Dear Kyoto NHK ESS members
Here is the follow-up announcement for the latter half of practice on March 4th, 2023. Everyone, please prepare for your own opinions. I attached four PDF files to distribute certain materials for you to preview, except for E) and F).
Genre: Debate
Proposition:(See attached PDF files. A～Fのうちから各グループで大至急、選んでください。)
A) Is limited nuclear war a viable battlefield option? (核兵器の限定使用は戦争における現実的な選択肢か否か？)
B) Should the United States demand compensation from China for its alleged responsibility for the coronavirus pandemic? (米国はコロナ禍の責任を問うて中国に補償を要求すべきか否か？)
C)Is violence an effective tool for protests？ （暴力は、抗議の有効な手段か否か？）
D)Should the trade in wildlife for human consumption be banned？ （野生動物の商取引は禁止すべきか否か？）
E)Is the United States better to emigrate to than the UK? (米国は移住するなら英国より良い国か否か？）
F)Is cashless payment more convenient than cash? (キャッシュレス支払は現金払いより便利か否か？）
Please keep in mind that this debate is a practice with one type of game and has no substantial connection with your standpoint, merits, and demerits of you as an independent individual in your social life. Therefore, please do your best to win the game as one good way to enrich your experience to present better debate practice in our ESS activity.
Description
1) Make some groups so each group would consist of 3 members. If two members were left, Minamihashi would join the group. If there are only two members for two groups, I would ask the leader to be a special additional judge for group one. Be your timekeeper within your group for each of you. Choose the proposition for your group immediately. It’s up to you.
2) Write and prepare the proposition's significant points, advantages, and disadvantages, true or false, within 3 minutes.
3) In your group, decide your order to be Affirmative, Negative, and Judge. The Affirmative must sit right side of the Negative and the left side of the Judge.
4) If you are in the Affirmative, argue that the Affirmative is correct and has significant advantages and few disadvantages. If you are the Negative, say that the Affirmative is wrong and has fewer advantages and more significant disadvantages. If you are the Judge, compare the initial link of claims, advantages, and disadvantages of the Affirmative points, whether the Affirmative undoubtedly causes those points, and which is likely to be true or outweighs the other. Articulation and, grammar, logical persuasiveness would also be necessary when the comparison of probabilities, advantages, and disadvantages was difficult. However, the Judge should regard any argument in the rebuttal speech that neither side presented initially during the constructive speech as a "new argument" and not count for the decision.
5) Start the debate match in the following order. Each Judge should be the timekeeper for each group and announce each time's the beginning and the end. Take note on your flow sheet while listening to the other's speech.
Affirmative Constructive Speech 1 minute(肯定側立論1分)
Cross-Examination by the Negative 1 minute（否定側による肯定側への反対尋問1分）
Preparation Time 1 minute（準備時間1分）
Negative Constructive Speech 1 minute（否定側立論1分）
Cross-Examination by the Affirmative 1 minute（肯定側による否定側への反対尋問1分）
Preparation Time 1 minute（準備時間1分）
Affirmative Rebuttal Speech 1 minute（肯定側による反論1分）
Cross-Examination by both sides 1 minute（双方による反対尋問1分）
Preparation Time 1 minute（準備時間1分）
Negative Rebuttal Speech 1 minute（否定側による反論1分）
Decision & Reason by the Judge 3 minutes（ジャッジによる勝敗の判定及びその理由3分）
(Go through "step 5)" with 13 minutes.)（「ステップ５）」を13分でやって下さい。）
6) Turn the role clockwise in your group. (時計回りに肯定側、否定側、ジャッジの役割を変える）
7) Repeat the process of 6) with the different roles in your group for 13 minutes. (ステップ６）を前回と異なる役割で13分で繰り返す。
8) Turn the role clockwise in your group once more. (もう一度、時計周りに肯定側、否定側、ジャッジの役割を変える）
9) Repeat the process of 5) with the other role, you haven't played in your group for 13 minutes.
（「ステップ5）」の役割でまだやっていない残りの役割を13分でやる）。
10 Discuss the overall debate on the proposition. (ディベートの試合の感想を一言ずつ述べる）。
11) Decide the best debater in your group by voting. (自分のグループの多数決でベストディベーターを決める）。
12) Report briefly to all the members the result of the three debate matches and who won the best debater in your group.
Let's enjoy debating and have fun by taking three roles in the debate on the propositions.
なお、お時間のある方は、何が真実か、具体的にどういうAdvantage, Disadvantageがあり得るか、考えておかれるようお勧めします。頭の体操になります。ただ、プラクティスの時間が1時間、１試合１３分と短いので、今回は、evidence（証拠資料）は使わないことにします。ディベートのスタイルには、この他にも様々なバリエーションがある事も覚えておいて下さい。詳しくは、参考文献などをご参照下さい。Amazonで入手可能です。
参考文献：
小西卓三・菅家知洋・Peter J. Collins, 『Let the Debate Begin! Effective Argumentation and Debate Techniques〔Teacher's Edition〕-―英語で学ぶ論理的説得術――』、東海大学出版会、2007
松本茂・鈴木健・青沼智、『英語ディベート 理論と実践』、玉川大学出版部、2009
この他に、入門書として、以下がお薦めです。
安井省侍郎（著）Debate Forum出版会監修、『初心者のためのディベートQ&A』、第4版、Debate Forum出版会発行、2004
西部直樹、『「議論力」が身につく技術』、あさ出版、2003
小西卓三・菅家知洋・Peter J. Collins, 『Let the Debate Begin! Effective Argumentation and Debate Techniques―英語で学ぶ論理的説得術――』、東海大学出版会、2007（学生向け）
専門書としては、以下などがあります。
ジョージ・W・シーゲルミューラー、ジャック・ケイ著、井上奈良彦監訳、『議論法 探求と弁論 第3版』、花書院、2006
The Editors of IDEA, 『The Debatabase Book: A Must-Have Guide for Successful Debate』, 6th ed., Introduction by Robert Trapp, International Debate Education Association, 2013.
Debbie Newman, Ben Woolgar (ed.）, 『Pros and Cons: A Debater's Handbook』, 19th ed, Routledge, 2014.
Austin J. Freeley, David L. Steinberg, 『Argumentation and Debate: Critical Thinking for Reasoned Decision Making』, 13th ed., Wadsworth Cengage Learning, 2014
植田一三、『英語の議論を極める本』、アスク出版、2021
CQ Press, 『GLOBAL ISSUES SELECTION FROM CQ RESEARCHERS 2022 EDITION』、SAGE Publication, 2022
笹島茂(他)、『CLIL 英語で学ぶ国際問題〔改訂版〕』、三修社、2022
Garry Pearson(et al.), 『Global Issues –An Introduction to Discussion Skills—身近な世界を英語で発信』、成美堂、2021
Brian J. English (ed.), 『Global Issues: Wealth and Poverty A language art textbook for English learners』, 2021
Osamu Minamihashi