Lecture - Using Debate in University Courses - Steve Llano

Using Debate in University Courses from Steve Llano on Vimeo.

From http://progymnasmata.posterous.com/using-debate-in-university-courses

Here's a lecture I gave a month ago to some faculty members about using debate in regular coursework. The session was sponsored by our Center for Teaching and Learning on campus. My goal was to encourage these professors to see debate as another valuable tool to use in their pedagogy. I tried to convey that debate is both useful as a learning process instrument in the classroom, as well as an assessment instrument in courses. 

I really dislike taking an instrumentalist view of debating. But in this case it seemed to be a good way to get faculty to think of it as something useful instead of a time-waster, or worse, the introduction of anarchic conversation into the classroom. By portraying debate as the equivalent of a class discussion, essay, or examination, I hope to get a more positive view on it across campus. 

I think eventually they will figure out that debate is a bit more powerful than just another learning tool. But that might be for a different talk.

Lecture - When Classes Collide in Debate - Wheatly - 3rd Better World Conference

Lecture - When Classes Collide in Debate - Wheatly - 3rd Better World Conference from Alfred Snider on Vimeo.

When classes collide – suburban and inner city debaters, Chris Wheatly, Aspen Colorado Schools, USA
After rising by an average of almost 50% for the previous ten years, firearm related deaths and injuries among juveniles in the U.S. reached an all time high in 1993, (National Center for Health Statistics). Entire neighborhoods in U.S. cities became ‘off limits’ for members of other neighborhoods. Debate, in the form of the Urban Debate League began as a way to address this national crisis and embarrassment. The successes and disappointments of the efforts to use debate as a pedagogical tool of empowerment and fellowship are those arising from twenty plus years of experience in Atlanta, Georgia and five plus years in Aspen, Colorado, this paper seeks to identify the advantages and potential sources of conflict occurring when cultures meet in the middle and/or high school debate tournament competition. Debate has been able to bring together and foster conversations among and between extremely diverse neighborhoods and communities. Debate can also reflect and magnify differences in ethnicity, culture and socio-economic status. This paper will attempt to explain and describe as many as possible.
This paper/presentation would seem to be central to the conference theme of, “ Rhetoric, Debate and the Pedagogy of Empowerment – Thinking and Speaking a Better World.” This author/speaker has had the pleasure of watching high school debate applied towards personal, familial, academic, social, political and economic empowerment and leadership.

3rd International Conference on Argumentation, Rhetoric, Debate and the Pedagogy of Empowerment, October 2010, Maribor, Slovenia.

Further details can be found at the conference websites:
Basic information at debate.uvm.edu/​debateblog/​better/​Welcome.html
News blog at betterworldconference.blogspot.com/

The conference was organized by the Department of Philosophy, Faculty of Arts, University of Maribor in Slovenia uni-mb.si/ , ZIP, Za in proti, zavod za kulturo dialoga/Pro et contra, institute for culture of dialogue zainproti.com/ , and the World Debate Institute of the University of Vermont debate.uvm.edu/​debateblog/​wdi/​Welcome.html .

The organizers are grateful for the support of our sponsor QatarDebate qatardebate.org/ .

Thanks to organizers Boris Vezjak, Alfred Snider and Bojana Skrt. Special thanks to Peter Mesarec, Monica Sobocan and Aljoša Polšak. 

Lecture - Study on Social Outcomes and Debate - Rogers & Runnels - 3rd Better World Conference

Lecture - Study on Social Outcomes and Debate - Rogers & Runnels - 3rd Better World Conference from Alfred Snider on Vimeo.

