Coaching Debate in Canada

Coaching Debate
2012 Summer Debate Camp Coaching page 2

C
o
a
c
h
i
n
g
A Philosophy of Coaching................................................................................1
Coaching Debate...............................................................................................2
Advice to New Coaches....................................................................................9
What to Expect at a Tournament....................................................................10
Tournament Organizing..................................................................................11
Practical Tabbing............................................................................................15
Tabbing and Back Tabbing.............................................................................16
Index
C
o
a
c
h
i
n
g
T
hese materials were written for high school
teachers who were unfamiliar with debate.
Of course, in addition to the materials about
coaching and tabbing, all of the materials in this book
and on the website might be useful for a coach.
I hope however that students will use the coaching
materials, too. The biggest impediment to a healthy
debating program is the absence of coaches. I am very
lucky at Sacred Heart to have a number of students and
former students who coach the junior high debaters or
who help out with the senior high students.
You too can help with debating in your school or
another one either now, or when you are at university.
Sometimes that will make it possible for a supportive
teacher (who knows nothing about debating) to run
a debate club; other times, it might make it possible
for the students to compete who would otherwise not
have the chance.
And for those of you without a coach of your own, I
hope some of this information will make you a better
debater.
There are a variety of theories and strategies about
debate coaching. I am sure not everyone would agree
with the following advice. However, here goes:
Debaters learn by doing When I started debate
coaching I had been a successful debater and I thought it
would help to give students advice on how to improve.
Not so much. The most important thing Ive learned is
that students mostly need to fgure it out themselves.
They get better by debating more, against debaters who
are slightly better than they are. The more ice time they
get, the more they improve.
So I enter my junior high students in senior high
tournaments when I can so they get more practice,
and more practice debating against better debaters.
One sheet of paper I do not let my students
write out their speech word for word, and they are only
allowed one sheet of paper when the debate begins.
(They can take notes during the debate, however). It
is hard for students to learn to speak without notes. It
is easier in the long run if they are never allowed to
have many notes and are forced to get this right from
the start.
Debaters can model what they see- If you can
demonstrate a good PM speech, over time the debaters
in your club can duplicate it. If you are lucky enough
(as I am at Sacred Heart) to have once had a good
debater, you have it made because everybody who was
in club while they were there can steal some of their
stuff. In Nova Scotia, we have a relatively tiny debate
community (maybe thirty schools, but we see each other
regularly). That means that my students get to watch
all of the other good students and emulate them.
Individual criticism can help, a little
When I have time, I try to watch my students at a
tournament, and then give brief written comments
later. I dont normally comment on the topic (which
they might never debate again); I try to comment on
skills: Rebuttal, time management, construction, public
speaking skills. In short, those things they will do again,
time and again. I dont put much stock in an individual
score for an individual round. A tournament average,
however, is almost always right. I look to see if one
bad round has skewed the results but if not, I put a
lot of weight in the collective judgement of the judges
at the tournament.
Numbers tell you something. I have been
surprised to discover that almost without exception
my debaters improve a little bit at every tournament.
Whether it is a high school tournament in Nova Scotia
(which here is judged based on speaker points, not win-
loss record), a university tournament, a BP tournament,
a national competition almost everyone gets a little
better each tournament and their scores are remarkably
consistent. So I keep track of each debaters individual
scores, and watch their progress. It lets me predict the
future! It also lets me compare where the debater is
based on their age. It is unrealistic to expect a student
who has been debating for a year to win a signifcant
tournament. But if I can put their scores in context by
comparing them to other students who were in their
frst year of debating I can get a reliable measure
of their ability and success. And thats important
information for students: nice for them to know that
placing 30
th
at McGill is an outstanding fnish for a
grade nine student in their second year of debate.
It takes two years- There are no hard and fast
rules, of course, but because there are a lot of things to
get right content, delivery, rebuttal it usually takes
a couple of years for things to gel and the debater to
be successful. The learning curve is similar no matter
when they start, so I encourage students to start early
(so they have several years of success).
We serve different communities. Some
students want to win everything, and have the time
and ability to do so; others are interested in polishing
their resume and becoming a little better at public
speaking. Debating has something to offer both groups,
even if it is only the former that you can make magic
happen with.
The most important skill is analysis. The
reason one debater wins and another doesnt is
ultimately about analysis. Picking how to run an
argument, what arguments will work, and in what
order they have to be made is what separates the
student who places 1
st
in Canada from the very good
debater, who fnishes 12
th
.
They are better after a break. I dont understand
how the brain processes information it has learned,
and in particular the debate skills it has learned. After
thirty years of coaching I can say that a student in
September will be signifcantly better than they were
in April apparently because the break has given
their brains an opportunity to process and integrate
whatever subliminal learning was going on. A student
in January will be a signifcantly better debater than
they were in December.
A PHILOSOPHY OF COACHING
Introduction
A
student in your grade nine class has begged
you to start a debate club. Me, you say, I
know nothing about debate coaching. You
might do worse than the following.
Begin by working on the structure: explain what the
teams are called, explain what order they speak in,
explain what they must do. Talk about defnitions
and why they are important. Let the debaters see a
demonstration debate before they do one.
Debating consists of three parts: public speaking,
content, and refutation. It is diffcult for new debaters
because they need to do all three parts well for the
debate to look good. One of the tasks of the novice
coach is to help debaters address these three parts of
their debate.
Some teachers who would like to promote debating
worry that they lack the necessary experience.
The purpose of this paper is to provide them with
suffcient information so that theyyou can coach
or teach debate with confdence. Nearly every debate
teacher or coach begins without experience, so you
neednt feel inadequate for this reason. Though
coaching and teaching debate are similar in most
aspects there are some ways in which they differ
signifcantly. This paper will indicate how and when
those differences necessitate differing approaches.
1. What is a Debate?
A debate, of course, is a structured argument between
two teams of debaters. The materials that follow are
designed to help you organize educational debates -- -
designed to teach principles of argument (research,
speaking and refutation) in an atmosphere of good
sportsmanship. Materials dedicated to teaching
particular debate skills are cited in Part 6 of this
paper.
ROLE OF DEBATERS
In competitive contests, debaters are trying to
persuade the judges that their team should be
awarded the decision, as well as to score high
individual marks.
When a debate team receives a topic, its members
need to analyze the resolution carefully to determine
exactly what an affrmative team must prove in order
to discharge the burden of proof, then decide how to
go about this.
In either an impromptu or a prepared debate,
students should divide arguments and evidence
among themselves. For a prepared resolution, they
should so organize research responsibilities among
team members that they are thorough but do not
duplicate each others efforts. A deadline should be
set for initial research, after which the team members
should meet to discuss both sides of the resolution.
(In tournaments, teams are usually required to argue
each side of a resolution the same number of times in
regular rounds. Even if they are preparing for a single
exhibition debate, however, good debaters try to
anticipate what their opponents are likely to say.)
The team members need to consider all possible
interpretations of the resolution and adopt one
that they are prepared to defend; they must also be
prepared to attack other defnitions that opponents
may try to use. If one team attempts to use defnitions
that would produce a truism or a tautology, the other
must immediately challenge such an interpretation
as unreasonable. The frst affrmative speaker has the
duty to defne terms in the resolution; the negative
team is not bound to accept affrmative defnitions
but if it intends to rely on another interpretation, it
must make this clear in its frst speech.
The team should decide the order in which its
members will speak (not necessarily the same for
