ARGUMENTATION COURSE PACKET

Alex Kramer

Table of Contents
Handouts
Information Sheet

Argument Model

Prep Time Exercise

Policy Debate Format

Editorial Response Paper

Speaking Exercises
Speaking Exercise #1 Assignment Sheet

Speaking Exercise #1 Outline Worksheet

Speaking Exercise #1 Evaluation Form

Speaking Exercise #2 Assignment Sheet

10

Speaking Exercise #2 Evaluation Form

11

Speaking Exercise #3 Assignment Sheet

12

Speaking Exercise #3 Peer Evaluation

13

Parliamentary Debates
Parliamentary Debate #1 Assignment Sheet

17

Parliamentary Debate #1 Evaluation Form

18

Parliamentary Debate #1 Self-Evaluation Form

19

Parliamentary Debate #2 Assignment Sheet

20

Parliamentary Debate #2 Evaluation Form

21

Parliamentary Debate #2 Questions

22

Information Sheet
Name: Trae Givens
1. What is your academic major and/or career goal?
My major is Business Administration and one day I hope to own several
businesses or maybe even become an executive and overseeing many
companies like Warren Buffet.
2. Have you taken a speech class before? If so, which one(s)?
Yes, I took a speech class in high school as well as Speech 1 last summer
with Hamilton.
3. Do you have any other experience with public speaking and/or debating?
Outside of the classes that I have taken, I have not had any experience with
public speaking or debates.
4. Rate your level of anxiety when it comes to speaking in front of an audience:
1

Cool as a cucumber
hell

6
Nervous as

5. What topics/issues are you interested in speaking/debating about?

I would like to talk about recent topics that affect us as students and as young
people.

ARGUMENT MODEL
Support/Evidence---------------------------------------------------------------- Claim/Argument
(examples/experience)
I
(conclusion)
(statistics)
I
(judgment)
(testimony)
I
(opinion)
Reasoning/Warrant
(logic)
(explanation)

Some Major Types of Logical Reasoning

Example/Inductive Working from examples or specific instances to form general
conclusions about the nature or existence of something. Surveys indicate that obesity is
rising in America.
Analogy Comparing two cases known to be similar in many respects in order to
conclude something about one case based upon what is known from the other. The
history of the Vietnam War shows why we should never have invaded Iraq.
Causal Examining specific cases to identify a cause/effect relationship between two or
more elements. The use of violent video games leads to an increase in violent behavior in
young children.
Deductive Taking an established premise and applying it to a particular case to develop
a certain conclusion. Like all politicians, Governor Jerry Brown is more interested in
helping special interests than looking after the people of California.

The Syllogism
The syllogism is a way of clearly and concisely stating a deductive argument. The
relationship of the premises of a syllogism allows for a high degree of certainty in drawing
the conclusion, so long as the premises are valid. A syllogism consists of three statements
that logically follow each other:
Major Premise:

All politicians are corrupted by special interests.

Minor Premise:

Governor Jerry Brown is a politician

Conclusion:

Governor Jerry Brown is corrupted by special interests.

Name:__________________

PARLIAMENTARY DEBATE
Prep Time Exercise

For each proposition below, take 10-15 minutes to prepare a brief case for either the
Government (affirmative) or Opposition (negative) sides.
Proposition: National security is more important than individual liberty.
Definitions:
Main Points:
1.

2.

3.

Proposition: The media have gone too far.

Definitions:
Main Points:
1.

2.

3.

POLICY DEBATE STOCK ISSUES FORMAT

4

In a policy debate, the affirmative calls for a change in the present system (status quo)
while the negative supports, or defends the status quo. To win, the affirmative must do the
following:
1. Demonstrate that there is a need for change in the status quo due to significant
harms that the present system is unable to solve. The affirmative should also
explain why these harms are taking place (the cause) and why they havent
been solved yet (inherency, or failed solutions).
2. Present a plan that will solve the current problem. This plan should include the
following components:
a.
b.
c.
d.

Mandate (what exactly will happen?)

Agency (who will do it?)
Cost (how much $?)
Oversight (who makes sure that it works?

3. Demonstrate that the plan will be beneficial to society and preferable to the
status quo.
The negative only has to clash with the affirmative case. However, it is also a good idea to
present a counter-case, or off-case, which involves doing one or more of the following:
1. Demonstrate that there is no need for change because the harms aren't
significant or because they can be easily solved by the present system.
2. Demonstrate that the affirmative plan is insufficient or unworkable, or will cause
major disadvantages.
3. Concede that there is a problem, but present an alternative solution, or a
counter-plan, that is superior to the affirmative plan.
Notice that the negative side cannot logically argue all three of these, since arguing a
counter-plan involves conceding that there is a significant problem.

