Combining from many sources specially the ones I get from English Debate Society of Universitas Bakrie, here's the Debate 101 presentation that I usually used in my coaching or teaching activities.

1. DEBATE 101
By:
Oktafia Rachmawati Putri
(Universitas Bakrie)

2. Session 1i: Debate In A Glance
Session 3: Motion Understanding – Case Building
Session 4: Constructing Argument
Session 5: Constructing Rebuttal
Session 2: Roles of Speakers
AGENDA

3. SESSION 1
DEBATE IN A GLANCE

4. Debating is…
•A clash between government and opposition team
•Developing communication skills
•Arranging, organizing and delivering effective arguments
•The objective of the debate is to convince the adjudicators (and audience) that your team is
the most convincing (through your reasoning, arguments and explanations) and therefore
deserve to win the debate.
•Debating requires sufficient knowledge, skills, willingness, and tireless practices!
• Asian parliamentary system
– 3 speakers per team, 7 minutes speech, with POI
• Australs parliamentary system
– 3 speakers per team, 8 minutes speech, no POI
• British parliamentary system
– 2 speaker per team, 4 teams debating in a round
– 7 minutes speech, with POI
Debate Intro
Debate Formats

5. • Affirmative/Government vs. Negative/Opposition
• Asian: Points of Information (POI) are allowed during speech
• Australs: No Points of Information (POI) are allowed during speech
• Asian: Substantive Speech: 7’20” | Reply Speech: 5’20”
• Australs: Substantive Speech: 8’20” | Reply Speech: 6’20”
• Speech duration and order:
1st
Affirmative (7’20”) 1st
Opposition (7’20”)
2nd
Affirmative (7’20”) 2nd
Opposition (7’20”)
3rd
Affirmative (7’20”) 3rd
Opposition (7’20”)
Reply Opposition (5’20”)Reply Affirmative (5’20”)
Debate Formats
ASIAN & AUSTRALS

6. • Issue or topic that you will debate upon
• Full propositional statement, not question or phrase
• Affirmative: defend the motion | Negative: oppose the motion
Motion
• Types of Motion:
– Proposal motion
• Concerned with practical problems. The motion ask the debater to
propose specific solvency to deal the problem
• Example: THW allow gay couples to adopt children
– Judgment motion
• Concerned with question of right or wrong. The motion ask the debater
to prove a general fact/statement
• Example: THBT capitalism has failed
– Comparison motion
• Concerned with two values in conflict. The motion ask the debater to
prefer a value over another value based on hierarchy outlined in the
motion
• Example: THBT free trade is better than fair trade

7. • Case: a complete set of argumentation to defend or oppose the motion
• Anatomy of a case:
– Set up: definition of a motion into a debatable context
– Arguments: reasoning why your team is right
– Responses: reasoning why your opponent is wrong
Case

8. • Matter (content) - 40%
– Arguments (logic, use of evidences, relevance)
• Manner (delivery) - 40%
– Public-speaking skills: vocal style, use of language, use of notes, eye contact,
gesture, stance, dress, impression of sincerity, and humor
– Personal attacks on opponents reduce manner points
• Method (structure) - 20%
– Structure: of individual speech and of team’s case
– Response to the dynamics of the debate
Debate Assessment

9. What do We Talk about on Debates?

10. SESSION 2
ROLES OF SPEAKERS

11. Role of Speakers
Roles – 1st
Affirmative
• Defines the motion (see the elements of definition)
• Presents Affirmative’s theme line = GOAL
• Outlines Affirmative’s team split
• Delivers first part of split
– Foundation of case (basic justification)
– For proposal debate: provide the complete model include: urgency of proposal,
model feasibility and how the model effectively achieve the objective
– Preemptive argument e.g.: how your issue should be weighted more than other
issue
• Summarizes/recaps own speech

12. Role of Speakers
Roles – 1st
Negative
• Responds the definition (accept/reject)
• Provides negation = A-
• Rebuts 1st Affirmative briefly (usually focus on the objective and basic justification
of aff’s stance)
• Presents Negative’s theme line and team split
• Delivers first part of split (the positive case of opposition):
– Foundation of the case (basic justification)
– Counter proposal if necessary (the model, feasibility, effectiveness, and brief
model comparison)
– In what way aff’s idea is not acceptable
• Summarizes/recaps own speech

13. Role of Speakers
Roles – 2nd
Speakers
• Clarifies/ reminds the adjudicators what the room of debate is and how
previous speakers fulfill their burden of proof. shows to adju if your opponent
fail to engage properly
• Briefly reiterates team’s case (in general) and shows how your team still has
upper hand
• Defends your 1st
speaker argument (answer the rebuttals given towards your 1st
speaker)
• Attack previous speakers
• Delivers 2nd part of split (the extension of your case).
Your extension should be distinguished from your foundation. It could be
analysis on other point of view/ other actor involved, analysis on various
scenario, deeper analysis on wider perspective, or further implications that may
happen.
Watch for: contradiction (your extension backstabbing your argument) and
additional burden of proof
• Summarizes/recaps own speech

