This activity aims to assist students with persuasive tactics for argumentative speeches. The activity involves students creating an argumentative speech to defend a hot-take assertion chosen from a list provided by the instructor. In small groups, students will craft an argument supporting their hot-take assertion and present it to the class.…

This study evaluates an innovative three-sided approach to classroom debate aimed at fostering critical thinking beyond adversarial argumentation. In an undergraduate Food Justice course, two teams presented arguments "for" and "against" pre-defined resolutions, while a third team explored areas of convergence and divergence at…

It is commonly observed that during classroom or group discussions some students have greater influence than may be justified by the normative quality of those students' contributions. We propose a 5-component theoretical framework in order to explain how undue influence unfolds. We build on literatures on persuasion, argumentation, discourse, and…

This study seeks to obtain argumentation models, which represent argumentative processes and an assessment structure in secondary school debatable issues in the social sciences. The argumentation model was developed based on mixed methods, a combination of both theory-driven and data-driven methods. The coding system provided a combing point by…

Recent science education reforms have emphasized the importance of students engaging with and reasoning from evidence to develop scientific explanations. A number of studies have created frameworks based on Toulmin's (1958/2003) argument pattern, whereas others have developed systems for assessing the quality of students' reasoning to support…

This experience report details the use of debates in a course on Information Ethics. Formal debates have been used in academia for centuries and create an environment in which students must think critically, communicate well and, above all, synthesize and evaluate the relevant classroom material. They also provide a break from the standard…

One shortcoming in the literature on policy framing has been the absence of analytic models through which to explicate change. This paper advances research in this area in three related ways. First, it links policy frames to the actors who employ them. Second, based upon this linkage it proposes two complementary approaches for examining…

Building on McMillan's two-way model of interactivity, this study presents a three-way model of interactive communication, which is used to assess political Web sites' progress toward the ideals of cyberdemocracy and the fostering of public deliberation. Results of a 3-year study of state legislature Web sites, an analysis of the community…

Discusses a routine to use for identifying and classifying the values present in a particular policy system in academic debate. (PD)

Reflects on Daniel Rohrer's legacy: a view of debate as a comparison of policy systems. Advocates greater emphasis on value-oriented debate as a complementary outgrowth of policy deliberation and suggests experimentation in wording resolutions and in the use of computers. (PD)

Reaffirms the primacy of the policy-making paradigm in academic debate. (PD)

This paper presents a narrative (in feminist style) of a debate round in the Lincoln-Douglas format to illustrate the principles of an intercollegiate debate round. In the context of the debate round, the paper examines the Toulmin model for argument and suggests an alternative model. The paper also challenges specific debate practices with…

An exploration of systems concepts applied to argumentation and causal theory. (CH)

Suggests that inherency is a composite of several distinct factors operating to block the solution of particular policy dysfunctions and offers a rhetorical model as an alternative to the single-definition approach to the concept of inherency. (MH)

Identifies the purpose of academic debate (to teach students argumentative skills) and the characteristics that a debate paradigm must have to fulfill that purpose. Takes a functional view of the debate judge as one who judges argumentative practices, not one who decides policy issues as would a real-world decision maker. (PD)