EDITORIAL RESPONSE PAPER

For this assignment you will need to select an opinionated article (editorial, column, letter)
from a major newspaper. Pick one that you find interesting and/or you have a strong
reaction when reading it. After reading your chosen article, respond to the following in a
short essay:

Briefly summarize the author's main point/argument. Why did they write
this article? What are they trying to convince you of?

What is your reaction? Do you agree or disagree with the author's

argument? Does this opinion anger/upset you? Are you sad? Glad?

Identify one argument or point that you feel is exceptionally compelling.

What is it about the point that makes it good?

Identify one argument or point that could be improved upon. How might the
author have made it better?

This paper should be typed and no more than 2 pages in length. A well-developed
paragraph for each of the above points should suffice.
Please attach a copy of the article to the back of your paper.
This assignment is worth 15 points.

SPEAKING EXERCISE #1 SOAP BOX

This speech is an opportunity for you to speak out about something that bothers you in
society. Try to avoid speaking about personal matters, but rather focus your attention on
some aspect of our social world that you find lacking. You do not need to do any additional
research for this assignment; base your arguments on your own observations, feelings
and opinions. Basically, this is your chance to stand up on a soap box and gripe about
what you think is wrong with the world.
REQUIREMENTS:

The speech should be one to two minutes in length.

Try to have some form of organization that holds the speech together. The progression
of ideas should be logical and the major points should stand out from the subpoints
that develop them.

Your delivery should be extemporaneous; please use a key-word notecard that

contains your main ideas.

You will need to turn in an outline worksheet that contains the content of your speech.
Make sure to thoroughly fill this out using complete sentences.

POINT DISTRIBUTION:
Total points for the assignment will be weighted as follows:

Content
Delivery
Outline
Total

7 points
3 points
5 points
15 points

OUTLINE WORKSHEET
Intro:

Proposition: _______________________________________________
________________________________________________
I.
A.

B.

II.
A.

B.

Conclusion:

Name: ________________

Speaking Exercise # 1 Soap Box

Evaluation Form

Speech Element

Comments and suggestions for improvement

CONTENT:

DELIVERY:

OUTLINE WKSHEET:

SPEECH GRADE
CONTENT
DELIVERY
OULTINE WKSHT

/7
/3
/5

TOTAL POINTS

/15

SPEAKING EXERCISE #2 - IMPROMPTU

For our first round of debates, you will need to be able to build a convincing case in a
limited amount of time. This speech will help you practice the difficult but important skills
required for impromptu speaking. You will: (1) be given a proposition of value, (2) take a
stand in favor of this proposition , and (3) develop a short case (list of arguments) that
supports the proposition.
REQUIREMENTS:

The speech should be one to two minutes in length.

Try to offer a brief attention-grabbing intro at the beginning of the speech and a short
closing statement at the end.

Try to organize the speech into several main arguments. Give a preview of these
arguments at the beginning of the speech and review them at the end.

You dont have to do any explicit research for this speech; base your arguments on
what you know. Try to use examples and illustrations to support your points.

Your delivery should be extemporaneous; please use a key-word notecard that

contains your main ideas.

Since this is an impromptu style speech, you will not have time to develop an outline.
Instead, you will be turning in your notecard that contains your key ideas in an
organized fashion.

POINT DISTRIBUTION:
Total points for the assignment will be weighted as follows:

Content
Delivery
Notecard
Total

7 points
3 points
5 points
15 points

10

Name: ________________

Speaking Exercise #2 Impromptu

Evaluation Form

Speech Element

Comments and suggestions for improvement

CONTENT:

DELIVERY:

NOTECARD:

SPEECH GRADE
CONTENT
DELIVERY
NOTECARD

/7
/3
/5

TOTAL POINTS

/15

11

SPEAKING EXERCISE #3 - ADVOCACY

This is a chance for you to speak on a significant local issue. You do not need to propose
or defend a specific policy, but you do need to establish that there is a problem with the
current situation and provide some suggestions for how to make things better. You should
base your arguments on sound reasoning and evidence and deliver the speech in a clear,
persuasive manner.
REQUIREMENTS:

The speech should be three to four minutes in length.

The speech should be well-organized. Try to follow the problem/solution organizational

pattern for your main points, and include a brief introduction, transition, and
conclusion.

Try to support your arguments clearly with sound evidence and reasoning.

Your delivery should be extemporaneous; please use several key-word notecards.

Cite at least two sources in your speech.