every debate) and the order in which points will be
presented. It should decide what the most important
points are for each side and how best to prove them.
(Unsubstantiated assertions carry little or no weight,
so three points with proof are usually better than ten
points without.)
Most debaters prepare for their debates by dividing
their paper into pro and con sides. Constructive points
must be divided between debaters and examples and
explanations found. In classroom debates students
have some diffculty thinking about ways they can
thoroughly explore a constructive point through
explanation or example. They need help with this just
as they need help with understanding the importance
of supporting details in writing essays. Even in class,
however, debaters should be encouraged to have no
more than two constructive points each. They need to
fll up their time with explanation and organizational
signposts. Because classroom debates inevitably
involve students who are new to debating the time
requirements should be reduced substantially. In
my grade 11 cross-x class debates the times are three
minutes for each constructive speech, two minutes
for each set of questions and one minute for each
rebuttal. In grade 12 the times can be increased by
up to one minute per category if the students have
been exposed to debate in grade 11.
By keeping track of what the opponents have argued
on the opposite side of the paper debaters can begin
to construct an effective rebuttal.
Competitive debaters should practice delivering their
speeches in conditions that simulate the actual debate
situation - before an audience, with heckling, etc.
They should not try to memorize speeches - rather
rehearse until they are familiar with their material.
Debaters should concentrate on communicating
when they speak, smile and take a deep breath
before beginning to speak, and look at the audience
COACHING DEBATE
C
o
a
c
h
i
n
g
and watch its reactions throughout a speech. They
should be careful not to speak too quickly, and pause
between points and for dramatic effect. They ought
not refer to other debaters by their given names;
rather address them in the third person (or by title
in Parliamentary debates).
During a contest, debaters should stay alert and
appear confdent at all times. (There is a fne line
between being confident and appearing to be
arrogant: the latter can alienate judges quickly.)
Debaters should listen carefully to their opponents
and make notes of exactly what they say, to facilitate
rebuttal. It demonstrates teamwork if they pass notes
or whisper to colleagues (except ones who have the
foor, as this is against the rules). Debaters should
be polite at all times, even if an offcial rules against
them or an opponent is rude to them.
2. Organizing and Administering your
Debate Club
The most important thing to keep in mind is that
debaters learn by doing. As the old saying goes,
Practice makes perfect. Dont take your students to
a tournament to observe: take them to participate.
High school debates in Canada usually operate at
four levels:
a) in-house debates, held at your school
between different team members;
b) exhibition debates against other schools,
arranged by telephoning another schools debate
coach and challenging its team to come over for a
debate;
c) inter-school leagues, in which schools debate
teams from other schools on a scheduled basis;
d) tournaments, to which a number of different
schools are invited, in which teams compete for
prizes or the right to represent the area at some other
tournament.
Because of the amount of work that organizing a
tournament requires, it is likely that there will be only
two or three in your area each year (although success
at these tournaments may qualify your debaters for
other tournaments). Some school debate clubs are
content with only two or three debates a year. Most,
however, want more than this, and that void can
be flled by either in-house debates or exhibition
debates against other schools. Neither requires much
organization - normally a room, three judges and a
time when everyone is free. Attending a tournament
is only slightly more diffcult: it normally requires
that a registration fee be paid, perhaps a form be
submitted by a particular deadline, and that the team
attend on the date of the tournament. Many School
Boards now require specifc protocols be followed
for all teams leaving the school, especially if staying
overnight. New coaches need to make sure they are
familiar with these protocols.
Little effort or experience is required to organize a
healthy debate club at your school. Organizing a
debate tournament is another story, and is something
not usually attempted by novice debate coaches.
These tournaments are, however, a valuable source
of revenue for your club and might be considered
when determining your budget for the year.
In my experience, it is best to have regular in-house
debates regardless of what else you do. The debates
may occur weekly, bi-weekly, monthly or whatever
is to the convenience of the club. If debates are held
regularly, debaters reserve the time for the activity
and interested spectators know when to come to
watch. When tournament dates are near, the regular
meeting can be used to rehearse your team. Before
sending a team off to a tournament, I would normally
see the team debate the tournament topic once or
twice and suggest whether I thought that the content
needed to be changed or tightened, whether the
speaking style was appropriate, and so forth.
3. Judging and Criticizing Debaters
A very important part of your job as a debate coach
is to observe your debaters debate and to tell them
what they are doing wrong - preferably in positive,
diplomatic terms! You will also be called on to judge
and criticize other debaters at tournaments.
Although you may be completely new to debate,
this is nonetheless something for which you are as
well qualifed as anyone. A debater who convinces
you has debated well; a debater who does not, has
not. Debate judging is subjective - a debater can
expect to fnd different judges reacting to the same
speech in different manners. But this is as it ought
to be: debating is not a closed subject which only
those in the know can judge; all members of the
public are people whom a debater may, in different
circumstances, wish to persuade. Debaters ability
to fulfll the differing expectations and demands
that different judges bring to the debate mirrors
their ability to persuade the public at large. So your
opinion as a novice is every bit as valid as the opinion
of somebody who has been coaching or watching
debate for a long time.
What may need refnement, however, is your ability
to identify the often subtle things about the debating
speeches that you found pleasing or not, so the
debaters can make changes in their presentations.
The balance of this part is directed to that end. If you
want further guidance, consult the teaching materials
noted at the end of this paper.
Judges are asked to evaluate a debate awarding about
one-third of the marks for each of three categories:
the content of the speech, the debaters presentation
(or delivery or style), and debating skills. Content
includes the debaters analysis and understanding
of the subject; presentation includes organization.
Debating skills include logic, the ability to rebut
the arguments of the other team, and technical
knowledge and practice of the rules. Of course, the
three categories are not quite distinct: for example,
poor content may detract from strong presentation,
or vice versa. However, it is useful for instructing
judges to break the debate into these major parts.
These criteria are used on most common debating
score sheets.
C
o
a
c
h
i
n
g
Topic Anything goes, but it should be controversial and worded as an affrmative statement
(of fact, value or policy). Usually referred to as the resolution, proposition, or Bill.
Cross examination style debates, the recommended style for teaching debate in the
classroom, may form resolutions in the form of questions.
Teams Two temporary coalitions (usually of two or three debaters a side) called the Affrmative
(Pro, Government or Proposers) and the Negative (Con, Opposition, or Opposers),
among other things ...
Dress Tournaments tend to encourage, but not require, business casual dress. Classroom
debates require less formality.
Tools Facts, charts, pictures, logic, humour, homilies, emotional appeals, dramatic delivery.
Words, words, words. But no weapons, please.
The single biggest difference between teaching and coaching debate lies in the
commitment and enthusiasm of the participants. In the classroom, many students
are more frightened by the prospect of speaking in front of their peers than by any
activity we might require them to do. To alleviate their fears, I encourage them to
script their constructive speeches entirely and to prepare about 10 questions each to
ask their opponents. I then have them practice enough so that they are not tied to
their texts during debates, but I do not require them to memorize their speeches. In
debate club coaches should encourage students to speak extemporaneously as soon
and as much as possible. In class the students need speak extemporaneously only in
response to questions and during the brief concluding rebuttal.
Objective Affrmative must prove the resolution, Negative rebut it. These roles are reversed
if the Negative introduces a Counterplan (in which case, the Negative assumes the
burden of proof).
Offcials The Moderator (Speaker in Parliamentary style) calls the debate to order, announces
the topic, introduces the debaters and offcials, outlines the rules, maintains order, asks
the judges to consider (and when desired, announce) their decision, congratulates the
debaters, thanks the judges and adjourns the debate. In classroom debates this role
should be taken by the teacher. He or she should read from the moderators script
but may shorten or modify it to suit the needs of the class. It is important to treat
the debate with dignity and some formality in order to get the students to take the
exercise seriously. This formality is far less important when coaching debate because
