Mastering the Oxford-Oregon Debate

THE OREGON-OXFORD TYPE OF DEBATE permits three to four speakers in both the affirmative and the negative side. What makes it distinct from the parliamentary type of debate is the interpellation right after each constructive speech. This interpellation is also called ‘cross-examination,’ hence Oregon-Oxford debate is sometimes referred to as ‘Cross-examination debate.’

The format

Today, the so-called Oxford-Oregon Debate has various modifications. In fact, what is now commonly employed in academic debates is already a modified Oregon-Oxford which somewhat deviates from the traditional format.

In the original format, there are just two or three speakers on each side. On the other hand, the format usually used today has four (4) members on each side, the 4th one being the scribe and/or the rebuttal speaker.

Unlike in the Parliamentary Debate, the debaters in Oxford-Oregon are not to be interrupted while delivering the constructive speech. Instead, a debater and his match in the opposing team have to interpellate each other at the end of their respective constructive speeches.

Meaning, the 1st affirmative speaker will be interpellated by the 1st negative speaker after his (the 1st affirmative speaker’s) constructive speech. After the 1st negative speaker’s constructive speech, he will be cross-examined by the 1st affirmative speaker as well.

The second affirmative speaker will be interpellated by the 2nd negative speaker and vice versa. The same holds true to both 3rd speakers. After each rebuttal speech however (usually by the 4th speakers of both sides), there is no cross-examination.

Basic Parts

The Oxford-Oregon debates comprise three basic parts: the Constructive Speeches, Interpellations, and Rebuttals.

1. Constructive Speech

Constructive speech refers to the presentation of arguments, proofs, and evidence by the first to third speakers of both teams. It is the chance for both sides to state and defend the various aspects of their respective position in the proposition.

1.1. Speakers’ roles

Oxford-Oregon divides the debate proposition into three main aspects: practicability, necessity, andbeneficiality:

1.1.1 Practicability pertains to the feasibility of the proposition which may include the legality, financial capacity of the related institution affected by the issue, people’s acceptance, public opinion, and the like.

The first speakersare assigned to tackle the practicability of the proposition in their respective constructive speeches. The 1st affirmative speaker has to prove that the proposition is practicable whereas the 1st negative speaker ought to demonstrate otherwise, basically by disproving his opponent’s claims.

1.1.2. Necessity refers to the need for the proposition which may involve discussing the supposed flaws, crucial errors, and defects in the status quo.

The second speakersdebate on this aspect. If the proposition calls for a change in the status quo, the 2nd affirmative speaker has to justify in his constructive speech that the change is necessary, whereas the 2nd negative speaker ought to prove that the proposed change is not needed.

1.1.3. Beneficiality involves the advantages and benefits (or disadvantages and losses) of adopting (or rejecting) the resolution.

The third speakers, in their respective constructive speeches, discuss the beneficiality of the proposition. The 3rd affirmative speaker’s main obligation is thus to prove that the proposition is beneficial, helpful, useful, valuable, advantageous, and favorable.

On the other hand, the duty of the 3rd negative speaker is to defend that the resolution is not beneficial, or even detrimental, harmful, damaging, disadvantageous, unfavorable, and injurious.

1.2. Constructive Speech Types

The constructive speech in an Oxford-Oregon Debate can be prepared and written in advance, especially that this debate usually allows the participants to know beforehand the proposition and the side they would take. Hence, constructive speech here may be done through the ‘reading method.’

Another option, which is better than merely reading the speech, is the so-called ‘memory method.’ Here, the speech is prepared in advance, and then memorized and rehearsed.

But what is highly recommended, especially if one is looking forward to win in a debate contest, is the ‘extemporaneous’ delivery. ‘Extemporaneous speech’ is prepared in advance but said without notes. It is different from ‘memory method’ in the sense that it is not delivered word for word the way it is pre-written or prepared.