A full-sentence outline (following the correct format) is to be submitted on the day of

your speech. The following elements are to be included:

Proposition Statement
Fully written out introduction and conclusion
Two well developed main points
At least 2 source citations in the text of the outline
A reference list with at least two different published sources

POINT DISTRIBUTION:
Total points for the assignment will be weighted as follows:

Content
Delivery
Outline
Total

15 points
5 points
10 points
30 points

12

Peer Evaluation
Speaker name: ___________________
Content:
Did the speaker present a clear and compelling argument?
Was there adequate supporting evidence?
Was the speech well organized?

1=poor

5=good

1
1
1

4
4
4

2
2
2

3
3
3

5
5
5

Comments:
_____________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________
Delivery:
Did the speaker speak clearly and conversationally?

Comments:
_____________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________

Peer Evaluation
Speaker name: ___________________
Content:
Did the speaker present a clear and compelling argument?
Was there adequate supporting evidence?
Was the speech well organized?

1=poor

5=good

1
1
1

4
4
4

2
2
2

3
3
3

5
5
5

Comments:
_____________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________
Delivery:
Did the speaker speak clearly and conversationally?

Comments:
_____________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________

13

Peer Evaluation
Speaker name: ___________________
Content:
Did the speaker present a clear and compelling argument?
Was there adequate supporting evidence?
Was the speech well organized?

1=poor

5=good

1
1
1

4
4
4

2
2
2

3
3
3

5
5
5

Comments:
_____________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________
Delivery:
Did the speaker speak clearly and conversationally?

Comments:
_____________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________

Peer Evaluation
Speaker name: ___________________
Content:
Did the speaker present a clear and compelling argument?
Was there adequate supporting evidence?
Was the speech well organized?

1=poor

5=good

1
1
1

4
4
4

2
2
2

3
3
3

5
5
5

Comments:
_____________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________
Delivery:
Did the speaker speak clearly and conversationally?

Comments:
_____________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________

14

Peer Evaluation
Speaker name: ___________________
Content:
Did the speaker present a clear and compelling argument?
Was there adequate supporting evidence?
Was the speech well organized?

1=poor

5=good

1
1
1

4
4
4

2
2
2

3
3
3

5
5
5

Comments:
_____________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________
Delivery:
Did the speaker speak clearly and conversationally?

Comments:
_____________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________

Peer Evaluation
Speaker name: ___________________
Content:
Did the speaker present a clear and compelling argument?
Was there adequate supporting evidence?
Was the speech well organized?

1=poor

5=good

1
1
1

4
4
4

2
2
2

3
3
3

5
5
5

Comments:
_____________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________
Delivery:
Did the speaker speak clearly and conversationally?

Comments:
_____________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________

15

Peer Evaluation
Speaker name: ___________________
Content:
Did the speaker present a clear and compelling argument?
Was there adequate supporting evidence?
Was the speech well organized?

1=poor

5=good

1
1
1

4
4
4

2
2
2

3
3
3

5
5
5

Comments:
_____________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________
Delivery:
Did the speaker speak clearly and conversationally?

Comments:
_____________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________

Peer Evaluation
Speaker name: ___________________
Content:
Did the speaker present a clear and compelling argument?
Was there adequate supporting evidence?
Was the speech well organized?

1=poor

5=good

1
1
1

4
4
4

2
2
2

3
3
3

5
5
5

Comments:
_____________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________
Delivery:
Did the speaker speak clearly and conversationally?

Comments:
_____________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________

16

PARLIAMENTARY DEBATE #1 - VALUE

For this assignment, you will team up with someone in the class and debate against
another team on a value proposition. The proposition will be given at the beginning of
class and each team will have 15 minutes to prepare a case. Since this is a limited
preparation style of debate, you will need to focus on direct refutation of arguments, clear
organization, and the use of examples and illustrations for evidence. Effective teamwork is
also essential; you will need to help each other develop arguments during the preparation
time and respond to arguments during the debate.
REQUIREMENTS:

The debate will be arranged as follows:

1st Aff Constructive
1st Neg Constructive
2nd Aff Constructive

3 min
4 min
4 min

2nd Neg Constructive

Neg Rebuttal
Aff Rebuttal

4 min
1 min
2 min

The first affirmative/negative speaker also gives the rebuttal. You and your partner
will decide who does what.
The first constructive speaker should construct a value case using the criteria
application model. You should support your points thoroughly with examples and
other "common knowledge" forms of evidence, and use sound logical reasoning to
connect the evidence to your claims.
The second constructive speaker should thoroughly refute opposing arguments and
extend upon the points made during the first constructive. The rebuttal should finish
any refutation and summarize why you have won the debate.
All speeches should be well organized, previewing the main points in the
introduction and reviewing them at the end. Also try to use signposts to indicate the
order of your points. When refuting the opposing case or supporting your own, try
to go in the same order as it was originally presented.
Your delivery should be extemporaneous, using flowcharts that contain your
arguments written in an abreviated form.
Audience interaction is an important part of parliamentary debate. Show your
support for an argument by rapping your knuckles on the desk.
Instead of an outline, you will turn in your flowcharts that you take during the
debate. Although these can be rough around the edges, I will be looking for
thorough notetaking and effective organization.