all club members have made a commitment to the activity.
The Timekeeper (Clerk in Parliamentary style) carefully keeps track of speaking
times, advises debaters (with cards or hand signals) how much speaking time remains,
and signals (usually by standing up) when the speaking time and any period of grace
have expired. Allowances should be made for interruptions. This role should be
performed by a student in classroom debates.
The Judges are usually adults who are expected to be non-partisan and to decide
which team won the contest on the basis of what the debaters said, disregarding
their own beliefs, prejudices, or special knowledge of the topic. Judges should sit
apart from and not confer with other judges before completing their Score Sheets.
In classroom debates students should be required to act as judges. In my grade 11
debating unit every student is required to debate once and judge once. Student marks
are averaged with the teachers mark to come up with the students grade for the unit.
In my debate club team members critique each other but do not assign point values
for practice debates.
Order of Speeches The Affrmative team enjoys the frst speech and the last word. The constructive
speeches alternate between the teams Affrmative, Negative, Affrmative ... while
rebuttals alternate between the teams Negative, Affrmative, Negative ... (In
Parliamentary style, only the Prime Minister has a separate rebuttal speech: all other
debaters must include any rebuttal in their constructive speeches.) Intermissions
between speeches are generally not encouraged as they can interfere with the
spontaneity of the debate. In the classroom I give teams two minutes between the end
of the constructive speeches and cross-examination portion of the debate to prepare
their summary and rebuttal.
Some basic rules of debate:
C
o
a
c
h
i
n
g
Rebuttal Attacking the other teams arguments and evidence and defending your own
(sometimes called refutation). This is the clash that characterizes good debating and
is encouraged throughout the debate (except during Cross-Examinations). In the
Cambridge format of rebuttal, each debater has a separate rebuttal speech; in Oxford
format, only one debater for each team has such a speech.
Speaking Times Vary, depending on the experience of the participants. It is highly desirable that all
debaters have equal speaking time in tournaments. In most championship debates,
the maximum speaking time is eight minutes per debater at the senior high school
level.
Styles of Debate Some of the most popular styles of debate throughout Canada are Academic, Cross-
Examination, Canadian Parliamentary, British Parliamentary and Worlds Style.
In Academic style, each team member gives a constructive speech. Depending on the
rebuttal format, one or all members of each team give a rebuttal-defence-summary
speech. There is then an opportunity for debaters to complain about rule violations
and having been misquoted or misrepresented by their opponents. Heckling may be
allowed, though it is probably wise not to introduce this feature until after novice
debaters acquire some experience.
In Cross-Examination style, the procedures are the same as those in Academic
style, though no heckling or points of order or privilege are allowed. After each
constructive speech, the debater who delivered it is questioned (cross-examined)
by an opponent. Strict rules govern the witness (debater being questioned) and
the examiner (questioner). After all speeches and cross-examinations, there is an
opportunity for debaters to complain about rule violations and having been misquoted
or misrepresented by their opponents.
In Parliamentary style, debaters assume Parliamentary roles (such as Prime Minister,
Leader of the Opposition) as they debate the Bill. Except for the Prime Minister, each
debater delivers a speech which is expected to include rebuttal; the Prime Minister has
a (shorter) opening speech and an Offcial Rebuttal. Debaters may heckle and raise
Points of Order and Points of Privilege. They may also raise Points of Information if
the member with the foor consents.
In British Parliamentary style four two-person compete simultaneously. In the high
school version of this format speaking times are fve minutes and speakers may be
interrupted during the middle three minutes by their opponents rising on points of
information. All teams must present new arguments with the last speaker, or party
whip, for each side summarizing the entire debate. This is a lively and popular style
with students and is one of two styles used for all university debating tournaments
in Canada.
Worlds Style requires three person teams with each member taking on a specifc role.
One member for each team delivers a fnal reply speech. Debates are enlivened by
frequent Points of Information raised throughout all but the respective reply speeches
which conclude the debates.
One distinct advantage shared by both parliamentary styles as well as Worlds style
is one reply or rebuttal speech per team. A disadvantage of Cross-X and Academic
styles, especially evident in debates of three aside, is the sometimes tiresome repetition
that accompanies the three summary/defense/rebuttal speeches. This repetition is
not, however, as evident in the best teams.
The reason that Cross Examination style works best in classroom debates is that novice
and/or reluctant and/or nervous debaters beneft from the formalized clash that
comes with the questioning period. It does not have to be created extemporaneously
as it does in the other formats.
C
o
a
c
h
i
n
g
Keep in mind the following when offering your
review of a debate:
CONTENT
You need to choose resolutions that are interesting
for your students, but do not require a greater skill
level or knowledge base than they are capable of. For
elementary students, I start with students should not
be allowed to watch television on school nights.
For older students I start with a banned or legalise
topic This house would ban boxing or legalize
prostitution or drugs or beauty pageants or
whatever might be of interest. These are entry
level topics (although they can be valuable for more
advanced debaters) because they have a yes-no
outcome. The arguments on each side can be simple
and still be effective.
I never suggest arguments to competitive debaters
Im not sure it helps them, as thats part of the learning
I want them to do. You can ask about examples, you
can challenge content and argumentation, and you
can critique what they have done. In the classroom
some suggestions may be made to prod students
having trouble but try to avoid doing their work
for them
In terms of what content to coach for, students
normally start off by advancing reasons, and then
(over time) learn to make arguments. There is a
difference. Increasing physical ftness is a reason
high school students should be required to take gym
through grade 12, but it is not an argument. An
argument requires two parts of analysis: to show
frst of all why something is desirable (ftness in our
example) and secondly that the proposal will achieve
it. An opposition debater may agree that ftness is
desirable but disagree that gym class will achieve it,
or argue that there is a better way to achieve it, or
argue that ftness is not desirable.
When evaluating the content of a debaters speech,
take a long view. The same debater will never have
exactly the same content in two different debates
- even if the debates are on the same topic - so he
or she will not beneft very much from an intricate
discussion of where his or her content succeeded or
failed. If the debater has poor research skills, the
way to correct this is to show him or her where and
how to fnd relevant information. But this should
be done while the debater is preparing for his or her
next debate rather than in a post mortem on what
has just fnished.
You do owe your debaters your assessment of their
content after a debate, however, so they can develop
an ability to gauge what sort of documentation is
adequate. Did each point have suffcient proof? It
is also important in my experience that you review
your notes of the debate with the debaters. A debater
may fnd it diffcult to know when he or she has
made a point effectively. For example, one debater
on a team will rebut an argument and the same point
will then be rebutted (unnecessarily) by a colleague.
So tell your debaters what points you thought each
team won - established through their reasoning and
evidence - and why.
PRESENTATION
Competitive debaters need to learn to speak mostly
without notes. I do not let even my novice debaters
use more than a single page of paper. This has
disastrous results in the short term because they are
nervous and inclined to forget important material.
In the medium term, however, it forces the debaters
to speak from notes (rather than reading something
they have written out). They need to get used to
writing points or headings, and then pulling up their
supporting material without notes. This is a skill
which is quickly learned. If you let debaters start
writing out their speeches, it will be hard to break
them of this.
Otherwise, regard public speaking as a longitudinal
skill. The material for a debate on climate change is
likely completely different from a debate on how to
get rid of dictators. So comments about content are of
limited use in a debate because the debater may never
debate that exact subject again. However, most of the
speaking mistakes a student makes will be repeated
again and again. So initially, this is a useful place to
critique. Generally:
Debaters need to slow down
Debaters need to vary their speed, volume
and tone
Debaters need to organize their argumentation
(signposting with a roadmap, and named points)
A debaters delivery is much less likely to change
dramatically from speech to speech. You therefore
are able to work on weaknesses in this category over
time, knowing that you will have a chance to see
the debater perform again and be able to evaluate
whether he or she has been able to correct any faults
you have identifed.

