The World Schools Style Debate: Mastering this Format in Argumentation

© by Jensen DG. Mañebog/MyInfoBasket.com

The World Schools Style debate (or ‘WSS’) is a blend of the British Parliamentary and Australia-Asian debating formats, originally drafted for the World Schools Debating Championships tournament.

In WSS, there are two opposing teams (the Proposition and Opposition) with three debaters each. Every debate comprises eight speeches, the first six of which are eight minutes in duration, and the last two are four-minute concluding reply speeches.

1. WSS Debate Sequence

a. First speaker of the Government (Constructive Speech)

b. First speaker of the Opposition (Constructive Speech)

c. Second speaker of the Government (Constructive Speech)

d. Second speaker of the Opposition (Constructive Speech)

e. Third speaker of the Government (Rebuttal Speech)

f. Third speaker of the Opposition (Rebuttal Speech)

g. Reply speaker of the Opposition (Reply Speech)

h. Reply speaker of the Government (Reply Speech)

Debate organizers may opt to give a two-minute break after the last rebuttal speech and before the first reply speech (between f and g in the sequence) to allow the team members to confer to each other. In the World Schools Debating Championships however, no break is provided throughout the debate proper.

2. Roles of each speaker

The following are the respective duties of each speaker in both debating teams. Efficiently accomplishing these duties practically means doing well in this type of debate. In fact, the roles listed below are virtually like tips in winning in this debate format:

2.1. First Speaker of the Government

Following the terminology of traditional parliamentary procedure, the first speaker of the Proposition (affirmative side) may also be addressed as Prime Minister (PM) (especially if one has Australia-Asia debating orientation).

The Prime Minister’s main role is to open up the case of the government which is basically presenting the affirmative side’s stand, opinions, points, and arguments. The following are his specific fundamental tasks:

a. Defining and setting up the debate.

The first Government speaker defines how words shall be understood in the debate, though not all words in the motion but only those that might be misunderstood (like those that have multiple meanings). Here, contextual definition is more favored than dictionary ones.

The PM also sets up the debate by establishing parameters and context to avoid confusion in the debate. He may also state the significance of the motion, provide brief background or history of the issue, and present a status quo or his side’s evaluation of the current situation justifying the need for a solution or improvement.

b. Presenting the team’s position and case.

The team’s position is basically the team’s general stand on the motion which the members will prove, defend, and justify. Typically, a team does not simply demonstrate that a motion should be adopted or implemented but also explains how it is going to be carried out. The proposed implementation procedure is also called the ‘model’ or ‘mechanism.’ The Government’s proposed policy or motion, model, theme, and arguments are collectively called its ‘case.’

c. Outlining the ‘team split’ and presenting one or two main arguments

The Prime Minister also introduces the framework of Proposition’s case and the team’s argumentation flow. He then outlines the ‘team split,’ that is, what argument/s each of the team’s constructive speakers will be discussing. This is important as it guides the adjudicators and the audience on the team’s substantive contentions and debate ‘battle plan.’ He then offers and explains his assigned argument/s, which is/are the team’s most important reasons. He may end by asserting the Proposition’s stand.

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

2.2. First Speaker of the Opposition

Also referred to as Leader of Opposition (LO), the first speaker of the Opposition has the fundamental duty to refute the claims of the Proposition, particularly the points mentioned by the Prime Minister. It is his constructive speech which sets where the Opposition will clash with the Government and what direction the Opposition team will undertake in the debate.

Specifically, the following are his basic roles:

a. Responding to the definition and set up made by the Government

The Leader of the Opposition states which elements of the Government position the Opposition agrees and disagrees with. Remember that finding some ‘common grounds’ is also important so that there will be a debate.

More importantly though, the LO has to emphasize the things his team essentially disagree with. He may clash with the given context and parameters or allege that the set up is unfair or not sensible. He may also challenge the Government’s definitions or identify a ‘squirrel,’ that is, an unexpected definition that makes it too easy for the Government side, or one that is so obscure that there is no known negative against it.

b. Presenting the team’s position, case, and ‘team split’

Based on the established ‘common grounds’ and the negative side’s assumptions on the matter, the LO presents his team’s position, that is, that which his team will defend, prove, and demonstrate.

Though it could suffice to just counter the proposition’s motion and points, many Opposition debaters opt to build their own case (counter-case). Opposition’s counter-case basically involves proofs that the Government’s motion would worsen the current situation. (The LO may also offer a ‘counter-model or ‘counter-policy,’ though this is only advisable in few circumstances as it is risky and burdensome to use this strategy.)

The LO also outlines the Opposition case’s framework and presents the ‘team split’ by mentioning the main arguments he and his co-constructive speaker will discuss respectively.

c. Rebutting Prime Minister’s argument/s

The first speaker of the Opposition refutes Prime Minister’s main argument/s and submitted justifications. The LO briefly outlines the opponent’s points, then makes short but concise rebuttal of each of them.

d. Developing one or two main arguments

Based on the ‘team split,’ the first Opposition speaker offers and explains the most substantive argument/s in favor of his position. He may end by asserting the Opposition’s stand.