POINT DISTRIBUTION:
Content
Delivery
Flowchart
Total

15 points
7 points
8 points
30 points

17

Name:________________

Parliamentary Debate #1 - Value

Evaluation Form

Comments and suggestions for improvement

CONTENT:
DELIVERY:
FLOWCHART:

DEBATE GRADE:
Content
Delivery
Flowchart
Total

/15
/7
/8
/30
Name:________________

Parliamentary Debate #1 - Value

Evaluation Form

Comments and suggestions for improvement

CONTENT:
DELIVERY:
FLOWCHART:

DEBATE GRADE:
Content
Delivery
Flowchart
Total

/15
/7
/8
/30

18

Name:_______________

Parliamentary Debate #1 Self Evaluation

1. Describe your level of comfort and confidence during the first debate.

2. If you had it to do over again, what changes would you make for debate #1? (Be
specific)

3. What goals do you have for improving the element of content in your next
speech/debate?

4. What goals do you have for improving the element of delivery in your next
speech/debate?

PARLIAMENTARY DEBATE #2 - POLICY

19

For this assignment, you will team up with someone in the class and debate against another team
on a policy proposition, using the same issues as the third persuasive speech. The four of you will
develop a proposition of policy that proposes a specific plan of action for dealing with the issue
you have selected. You will then work with your partner to develop a case for both the affirmative
and negative sides. On the day of the debate you will find out what side you are debating on,
after which you will get 5 minutes of preparation time to fine tune your arguments. These debates
will follow the same format as the value debates, although the time limits will be longer and you
are encouraged to ask points of information during the constructive speeches.

REQUIREMENTS:

The debate will be arranged as follows:

1st Aff Constructive
5 min
1st Neg Constructive
6 min
2nd Aff Constructive
6 min

2nd Neg Constructive

Neg Rebuttal
Aff Rebuttal

6 min
2 min
3 min

The first affirmative/negative speaker also gives the rebuttal. You and your partner will
decide who does what.

The first constructive speaker should construct a policy case using the stock issues model.
You should support your points thoroughly with evidence obtained through research, and use
sound logical reasoning to connect the evidence to your claims.
The second constructive speaker should thoroughly refute opposing arguments and extend
upon the points made during the first constructive. The rebuttal should finish any refutation
and summarize why you have won the debate.
All speeches should be well organized, previewing the main points in the introduction and
reviewing them at the end. Also try to use signposts to indicate the order of your points. When
refuting the opposing case or supporting your own, try to go in the same order as it was
originally presented.
Your delivery should be extemporaneous, using flowcharts that contain your arguments and
evidence written in an abreviated form.
Make sure to ask at least one point of information during the constructive speeches.

You and your partner will turn in a 4-6 page debate brief on the day of your debate. The
following elements are to be included:
Two full-sentence outlines for both the affirmative and negative sides of the debate.
These outlines should contain the arguments that you would present in the first
constructive speech for each side.
A list of points of information, containing at least five questions for both the affirmative
and negative sides, with answers.
A reference list in the proper format with 3-5 different published sources.

POINT DISTRIBUTION:
Content
Delivery
Debate Brief

25 points
10 points
15 points

Total

50 points
20

Name:________________

Parliamentary Debate #2 - Policy

Evaluation Form

Comments and suggestions for improvement

CONTENT:
DELIVERY:
DEBATE BRIEFS:

DEBATE GRADE:
Content
Delivery
Briefs
Total

/25
/10
/15
/50
Name:________________

Parliamentary Debate #2 Policy

Evaluation Form

Comments and suggestions for improvement

CONTENT:
DELIVERY:
DEBATE BRIEFS:

DEBATE GRADE:
Content
Delivery
Briefs
Total

/25
/10
/15
/50

Name: __________________
21

Parliamentary Debate #2 - Questions

Write three questions based on todays debates. Turn in at the end of class to get credit
for attendance.

Question #1:

Question #2:

Question #3:

22

Name: __________________

Parliamentary Debate #2 - Questions

Write three questions based on todays debates. Turn in at the end of class to get credit
for attendance.

Question #1:

Question #2:

Question #3:

23