The Power of Debate - Mr. Rosentel`s Website

January 9, 2018 | Author: Anonymous | Category: Social Science, Anthropology, Mythology
Share Embed Donate


Short Description

Download The Power of Debate - Mr. Rosentel`s Website...

Description

DaNaya Burnett: founding member of NOLA Debate Team; freshman @ SIU-E  Keyonte Cobb: founding member of NOLA Debate Team; CDL Adjudicator of the Year; CDF Freedom School Servant-Leader  Vernessa Gipson, MSW: former 21st CCLC Director; NOLA Debate Team founder and co-coach  Charles Rosentel: head coach; Social Studies and Composition teacher 

Participants will understand: 

the benefits of competitive academic debate.  Social-emotional skill development  Connection to learning standards  Post-secondary readiness skills

   

the basic format for policy debate. strategies for implementing debate-related activities. how to organize a debate team and prepare for tournaments. how to provide other debate-related activities.

When programs or activities include a competitive component, increased engagement may also vary according to how successful a student is at the activity (Feldman & Matjasko, 2005).  Adolescence is characterized by rewardseeking behavior (Galvan, 2010) and the development of higher-level thinking and reasoning skills (Sternberg & Downing, 1982).  Programs that utilize these developing skills may improve educational attainment via increased school engagement. 

Primary finding from this study:  Students who participated in the Chicago Debate League were more likely to graduate from high school and less likely to drop out than students who did not participate in debate. Debaters were significantly more likely to graduate than non-debaters in every risk group.  Debate participation may be an effective tool for maintaining or increasing school engagement even among students most at-risk for dropping out of high school.  Students who participated in debate had significantly higher scores on all sections of the ACT after adjusting for demographic and risk variables.  Debaters were also more likely to reach the college-readiness benchmark on the English, Reading, and Science sections of the ACT even among at-risk students.  More intense participation was associated with better academic performance. Anderson, S., & Mezuk, B., Participating in a policy debate program and academic achievement among atrisk adolescents in an urban public school district: 1997–2007, Journal of Adolescence (2012), doi:10.1016/ j.adolescence.2012.04.005

Today, 19 urban debate leagues provide competitive policy debate programs to high school and middle school students across the United States, in school districts where 87% of students are minority and 78% are low income.  Urban Debate Leagues have proven to increase literacy scores by 25%, to improve grade-point averages by 8 to 10%, to achieve high school graduation rates of nearly 100%, and to produce college matriculation rates of 71 to 91%. 







The 2010 CCS aim to refocus literary education on analysis and evaluation of non-fiction texts and oral communication (i.e., listening, speaking, and presenting) (Porter et al., 2011). Appendix A, titled “The Special Place of Argument in the Standards,” notes that the Common Core places “particular emphasis on students’ ability to write sound arguments on substantive issues, as this ability is critical to college and career readiness.” On face, competitive policy debate programs appear to match well with many of the Englishlanguage arts and reading objectives outlined in the CCS.

City demographics  Consent decree  School demographics  Student performance (report card data) 

› AYP › Graduation

rates › Afterschool participation



Needed to provide academic enrichment services in a nontraditional format › More than cooking, dance, and

sports



Opportunity to travel out of the community › Motivation to join was NOT

academically based



Opportunity to meet other “minority” peers who are academically talented › They have to see to believe

In competitive academic debate (also called “policy debate”), teams of 2 argue for or against a resolution.  The affirmative team presents a plan that supports the resolution and the negative team argues for the status quo.  When debate teams arrive at tournaments, they must be prepared for any possibility, as they may argue either the affirmative or negative and, by the end of each tournament, will have argued both sides multiple times. 



http://www.urbandebate.org/video_cps now.shtml

Practice  Research  Discussion and Dialogues  Sparring 



Resolution › Resolved: The United States federal

government should substantially increase social services for persons living in poverty in the United States.



Cases › › › ›

Katrina Single Stop Dream Act Housing Vouchers



Resolution › Resolved: The United States federal government

should substantially reduce its military and/or police presence in one or more of the following: South Korea, Japan, Afghanistan, Kuwait, Iraq, Turkey.



Cases › › › ›

Afghanistan/Counter-Terrorism Japan/Okinawa South Korea/Ground Troops in ROK Turkey/Tactical Nuclear Weapons



Resolution › Resolved: The United States federal government should substantially increase its exploration and/or development of space beyond the Earth’s mesosphere.



Cases › › › ›

Lunar Mining Space-Based Missile Defense Space Colonization China Cooperation

       

Reading Writing Critical thinking and questioning Public speaking Social-emotional learning Note taking Teamwork Advocacy

Storyteller is a game designed to help students think on their feet, speak fluently, use transitions and avoid verbalized pauses (e.g. um, uh, like, you know).  Roles 

› Storyteller: Tells ad-lib story according to words

the Wordsmith calls › Wordsmith: Directs the story by calling out words › Buzzer: Buzzes when Storyteller has verbalized pause





SPAR (SPontaneous ARgumentation) debating introduces students to academic debate and helps them refine argumentation skills they already possess while motivating them to participate in debate. Brainstorm resolutions

› Resolved: That all public schools should extend their school

day by at least 1 hour › Resolved: That social media websites (including Facebook and YouTube) should be allowed in school for educational purposes › Resolved: That the Internet has made people lazy and stupid.



Roles › › › ›

1A: Affirmative Case and Affirmative Closing Statement 2A: Affirmative Rebuttal 1N: Negative Case and Negative Closing Statement 2N: Negative Rebuttal







The Case should consist of 3 main arguments, distinct from each other, that are supported by whatever reasoning (or "warrants"), evidence, data, and analysis that you can devise. The Rebuttal should be refutations of the other team's Case and should include a pointby-point refutation of their 3 arguments. The Closing Statement should be an extension of the 1 or 2 strongest arguments from your Constructive, with a final rebuttal of your opponent's arguments, concise and synthesized.

   

 

Affirmative Constructive (1A): 2.5 minutes Negative Constructive (1N): 2.5 minutes Negative Rebuttal (2N): 2.5 minutes Affirmative Rebuttal (2A): 2.5 minutes Negative Closing Statement (1N): 2 minutes Affirmative Closing Statement (1A): 2 minutes



Recruitment › Members › Coach



Support › Time › Resources

100% graduation rate  100% college enrollment  DaNaya’s scholarship accomplishment  Keyonte’s award and speech 



What questions do you have?



Multiple relevant links are posted here:

http://wp.me/p3ylC-Lf

View more...

Comments

Copyright � 2017 NANOPDF Inc.
SUPPORT NANOPDF