14. Role of Speakers
Roles – 3rd
Speakers
• Identify the fulfillment of burden of proof from both teams, your opponent’s engagement,
and battle happen during the debate. Explain that your team still has upper hand.
• From each battles happen ensure the adjudicator that your team win those battles by
providing holistic rebuttals for everything given by your opponent. Arrange your rebuttals
for each battles so the adjudicators easily understand how your rebuttals contribute.
• Some important elements to be a good 3rd
speaker:
– Your main duty is to attack. Since you are the last hope of your team, attack
everything given by your opponents. Focus on arguments or responses that you
consider essential and could determine the winner of that round.
– Hinder unnecessary repetition. Sometimes you need to be creative to extend the
previous rebuttal. (Tips: use multilevel approach on developing your rebuttal). Identify
contradiction, hung case, and new matter.
– Be structurized! Always use sign posting to help adjudicators understand.
– 3rd
Aff is discouraged from bring new matter. 3rd
Neg is prohibited from bring new
matter. New example is not a new matter.

15. GAME
ON

16. SESSION 3
MOTION UNDERSTANDING – CASE BUILDING

17. Case Building
BRAINSTORM
CONTEXTUALIZE
STANCE
B.O.P
Wikipedia
Hard vs Soft
Disclaimer

18. Motion Understanding
THIS HOUSE WOULD CRIMINALIZE FPI
WOULD
1. Does this motion require mechanism?
2. Do we have to create a completely new mechanism or modify from SQ?
FPI
1. Does this proposal apply to the organization as an entity? Or should it also affect
each members of FPI?
2. Should we debate be about whether FPI is a good organization or not?
CRIMINALIZE FPI
1. How should the ‘criminalize’ be?
• Government ban the existence of FPI
• Stops any activities and anything related with FPI, and punish those who do
not obey
• Restrict any such organization (radical ones) to exist and grow (but WAIT.
We’re not going to debate that far!)
Motion understanding is helping you to get early definition

19. Case Building
A. Write down any relevant ideas and knowledge that you have.
B. Don’t be lazy! Think! Analyse!
C. Do this approx. 5 -10 Min Individually
• FPI = a religious organization
• Has been existing in Indonesia for quite long time
• All organization want to spread their values to attract followers
• All organization/entity should follow the country’s rules
• Country’s rules = don’t create destruction, do not force!
• Majority of Indonesian citizens = moslems
• FPI wants to keep the societies in ‘moslem’ values and tracks
• Society is okay with moslems’ values
• But, is society OK with what FPI usually does?
• Government has responsibility to protect society
• Government has obligation not to limit the society’s freedom of expressions
• There is no special mechanisms for dealing with FPI
1. BRAINSTORM TO PREPARE THE SET UP

20. Case Building
A. Describe Status Quo
• Focus on the matter that becomes the issue of the motion
• Where and what happen  Notice the setting element
(Liberal democratic countries, under developed countries)
• Pay attention to specific term
B. Identify The Controversy
• Controversy usually happens when certain actor is violated
• Controversy usually happens when some values are conflicting
2. CONTEXTUALIZE THE DEBATE

21. Case Building
A. Declare your position to the controversy
B. Clear! No room for multi intepretation
• How, Who, and When
• Sometimes all, but sometimes not
C. Explain your position with simple elaboration or mechanism
• Mechanism is also necessary to avoid unnecessary harms
D. Beware of creating “soft stance”
3. DECLARE YOUR STANCE
Hard vs Soft

22. Case Building
A. Identify what you should prove to make your stance stands
B. Show your opponent burden of proof
• Add disclaimer to dismiss possible unimportant harms
C. Elaborate! Elaborate! Elaborate!
4. IDENTIFY BURDEN OF PROOF
Disclaimer

23. SESSION 4
CONSTRUCTING ARGUMENT

24. Constructing Argument
The point you’re trying to make that you believe to be true
1. IDEA/ASSERTION
Argument is not an assertion. Argument has anatomy
The logical and analytical explanation to prove your idea. Reason.
2. ANALYSIS
Something like a statistic, a survey, a case study, or an analogy to give
Greater credibility to your idea and analysis.
3. EVIDENCE
The Conclusion. So What.
4. LINK BACK

25. SESSION 5
CONSTRUCTING REBUTTAL

26. Constructing Rebuttal
Rebuttal is an argument. Rebuttal has anatomy
1. Rebuttal is a process of proving how you opponent’s arguments are wrong
2. You need to prove otherwise: A- Theory:
• A rebuttal should contradict an argument
• A rebuttal should not give asymmetric rebuttal to the argument (B, not A-)
3. Never mix your rebuttal with argument. Argument explains why your team is
right, rebuttal explains why your opponent is wrong
4. An effective rebuttal is not “pre-prepared rebuttal”. A good rebuttal is about
effectively attacking your opposition’s argument as they were presented. You
should pay attention to your opponent’s argument
5. A good rebuttal consists of layered rebuttal that could answer every possible
scenario from your opponent’s argument: Even if rebuttal
• Even if rebuttal: Proving that, although your opponent maybe right, we can
still rebut that point

27. LET’S GET THE GAME STARTED!