What-Is-Policy-Debate
常用政治术语的英文翻译
马列主义、毛泽东思想、邓小平理论、江泽民"三个代表"重要思想Marxism-Leninism, Mao Zedong Thought,Deng Xiao-ping Theory, Jiang Zemin "Three Represent's" important Thought新民主主义革命new-democratic revolution民族独立和人民解放national independence and the liberation of the people经济体制改革和政治体制改革reforms in the economic and political structure社会主义制度socialist system社会变革social transformation建设有中国特色的社会主义事业the cause of building socialism with Chinese characteristics中华民族的伟大复兴the great rejuvenation of the Chinese nation党在社会主义初级阶段的基本理论、基本路线、基本纲领the basic theory, line and program of our Party in the primary stage of socialism改革开放政策the policies of reform and opening to the outside中国共产党十一届三中全会The Third Plenary Session of the 11th Central Committee of the Communist Party of China马克思主义政党Marxist political Party党的第一（第二、第三）代中央领导集体the collective leadership of the Party Central Committee of the first (second\third)generation人民民主专政the people's democratic dictatorship国民经济体系national economic system综合国力aggregate national strength国内生产总值the annual gross domestic product(GDP)独立自主的和平外交政策an independent foreign policy of peace马克思主义基本原理同中国具体实际相结合the fundamental principles of Marxism with the specific situation in China加强和改进党的建设，不断增强党的创造力、凝聚力和战斗力，永葆党的生机与活力strengthen and improve Party building, continuously enhance the creativity, rallying power and combat capability of the Party, and always maintain its vigor and vitality.“三个代表”就是必须代表中国先进生产力的发展要求，代表中国先进文化的前进方向，代表中国最广大人民的根本利益，是我们党的立党之本、执政之基、力量之源，是我们党始终站在时代前列，保持先进性的根本体现和根本要求。
BP制英语辩论
Deputy Leader of the Opposition ：
职责与注意点参照 deputy prime minister
Member of Proposition/Opposition：
1、通过案例延展来支持upper house的立场 2、支持的同时提出新的不同意upper house的观点或者原因 3、反驳对方的理由与观点 注意： 一定要提出新的观点，否则视为职责完成不充分 如果己方的upper house对于某个问题的理由解释不充 分或表述不成熟一定要提出并且完善
Lower house
Whip
2nd~6th
(POI、六分钟末响铃提示)
7th
( 响铃两下 )
1st
( 第一次响铃 )
15’ more
Prime minister：
1、定义权（解释议题）
2、有条理地铺展开己方的理由与依据（相关事例） 注意： 不能歪曲题意
定义特殊词关键词
抓准议题中心
Leader of the Opposition:
General Advice
• First, you’d better get prepared physically and psychologically. Otherwise, you will certainly feel afflicted • Secondly, you have nothing to enjoy except the game itself. • Team work, while self-show is equally important • Last but not least, have a strong desire to win, you guys can learn this from Du Yirong. •
Whatisdebate
Opening arguments
Affirmative contentions
Negative contentions
Handguns have no purpose other than to kill We need guns for the protection of our
people.
property.
On the back of this page is a planning sheet to begin the process.
Structure of a Debate edited from The Code of the Debater /code2001.pdf
Crimes of passion will be fewer if handguns Owning a handgun is a constitutional right. are not available
Only banning handguns will solve the problem; gun registration is not enough.
your position. It should be stated clearly and directly. “Handguns kill people.” R= REASONING: Explain what you mean by your assertion. Why is it true? “Everyday in this country someone dies in a handgun accident or a street shooting..” E= EVIDENCE: Use a fact, statistic, testimony, or expert opinion to back up your point. “ In 1999, there were 28,874 gun-related deaths in the United States - over 80 deaths every day.(Source: Hoyert DL, Arias E, Smith BL, Murphy SL, Kochanek, KD. Deaths: Final Data for 1999. National Vital Statistics Reports. 2001;49 (8).)
