WHY?
o Combats possible passivity and inattention by engaging
students in a novel learning exercise.
o Raises confidence and cultural awareness
o Opens up learning
o Engages them in team work
o Aids critical thinking
o Allows them to explore difficult positions in a safe context
o Encourages in-depth study of a particular topic
WHAT?
Students have to:
o Defend positions they do not necessarily agree with
o Speak in a formal public forum
o Answer difficult questions
o Ask difficult questions
o Research evidence for and against a topic of academic interest
o Draw on a wide range of sources
o Construct arguments
o Critique evidence
o Be combative
o Be succinct
o Keep strictly to time allotted
o Work closely with a group of relative strangers
o Overcome inclinations towards social loafing
WHERE?
Anywhere.
o Lecture theatre
if more
formality
desired
o Students to be
encouraged to
stand away
from the rest of
the team, come
out from
behind the
lectern and look
the audience in
the eye.
HOW?
o Teams consist of 6-8 members.
o Three people present the arguments, one person is the discussant.
o Order of speakers and time allowed is strictly controlled (see box
below)
o The discussant summarises the points presented by their team and
responds to any points raised by the opposition
o The team members who are not speaking do the research as directed
by the whole team
o Non speaking team members present this to the speakers to use in
their arguments
o All team members decide on how to divide up the tasks
o No audio visual aids allowed – the arguments will be judged entirely
on their force and persuasiveness
o Members of the teams not taking part in that particular debate give
peer feedback and are in turn given feedback when it is their turn to
debate.
o The audience votes for most convincing argument
o Times are strictly enforced: students take it in turns to have custody of
the timer and the bell.
Examples of previous debates:
Debate 1:
• Group 1. Will argue for involvement of service users in research in issues concerning mental health and well being.
• Group 2. Will argue against involvement of service users in research in issues concerning mental health and well being.
Debate 2:
• Group 3. Will argue for the motion that Anorexia Nervosa is a Culture Bound Syndrome
• Group 4. Will argue against the motion that Anorexia Nervosa is a Culture Bound Syndrome
Debate 3
• Group 5. Will argue that Government policy makers should decide on research funding policy in issues concerning mental health and well being
• Group 6. Will argue that academic experts should decide on research funding policy in issues concerning mental health and well being