Page 277 - Gabrijela Kišiček and Igor Ž. Žagar (eds.), What do we know about the world? Rhetorical and argumentative perspectives, Digital Library, Educational Research Institute, Ljubljana 2013
P. 277
debate as an educational tool:
is polarization a debate side effect? 277
vantly to the issue debated, the main features of the debate and elements
of the definition of debate itself. Indeed, if we do not consider rules as a
fundamental aspect of debate, debate would not differ from other types
of dialogue. Furthermore, if we do not consider arguing relevantly to the
issue as a fundamental aspect of debate, debate could be confused with
the eristic dialogue as some scholars seems to do (Cf. Walton, 1992):
when debaters, as well discussion partners, turn eristic, they violate the
norm of the model, letting the interaction deteriorate in a different kind
of exchange (Jørgensen, 1998: 439).
Therefore, in this paper, debate will be considered a strictly ruled
type of competitive (Wood and Goodnight, 1994) dialogue where op-
posing parties try to win their opponents, by persuading the audience,
the judges or the referees, i.e. the decision makers, through advancing,
disputing and defending arguments relevant to the issue being debat-
ed (Branham, 1991: 22). The benefits of debate as a type of dialogue are,
among others, to enable parties to make wise decisions (Ehninger and
Brockriede, 1978), to facilitate spreading of information (Walton, 1992),
to test different points of view (Brimble and Pritchard, 2003) and to de-
termine how changes should occur (Snider, 2008).
Following this framework, the so-called academic debate (Freely,
1961), competitive debate (Hensley and Carlin, 1994), and classroom de-
bate (Snider and Schnurer, 2002), among other designations (from now
on, all known as competitive debate), differ from the general definition of
debate. Unlike forensic, public, political, or parliamentary debate, com-
petitive debate is rigorously conducted under the direction of an educa-
tional institution for the purpose of providing educational opportuni-
ties for its students (Freely, 1961).
1.1. Debate’s Positive Impacts
Many positive impacts of competitive debate exist for students. For
our purposes, we will focus just on three of them: learning (Combs and
Bourne, 1994; Scott, 2008; Vo and Morris, 1996), critical thinking and
argumentation (Allen et al., 1999; Colbert, 1995; Korcok, 1997), and
verbal and non-verbal communication (Inoue and Nakano, 2004).
School or academic debate occurs on controversial issues. Perform-
ing research to find material to advocate pro or contra positions facil-
itates the ability to understand issues, as shown by the five-year study
of Combs and Bourne (1994). According to their survey, students par-
ticipating in their business administration courses considered competi-
tive debate a better learning tool than standard lectures. Of those stu-
is polarization a debate side effect? 277
vantly to the issue debated, the main features of the debate and elements
of the definition of debate itself. Indeed, if we do not consider rules as a
fundamental aspect of debate, debate would not differ from other types
of dialogue. Furthermore, if we do not consider arguing relevantly to the
issue as a fundamental aspect of debate, debate could be confused with
the eristic dialogue as some scholars seems to do (Cf. Walton, 1992):
when debaters, as well discussion partners, turn eristic, they violate the
norm of the model, letting the interaction deteriorate in a different kind
of exchange (Jørgensen, 1998: 439).
Therefore, in this paper, debate will be considered a strictly ruled
type of competitive (Wood and Goodnight, 1994) dialogue where op-
posing parties try to win their opponents, by persuading the audience,
the judges or the referees, i.e. the decision makers, through advancing,
disputing and defending arguments relevant to the issue being debat-
ed (Branham, 1991: 22). The benefits of debate as a type of dialogue are,
among others, to enable parties to make wise decisions (Ehninger and
Brockriede, 1978), to facilitate spreading of information (Walton, 1992),
to test different points of view (Brimble and Pritchard, 2003) and to de-
termine how changes should occur (Snider, 2008).
Following this framework, the so-called academic debate (Freely,
1961), competitive debate (Hensley and Carlin, 1994), and classroom de-
bate (Snider and Schnurer, 2002), among other designations (from now
on, all known as competitive debate), differ from the general definition of
debate. Unlike forensic, public, political, or parliamentary debate, com-
petitive debate is rigorously conducted under the direction of an educa-
tional institution for the purpose of providing educational opportuni-
ties for its students (Freely, 1961).
1.1. Debate’s Positive Impacts
Many positive impacts of competitive debate exist for students. For
our purposes, we will focus just on three of them: learning (Combs and
Bourne, 1994; Scott, 2008; Vo and Morris, 1996), critical thinking and
argumentation (Allen et al., 1999; Colbert, 1995; Korcok, 1997), and
verbal and non-verbal communication (Inoue and Nakano, 2004).
School or academic debate occurs on controversial issues. Perform-
ing research to find material to advocate pro or contra positions facil-
itates the ability to understand issues, as shown by the five-year study
of Combs and Bourne (1994). According to their survey, students par-
ticipating in their business administration courses considered competi-
tive debate a better learning tool than standard lectures. Of those stu-