高二英语外交政策常用专业术语
高二英语外交政策常用专业术语外交政策是指一个国家或地区在处理与外部世界的关系时所采取的一系列政策和原则。
随着国际关系的日益复杂化，外交政策涉及到的专业术语也越来越多样化和丰富。
本文将介绍一些高中二年级学生需要了解和掌握的英语外交政策常用专业术语，以帮助同学们更好地理解国际关系和外交政策。
一、国际关系的基本概念1. 外交（Diplomacy）：国家通过外交手段，与其他国家进行交流、协商和谈判，解决国际事务和问题。
2. 主权（Sovereignty）：国家拥有独立决策权和实施权，不受其他国家干涉。
3. 领土完整（Territorial Integrity）：国家领土不受其他国家侵犯和分割。
4. 平等互利（Equality and Mutual Benefit）：国家之间在外交交往中应遵循平等、互利和相互尊重的原则。
5. 多边主义（Multilateralism）：多个国家在国际事务中通过协商、合作来寻求解决问题的方式。
二、外交政策的基本原则1. 不干涉内政（Non-interference in Internal Affairs）：国家不干涉其他国家的内部事务。
2. 和平共处（Peaceful Coexistence）：国家应通过和平手段解决争端，维护和平与和谐的国际关系。
3. 预防战争（Prevention of War）：国家应预防战争的发生，并通过不同的方式来避免战争。
4. 和解与调停（Reconciliation and Mediation）：国家应积极调停争端，促进各方和解。
5. 外交豁免（Diplomatic Immunity）：外交人员在特定情况下可以享受到免于执法追究的特权。
三、外交政策的主要工具和行动1. 外交官（Diplomat）：代表国家与其他国家进行外交活动的专业人士。
2. 外交使团（Diplomatic Mission）：国家派往外国的代表团，包括大使馆、使领馆等。
3. 外交谈判（Diplomatic Negotiation）：国家之间通过谈判来解决争端和达成协议。
英语debate
6. How to give clarification F
Well, the point I’m trying to make is that… Well, what I’m trying to say is that… What I mean is that … All I’m trying to say is that… Well, what I’m getting at is that…
1. How to ask for an opinion
F I was wondering where you stood on the
question of X? What’s your position on X? What’s your opinion of X ? What do you think of/ about X? How do you find X? How do you feel about X ? What do you reckon about X? What about X? Inf
Sorry to interrupt ,but + CLAUSE
Excuse me, but + CLAUSE
Wait a minute!
Hold on
+ SENTENCE
Hang on Inf
5. How to ask for clarification F
I’m afraid I’m not quite clear what you mean by X. I’m sorry , I don’t understand what you mean by X. I’m sorry , but could you explain what you mean by X. What (exactly) do you mean by X. What (exactly) are you trying to say? What (exactly) are you getting at?
policy的形容词形式
policy的形容词形式首先，我们需要了解什么是policy。
Policy是指一个组织、政府或个人采用的战略、计划、规则或制度。
一个policy可以对组织的运作和决策产生重要影响，它可以帮助组织达成预期的目标和效果，同时也可以预防一些错误和不良后果。
当我们需要形容policy的时候，我们可以使用policy的形容词形式来描述。
以下是一些常见的policy形容词：1. Policy-based这个形容词经常用于描述一种政策制定的方式或流程。
Policy-based指的是一种策略、计划或决策是按照政策制定的原则和规定来制定的。
2. Policy-oriented这个形容词通常用于描述组织或政府的决策方式。
Policy-oriented指的是这个组织或政府关注并遵循政策，以制定行动计划和决策。
3. Policy-drivenPolicy-driven形容词是指某个组织在制定决策时，严格遵守其已经制定的政策或规定。
这种形容词通常被使用在公司、政府、非政府组织等需要依照其政策制定决策的场景中。
4. Policy-oriented Industry这个形容词通常被用来描述一个行业或组织，其决策和运作是基于其制定的特别的政策或是面向政策制定的。
5. Policy-minded这个形容词用于形容一个人或团体，侧重于其对政策的关注和深入了解，以便在做决策时可以更好地依据政策出发点来判断和决策。
6. Policy-driven Growth这个形容词经常被使用来形容经济增长或公司发展，是基于政策制定的原则和规则来推动的。
综上所述，policy的形容词形式说明了在决策、规划、制定行动计划时，背后的政策或政策制定的原则在实践中的使用情况，同样也强调了它对组织、政府的整体影响。
当我们使用policy的这些形容词时，要确保与句子主语和语境一致，体现出具有科学性和准确性。
policy词根词缀
policy词根词缀【原创版】目录1.政策（policy）的词根和词缀2.policy 的词源和含义3.policy 的常见用法和搭配4.policy 与其他相关词汇的比较正文【政策（policy）的词根和词缀】“政策”这个词在英语中是“policy”，它的词根和词缀是什么呢？首先，我们可以看到“policy”这个词的词根是“poli”，意思是“城邦”或“城市”。
