Our culture will suffer if we don’t do more to teach

performing arts. (interactive debating)

General Goals:

1. To be able to see, analyse, debate, defend and refute different viewpoints on the issue.2. To speak, read, write, and listen in English in an effort to make a cohesive

argumentation on the subject

Specific Objectives: students will:

define the key words of the motion, describe the status quo; build up REAL arguments (based on: Reason, Example, Analysis, Link) cross-examine their opponents (ask challenging questions) in order to clarify the

substance of the debate or to identify logical errors refute arguments; summarize their team’s case and say why they must win the vote of the judges use “SURPRISE” words or expressions

Materials: cards with statistics and data written on them; argument sheets; handouts with “SURPRISE” words or expressions cards with the evaluation criteria; flow - charts. the board

Description:

Students will debate in four large groups of 6; 5 of them will be the judges of the debating session and a student will be the time-keeper. They will use cards, argument sheets and flow charts in order to organize what they will be saying; they will try to convince the audience by using real arguments, voice, gestures, body language; they already know the criteria after which the whole debating will be judged (presented on the cards with the evaluation criteria).

While the debating is in progress, the T takes notes on common errors made by the studentsand counts how many times a student uses the “SURPRISE” words At the end of the debating, the T may take time for a short focus on common mistakes. This is important, as students should not be too involved emotionally and therefore will be quite capable of recognizing language problems - as opposed to problems in beliefs!

Each debater has a pre-established role and will speak for approximately one min. (no more than 1min and 20 sec.)

During the debate:

the students must fill in the flow-chart during the debate; the students can consult with a partner for help with clarification or write suggestions

on scraps of paper for Speakers 5 and 6 who must do the cross- questioning.

Following the debate:

The judges of the debating must explain their vote on the basis of their flow charts and judging forms, the president of the board of judges adds up the score and announces the winning team. The teacher is just an observer now and takes notes to provide feedback on strong points and things to work on (in the next class if there’s no time left in this class).

Voting (2 min)

The judges are preparing to give an individual vote and now they get ready to explain which team has had the most convincing arguments. They must choose the winning team(s) and specify what other teams have done according to the criteria/categories of debating on their handouts (previously explained and accepted in the preparatory session).

On their flow-charts the other students must make their own classification of the teams they are not on.

Feedback (18- 20 min) on the debating at the end is given by:

- the five judges of the debating session; they motivate their choice for the classification of the teams, showing which arguments were most convincing and which were not. Each of the judges has approximately 2 minutes to argue in favour of their decision

- the invited teachers / Inspector / Professors

1. EXCELLENT, 2. GOOD, 3. SATISFACTORY and 4. NEEDS IMPROVEMENT.

The team(s) with the most votes in favour of “EXCELLENT” wins (win).

Assessment ( 5 min)

The teacher-moderator praises and evaluates by giving credit points to those who best achieved their task; the teacher may have spotted some mistakes which she may correct now or in the following class.