2.3. Second Speakers

The second speaker of the Government is also called Deputy Prime Minister (DPM) and his counterpart in the opposing team is addressed too as Deputy Leader of the Opposition (DLO). Both of them maintain and further shape the ensuing clash points of the debate. To accomplish these, they have the following specific tasks:

a. Defending one’s case and position against the opponent’s attacks

The second speaker stands to speak when a debater on the other side has just rebutted his teammate. The DPM or DLO thus needs to immediately back up his teammate’s attacked arguments for those constitute their respective case.

b. Attacking the opposing team’s position, case, and arguments

The second speaker also rebuts the arguments already submitted by the other side. The DPM refutes the LO’s main arguments and the DLO rebuts the arguments given by the PM and DPM.

c. Presenting one or two additional arguments

The second speaker continues with his team’s respective case by introducing more arguments. Basically, he spends the second half of his constructive speech advancing his team’s case and position. He may end by reasserting his team’s stand.

2.4. Third Speakers

The third speaker of both teams restructures the debate, sorts out the key issues tackled, and ultimately gives a rebuttal. Because their primal duty is to prove that the other team is ‘wrong,’ they are also called the ‘Rebuttal Speaker’ (or ‘Whip’ in the Asian Parliamentary tradition). Particularly, the third speaker does the following functions:

a. Briefly summarizing and defending one’s case

The third speaker spends about a minute at the beginning of his speech to stress the points made by his team. This serves as a take-off point in his eventual rebuttal.

b. Identifying and prioritizing the most important arguments or issues

The Rebuttal Speaker pinpoints the main themes and issues or the most crucial or dominant arguments discussed in the debate. This is still in preparation to his ensuing rebuttal.

c. Analyzing the key issues and rebutting the opponents’ main arguments

The Rebuttal Speaker provides a deeper and more comprehensive analysis of the discussed issues, arguments, and rebuttals. Here, he takes time pronouncing the practical and logical flaws in the opposing team’s case and demonstrating that his team’s arguments and points about the issues are better. More importantly, he undermines the underlying principles and foundations of the opposing team’s position.

The third speaker cannot offer essentially ‘new’ arguments but he can present new analysis, examples, rebuttals, angles, and defense of the arguments that have already been made in the debate. A good third speaker also does case rebuilding and reasserts his team’s stand in the end.

2.5. Reply Speakers

The reply speech is also known as the ‘right of reply’ and is given by either the first or second speaker from both teams. It is basically a ‘biased adjudication’ of the debate for it is like making an adjudicator’s oral feedback on the debate, but with the aim of persuading the judges and audience that one’s team deserves to win.

Compared to rebuttal, reply speech is ‘retrospective,’ that is, it is passing judgment on the debate that is somewhat considered done already. Accordingly, strictly no new things may be added to the debate in this speech. The following are the roles of the Reply Speaker:

a. Outlining what happened in the debate

The Reply Speaker summarizes the debate by briefly mentioning the major issues and questions and the primary points of contention that the debate has centered around.

b. Evaluating the course of the debate

This involves summing up the position and case of the opposing teams and how the teams respectively approached the motion. The Reply Speaker assesses both teams’ distinct ‘line of attack’ by stating the strategies used and the major ideas and arguments mentioned.

c. Concluding that one’s team did a better job

The Reply Speaker demonstrates that his team’s performance or approach was better. Some of the ways to do it is to prove that one’s team did better on most if not all of the major issues, had more sound arguments, engaged better, answered the most important questions in the issue, developed ideas better, proved their burden, and the team members never contradicted each other.

Points of Order and Points of Personal Privilege are serious charges and must not be raised for negligible transgressions. Teams may be penalized for raising flimsy points of orders and spurious points of personal privilege. In many Parliamentary debate tournaments, these two types of points are either discouraged or not employed at all. In British Parliamentary, for instance, there is no such thing as Points of Personal Privilege.

3. POI in WSS

Points of Information are very much encouraged in many Parliamentary debate contests, especially in World Schools Style debates. In WSS, though both teams are not obliged to offer and accept POIs, they are likely to be marked down by adjudicators if they do not offer and accept any.

The team that is not speaking can offer as many POIs as its members want. To offer POIs, they stand up and say something short like “Point of information” (some do it while raising an arm). The debater speaking then either accepts or refuses the point. He can choose when and from whom to accept a POI. To decline a point, the debater speaking says, “No, thank you,” “Sit down, please,” or “Not at this time.” Accepting a point, a debater says, “Yes” or “I’ll take your point.” The debater who offered the point then states his POI. It must be done in fifteen seconds or less, and the debater holding the floor has the right to cut him off at any point. The debater speaking then immediately addresses the POI made.

Debaters in competitive debates must be careful in offering POIs. The first and last minute of each main speech, as well as the entire duration of reply speeches, are “protected time” (during which no POI may be offered, that is). Debate judges also frown upon ‘barracking’ or relentlessly interrupting the one speaking by offering points. Furthermore, the presence of the mechanism called “POI Adjuster” allows the adjudicators in WSS to add or subtract marks from a debater’s overall score based on the quality of his POIs. (Read here for the discussion about Heckling) (© 2013-present by Jensen DG. Mañebog/MyInfoBasket.com).

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

To comment, use #CorrectReasoning #Jensenismo #Debate