A debater must be audible, appear confdent, and
his or her voice should be interesting, of course.
Debaters should appear spontaneous and natural
and make frequent eye contact. But it is clear that the
ability to speak in public is more complex than that.
In this respect, however, your untrained reactions to
your debaters are valid guides to whether they are
succeeding or need improvement. If you think that
a debater is speaking too rapidly, tell him or her to
slow down. Tell debaters what they must do to make
a better impression on you, but also warn them that
different judges may have different expectations. Try
to have a variety of people help you to judge debates
from time to time, the more, the better, especially
those with expertise in pertinent felds.
ANALYSIS
This is usually equated on debating score sheets with
a debaters ability to understand the arguments made
in the debate (by both his or her team and opponents)
and the relationship between the arguments made
in the debate. The ability to recognize the areas of
agreement between the teams and to focus attention
on the central issues that are in dispute is part of
this. An effective way to teach this skill is to ask the
C
o
a
c
h
i
n
g
debaters to identify the key issues in the debate. I
ask this question before a debate, and again after,
and I expect each debater to be able to identify the
issues that both teams will raise. In reviewing my
notes on the debate with the debaters afterwards, I
try to identify the issues I thought were important,
especially if they were overlooked by one side or the
other, and to show how the issues ft together.
ORGANIZATION
Visible, clear organization is vital to a successful
debating speech. The essence of debate is controversy
- a disagreement between two teams. It is essential
that you as a judge are able to understand exactly
what points are being made by a team and which
opposition arguments have been answered. The
speech should have a clear introduction, middle
and conclusion. The transition between arguments
should be clear. The conclusion should be both a
summary of the team arguments and the debate to
that point, and an emphatic appeal for support.
REBUTTAL
There are three things to coach for: have students
clearly label or identify the argument they are
responding to, have them refute primarily arguments
and only if time permits should they refute facts,
and encourage them to have more than one line of
rebuttal if possible.
Rebuttal is not really a separate debate skill. It is
a specific occasion for a debater to use content,
presentation, analysis, logic and organization. But
because the key difference between debating and
public speaking is the necessity for debating speeches
to clash with each other, rebuttal is often singled out
for special attention on a debating score sheet.
Rebuttal is a compendious term which includes
both the re-building of ones own teams arguments,
and the attacking of the arguments of an opponent.
In each case the procedure should be the same, and
should consist of two stages. First, the debater should
recall for the audience the opposition criticism: My
friend told us that this plan would improve Canadas
credibility with NATO. (Too often debaters simply
launch into their reply and the audience is left
wondering what point is being answered). After
identifying the argument, the debater must answer it.
Does the debater address both parts in rebuttal and
does he or she succeed in neutralizing all important
opposition arguments?
Pay special attention to a debaters speaking skills
during rebuttal: this is a more spontaneous part of the
debate, and relatively strong delivery here can signal
that a debater is suffering in his or her constructive
remarks by being tied down to a prepared script.
DEBATE SKILLS
This category is used partly to evaluate a debaters
technical mastery of particular debate rules or
procedures. As such, it tends to be cut and dried:
a debater either knows the proper way to raise a
Point of Order or does not. You should ensure that
you and your debaters are thoroughly familiar with
the Rules of Debating (both general and those for
the particular style(s) employed) so that they do
not break them and also so that they know how to
protect themselves if their opponents break the rules.
Myths and misconceptions about the rules abound,
mainly because many debaters never bother to read
them. Apart from the Rules of Bilingual Debating,
there are only six pages of rules, and coaches should
review these carefully with their debaters before
tournaments.
Not every debate by your students will justify an
exhaustive review. Debaters who are new may need
to concentrate on basic skill development and be
unable to beneft from a detailed critique. In time,
however, most debaters will appreciate being offered
constructive criticism on these topics. I suggest
that you let different judges in the room deal with
different topics during their critiques. In that way the
debaters need not hear long, repetitive critiques but
will nonetheless fnd each topic covered. By having
different judges discuss content, speaking style, and
so on after different debates, debaters will obtain
the beneft of the different points of view that judges
bring to a debate.
In classroom debates I tend to emphasize that judges
pay attention to content and presentation only.
Debate skills are appropriate for more sophisticated
and experienced debaters. In content I tell student
judges to listen for arguments, evidence and examples
that convince. I think that organization has both
content and presentation implications. If content is
well organized it is easier to follow.
In terms of presentation I tell my student judges to
pay attention to such things as pace, volume, and
emphasis. I tell them that they should watch for eye
contact and that debaters should not be too tied to
their texts.
Marks for my grade 11 students range between 80-
95. Because this is a diffcult task for many students
I do not want any of them to be discouraged by poor
marks. However, I do impose signifcant penalties
on students who fail to fll their time during their
constructive speeches. These speeches should be
three minutes long and I insist that they all be at least
two and one half minutes. I also allow them thirty
seconds grace time. This allows students to make
sure they practice enough to confdently know they
will fll at least the minimum time required. Students
who fall short of the required time are penalized
two points for every fve seconds short. These rules
should be made clear to students at the beginning
of the unit.
Though students judge one another in class debates
I do not allow debaters to know how they have been
marked by their peers and the only comments they
are privy to are mine.
4. Tournament Etiquette
Sooner or later, you are likely to attend a debating
tournament. Let me set out for your information
C
o
a
c
h
i
n
g
some dos and donts.
First, realize that the tournament organizer needs your
consideration. Submit your registration forms by the
deadline, or early; pay your fees when required, and
do what you can to make his or her life easier. If you
say you are bringing a team to the tournament, show
up with one: the entire draw is predicated on your
living up to your word. If you let the tournament
organizer down, that necessitates substantial changes
to the draw, puts the tournament behind schedule,
and inconveniences every team attending.
Second, once at the tournament, put yourself in the
place of the organizer. He or she may be new at the
job and in any event is probably in need of all the
help you can provide. Offer to do those things youd
want help with if you were running the tournament
and expect to be asked to judge and to supervise
certain activities.
Offer your debaters moral support between rounds,
but dont coach them. In particular, it is unethical to
listen to their future opponents and then brief your
debaters on the case they will meet. It is also bad form
(and often does more harm than good) to suggest to a
debater that he or she should suddenly begin making
drastic changes in his or her presentation. Your
debaters deserve your support and encouragement,
but save the detailed de-briefng until you return
home.
During a debate, you must do nothing to indicate
to your debaters how they should proceed: passing
notes or signalling is improper. (Before the debate
begins it is normally proper to counsel your team
on which side of the resolution they should choose,
if they have a choice, or what style of debate they
should opt for. It is improper, however, to help
debaters with the preparation of an impromptu
debate. When in doubt, ask.)
If during the tournament you see a debate in which
a clear abuse is taking place (for example, Points of
Order are getting out of hand), in rare cases it may
be appropriate for you to interrupt the debate as
a judge. With that exception, however, you must
not interrupt a debate once it is in progress, and of
course you may never interrupt a debate in which
one of your own debaters is taking part. You must
not attempt to convince another judge how to score
a debate - his or her independent opinion is sought -
although if you are experienced, you might feel able
to answer a question concerning the rules or some
similar matter. If in doubt, refer questions to the
tournament organizer. You must not speak to judges
who are judging a debate in which your debaters
have taken part until the judges have completed and
submitted their score sheets.
Some tournaments solicit a critique of debates you
have judged. If this is done, please keep your public
comments brief so as not to delay the next round of
debates. Debating is intended to be educational,
and most debaters appreciate constructive criticism.
Please restrict your public comments to general
remarks and, where possible, to positive remarks.
Any negative or personal comments you have to offer
are best given privately or, when the debate ballot so
provides, in writing.
Even if you disagree with some aspect of the
administration of a tournament, such as judging in
a particular case, you should not publicly criticize it,
especially not in front of your or other students. This
is not good sportsmanship and does not set a good
example for them. You are welcome to complain
privately to the Provincial Co-ordinator, however,
and such input is welcome as it helps the debating
organization to improve its practices.
5. Practice
Debaters seem to need about ffty debates before
everything gels and they are suddenly pretty good
at all skills. The sooner they get their ffty debates
in, the sooner theyll be good. That means lots of
debating and they learn bad habits as well as good,
so debates against other debaters who are better are
more valuable than debates against weaker debaters.
The best learning comes from debating someone
who is a little bit better, not a lot better, than they
are. Good debaters are not born, they plagiarize. By
debating against someone who is good, they learn to
model that debaters technique. I dont mean that
they lift their arguments (they probably wont do
the same topic again any way); they imitate what
they do. That means that as a priority, a novice club
needs to go to tournaments or workshops where they
will debate against or be paired with good debaters.
Debaters are able to model good debating they have
seen elsewhere much faster than they can learn it
themselves.
While very successful debaters have better technique,
I think most of the technique only comes from time
and experience. So I coach for analysis: more thought
about the resolution is what normally separates the
decent debaters from the outstanding. I review the
score sheets and comments from every debate my
students attend. Almost without exception (despite
differences of judging and style) every students
average mark improves every tournament. One of
your tasks as coach is to reassure students who have
had their egos bruised that they are getting better,
and to show (from your longer view of their progress)
that success is at hand. Almost without exception,
everyone stinks when they start. The ones who place
frst have simply kept at it until they got better. You
need to help your students see it.
6. Other Materials
The Canadian Student Debating Federation is
an organization dedicated to promoting and
coordinating high school debate in Canada. It
has affliated organizations in each province and
territory.
Please dont hesitate to call on the Federation if we
can assist your programme in any way. In addition to
offering advice, we will attempt to supply you with
the names of schools in your area which participate
in our programme.
C
o
a
c
h
i
n
g
Nova Scotia Debating Society materials are available
from: http://www.debatingsociety.ca/ns/
Other debating materials may be found at: https://
sites.google.com/site/debateresourcesns/