In fact, only the key concepts are remembered or memorized in this method. Using an outline which contains the speech’s key concepts and speaking from it without any predetermined order of words is also considered an extemporaneous speech.

Some great speakers, nonetheless, use the combination of the abovementioned methods. Some use notes that contain the outline or key concepts of what they intend to discuss and when circumstances call for it, they insert portions which are not prepared or planned in advance.

This way, they are able to include in their delivery another method called ‘impromptu speech.’ (A more detailed discussion on the various methods in presenting a speech can be found in the lecture, “Drafting and Delivering an Impressive Debate Speech.”)

2. Interpellation (Cross-examination)

Interpellation is the opportunity for the constructive speaker to ask about the speech of his match from the opposing team. Done after a constructive speech, it is questioning the debater who has just finished speaking.

A good cross-examination is valuable in Oxford-Oregon as about 30% of the whole debate is spent in interpellation. Especially when both teams are well-prepared in their constructive speeches and equally good in the rebuttal, the cross-examination serves as the deciding factor on which side deserves to win. The cross-examination can show to the judges how knowledgeable, spontaneous, and logically sharp the debaters are. Thus, an impressive interpellation can play a major role in getting favorable decision from the judges.

2.1. Some Basic Rules on Interpellation

The following are the fundamental rules to be observed during the cross-examination:

2.1.1. Both speakers must stand during the interpellation. Depending on the venue setup, the debaters may either face each other or the audience.

2.1.2. Asking and answering questions should be done courteously.

2.1.3. Interpellation questions should be about the matters mentioned in the constructive speech. However, matters essentially relevant and material to the proposition or the topics mentioned in the opponent’s speech are admissible.

2.1.4. Vague, ambiguous, irrelevant, or loaded questions may not be answered. The speaker may ask the questioner to rephrase or revise his question.

2.1.5. Once the cross-examination has started, neither the interpellator nor his opponent may consult anyone. Consulting the teammate could be done before interpellation, but as silently as possible.

2.1.6. The questioner should ask question and not deliver a speech. He should not also comment on the answer of the opponent, though he may ask follow up questions concerning the response.

Also Check Out:
Reasoning and Debate: A Handbook and a Textbook by Jensen DG. Mañebog

3. Rebuttal 

The Rebuttal Speech is the summary and defense of each team’s case, arguments, and evidence. It is an opportunity to restate your team’s strong arguments, rebuild points which have been assailed, and point out the flaws of the opponent’s case. Though rebuttal is usually done by the team captain or the scribe, many institutions allow anyone from the team to deliver the rebuttal speech.

The negative side always does the rebuttal first, to be followed immediately by that of the affirmative side. (Since the affirmative side always carries the harder duty called burden of proof, the privilege of opening and closing the debate, through the first constructive and the last rebuttal speeches, is given to it.)

No new argument, evidence, proof, or point is allowed during the rebuttal. However, explanations or justifications that serve as a reply to the opponents’ arguments or that which rebuild one’s assailed points are permitted.

Debate Sequence

1. Constructive Speech of the 1st Affirmative Speaker

2. Interpellation by the 1st Negative Speaker of the 1st Affirmative Speaker

3. Constructive Speech of the 1st Negative Speaker

4. Interpellation by the 1st Affirmative Speaker of the 1st Negative Speaker

5. Constructive Speech of the 2nd Affirmative Speaker

6. Interpellation by the 2nd Negative Speaker of the 2nd Affirmative Speaker

7. Constructive Speech of the 2nd Negative Speaker

8. Interpellation by the 2nd Affirmative Speaker of the 2nd Negative Speaker

9. Constructive Speech of the 3rd Affirmative Speaker

10. Interpellation by the 3rd Negative Speaker of the 3rd Affirmative Speaker

11. Constructive Speech of the 3rd Negative Speaker

12. Interpellation by the 3rd Affirmative Speaker of the 3rd Negative Speaker

13. Short Break

14. Rebuttal of the Negative Side

15. Rebuttal of the Affirmative Side

Duration

The time allotted for the basic parts of the Oxford-Oregon Debate largely depends on the institution sponsoring the debate. Conventionally however, constructive and rebuttal speeches have similar duration and cross-examination is a little shorter. For instance, if constructive and rebuttal are seven (7) minutes, the interpellation is usually five (5) minutes.

