Mota guide to first steps in teaching



Download 0.5 Mb.
Page1/29
Date17.03.2022
Size0.5 Mb.
#87205
  1   2   3   4   5   6   7   8   9   ...   29
LD Teaching Handbook - Minnesota
LD Teaching Handbook - Minnesota

n
n
MOTA GUIDE TO FIRST STEPS IN
TEACHING LINCOLN-DOUGLAS DEBATE



!
l
Li SECOND EDITION
u © 1994MDTA



FIRST STEPS IN LINCOLN-DOUGLAS DEBATE



SECOND EDITION PREFACE
This publication is a production of the Minnesota Debate Teacher's Association. It incorporates ideas gathered at the MDTA Curriculum Exchange during the 1990 convention of the Speech Association of Minnesota and draws upon The MDTA Guide to First Steps in Teaching Policy Debate, published in 1991.

The first edition was written and edited by: Andy Charrier, Lakeville High School Susan Clark, Lakeville High School Steven Fetzik, Austin High School Susan Stolen, Duluth East High School




The second edition was revised by Andy Charrier and Susan Clark.
When we began planning the second edition, we looked back at our original work and were proud of what we had l
produced: A document that made the first attempt to textualize basic instruction in Lincoln-Douglas debate for high school
students. The second edition is an attempt to make the book more classroom-ready and user-friendly. It also recognizes the changing nature of Lincoln-Douglas debate. ]
We hope you enjoy the book and find it to be a useful tool in your classroom. . I


J
l
J
j
j

2 MINNESOTA DEBA1E TEACHER'S ASSOCIATION




FIRST STEPS IN L!NCOLN DOUGLAS DEBATE

TABLE OF CONTENTS


SECOND EDITION PREFACE 2


CHA R 1:WHAT Is L-D DEBA"fE? 4
CHA.P'f'ER 2: ANALYSIS OF Tl-IE RESOLUTION ................,. 6
CHAPTER 3: INFORII.IATION AND EVIDENCE 7
CHAPTER 4: UNDERSTANDING VALUES .............................................................................._ 10
CHAPTER 5: CRJTERJA ••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••.. ••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••.. ······- 11
CHAPTER. 6: AFF1RMATIVE CASE BUil.DiNG ··················-·····················-·················.....................................& 14
CRAP'rER 7: NEGATIVE CASE BurLDING 16
CHA.M'E-R 8: CROSS EXAJ\tlNATION 17
CHAPTER 9: REFUTATION 19
CHAPTER 10: REBUITALS 21
CIIAP'TBR 11: FLOMNG TIIE DEBATE····························••&•..•••••..•·..•••••••• 23
CHAP'J"ER 12: DELIVERY AND PERSUASION 24
CHAPTER 13: THE TOURNAMENT 25
CHAPTER 14: PICKING THE WINNER 29
CHAPTER 15: BALLOT REVIEW 31
CHAPTER 16: MODEL CASES 32
CLASSROOM-l'EsTED CURJUCULUM 41
IIANoour #1: REsoLU110NS WORKSHEET .......................................................................u S3
HANoom #2: L1Nco AND DouGLAS 55
HANDOUT #3: REsEARCH ON ABRAHAM LINCOLN AND STEPHEN DOUGLAS 56
lliNDOUT #4: PRE-REsEARCH TOPIC ANALYSIS ...........................................................& 58
HANDOUT #5: Posr-R&SEARCH Torie ANALYSIS ••••.,,...................,,."'····................................................H 59
- - - - - - - IIA ND0 l:JT--#6·:- S A:MPI;E-E --vn>ENC E .............................................................................................................................. 61 1 ,
HANDOUT #7: EVALUATING EVJDENCE 61
HANDOUT #8: UNDE.RSl"ANDING VALIJF..S ............................................................................&••······........................................1o 65
HANDOUT ##9: APPLYING VALUES 66
HA.NDOUT #10: RANKING VALUES 68
HANDOUT #11: VALUES AND PROM 69
IIANooUT #12: DEBATE CRITERIA ...............................................................................................- •••••••••••••••••••••••••••• 71
HANDOUT #13: PmLOSOPHER RESEARCH 72
HANDOUT #14: GROUP REsEARCH ON PHILOSOPHERS 73
HANootJT #15: CRITERIA QUIZ.········••&••···········..·•••••••·••••·•·••••·•••••..................................._ 74
HA.NDOU'I' #16: AFF1R.MATIVE CASE BUILDING 75
HANDOUT #17: AFFIRMATIVE CASE EVALUATION 76
IIA.NDOlIT #18: NEGAllVE CASE BUILDING 77
JIANDOtrr #19: CROSS EXAMINATION 78
1-IANDOUf #20: REFln'ATION 79
ffANDOlJT #21: FALLACY NOTES ................................................................................................1o.. . ... .1o., 80
HA.Noour #22: REBUTTALS 81
IIANDOUT #23: SAMPLE FLOW 82
ffANDOlIT #24: PERSUASION •••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••• 83
IIANDOlIT #25: DELIVERY AND PERSUASION •••••••••••••••.••••••••.•••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••.••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••• 84
MINNESOTA DEBA1E TEACHER'S ASSOCIATION 3
FIRST STEPS IN LINCOLN-DOUGLAS DEBATE
CHAPTER 1: WHAT Is L-D DEBATE?