Brian Casey, 1984

John Filliter, 1995
David Stewart, 2011

C
o
a
c
h
i
n
g
C
o
a
c
h
i
n
g
Meet regularly.
When you are starting a new club, it will be hard to
get enough people to come out. Generally, people
who tend to be interested in debating are already
involved in a ton of other activities. You need to
carve a space out for yourself on the extra-curricular
schedule. Having a regular meeting provides
stability to your club that people can then work
around with the rest of their very busy lives. It is
inevitable that whatever time you pick will confict
with something else. Thats OK. Not everyone will
have time for debating. Once a week after school for
about one and a half hours is ideal.
Have a debate at every club
meeting.
It doesnt need to be serious and it doesnt need to
be long but you really should have a debate every
time you get together. First of all this gives everyone
valuable practice and gets people in the habit of
getting up and talking. You want to give a many
people as possible the chance to debate and you
want to give everyone as much practice as possible.
Secondly, it is much easier to frame lessons in terms
of practical experience than theoretical situations.
The only way to get good at debating is to debate
a lot.
Watch a demonstrati on
round.
If possible ask a nearby club of more experience
debaters to come and give a demonstration debate at
you club. Or go visit them or whatever works best. It
is a good idea to see some debates done well so that
you have an idea as to what youre striving for.
Debate!
Its all well and good to read up on the different styles
of debating and listen to all the seminars that are
available and so on, but there is no better experience
than being in a debate yourself. Kick of your shoes,
pick a fun topic, team up with one of your students
and get your hands dirty. Its fun for students to take
their teachers on and its good practice for you to
help you get your head around some of the stranger
concepts of debating.
Go to tournaments.
Tournaments are the focus of competitive debating
as well as being a fantastic learning opportunity. In
one weekend tournament your students will get as
much debating experience as they would get in six
club meetings. In addition, many tournaments will
allow judges to give constructive criticism at the end
of rounds; this offers a valuable alternate perspective
on the performance of your teams. Finally, debaters
will have the opportunity to debate against new
people so they will see new tricks and techniques
as well as getting experience dealing with tactics
theyve never seen before.
Ask around.
In general, the people involved with debating are a
talkative bunch. This shouldnt surprise you, theyre
debaters! Take advantage of this fact by getting them
to talk to you about tips and tricks for coaching.
A lot of strange thing can happen in a debate and
experienced coaches have probably dealt with a
similar situation. They will probably also have some
good ideas on what resources you might fnd useful
in any given situation. Speaking of resources, check
out the following web site to get you started.
https://sites.google.com/site/debateresourcesns/
Make it fun.
Debating is fun. If you arent having fun while you
are debating, something is wrong. Debaters who
have fun tend to debate a lot and the only way to get
good at debating is to debate a lot. So make sure that
you and your students are having a good time.
Tim Maly
ADVICE TO NEW DEBATE COACHES
C
o
a
c
h
i
n
g
Guidelines for Coaches and Debaters
L
ike any activity, there are a number of
unwritten assumptions that are part of
debating tournaments in Manitoba. That can
be confusing for coaches and students who are
unaware of them. This document is intended to
provide some additional information about what to
expect at tournaments. If you have any questions or
suggestions, please contact the executive.
1. There is an initial maximum number of teams
allowed per school, but you are welcome to ask
to bring more. If you ask and there is space, the
organizer will let you know how many additional
teams you are allowed to send.
2. Unless it states otherwise on the invitation,
schools need to bring one judge per 2-person team
that they send. Judges do not need to be experienced.
Judges for senior events may not be high school
students. Judges for junior events may be in grade
10 or older.
3. Once the topic is given out, teams must prepare
for impromptu debates on their own without help
from pre-prepared notes, electronic devices, debaters
on other teams, coaches, adults, etc.
4. Coaches should not judge their own students,
unless the organizer has specifically approved,
something that will only happen when there is no
other option.
5. If coaches are just watching rather than judging
a debate, they should not make comments during or
after the debate, although they may make comments
to their own students privately.
6. Normal dress for debaters is tie and dress
shirt, dress pants and dress shoes for boys, and
the equivalent for girls. That is an expectation and
should be encouraged but is not required, so it
should not be a barrier to someone debating.
7. Resolutions must be defned in a straightforward
way, i.e. an interpretation that the average person on
the street would accept as a reasonable interpretation
of the resolution. In some cases the organizer may
limit the defnition and those limitations must be
followed. Defnitions cannot use time/place sets (i.e.
specify a particular place or time that the debate will
take place in, e.g. the British cabinet during the Battle
of Britain) or squirrel (i.e. change the meaning of the
resolution to something different) the resolution,
unless the organizer explicitly allows it.
8. Students may use points of order or privilege but
this would be a very rare thing reserved for extreme
cases, e.g. a point of personal privilege because the
student was signifcantly misrepresented. Points of
information are not allowed in the novice categories
but are encouraged in the open category. As a
guideline, ideally students should offer 2 per speech
but they should not be too frequent, i.e. at least 20
seconds between them. Students should accept 1 or
2 per speech. Students do not have to use points of
information but students who use them well should
get additional marks.
9. If there are an odd number of teams in a category,
the organizer may move a team from one category
to another to balance numbers or can use a swing
team, i.e. an additional team to balance numbers.
In order to balance numbers, the organizer may
split a team, but only with the coachs agreement,
so that each team member debates on their own as
a one person team.
10. Hybrid teams, i.e. teams with members from 2
different schools, are not normally allowed but can
be permitted by the organizer if there are students
whose partners dont show up, or if a school does
not have enough debaters to feld a full team, or for
a swing team. Hybrid teams should not be used to
produce super-teams, i.e. the best debaters from 2
different schools in one team. That being said, the
organizer may allow hybrid teams even if those
reasons dont apply, if they make that clear on the
invitation so that everyone has the same chance,
and if the event is not a provincial championships
or qualifer.
11. Awards are presented to the top speaker from
each school, with open taking precedence over
novice, and to the top speakers and teams overall.
Usually the team awards are based on total speakers
points rather than win-loss record, although some
tournaments use win-loss.
12. Organizers try to avoid scheduling teams from
the same school against each other, although it
sometimes can occur.
John Robinson
WHAT TO EXPECT AT A TOURNAMENT
C
o
a
c
h
i
n
g
T
he debate community depends on new coaches
taking the plunge and organizing debate events.
It is rewarding: your students get to attend a
tournament without any travel or hotel cost, and
other coaches will lionize you, briefy. Experienced
coaches are always willing to offer advice, and will
share the burden if they can.
Some of the advice which follows is cribbed from a
piece I wrote in 1976 with Daphne Gray-Grant; no
acknowledgement whatever is offered for stealing
her work.
Less formal events
At Sacred Heart, I host two kinds of event with
little requirement for organization. Twice a year,
we have a novice workshop no one needs to
register in advance, we simply assign partners from
those who show up, trying to pair students from
different schools, to allow some cross pollination
at different levels of ability and force students from
different schools to get to know each other. We have
experienced students comment on the debates, so
there is no tabulation required. The experienced
debater also acts as moderator. Pairings for teams
are random. If we do not have an even numbers of
teams, we have a 3-a-side debate in one room.
Inter school debates are also important (whether with
a single other school or several) because students
take the process more seriously if they are facing
teams from somewhere else. Inter school debates
also offer tournament experience for my back bench
(who may not be able to participate in a tournament
which only registers a few teams from each school).
These events too can be done with assigned partners
from different schools and random pairings, but at
Sacred Heart I usually let students debate in school
teams. The challenge for an event of this kind is
fnding the necessary number of judges. I dont