Outcome based life choices: An outcome assessment comfirmation study measuring positive social outcomes beyond undergraduate experiences for participants and society in competitive intercollegiate debate, Jack E. Rogers, Department of communication, University of Central Missouri and Arthur Rennels, Interim Director of Forensics, University of Central Missouri, USA
In Fall1997, 200 first-year students (100 debaters and 100 non-debaters) were selected to participate in a four-year longitudinal study. The purpose of the study was to determine if active participation in competitive, intercollegiate forensics led to more significant positive student outcomes for the 100 debate participants as compared to 100 non-debate participants. At the end of each year, an 84-item survey was administered. The participants were compared in five specific areas: 1) social responsibility; 2) cultural understanding and tolerance; 3) academic success; 4) moral and ethical issues; and 5) psychological multipliers. The study, published in 2002, concluded that in almost every case, in almost every area, participation in debate had significant positive outcomes for the respondent population. A second study, published in 2005, followed those research participants, both debate and non-debate, into the post-graduation world. The study compared debate and non-debate populations as they matriculate through graduate and professional programs, earned advance degrees, and make first career choices. Some job performance data was included. It also compared continued expressions of social responsibility, cultural understanding and tolerance, moral and ethical issues, and perceptions of mental well being and confidence between groups. The study concluded that again, in almost every case, in almost every area, former forensic participation had led to significantly more positive life outcomes beyond graduation for the debate population than for their non-debate peers. This study continues to follow our study participant groups, but focuses in on comparisons of continued social responsibility; cultural understanding and tolerance; and moral and ethical issues. In this case, participants were asked questions regarding behavioral involvement in politics, not-for-profit and social causes, fund-raising, the education and academic environment, and political decision-making. As in previous studies, in almost every case prior involvement in academic debate led to more significant, positive outcomes for not only the debaters but for the society as a whole.

3rd International Conference on Argumentation, Rhetoric, Debate and the Pedagogy of Empowerment, October 2010, Maribor, Slovenia.

Further details can be found at the conference websites:
Basic information at debate.uvm.edu/​debateblog/​better/​Welcome.html
News blog at betterworldconference.blogspot.com/

The conference was organized by the Department of Philosophy, Faculty of Arts, University of Maribor in Slovenia uni-mb.si/ , ZIP, Za in proti, zavod za kulturo dialoga/Pro et contra, institute for culture of dialogue zainproti.com/ , and the World Debate Institute of the University of Vermont debate.uvm.edu/​debateblog/​wdi/​Welcome.html .

The organizers are grateful for the support of our sponsor QatarDebate qatardebate.org/ .

Thanks to organizers Boris Vezjak, Alfred Snider and Bojana Skrt. Special thanks to Peter Mesarec, Monica Sobocan and Aljoša Polšak. 

Lecture - Academic Debate Needs to Engage in the Public Sphere - Taylor Hahn - 3rd Better World Conference

Lecture - Academic Debate Needs to Engage in the Public Sphere - Taylor Hahn - 3rd Better World Conference from Alfred Snider on Vimeo.

Failure in the public eye: The need for renewed engagement of the public sphere in academic debate communities within the United States, Taylor Hahn, Clarion University of Pennsylvannia, USA

Identified as a core of intelligent and engaged academics, the debate community has historically enjoyed a privileged position in American culture. Unfortunately, the majority of these communities have developed into isolated groups of intellectuals whom rarely utilize their rhetorical skills for the good of public argument. Focusing specifically on policy debate in the United States, this paper argues that debate communities must increase their collective engagement of the general public. Offering multiple options on how to engage a wider audience, this paper identifies both debate competitors and their coaches as forces capable of increasing public engagement and debate through event organization and skill development. What was once a keystone of democratic dialogue, collegiate debate communities are now failing to appeal to groups and cultures outside of their own comfort zones. Working to bridge the gap between academic debate and public deliberation, this paper is an effort to call debaters and their mentors to action. As a former policy debater and current debate coach, I outline two critical goals of this paper. First, to identify flaws in the current system of collegiate policy debate in order to improve the activity. Second, to issue a word of caution to other debate communities, both domestic and international. Policy debate in the United States, while the most identifiable system in need of reform, should function as both a warning and an insight into developing holistic problems for debaters and their educators across the globe.

3rd International Conference on Argumentation, Rhetoric, Debate and the Pedagogy of Empowerment, October 2010, Maribor, Slovenia.