Lincoln-Douglas debate takes its name from the famous Illinois debates between Abraham Lincoln and Stephen Dou­ glas. When the two men were campaigning for the U.S. Senate in Illinois in 1858 they debated each other over state's rights to determine slavery. Not only did these two men stand for opposite values politically; they looked like opposites and had very different debate styles. Lincoln was tall and lan ky. He had a relaxed debate style and used humor to make a point. Douglas who was short and stocky was known as the Little Giant. He had an aggressive debate style, was already popular and drew large crowds when he spoke. Lincoln was unknown and was at this time a small town lawyer from Springfield. Self-educated, he had served one term as a U.S. Representative but did not appear to be an up and coming politician. Because on his own Lincoln did not draw crowds, he challenged Douglas to a series of seven debates. Douglas arrived in style in a private railroad car. Lincoln arrived as a regular passenger. In the debates both Lincoln and Douglas opposed slavery and wanted to maintain the Union. However, their proposal for achieving this differed. Lincoln stood for all states eliminating slavery. Douglas believed the best way to pressure the nation was to give each state the right to choose. President Buchanan had appointed a majority of Southerners to his cabinet. Although many northern democrats opposed the cabinet, supporters united under Douglas. Douglas was hoping to win the presidency in 1860. Douglas won the senate election but Lincoln won national fame and woo the presidency two years later.


Just as Lincoln and Douglas debated the values surrounding the slavery issue, L-D debaters persuade the audience or judge of the worthiness of a value resolution . In Lincoln-Douglas debate sides are taken to debate good vs. bad or right vs. wrong or just vs. unjust. Debaters do not advocate a change in the status quo. The debate is centered on a philosophical plane and not one based on practicality. There are three types of resolutions: fact, value and policy. Debate students should be able to identify all three.




A resolution of fact is straightforward and is either true or not true. "Resolved that it rained last night" is a resolution of fact. FactuaJ resolutions can involve values such as "Resolved that God exists" but in and of themselves they are factual in nature.

Resolutions of value ask for debate over issues of good/bad, right/wrong, useful/useless. L.D. debate is about values like these. There is not any one right answer. "Resolved that competition is superior to cooperation as a means of achieving excellence" is an example of a value resolution.


Resolutions of policy expect a problem and a solution to be debated. They advocate change in the current system. "Resolved that the U.S. should significantly decrease overcrowding in U.S. jails and prisons" is an example. The affirmative must identify the problem and propose a solution. The negative can deny the problem and or reject the proposed solution.




Fact Resolutions:

Resolved that the unemployment rate in Minnesota is the lowest in the nation. Resolved that high school students understand computers.


Resolved that Bill Clinton is a liberal democrat.

4 MtNNESOTA DEBA1E TEACHER'S ASSOCIATION



,,.
FJRST Sm>s IN LINCOLN-Doucus DEBATE 12'
Policy Resolutions:

Resolved that the federal government should amend the Constitution to prohibit desecration of the Ameri­


can flag.

Resolved that the federal government should adopt a comprehensive national policy to provide health insur­ ance to all U.S. citizens.


Resolved that the federal government should significantly decrease overcrowding in U.S. jails and prisons.


Value Resolutions:


Resolved that showing disrespect to the American flag is antithetical to fundamental American values. Resolved that the federal government is morally obligated to provide health insurance to all U.S. citiz ens. Resolved that human genetic engineering is morally justified.


AJl debates must start with a resolution. A resolution narrows the scope of the debate. The Lincoln-Douglas debate is one of value. The L.D. debate does not have to explain how a goal will be achieved. All debates present two sides to the issue. The affinnative upholds the resolution and attempts to show it to be true. The negative opposes the resolution. Both speakers receive equal speaking time. Two models for format are provided below.


