutes  • Affirmative Closing Statement (1A): 2 minutes 

  22. Team Development and Retention • Recruitment • Members • Coach • Support • Time • Resources

  23. Long-Term Benefits • 100% graduation rate • 100% college enrollment • DaNaya’sscholarship accomplishment • Keyonte’s award and speech

  24. Q & A • What questions do you have?

  25. Links You Might Like • Multiple relevant links are posted here: http://wp.me/p3ylC-Lf

More Related