Instruction manuals

APD

Description
APD or Asian Parliamentary Debate just got also from internet
Published
of 8
All materials on our website are shared by users. If you have any questions about copyright issues, please report us to resolve them. We are always happy to assist you.
Related Documents
Share
Transcript
  Asian Parliamentary Debate Teams: There two opposing teams in an Asians format of debate: 1. Government side- proposes and defends the motion; 2. Opposition side- refutes and negates the motion.Each side is composed of three members.The embers of the government side are the fo!!owing: 1. rime minister # $ - opens the debate% defines the motion and advances arguments;2. &eput' prime inister#& $- refute at first instance the case of the opposition% re-estab!ish the government(s c!aim% and advances arguments;). Government whip #G*$ - ma+es an issue-based rebutta! of the opposition(s case and summari,es the case of the government.The embers of the Opposition side are the fo!!owing: 1. eader of the Opposition #O$- responds direct!' to the case of the government b' giving a direct c!ash% and advances arguments. a' cha!!enge the motion if the definition is cha!!engeab!e;2. &eput' eader of the Opposition #& $ - refutes the case of the & % reestab!ishes the case of the opposition% and advances an argument;). Opposition *hip #O*$ - ma+es an issues-based rebutta! of the government(s and summari,es the case of the opposition.Time of peeches: Each spea+er is a!!ocated seven minutes to de!iver their constructive speeches. One spea+er from each side #/or the Government: 0& % for Opposition: O0&O$ is given four minutes to de!iver a rep!' speech. The spea+ers wi!! be spea+ing in the fo!!owing order:1. rime inister 2. eader of the opposition). &eput' rime inister . &eput' eader of the Opposition. Government *hip3. Opposition whip4. Opposition 5ep!'6. Government 5ep!'&uring the constructive speeches% oint of 7nformation # O7$ ma' be raised b' the opposing side after the first minute up to the si8th minute. O7 ma' be refused or accepted b' the spea+er. &uring rep!' speeches% no O7 ma' be raised.5ep!' peech:5ep!' speech is a comparative ana!'sis of the strength and wea+nesses of the case of both sides. The aim of the speech is to give a bias 9udgment as to wh' shou!d the peop!e support the team(s c!aim. The speech is first de!ivered b' the opposition side and fo!!owed b' the government side who wi!! c!ose the debate.atter% anner% ethod: Asian ar!iamentar' &ebate is assessed b' an Ad9udicator ane! composed of an odd number according to the fo!!owing criteria:1. atter #$- substance of the debate% the arguments and evidence presented% and the !ogica! reasoning and presentation of said arguments.2. anner #$- the st'!e of de!iver'% the persuasion s+i!!s% and the conduct of the debaters.). ethod #2$- the response to the d'namics of the debate% and the observance of the ru!es of debate. Speaker Roles in Asian Parliamentary Debate Government: Prime Minister (PM) &efine conte8t and parameters of debate. /or e8amp!e% in an open motion !i+e This <ouse *ou!d upport usicians% the debate cou!d be conte8tua!i,ed into whether music shou!d be a commodit' for trade% or it shou!d be avai!ab!e gratis #i.e. free music down!oad and transfer$ rovide concise bac+ground or histor' !eading to the issueGive framewor+ of government bench(s case. 7.e. mechanisms #if an'$% argumentation f!ow #what the government(s first argument is and what the &eput' rime inister wi!! ta!+ about$7ntroduce 1st argument Assert Government stand Deputy Prime Minister (DPM) 5ebut first argument from eader of Opposition5ebut rebutta!s to (s argument7ntroduce 2nd and )rd argument5eassert Government stand and case Government Whip 5ebut &eput' eader of Opposition% and eader of Opposition  5ebut rebutta!s to &  and  arguments rovide a deeper !eve! of ana!'sis for previous arguments and rebutta!s=o new arguments% but new ang!es of arguments shou!d be given>rief summar' of entire case of Government5eassert Government stand and caseOpposition: Leader of Opposition  Agree or disagree with conte8t0 parameters of debate #an' definitiona! cha!!enges% accusations of s?uirre!ing% or unfair set up shou!d be made from the O speech and no !ater$5ebut rime inister(s argumentGive framewor+ for Opposition case #if Opp agrees to prob!em% then their case shou!d provide so!ution% or at !east