Tournament Debate:
Affirmative-6mstractive 6 minute Negative Cross Examination 3 minutes Negative Constructive 7 minutes Affirmative Cross Examination 3 minutes 1st Affumative Rebuttal 4 minutes
Negative Rebuttal 6 minutes
2nd Affirmative Rebuttal 3 minutes

Classroom Debate:


Affirmative Constructive 4minutes Negative Cross Examination 2 minutes Negative Constructive 4 minutes Affirmative Cross Examination 2 minutes Affinnative Rebuttal 2 minutes
Negative RebuttaJ 2 minutes
MINNESOTA DEBAiE TEACHER'S AsSOCIATION 5
I FIRST Sms IN LINCOLN-DOUGLAS DEBATE
CHAPTER 2: ANALYSIS OF THE RESOLUTION

As a debate teacher, you need to become knowledgeable about the topic. A classroom full of bright minds will chal­ lenge you with inqui sitiveness. No one person comes equipped with enough data about debate topics (e.g. genetic engineer­ ing, freedom of speech, gun control, health care, national service, and affinnative action) to lead a cogent group discussion without needing to learn more themselves. To educate yourself about the topic, try this idea:


Take your class to the library. Have each student find 2 or 3 articles on the current or classroom topic and then have them Xerox the articles after they check with you; you should keep a list of articles that have been copied and not allow anyone to copy duplicate out-of-date or otherwise inappropriate articles. Collect these articles and you will have a good assortment to read about the topic. To put more responsibility on the students you might choose to have them read the articles themselves and report orally to the class. They should be asked to look for facts, examples, expert opinion, and possible arguments for and against the resolution.


Hint: a good start for information can be a book published by Greenhaven Press that compiles a collection of articles both for and against a topic. This series of books is called Opposing Viewpoints and can be ordered by phone ( l-800-231- 5163) or by writing box #289009, San Diego CA, 92198-9009.


The best way to prepare to analyze the resolution is to make lists of ideas that fall into these two categories: Reasons to support the resolution.
Reasons to reject the resolution.

You will find that many ideas can be used by both sides. Once you have made your list of ideas, you can use the student handout as a way to have all students actively participate and brainstorm a master list of ideas. As the leader of this exercise, you will find it necessary to keep the class from breaking out into a giant argument; emphasize that you are trying to assemble all ideas without judging their merit. Having the class read a couple solid background articles on the topic stimulates more contribution.


The kind of articles that students are seeking are those that deal with the resolution in a broad, general sense. Articles about individuals or single examples are often good for illustrating a point, but in a debate are usually refuted on the grounds that these occurrences are more likely the exception than the rule. Srudents should also be looking for articles that are readable and clear. Text that is complicated or difficult to understand when read will be incomprehensible when spoken in a debate.



6 MINNESOTA DEBATE TEACHER'S ASSOCIATION



l
l F,m Sms 1N L1NcoLN-DouoLAs DEBATE ti'
[ CHAPTER 3: INFORMATION AND EVIDENCE

As students continue researching the resolution and gathering infonnation, they will need to become advanced re­ searchers. This section deals with sources of infonnation, research skills, and recording the information to use as evidence.


Students can use a variety of sources for information relating to the resolution. These include:



  1. What the student already knows.

  2. Other infonnation with specialized information {doctors, lawyers etc.)

  3. Mass Media Sources

  4. Textbooks

  5. Special Interest Groups

  6. Government Publications

The following is a list of some of the different sources of infonnation.





  1. Card/Computer Catalogue

r 2. Periodical Sources

  1. Newspaper Indices

  2. Encyclopedias and Dictionaries Encyclopedia of Philosophy Encyclopedia of the Social Sciences Black's Law Dictionary

Satire's Political Dictionary
Modern Dictionary of Sociology
General Encyclopedias and dictionaries

  1. Statistics

Almanacs and other reference books

  1. Biography Reference books

  2. High School textbooks

  3. Special Interest Group Publications

  4. Government Documents

  5. Historical or Political Documents

  6. Media Center Director or Reference Librarian Debate research usually follows a progression:

0 Background Research: provides an understanding of the topic


0 General Research: provides more analysis of affinnative and negative issues

0 Affinnative Research: identifies information for case development 0 Negative Research: identifies infonnation for case development


MINNESOTA DEBA1E TEACHER'S ASSOCIATION 7
IJFIRST STEPS IN LJNcou+-DouGLAS DEBATE

  • Specialized Research: finds infonnation against the specific cases of opponents

Evidence is the information the student will use to support the arguments in a debate. Generally, evidence is quoted material from sources who are credible to make such statements. These would include direct quotations from individuals, legal documents, dictionaries, and other research sources. This "evidence" is then placed onto an evidence card, usually a 4" x 6" index card, and is read during the debate to support one's contentions. The gathering, selecting, cutting, and recording of evidence is crucial to the creation of effective and ethical debate.


Care should be taken to evaluate samples of each debater's evidence recording. Some of the most common mistakes occur when students fail to accurately represent the source of information, when they fail to cite each piece of evidence as they place it on their cards, and when they write too much or too little to effectively support the claims they are making.




