Each issue will be debated by 4 students: two on the "pro" side and two on the "con" side.

The responsibilities for each of the sides is as follows:

The stater . This person will be primarily responsible for stating the position taken by his/her side. He or she will bring up, point by point, the issues inherent in each part of the argument. A prepared written outline may be quite helpful, but direct reading of a prepared statement will not be appropriate. A conversational presentation of the position in the stater's own words will be much more acceptable. The stater will also be responsible for watching the flow of the arguments presented by the prover and the attacker (see below). At the end, the stater will summarize, recap, and state which of the points made can be salvaged to ultimately support the team's position. 

The prover . The prover will be responsible for citing relevant research to back up any of the statements given by the stater. He or she must have intimate knowledge of the empirical content of the positions taken and should understand the research supporting the side chosen. The prover can do well by looking up outside sources in order to strengthen the stater's arguments. He or she can support points by using survey data gathered in class or outside. However, the prover will be "attacked" at some length by the opposition--so he or she had better be able to back up his or her supporting data. It should be empirical and responsible. 

The attacker . The attacker will be responsible for probing the opposing position for weaknesses in its arguments. He or she may question data, disprove, counter, and use any rational method to discredit the opposition's position or data. A critique of research design and data analysis may help the attacker. It is also strongly suggested that the attacker be very familiar with the articles and materials being used by the opposing side. The questioner may insult one of the authors cited in the other side's research, but should refrain from attacking the student who supports that position. 

A given debate might consist of the following points: 

• Pro--the pro stater makes his or her points. 


Con--the con stater defines his or her counterpoints. 

Pro--the pro prover brings on his or her evidence. 

Con--the con prover delivers his or her data. 

Pro--the pro attacker moves in. 

Con--the con attacker responds in kind. 

Pro--the pro stater salvages the most persuasive arguments he or she has left and makes a concluding statement. 

Con--the con stater salvages the most persuasive arguments he or she has left and makes a concluding statement. 

The audience . The students not involved in a debate are still a part of the situation. They will get special points for participation (and it will be noted by the professor). Two kinds of audience participation can be expected: clarification and question. 

• Clarification --If a student is uncertain of a point, counterpoint, interpretation of data, a study, or any other portion of a presentation, the students in the audience can ask for clarification. Whoever is explaining the concept or supporting members on the team should clear the problem up for the student as a teacher would do in any class. Clarification questions should be asked at the end of the presentation of either side. 


Question --Questioning is appropriate when a student is disturbed by an answer or has data to counter or expand upon a position taken by the panel. Be reminded that the panel (pro and con) is primarily responsible for answering this sort of question.