effective!' high!ight how Government proposa! wi!! worsen the situation$7ntroduce first Opposition argument Assert Opposition stand Deputy Leader of Opposition 5ebut &  and  arguments5ebut rebutta!s to O arguments7ntroduce 1st and 2nd #if an'$ argument5eassert Opposition stand and case Opposition Whip 5ebut &  and  arguments5ebut rebutta!s to O @ &O arguments rovide a deeper !eve! of ana!'sis for previous arguments and rebutta!s=o new arguments% but new ang!es of arguments shou!d be given5eassert Opposition stand and case5ep!' peech:an on!' be done b' either 1st or 2nd spea+er from each bench rovide a biased (ora! ad9udication( of wh' the debate shou!d go to own bench<igh!ight issues 'ou thin+ 'our side won% carefu!!' tiptoe around issues 'ou thin+ 'ou !ost=ew e8amp!es to e8pand on discussed e8amp!es are usua!!' a!!owed and ma+e the rep!' speech sound fresh as opposed to verba! regurgitation5eassert stand---ost important!'% tr' to have fun whi!e 'ou(re doing a!! this. ;$trategies @ Tips for imited reparation &ebating5ead *ide!'Even 9ust s+imming a few internationa! news websites% !i+e >> news% A! Ba,eera or The =ew Cor+ Times wi!! he!p +eep 'ou abreast of internationa! issues. 7f 'ou have a computer% set one of these sites as 'our homepage so that g!oba! issues sin+ in each time 'ou open 'our browser. A great wee+!' read for sheer breadth is the The Economist.5esearch Time!' 7ssues7f there is an issue that is dominating the news and 'ou have a debate tournament coming up% 'ou can be sure that there wi!! be a motion on that topic. p!it tas+s with 'our partners and teammates and create briefs on these issues before the tournament so that ever'one can be up to speed. Deep these briefs throughout the 'ear so that 'ou can update them as events change.5esearch De' ountries and Organi,ationsome countries are g!oba! p!a'ers and wi!! enter near!' an' internationa! debate in which 'ou find 'ourse!f. >eing even passing!' fami!iar with the po!itica! structures and current situations of these countries - or groups of countries - can he!p 'ou win debates. ome good p!aces to start are: hina% the % 5ussia% the E and Bapan. 7nternationa! organi,ations% especia!!' the =% feature prominent!' in man' debates as we!!. Dnowing the decision-ma+ing machiner' of these organi,ations% their 9urisdiction and their activities wi!! he!p 'ou immense!'. 7n addition to the =% 'ou ma' want to !oo+ into =ATO% AEA=% the *TO and the G6.se 7&EA(s /ree 5esources&ebatepedia #the wi+i 'ou are on right now$ is a free resource open to an'one with internet access. 7t is a great p!ace to get a sense of an issue and begin constructing arguments. Cou ma' want to dig deeper into important events and controversies% but with thousands of artic!es% &ebatepedia is a good p!ace to start. Overview of Asian Parliamentary Debate 7n Asian ar!iamentar' t'!e% there are 2 teams - Government and Opposition. Each team has ) members and each team gives  speeches. The format is a !imited preparation format% meaning that the topic is announced% depending on the tournament% rough!' ) minutes before the debate.The ) members of the Government shou!d defend the motion. The ) members of the team% each of which gives a 4 minute speech% are:1$ rime inister 2$ &eput' rime inister )$ Government *hipOne spea+er from the Government team - either the rime inister or &eput' rime inister - is charged with giving a  minute rep!' speech that c!arifies the debate from the Government perspective without bringing forth new arguments.The ) members of the Opposition team shou!d negate the motion and refute arguments brought forth b' the Government. The ) members of the team% each of which gives a 4 minute speech% are:1$ eader of Opposition  2$ &eput' eader of Opposition)$ Opposition *hipi+e the Government team% one spea+er from the Opposition team - either the eader of Opposition or &eput' eader of Opposition - is charged with giving a  minute rep!' speech that c!arifies the debate from the Opposition perspective without bringing forth new arguments.7n the 4 minute speeches% the opposing team can stand up and as+ for oints of 7nformation # O7$ after the first minute and unti! the si8th minute. A O7 shou!d be a brief ?uestion or comment and not a !ong-winded mono!ogue or bac+ and forth cross e8amination session.Times and Order of Asian ar!iamentar' &ebate peeches rime inister - 4 minuteseader of Opposition - 4 