award prizes or determine results, and on that basis,
someone to offer comments in each round is all that
is required. I normally put my front bench to work
doing that. You might consider using an event like
this to train or prepare parents to become judges at
a real tournament.
More formal tournaments
Let me discuss some of the more important issues.
The organizational requirements, of course, depend
on the size, and scope of the event.
In my view, the three keys to a successful debate
tournament are the resolutions, the judging and the
tabbing. Of course, it would be lovely if everything
about the event is perfect. But it is normally those
three details that debaters notice when they go
wrong.
Resolutions Many excellent resolutions are
not suitable to be debated impromptu, others are not
capable of being debated by high school students,
some are not capable of being debated in the limited
time constraints available. Younger students may
lack the sensitivity to debate some topics (which are
appropriate by these standards) without sounding
offensive.
More commonly, the resolution is one sided, at least
in a special debate sense. If the arguments on one
side can be very briefy explained, the resolution is
probably not suitable for a debate. That is the case if
there is one very important argument which in real
life carries the day. The reason we dont give every
public school student an iPad is cost. However, once
a team states that argument in a debate, they dont
have anything else to say. So a debate which appears
one-sided because of cost, may in fact be one sided
in favour of the other team (who can fll 10 minutes
of constructive speaking time talking about why it
would be great to give each student an iPad).
It is not enough that there be good arguments for each
side; the arguments need to fll the allotted time, too.
Cost a key, real-life argument is generally not a
useful argument in a debate (because the costs are
not capable of being decided by the judge internally,
in the debate room, and without research).
Evaluating whether a topic is well balanced requires
some signifcant debate experience. I expect it will
take some time before you are comfortable in setting
debate topics that are appropriate for your event.
Bounce your suggestions off experienced coaches
who may be able to suggest tweaks or changes or
identify problems you had not foreseen.
Judging In a perfect world, any adult would be a
suffcient debate judge, because convincing an open
minded person of reasonable intelligence is the goal
of the high school debater. Unfortunately, there is
more to it than that. Untrained judges fnd it diffcult
to weigh content and refutation. The temptation
is for public speaking skills to be rewarded, rather
than content or refutation. The novice judge can
be fooled by a carefully prepared speech, which is
well written and well delivered but fails to respond
to the case on the opposing side. A debate is not
just public speaking: content and refutation are of
similar importance. Following and parsing the logic
of a high school debate speech may require some
experience.
There are no short cuts to coming up with qualifed
judges. People with debate experience (coaches,
university debaters, and older high school debaters)
are best. My experience is that each year I get about
two-thirds of last years judges to help out, which
means I am constantly trying to fnd more people.
Because my events grow from year to year, I am
always prepared to trade favours for anyone who is
willing to judge for me. Happily, university debaters
are a wonderful resource, and the experience of the
TOURNAMENT ORGANIZING
C
o
a
c
h
i
n
g
judges who return from year to year continues to
increase.
I do run a judges workshop in advance of my
tournament which helps a little, and I try to assign
judges so that better judges see more important
debates. For the judges workshop, I talk about the
three things we evaluate (content, refutation and
public speaking is the way I put it), have a shortened
debate with some of my own students (with a wide
range of ability) and then talk about what mark each
speech should receive and why.
Although conferral among judges does not work in
Nova Scotia, I think you can encourage the novice
judges to speak to more experienced judges after
they have scored the round.
Because I post results electronically on the web,
novice judges can take a look at their scores and
compare them with others in the room if they wish to
do so. I have also put up an electronic and a printed
briefng on the Donahoe site (https://sites.google.
com/site/donahoecup/briefng-for-judges). Im
not sure many judges used it, but it is an alternative
to having them give up the time for an in person
briefng.
Tabbing The subject of tabbing deserves a
separate essay (actually two), and they follow
this article. As an organizational consideration,
I encourage you to build in time for errors to be
corrected. At the Donahoe I do fve rounds of debate
on Saturday, and have all of Saturday evening to
check the tab and the break. We still make mistakes,
but fewer than if we had to announce the results
without the luxury of several hours to check their
accuracy.
Other details:
Awards Tournaments recognize the different
levels of skill of different debaters. That does not
require expensive awards, but it does require at least
reading out the name of the most successful debaters.
I encourage recognizing the best student from each
school if time permits. I think there is a value in
publishing the results on the web, because it is a
cheap way to offer some enduring recognition.
Billeting I think the headaches associated with
billeting make it an unlikely feature of most events.
Apart altogether from the difficulty of finding
families at your school to host a student, a number of
schools prohibit the billeting of their students. Those
that permit their students to billet have a number
of different (and conficting) requirements from
billeting in pairs, to criminal record checks and so on.
By all means, undertake it if you wish and are able,
but you can anticipate substantial administrative
challenges. This may be an easier undertaking in
a smaller community, or one where a local service
club is prepared to undertake the organizational
headache.
Cost the largest driver of tournament expense
is meals. Ideally, a tournament should have more
than one judge per room, and a separate moderator
or timekeeper for each room. What quickly occurs
is that there are more personnel who do not pay
for lunch than who do pay. (A two person team
of debaters is paying not simply for their own
lunch, but for the lunch for the moderator, one or
two judges and sometimes for spectators). Even
if lunch costs only $10 per person, that generates a
team registration fee of $45 if there are three judges,
a timer and a moderator to feed. If you offer two
meals at $10, that demands a reg fee of $90 per team!
You get the idea. The reason some tournaments
have fnancial surprises is often because of the large
number of people who we feed for free. On the other
hand, I dont think it is reasonable to invite someone
to come and judge for the day and not offer them a
free lunch.
Date of your event -- Religious holidays
should be avoided (Easter, Passover, Rosh Hashanah
to name a few). A number of important regional or
national tournament dates are set in advance, and
will compete against your tournament for debaters
if the dates are close or overlap. (I have a schedule
for Nova Scotia and national events here, which I
try to keep current: https://sites.google.com/site/
shshdebate/schedule).
Fund raising I dont raise funds for my
tournaments (in part because I dont want to interfere
with general school fundraising, and in part because
I think that is more appropriate when we are sending
a student away somewhere). I know from discussion
with other coaches that some communities are quite
enthusiastic about supporting them, and of course
if you are in a position to do so, it both reduces the
costs associated with the event and involves the
community in it.
Hospitality Depending on the scale of the
event, it may be appropriate to organize social
activities for debaters or adults. In my experience,
debaters generally like to talk so a successful social
activity is one where they can do so. Loud music
which interferes with conversation is less successful
here than with some other audiences.
Hotel arrangements Hotels will frequently
offer a group rate, including a free room or two if
you fnd it useful for your purposes. I fnd it easier
to let each of the teams or schools make their own
hotel arrangements. However, there is a signifcant
beneft for independent schools if you make all of the
arrangements centrally. Your school pays GST and
you are eligible for an input credit for the GST or
HST paid to the hotel for the hotel bill. In effect, the
school can give you back the HST on the hotel bill.
That refund is a source of free money for funding
the tournament. In Halifax some hotels decide to
subsidize their undertaking by extravagant charges
for audio visual and other services. Watch for that
in the pricing.
C
o
a
c
h
i
n
g
Invitation and Registration One of the
practical issues, of course, is getting people to come
to your event. Coaches are creatures of habit, and it
will take a few years before they discover that your
event is being held. Email has greatly simplifed
both the process of notifying coaches and the process
of harassing them to ensure they have registered.

