This document provides an introduction to competitive debating. It explains that a debate involves an affirmative team defending a motion while an opposition team negates it. Key concepts in debating include the motion, definition, theme lines, team splits, arguments, and rebuttals. A good definition clarifies the motion's interpretation in a logical way that provides room for opposition. Teams are split between speakers, who present arguments and rebuttals on their assigned side of the motion. The format involves each side presenting their case through three speakers, with rebuttals of the other team's points.

1. Welcome TO
Debate cluster

2. Getting to know debating
• Debate is a formal discussion on a particular
topic in a public meeting or lagislative
assembly, in which opossing argument are put
forward.
• Debating is a clash of argumentations among
the Affarmative team and Opposition team

3. • Everything starts from the word “motion”
• Competitive debating aims to simulate a
living, breathing parliamentary debate
• The soul of debating is to argue on
policies, or propositions of thought; good
or bad, effective or not effective, useful or
useless

4. Keywords to be a Good Debator:
• Content
• Style
• Strategy
• Teamwork

5. Keywords to comprehend:
 Motion
 Definition
 Theme line
 Team split
 Argument
 rebuttal

6. Motion
•Is the topic, a full propositional statement that
states what the debate is/shall be about.
•Usually proposes a policy, against the status quo,
or affirming the virtue (goodness) of a state or
condition.
•A affarmative team must defend the motion, and
an opposition team must negate the motion.

7. Definition
•Is a need to clarify what the debate is specifically
about, per keyword of motion if necessary.
•Scopes down a motion; to achieve a mutual
agreement among both teams on the interpretation
of the motion thus the entry point for a debate ->
“room of debate”.
•A Government team holds the right to determine and
offer the definition of a debate, while the opposition
can accept, broaden or challenge the provided
definition.

8. A definition is ideal if it :
•provides interpretation of a motion that is logical
and acceptable by common sense.
•simply aimed to clarify the debate from the motion
wording.
•provides room for opposition to negate.
•Is not truistic, squirreling, tautological, time and
place set.

9. Theme Line
A definition is ideal if it :
• provides interpretation of a motion that is
logical and acceptable by common
sense
• simply aimed to clarify the debate from
the motion wording
• provides room for opposition to negate
• Is not truistic, squirreling, tautological,
time and place set

10. •Division of argument in a team
•It helps to make a team
organized
•It makes sure that the
argument is correctly sustained
TEAM SPLIT

11. Argument
• points of view that supports the team stance
(support/refute)
• Logical and thoroughly explained
• Structure (the AREL theory)
1. Assertion
2. Reasoning
3. Evidence/Example
• Link Back Pool of arguments should be evenly
and strategically spread between the 1st and
2nd speakers.
• Arguments should be consistent within the
team’s main stance (theme/team line).

12. Rebuttal
 Responses on your opponent’s arguments
 It’s not as simple as “ascussing” things.
 Simply saying your opposition’s arguments are
inferior does not constitute a good rebuttal
 Rebuttals must logically explain and analyze the
weakness of an argument.

14. Formate of Debate

15.  Role of first speakers
Affarmative
 Defining the motion of
the debate.
 Presenting the
affirmative’s theme
line.
 Outlining the
affirmative’s team split.
 Delivering substantial
arguments.
 Providing a brief
summary/recap of the
speech
Opponent
 Responding the
definition given by the
affirmative team
(accept/challenge).
 Rebutting the 1st
affirmative speaker.
 Presenting the
negative’s theme line.
 Outlining the negative’s
team split.
 Delivering the
substantial argument.
 Providing a brief
summary/recap of the
speech.

16. Role of second speakers
Affarmative Opponent
 Rebutting the 2nd
affirmative speaker.
 Restating the
negative's team case
briefly.
 Delivering his
substantial arguments.
 Providing a brief
summary.
 Rebutting the 1st
negative’s major
arguments
 Restating the
affirmative’s team case
briefly.
 Delivering his
substantial argument.
 Providing a brief
summary.

17. Role of third speakers
Affarmative
 Rebutting the points
raised by the first two
negative speakers.
 Rebuilding the team’s
case.
 Summarizing the issues
of the debate
Opponent
 Rebutting the points
raised by all three
affirmative speakers.
 Rebuilding team’s case.
 Summarizing the issue
of the debate

19. 