minutes&eput' rime inister - 4 minutes&eput' eader of Opposition - 4 minutesGovernment *hip - 4 minutesOpposition *hip - 4 minutesOpposition 5ep!' peech -  minutesGovernment 5ep!' peech -  minutes Characteristics of Debate *e debate not 9ust for the sa+e of sa'ing an'thing. *e debate not 9ust to throw an' point. &ebate must genera!!' be substantive% persuasive and organi,ed. Debate must have the following characteristics: 1. Informative - a good debate presents comp!ete information and factua! setting. &ebate is supposed to inform the pub!ic of what the' shou!d +now% to educate the peop!e% and to he!p them reach a !ogica! understanding of the facts. &ebaters shou!d feed the audience the necessar' facts and evidence to wi!! proper!' aid the !atter in !earning% grasping and appreciating the nove!t' of the motion. &ebaters shou!d not re!' mere!' on their own opinions but on the genera! princip!es !aid down b' the authorities and e8perts.2. ell!reasone - arguments raised in a debate must be !ogica!% re!evant% competent and we!! e8p!ained. Arguments must show a direct !in+ on the motion that is debated upon. Arguments must support the core that wi!! aid the team prove their c!aims. Arguments raised must be acceptab!e to an average reasonab!e person who has an average ana!'sis of the issues presented. A!! ?uestions that wi!! !ead to the conc!usion of the debate must be c!arified% answered% and ana!',ed. &ebaters shou!d ma+e a!! their points c!ear and understandab!e.). Persuasive - &ebate shou!d give emphasis and force to strong arguments that need the support of the peop!e. 7n order to convince the peop!e in the position that debaters are supporting% debaters must be fir' in presenting their issues. &ebaters shou!d bui!d rapport with their audience and he!p them fo!!ow the points raised b' the debaters.. Or erly - A debate must fo!!ow a certain format that wi!! govern the proceeding of the debate and the conduct of the debaters. The ru!es shou!d among others set the tas+ of each spea+er and the time !imit a!!oted to each of them. peeches must be organi,ed% structured and presented in a methodo!ogica! form.. Dynamic - ince in a debate% two teams present opposing views% said views must be responded to b' both teams respective!'. A!! important points must be ?uestioned and answered b' each team and teams must direct!' c!ash with the points raised b' their opponent. Each spea+er must contribute and respond to the re?uirements and necessities of the debate. hat is Debate#Debate is venue of reasoned discussion from two opposing sides on a we!!-defined conte8t% where parties de!iver their arguments in an organi,ed fashion with the primar' purpose of convincing and persuading the par!iament or the audience to give merit on the contention of their cause.&ebate is  tool for a vocating a efine view  of a particu!ar issue with the intent of providing the re!evant information and supporting detai!s that wi!! convince the !istener to support their view.7t is an educated e8ercise where parties out!ine their arguments and offer d'namism b' contributing and responding to the different issues raised b' each side.ost universit' debating in the wor!d is done in what is +nown as (par!iamentar'( format% which is based on the functioning of the >ritish <ouse ommons #otherwise +nown as the *estminster mode!$. >ecause of this% to understand par!iamentar' debating% it is usefu! to ta+e a !oo+ at how the ommons functions% and how it has been adapted for universit' debates. *hi!e there is a range of permutations in universit' st'!es% the basic premise is the same for a!! st'!es referred to as (par!iamentar'( #as opposed to one-on-one st'!es% such as inco!n-&oug!as% or ross-E8amination$: in each debate% there is a government and an opposition% who spea+ in turn% de!ivering timed speeches. 7n anadian ar!iamentar' st'!e # $% there is one team composed of two peop!e representing each side. 7n >ritish ar!iamentar' st'!e #> $% which is used at the wor!d championships% there are two teams of two peop!e on both sides. >ut the basic ru!es are the same--!i+e in a *estminster par!iament% there must be a motion before the house% and both sides de!iver speeches in se?uence% and tr' to convince the house #in our case% the 9udges$ to support or defeat the motion that stands before it. 7n the rea! ommons% essentia!!' an' sitting member can propose a motion. <owever% in par!iamentar' debate% the government team a!one is responsib!e for proposing the motion #sometimes ca!!ed a (case($ to be debated. 