Some debate organizers include the duration in the declared format of the debate. “Modified Oxford-Oregon 7-5-7” for instance means that the type of debate is Modified Oxford-Oregon with 7-minute constructive speeches, 5-minute interpolation, and 7-minute rebuttal speeches. Some even use four (4) digits, the last of which being the duration of the break before the rebuttals. “Modified Oxford-Oregon 7-5-7-5” thus means that there is a 5-minute break to somewhat prepare for the rebuttal.

The Moderator

The moderator in the Oxford-Oregon Debate has to state the proposition to signal the formal start of the contest proper. He may or may not give a brief background of the proposition.

Responsible to keep order and implement the agreed upon procedure, he may state (like an emcee) each segment to guide the debaters and the audience on the debate sequence. For instance, after the constructive speech of the 1st affirmative speaker, the moderator may announce, “And now, the interpellation by the 1st Negative Speaker of the 1st Affirmative Speaker.”

During the interpolation, the moderator rules on points of order. If a debater, for example, refuses to answer a question on any ground and the questioner insists, the moderator rules on whether or not the question should be answered. The moderator also rules on points of clarification about the issues in the proposition. (For this reason and other things, the moderator may be required to attend or even administer the pre-debate conference between the opposing teams.)

The Timer

The timer’s basic duty is to accurately time the constructive speeches, interpellation, rebuttal speeches, and the break. Part of his obligation though is to provide essential signals especially to the debaters like the ‘ringing of the bell once’ to indicate that only one minute is left before the time is up and by ‘ringing the bell twice’ to signify that the allotted time has already expired.

Some debate organizers require the timer to announce right after each speech the time utilized by the debater so that the judges would know if the speech is too short, too long, or just enough.

Judging

There are at least two sets of criteria being used to judge an Oxford-Oregon debate. One set focuses more on the content of the debate as it comprises the following elements:

Evidence – 25%

Delivery – 30%

Interpellation – 30%

Rebuttal – 15%

On the other hand, another set considers other things like the so-called ‘form’ and rhetoric:

Validity and Preponderance of Arguments: 50%

Ability to Interpolate, be Interpolated and Rebut: 20%

Stage Performance (attire, diction, emphasis, courtesy): 15%

Team Work: 15%

In both sets of criteria, the debate organizers may adjust the percentage in each criterion. In the first set, for example, each criterion may be given 25% instead.

The winning team is determined by the majority decision of the Board of Judges. The judges also determine the Best Speaker and Best Debater usually through voting. (Read: Debate Tournament: Framework, Mechanics, Guidelines, etc.)

*If you want to know about other topics in Debate and Reasoning (e.g. other formats of debate, etc.), search here:

Copyright © by Jensen DG. Mañebog/MyInfoBasket.com

ALSO CHECK OUT:
Reasoning and Debate: A Handbook and a Textbook by Jensen DG. Mañebog

INTERACTIVE ONLINE ACTIVITY

Go online to www.OurHappySchool.com. Through its search engine (upper right section), look for the article “Curfew for Minors: Advantageous or Disadvantageous?” Link or share the article to any social networking site other than Facebook and Twitter with a comment stating your opinion on the issue. Ask at least three friends (not from the Philippines) to leave a comment on your post. Print your post together with your friends’ comments. Submit the print-out to your professor.

SUPPLEMENTARY ONLINE READING

Look for the article “Fraternity: Belongingness or Violence?” through the search engine (upper right section) of www.OurHappySchool.com. Pay attention to the various proofs, evidences, and arguments submitted by students concerning the issue.