Further details can be found at the conference websites:
Basic information at debate.uvm.edu/​debateblog/​better/​Welcome.html
News blog at betterworldconference.blogspot.com/

The conference was organized by the Department of Philosophy, Faculty of Arts, University of Maribor in Slovenia uni-mb.si/ , ZIP, Za in proti, zavod za kulturo dialoga/Pro et contra, institute for culture of dialogue zainproti.com/ , and the World Debate Institute of the University of Vermont debate.uvm.edu/​debateblog/​wdi/​Welcome.html .

The organizers are grateful for the support of our sponsor QatarDebate qatardebate.org/ .

Thanks to organizers Boris Vezjak, Alfred Snider and Bojana Skrt. Special thanks to Peter Mesarec, Monica Sobocan and Aljoša Polšak. 

Debate - WUDC - Vouchers for Social Services - Huber Debates 2010 Finals

Debate - WUDC - Vouchers for Social Services - Huber Debates 2010 Finals from Alfred Snider on Vimeo.

This debate was held at the University of Vermont, at the Huber Debates 2010, a tournament featuring over 120 debate teams from around the nation in two formats.

FINALS
THBT welfare payments should be done through vouchers.

1P St, John’s FM FIRST PLACE
1O Cornell BS
2P Cornell BoYe SECOND PLACE
2O Claremont GP

Judges: Boyle, Loeb, Gross, Natale, Bullock

Information about the Huber Debates
debate.uvm.edu/​debateblog/​huber/​Welcome.html

Information about the Lawrence Debate Union
debate.uvm.edu/​debateblog/​LDU/​The_Team.html

Debate - WUDC - Infant Euthanasia - Huber Debates 2010 Semifinal

Debate - WUDC - Infant Euthanasia - Huber Debates 2010 Semifinal from Alfred Snider on Vimeo.

This debate was held at the University of Vermont, at the Huber Debates 2010, a tournament featuring over 120 debate teams from around the nation in two formats.

SEMIFINALS

This house believes that parents who have a severely disabled child should be allowed to euthanize them shortly after birth.

Claremont SW 2O
Cornell BS 2P advances
Grove City HD 1O
Claremont GP 1P advances
Judges: Wright, Natale, Dionesotes

Information about the Huber Debates
debate.uvm.edu/​debateblog/​huber/​Welcome.html

Information about the Lawrence Debate Union
debate.uvm.edu/​debateblog/​LDU/​The_Team.html

Debate - WUDC - Expand NAFTA - Huber Debates Novice Finals

Debate - WUDC - Expand NAFTA - Huber Debates Novice Finals from Alfred Snider on Vimeo.

This debate was held at the University of Vermont, the Huber Debates 2010, a tournament featuring over 120 debate teams from around the nation.

This is the novice final round.

Motion: This House would expand NAFTA to all of Latin America

Colgate TP 2O FIRST PLACE
Bard LG 1P
Cornell BeYu 2P
Vermont CC 1O SECOND PLACE
Judges: Hernandez, Lattuca, Powell

Information about the Huber Debates
debate.uvm.edu/​debateblog/​huber/​Welcome.html

Information about the Lawrence Debate Union
debate.uvm.edu/​debateblog/​LDU/​The_Team.html

Debate - WUDC - Public Debate - Amnesty for Illegal Immigrants

Debate - WUDC - Public Debate - Amnesty for Illegal Immigrants from Alfred Snider on Vimeo.

This public debate was held at the University of Vermont the night before the beginning of the Huber Debates 2010, a tournament featuring over 120 debate teams from around the nation.

The motion was - this House would grant amnesty to illegal immigrants.

First prop - Portland State University, Aaron Baker & Lindsey Bing
First Opp - Claremont Colleges, Cassie Gurrola & Holly Poole
Second Prop - University of Vermont, Sarah Anders & Sam Natale
Second Opp - Cornell University, Ryan Yeh & Leah Salgado

No vote was taken.

Information about the Huber Debates
debate.uvm.edu/​debateblog/​huber/​Welcome.html

Information about the Lawrence Debate Union
debate.uvm.edu/​debateblog/​LDU/​The_Team.html