7n the <ouse of ommons% these motions can ta+e essentia!!' two forms. The' can be motions of princip!e: i.e. the <ouse can vote to condemn a particu!ar action b' another countr'% as a matter of princip!e #e.g. Apartheid in outh Africa$. <owever% these motions% even if passed% produce no binding effects. Or the' can be motions of practice: i.e. the <ouse can enact !aws that are binding on the countr'. 7n this case% the motion is in fact a piece of !egis!ation% which can be a two-page document% or a 4-page crimina! code. 7n  these distinctions e8ist as we!!% but on!' as a matter of form. Government teams can propose pure princip!ed cases% pure mode! cases% or a b!end of the two. There are no ru!es about what is a (right( or a (wrong( case% a!though +nowing whether the debate shou!d center most!' on princip!e or pragmatics ma' affect the wa' the debate evo!ves and what +ind of arguments the debaters wi!! emp!o'. o% as in a *estminster par!iament% the goa! of the debate is to convince enough members of the house to support one(s side of the motion. *hoever does so wins the debate. 7n universit' debating% there wi!! a!wa's be a pane! of 9udges #or sometimes on!' a sing!e 9udge$ who represent the (house( vote and decide the winner. #Eri+ Eastaugh% Debates, Cases,  Arguments, viden!e and Assertions the #argon $p%ained  $7n order to have a debate% the fo!!owing must be present:  1. $opic - the sub9ect to be discussed and debated upon.2. %ormat - the certain t'pe of debate ru!e that wi!! govern the conduct and proceedings of the debate.). Opposing teams - the' wi!! either support or negate the topic to be debated upon.. Arguments - the substance which both sides wi!! present.. &enue - p!ace to be debated upon.3. Au ience - the peop!e who wi!! witness and assess the issues of the debate.> &ebate <O % EF7 Arguments% Bune 24a+ing va!id arguments is the basic s+i!! of debating. *ithout this abi!it' the best 'ou wi!! be is a st'!istica!!' wonderfu! bag of hot air. An argument shou!d contain the three e!ements be!ow then it wi!! be a S'(I  argument. State your point: *hat is it that 'ou are tr'ing to sa'H a+e it c!ear and brief. rostitutes wi!! be safer in !ega! !icensed brothe!s. ')plain your point: *h' do 'ou thin+ thisH *hat is the basis for 'our statementHThis is because it wi!! be easier to arrest an'one assau!ting them if the po!ice +now where the' are and prostitutes fee! more comfortab!e contacting the po!ice. Illustrate your point: Give an e8amp!e or ana!og' which bac+s up 'our point.7n German'% where prostitution is !ega!% the number of prostitutes assau!ted b' their c!ients has fa!!en. Practise S'(I arguments on any topic * the structure is useful for essays an presentations as well as formal ebate+hat is an Argument# &uring their speeches% the members of each side wi!! be responsib!e for giving arguments in favor or against the motion as defined b' the government. The' wi!! a!so have to respond to each others( arguments; this is +nown as rebutta! or refutation. Argumentation is the rea! meat of debating. >ut (argument( doesn(t mean 'e!!ing at 'our gir!friend or 'our parents. An argument in debating is something ver' specific% to be defined in opposition to case% assumption% assertion and evidence. To !oo+ at it one wa'% 'our case is a statement that 'ou have to prove is true. 7f 'ou can prove that it(s true% 'ou win the debate. 7f as opposition 'ou can prove that it isn(t true% then 'ou win the debate. >ut 'ou don(t 9ust stand up and ramb!e on for 4 minutes about how 'ou thin+ 'ou(re right and the other gu's are wrong. There has to be some structure to how 'ou e8p!ain 'our point of view. Arguments are the bac+bone of that structure. An argument is a statement put forward b' 'ou which% if it is true% supports the truth or va!idit' of 'our side of the motion. /or e8amp!e% if we ta+e m' ear!ier case about intervening in the udan. et(s sa' 7 define the case as a hapter I77 intervention b' the nited =ations: in other words% an invasion. Once 7 have !aid out m' case% 7 have to convince 'ou that 7(m right. o 7 wi!! te!! 