Have students select the strongest evidence to support their claims. Be sure the evidence card includes the complete source citation (author, qualification, title of book, page number), the quotation, and a short summary of the meaning of the card.


Rules for Creating and Using Evidence



  • Good evidence is short enough to support your contentions easily.

  • Good evidence comes from a qualified source.

  • Good evidence is honest and ethical.

  • Good evidence is clear.

  • Good evidence gjves a complete source citation.

  • Good evidence is clearly labeled for easy, accurate filing.

Sample of a good evidence card:



AFFIRMATIVE illSTICE VITAL TO FREE EXPRESSION


John Rawls (Philosopher) in Michael J. Sandel 's, LIBERALISM AND THE LIMITS OF JUSTICE, 1982, p.22-23.


"The desire to express our nature as a free and equal rational being can be fulfilled only by acting on the principles of right and justice having first priority."






8 MINNESOTA DEBAIB TEACHER'S ASSOCIATION


FIRST STEPS IN LINCOl>I-DouGl.AS DEBATE rt
Sample of a bad evidence care:

AFFIRMATIVE JUSTICE ESSENTIAL TO DEMOCRACY


R.J. Thiel and Richard "Jumbo" Jatso, THE ATLANTIC, 1975.




"Justice is simply needed to cause somebody to come before a court for trial or to allow someone to receive punishment for one's misdeeds. Justice should never be used to circumvent the inherently inferior enforcement of liberalized standards for the misappropriation of linguistic standards."

Possible Ways to Organize Evidence Cards


0 Organize by subject (Definitions, Values, Affinnative Contentions, Negative Contentions, Criteria, Etc.) 0 Divided into affirmative and negative evidence, and then subdivide by issues or contentions
0 Any other filing system which will allow you to quickly find the information you need

How to Write an Evidence Card


l. In the top left comer, label the card "Affinnative," "Negative," or "Both."

  1. In the top right comer, give a 1-4 word summary of the card.

  2. Skip a line and write the author's name, qualifications, magazine or book, date, and page number.

  3. Put direct quotation on the card.

MINNESOTA DEBAlE TEACHER'S AsSOCIATION 9


fJRST STEPS IN LINCOLN-DOUGLAS DEBATE
CHAPTER 4: UNDERSTANDING VALUES



Since Lincoln-Douglas debate is a conflict about values, it is important to be able to identify which values are upheld by each side of the resolution. Debaters actually identify the values they uphold in the debate.

To begin the search for values, debaters first need to understand what values are and are not. Values are underlying principles that guide our behavior. These principles are ideas or concepts which we hold dear or valuable; they are used to judge right or wrong, good or bad, useful or useless. Some values are more important to us than others. For example, although we all value life, people have been known to die for the value of freedom. Values are not material things although they may underlie our desire for those things. It is easy to confuse valuable items with values. A winning lottery ticket is valuable. Its worth can be measured in tenns of money. However, we do not value a winning lottery ticket. Instead we value a lottery because it upholds our ideals of prosperity, independence, and property.


When analyzing a debate resolution, it is necessary to determine the values underlying each side of the resolution. A good first step is to become aware of the myriad of values that exist. There are aesthetic values such as beauty, fonn, balance, and perspective, There are personal and moral values such as truth, goodness, and right actions. Political-social values may include justice, liberty, and equality. There are also instrumental or practical values such as efficiency, order, and cooperation. All of these kinds of values can be used in a Lincoln-Douglas debate.


When analyzing a debate resolution, students will want to identify which values could be most important to the Affinnative and Negative positions. For example, in the debate topic: "Resolved: That disrespect of the American flag is antithetical to fundamental American values," students might list these Affinnative values: patriotism, respect for law and order, unity, preservation of our way of life, etc. Negative values could include these: individual freedom of expression, autonomy, liberty. A debater will generally choose one or two values to uphold for each side of the debate.


Comparing values is an important part of Lincoln Douglas debate. Why is the value of liberty more important than the value of unity? We can't prove quantitatively that one value is superior to another but we can use logic combined with the support of valued documents such as the Declaration of Independence, the Preamble to the Constitution, the Universal Dec­ laration of Human Rights. Frequently, experts are used by debaters to support their value positions. Philosophers, Supreme Court justices, college professors, and others may offer supporting opinions.





10 MINNESOTA 0EBA1c TEACHER'S AsSOCIATION


FIRST STEPS IN LINCOLN-DOUGLAS DEBATE rt

Download 0.5 Mb.

Share with your friends:
  1   2   3   4   5   6   7   8   9   ...   29




The database is protected by copyright ©sckool.org 2022
send message

    Main page