Recognize that coaches bringing teams to your
tournament suffer from the same practical
shortcoming you do: they work with kids who are
not always able to commit numbers can fuctuate
until the last minute. Indeed, I have had teams leave
during an event, so expectations that numbers are
stable or predictable are unreasonable.
In my experience the easiest and cheapest way to
deliver information about a tournament is by putting
a small website up on Google sites. The process is
free, and not particularly diffcult. Go here to start:
https://sites.google.com/
Once the information is up, you can email people a
link to the site. I go a further step and have google
docs handle the registrations. It is much easier than
putting this in a spreadsheet yourself, although it
pre-supposes a certain level of computer literacy in
your registrants.
My site for the Donahoe Cup is here: https://sites.
google.com/site/donahoecup/home - please steal
whatever you wish from the site. The google docs
form is here:
https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/gform?key
=0AogTPBfUcKjgdEZxblY5NU5XZlpxSjkxZGtUR
S02RGc&hl=en_US
which when completed automatically turns into an
online form (there is a place at the bottom to see the
published form), for example: https://docs.google.
com/spreadsheet/viewform?formkey=dE9kMVJV
VFV4YWczNGpqRnlNbE9Kd1E6MQ
which when completed automatically turns into this
excel spreadsheet:
https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/ccc?key=0
AogTPBfUcKjgdHdtUVM1Mm50dTl6YUxDaGtT
VWZHZVE#gid=0
By doing the registration electronically, I dont have
to transfer any information to a central document, it
is accessible to me whether I am at home or the offce
or school, and there are no accidental typographical
errors which change which student spells their name
with a K or is allergic to shellfsh. There are other
electronic forms out there, and of course, email
registration may be all you need.
It would be splendid if you were provided with the
names of the team members in advance, but it is
rarely possible for those details to remain unchanged
the day before the event. Im normally delighted if I
just know the approximate number of teams coming,
never mind their exact membership.
Meals I am lucky to have someone else organize
the meals. Her advice: many students have food
allergies or religious reasons to avoid particular
foods. Your food supplier may not be used to those
issues and some care must be taken. Find out in
advance whether the supplier provides serving
utensils, plates and glasses.
Moderators It is quite challenging for a
judge who is new at judging to keep track of each
debaters speaking time, judge the debate and act as
moderator. My advice is to train your junior debaters
or junior high students to act as moderators if that
is possible. (We offer a number of incentives and
bribes to secure help from non-debaters). If it is
not possible to have someone else time the debate, a
timing device which keeps track of the time for each
speech, is easier to use than a conventional watch.
Sacred Heart and the Nova Scotia Debating Society
have purchased stop watches (which tend to go
missing after events) but the cost is about $6 per
stop watch so I think it is still a worthwhile expense.
Scripts are available for the style of debate please
help yourself to the ones here: https://sites.google.
com/site/debateresourcesns/scripts
There is also a document on the Donahoe site which
you are welcome to use which has the script for that
event.
Permission & Liability releases In Nova
Scotia, volunteers are statutorily protected from
liability. However, you will need to comply with
the requirements and protocols of your school or
school board regardless of where you live, and may
need a liability release or permission form. Those
documents are only useful for the risks which are
known and explained when they are signed, so I
caution you against any last minute changes to your
program which introduce new risks.
Personnel Many hands make light work. It
takes a little while as a debate coach to accumulate
the helpers you need for a tournament, and to learn
the strengths each has for a task like this, and of
course if youre short handed you need to work
with what you have. The meals and meal clean up
normally take place while everyone is debating, so
that normally needs to be delegated. The tabbing
similarly happens while other things are going on.
Both of those jobs need someone else to run. Other
tasks to delegate if you can: briefng and assigning
judges, registering teams and judges.
Results It is faster and easier and cheaper to
scan the score sheets and post them to a google
website than it is to make paper copies, sort them
and distribute them, but of course, do which ever
you please. Debaters desperately want to know
every comma of their performance and will study
their scores and comments with an intentness usually
reserved for neurosurgery. I use these two sites for
posting results, which means I can take them down
C
o
a
c
h
i
n
g
and put them back up after everything is checked:
https://sites.google.com/site/donahoecupresults/
home and
h t t p s : / / s i t e s . g o o g l e . c o m / s i t e /
novascotiadebatingsociety/home. It is easy to
design a similar site.
Another alternative is to give every debater a
dropbox to access and then move the results to
the drop box when the debate results are public:
https://www.dropbox.com/. (There are fees for
more than fve installations, I believe).
Signage It is in your interest that each round
begin on time, or as close to time as possible. That
means that it is important that each room be easy
to fnd, or that you have guides, maps or other
strategies to ensure people fnd their way quickly. By
defnition, the event is one with judges, debaters and
perhaps moderators from other schools. Anything
you can do to reduce the time lost between rounds
(including, as a result of lost souls), helps.
Schedule Chris George, one of the fnest minds
of Canadian debating, observes that tournaments
dont run late although sometimes the schedule is
wrong.
Put differently, you need to build time into the
schedule for (a) the initial delay in running the
pairings caused by one or two teams or several
judges arriving late; (b) the time taken to tab each
round if bracketing is employed; (c) the delay
after a particular room has had a judge get lost. A
frequent strategy is to build in a little extra time at
the lunch hour, and at any snack break. If my lunch
is scheduled for 12 noon, Ive instructed the caterers
to serve between 12.30 and 12.45 and timed the
afternoon rounds on that assumption. I assume I
will be running at least 30 minutes late by lunch time,
and try to make up that time then. It is challenging
to run more than two rounds in the morning and
two in the afternoon, unless your tabulator is Chris
George.
Score sheet There are a number of score
sheets in general use. While I would make an
argument for using my score sheet, I think the score
sheet in general use in your debate community
probably trumps bringing one in from elsewhere.
The purpose, after all, is to provide judges in your
community with a score sheet, and one they are
familiar with will probably produce better results
than trying to get them to use one they have not seen
before. The one I use at the Donahoe is available
on that website (https://sites.google.com/site/
donahoecup/score-sheet), and you are welcome to
use it if you like.
General advice
- Have a spare resolution in case disaster strikes and
someone has recently used your topic elsewhere,
or because of some problem you need to drop a
prepared topic
- Have a few extra rooms available, just in case
- I find it easier to foresee problems if I have a
detailed, minute by minute schedule of exactly what
will happen on the tournament day
- Have a list of emergency contact information
- Have a list of the allergy information with you
- Have a list of the teams that owe you money and
receipts for those who have paid
- Think about the following details as you approach
the tournament:
Train moderators
Print scripts for Moderators
Prepare resolutions (and power point slides, or
whatever announcement process you will use)
Advance judges briefng
People to handle the registration table
Packages for the debaters (name tags, receipts,
etc)
Someone to brief judges and debaters on the
day
Someone to run the tab room
Someone to set up the classrooms
Someone to set up the IT required
Scrap Paper for Judges
Runners to collect score sheets
Someone to set up snacks and food
Someone to register judges
Someone to regjster moderators
Mechanical information for debaters
(Where to go after each round, whether adjudication
is open or closed, any details about washrooms,
whether electronic devices are prohibited, timing of
the break announcement)
C
o
a
c
h
i
n
g
A
t some point, you may be pressed into helping
in the tab room or running one yourself. I
thought it might be in order to talk about the
practical aspects of tabbing, apart from a particular
program.
Tabbing has a practical purpose: to ensure that
initially debaters face teams from different schools,
and thereafter debate against debaters of nearly
equal ability.
(I appreciate that some tournaments run randomly
paired rounds, but I presume you are not reading this
to learn how to generate random numbers).
The nuts and bolts
If the tournament is bracketing teams, the essential
piece of information is to record and track wins and
losses. Apart from some of the specialized programs
identifed later, a simple excel program (when you
assign a 1 to the team that wins and a 0 to the
team that loses) can do that for you. At the end of
each round, you can simply sort the teams based on
the number of wins.
As a second step, you will likely need to track the
speaker points for each team (so the highest ranking
2-0 team can face the lowest ranking 2-0 team). If you
can use a spreadsheet to sort the teams in a particular
bracket, you are then set.
For a small event, thats all you need.
Programs to assist with tabbing
There are of course a variety of programs which
pair teams, assign judges and produce a draw for a
debating tournament. In Canada, the pre-eminent
program for pairing two person teams is Chris
Georges CG tabs. For those who wish to run a BP
tournament, Tabbie is a web based draw software.
Finally, if your objective is to rank individual
speakers, you can use an excel spreadsheet.
All of the programs are linked here: https://sites.
google.com/site/debateresourcesns/tabbing
Decisions
There are some decisions to make in deciding how
to tab a tournament. Let me canvas the choices
briefy.
(1) Points or win loss record? Most Canadian
tournaments bracket based on win loss record.
Because judges are not perfectly consistent in
identifying a speech which deserves an 82,
bracketing on points may simply identify which
debaters had the more generous judges. It is believed
that generous and stingy judges might agree on
which team won the debate, and therefore, it is more
reliable to bracket based on win loss.
(2) Low point wins? Some tournaments allow a team
which has lower speaker points to win the round,
others require that the higher pointing team win the
round. The problem normally arises when one team
has the 1
st
and 4
th
best speaker on it, and the other has
the 2
nd
and 3
rd
. In that case, regardless of who won
the argument a particular team may have higher
individual point totals. It is tidy to prevent low point
wins (because then win loss and point totals match).
However it means that the best debater in the round
has his or her score lopped to correspond to the fact
that his partner lost the round for the team. If we
are awarding individual scores and recognizing
individual performance, I am uncomfortable with
artifcially altering the number that would otherwise
be appropriate for that individual performance.
(3) Ties? It is possible to allow ties, or to prohibit
them. The arguments are that ties are untidy and
mess up the correspondence between win loss and
speaker points, and that if the debate is a tie, the
team bearing the burden of proof loses. In real life,
trials do not end in a tie. On the other hand, most
bracketing systems function fne if both teams are
given the win.
(4) Folding the bracket. At most tournaments, the
bracket is folded (which means that the best team
in the bracket debates against the weakest team in
the bracket). If the bracket is not folded, then the 2
nd