'ou that a$ udan cannot escape this conf!ict on its own and too man' peop!e are d'ing% and b$ that the = has a mora! responsibi!it' to intervene and c$ that the = has a !ega! responsibi!it' to intervene. Each of those constitutes an argument. >ut it(s not enough 9ust to sa' those things; 7 have to e8p!ain wh' the' too are true. 7n a wa'% an argument is a mini-case. o to ma+e it even c!earer% debaters usua!!' brea+ down arguments into their three component parts: point% argument% evidence. The point is mere!' the statement itse!f. 7t is over ver' ?uic+!'. The argument is the reasoning that supports the statement. o !et(s ta+e argument b$ as an e8amp!e. <ere 7 wou!d te!! 'ou that the = is founded on the princip!es of human rights and human dignit'% and that% as the most universa! wor!d organi,ation and the corner-stone of wor!d order% it represents a!! of humanit'. 7 wou!d then te!! 'ou that the udanese government is massacring its own citi,ens a!ong racia! and ethnic !ines for the benefit of a particu!ar ethnic group% that humanit' #and thus the =$ cannot to!erate this +ind of behavior as it is offensive to a!!% and that this is precise!' the sort of thing the = was founded to stop # i.e. =a,i e8termination of the Bews$. The evidence is the e8amp!es that bac+ up 'our reasoning% to show that it has some basis in rea!it'. o% as evidence% 7 wou!d give 'ou e8amp!es of other situations where the = has got invo!ved for precise!' the same reasons% such as Dosovo% the ongo% ierra eone% the former Cugos!avia% and 5wanda. This is an over-simp!ified version of course. >ut this process must be repeated for ever' argument. ost peop!e wi!! te!! 'ou that a  case shou!d have at !east  arguments% and no more than . >ut this is on!' a guide!ine. an' of m' own cases on!' have ) main arguments. >ut these wi!! be ver' !arge% comp!e8 arguments with man' !a'ers of reasoning and evidence% and this comes from 'ears of practice. o unti! 'ou have more e8perience% 'ou shou!d a!wa's aim to have  arguments for 'our cases. Assertions an Assumptions vs+ Arguments One of the most common accusations that 'our opponents wi!! throw at 'ou is that 'ou are mere!' asserting something rather than arguing it. The difference between the two is fair!' eas' to understand. 7magine that% instead of going through the steps of point% argument% evidence% 7 mere!' stated m' point and !eft it at that. That is ca!!ed an assertion: when one simp!' asserts the truth of a statement% without bothering to provide evidence of its truth. 7t is inevitab!e that at some point% some things wi!! be assertions% because 'ou are !imited in the time 'ou have to support 'our arguments and 'our means of providing evidence. 7 can te!! 'ou that the = was founded to prevent crimes against humanit'; but chances are 7 won(t have a cop' of the = harter around to show 'ou that it(s true. 7n an' case% it is common enough +now!edge that most peop!e wi!! be!ieve me without me having to cite the specific artic!es in the harter that ma+e m' assertion true. o% sometimes asserting is o+; don(t thin+ 'ou have to prove ever' sing!e !itt!e thing 'ou sa' in a debate. >ut as a ru!e 'ou shou!d avoid ma+ing assertions as much as possib!e% especia!!' when it comes to those things that are essentia! to 'our case.  An assumption is 9ust a hidden assertion. ometimes it is hidden on purpose% and sometimes on!' because 'ou weren(t aware 'ou were ma+ing the assumption when 'ou made 'our argument. 7f we return to m' case about = intervention in udan% there is a perfect e8amp!e of this. A!! of the arguments 7 put forth and e8p!ain dea! with wh' the = needs to and shou!d intervene in udan. >ut nowhere do 7 e8p!ain that it can. 7 am assuming% that is to sa'% 7 am secret!' asserting% that the = wi!! be ab!e to find the resources and personne! to underta+e this mission successfu!!'. Ever' sing!e case% and ever' sing!e argument% no matter how good a debater the person who bui!t it is% wi!! be fu!! of assertions and assumptions. o the best advice 7 can give a new debater is: !oo+ for the assumptions. That is 'our best and simp!est strateg' for undermining 'our opponents( !ogic. #Eri+ Eastaugh% Debates, Cases, Arguments, viden!e and Assertions the #argon $p%ained  $ hat topics to anticipate when ebating# $ypes of motions#
We Need Your Support
Thank you for visiting our website and your interest in our free products and services. We are nonprofit website to share and download documents. To the running of this website, we need your help to support us.

Thanks to everyone for your continued support.

No, Thanks