best team at the tournament may be beaten by the
best team (or vice versa) and drop down into a lower
bracket, where they are dominant. Folding does a
better job of ensuring that the teams which move to
a higher bracket really are stronger.
(5) Pull ups. Bracketing pre-supposes that an even
number of teams occupy each bracket. Otherwise,
you need to pull up (or pull down) a team from a
different bracket. If that is done, you then need to
decide who the pull up debates against. Does the
pull up face the strongest team in the bracket? Or
a team in the middle? Most of the tournaments
feature a pull up hitting the team in the middle of
the bracket.
PRACTICAL TABBING
C
o
a
c
h
i
n
g
N
ew debaters sometimes fnd the pairings at debating tournaments mysterious. Let me try to shed some
light.
Tournaments are either bracketed (which means that teams with a similar win-loss record are matched against
each other) or randomly paired. Random pairings of course are easier and can be done in advance of the
tournament.
The attraction of bracketing is that it allows teams of nearly equal ability to debate against each other. That
has two benefts it should produce a better debate because the teams are evenly matched, and it should help
determine which team is better. Instead of wondering whether one team simply had slightly more generous
judges, pairing the close teams against each other allows a winner to be decided unambiguously. The judge
may be wrong, but since the same judge or judges saw both teams, we know that someone doing so preferred
one team over the other.
In a Canadian Parliamentary style tournament (CP), the bracketing is based on win-loss: for example, the
teams with four wins are matched up. In a British Parliamentary tournament, bracketing is done based on point
totals. The teams with 12 points are matched up. More on that in a moment.
Assuming there are no ties, and all rounds after round 1 are bracketed, this is the result of a 5 round tournament
with 32 teams in CP style:
Assuming the tournament has quarter fnals, the top eight teams advance, which means that the team with 5
wins, the teams with 4 wins and 2 of the teams with 3 wins advance. A table like this can be used to calculate
how many teams with each win-loss record will break. In this example, the teams which have four wins after
Round 4 are certain to advance to the quarters regardless of what happens in Round 5. (A round in which the
teams are certain to advance regardless of outcome is called a Brahmin round).
Back tabbing is the name given to trying to fgure out the top teams by looking at the pairings. Typically, the
bracket is folded: after round 1 there are sixteen teams with 1 win, and 16 teams with no wins. The team with
the highest point totals with 1 win is paired with the team with 1 win with the lowest point totals.
Different policies are pursued when there are an odd number of teams in the bracket. For example, if 5 teams
have the same win-loss record, they cannot be paired against each other. Another team must be pulled up;
often the pull up is put against the middle team in the bracket, but some pairings will put the pull up against
the best team.
If you put this information together with what you know from an open adjudication for a round or two it is
possible to calculate quite precisely what is happening. For instance, if you had one win and one loss in the
two rounds with open adjudication and you dont know the result of round three, but in round four you are
paired against a team with two wins in the open adjudication, you can anticipate that you won round three or
were the pull up in round four.
Similarly, by watching whether the team you faced is against a tougher team in the next round, or an easier
one, you may be able to determine whether you won or lost. You can take comfort in your record if you draw
a very strong team, because it means you are probably both doing very well.
TABBING AND BACK TABBING
After Rnd 1 After Rnd 2 After Rnd 3 After Rnd 4 After Rnd 5 Wins
1 5
2 5 4
4 8 10 3
8 12 12 10 2
16 16 12 8 5 1
16 8 4 2 1 0
C
o
a
c
h
i
n
g
British Parliamentary
A BP tournament assigns a point total, based on your rank in the room. The reasons for awarding a particular
ranking are dealt with in the essay on BP style. The ranks have the corresponding point total shown:
1
st
place 3 points
2
nd
place 2 points
3
rd
place 1 point
4
th
place 0
Bracketing still occurs, but round two should put all of the 3 point teams against each other, all of the 2 point
teams against each other and so on. The result is that teams quickly start facing teams of similar ability. This is
more apparent than real, however; the difference between being on 6 points and being on 4 points may have
nothing to do with your own debating in the round and everything to do with mistakes made by the other team
on your side of the house.
To make the spread of teams more predictable, I have done the draw here with 256 teams. (You will likely never
encounter a 256 team tournament). Even at that size, round fve is an approximation, because it is not possible
to forecast which team will win when a pull up occurs):
After Rnd 1 After Rnd 2 After Rnd 3 After Rnd 4 After Rnd 5 Points
14
1 13
1 3 12
4 8 11
10 16 10
4 20 25 9
12 31 34 8
24 40 39 7
16 40 44 39 6
32 48 40 34 5
48 48 31 25 4
64 64 40 20 16 3
64 48 24 10 10 2
64 32 12 4 4 1
64 16 4 1 1 0

Coaching Debate in Canada

Transféré par

Informations du document

Titre original

Copyright

Formats disponibles

Partager ce document

Partager ou intégrer le document

Options de partage

Avez-vous trouvé ce document utile ?

Ce contenu est-il inapproprié ?

Droits d'auteur :

Formats disponibles

Coaching Debate in Canada

Transféré par

Droits d'auteur :

Formats disponibles

Coaching Debate

2012 Summer Debate Camp Coaching page 2

Vous aimerez peut-être aussi