在古希腊和古罗马时期，城邦是国家的基本单位，因此，“poli”后来引申为“政治”或“治理”。
其次，“policy”的词缀是“-cy”，表示“状态”或“性质”。
这个词缀常用于构成名词，表示某种状态或性质。
比如，“accuracy”（准确性）和“inaccuracy”（不准确性）中的“-cy”就是表示状态的词缀。
因此，“policy”这个词的词根词缀组合起来，就是表示“政治状态”或“治理方式”的词汇。
【policy 的词源和含义】“Policy”这个词最早的词源可以追溯到古希腊语和拉丁语，它们的意思都是“政治”或“治理”。
在英语中，“policy”的意思也主要是指“政策”或“策略”。
具体来说，“policy”可以指国家的政策，如“财政政策”（fiscal policy）和“货币政策”（monetary policy）；也可以指企业的策略，如“营销政策”（marketing policy）和“人事政策”（personnel policy）。
【policy 的常见用法和搭配】在英语中，“policy”最常见的用法是构成名词短语，表示某种政策或策略。
比如：- Economic policy（经济政策）- Environmental policy（环境政策）- Education policy（教育政策）此外，“policy”还可以用作动词，表示制定或执行政策。
比如：- The government should policy to reduce poverty.（政府应该制定政策来减少贫困。
考研英语词语大辨析35组
◣词语大辨析◢-§(21)"争论,争吵"argue,debate,discuss,dispute,quarrel都含有一定的"争论"之意argue指一方坚持自己的意见,立场和观点,通过争论企图说服对方(argue with sb. about/over sth.) debate多指公开,正式场合进行的辩论或严肃的争论,双方各自陈述理由,"交锋""往返"的意味较强discuss指为了解决问题或弄清对方的观点而进行的讨论,磋商dispute指持续,激烈的争论,语气较强,有”相持不下,未得解决”的意思(in dispute在争论中)quarrel争吵,争论,含与人发生口角的意思1.I ____ with my flat-mate about who should do the housework.A.discussedB.debatedC.arguedD.quarreled2.What we are ____ about is not survival but the quality of life.A.disputingB.deducingC.discussingD.debating3.They are ____over foreign policy.A.disputingB.discussingC.arguingD.debating4.They hold a fierce ____ as to whether their company should restore the trade relationship which was broken years ago.A.debateB.clashC.disagreementD.contest5.What he said just now had little to do with the question under ____.A.debateB.discussionC.disputionD.arguement6.The case was fully ____ before agreement was reached.A.quarreledB.arguedC.debatedD.contested1.I __D__ with my flat-mate about who should do the housework.我和我同住一个单元的人关于谁应做家务吵了一架.(quarrel with sb. about sth.与某人发生口角)A.discussedB.debatedC.arguedD.quarreled2.What we are __A__ about is not survival but the quality of life.我们所争论的不是生存问题而是生活质量问题.A.disputingB.deducingC.discussingD.debating3.They are __C__ over foreign policy.他们正就外交政策进行辩论. (argue with sb. about/over sth.)A.disputingB.discussingC.arguingD.debating4.They hold a fierce __A__ as to whether their company should restore the trade relationship which was broken years ago.他们就公司是否应当恢复几年前中断了的贸易关系进行了一场激烈的争论.A.debateB.clashC.disagreementD.contest5.What he said just now had little to do with the question under __B__.他刚才所见讲的与讨论的问题关系不大.(under discussion在讨论中)A.debateB.discussionC.disputionD.arguement6.The case was fully __B__ before agreement was reached.这案件在达成一致意见前进行了充分争论.A.quarreledB.arguedC.debatedD.contested◤词语大辨析◥-§22.arise,arouse,raise,rise四个形近词,你分清了吗?arise vi.突然出现;起床arouse vt.引起,唤醒,激起raise vt.举起,提高,较多地被用于具体的场合,如举手,举杯,升旗等;有时也用于提高工资,提高工作效率等rise vi.上升,升高,上涨等,大多用于抽象或比喻的场合,如太阳,蒸汽,产量的上升,有时也用于具体场合,如人的起立,河水的上涨等1.The wind is ____.A.risingB.raisingC.arousingD.arising2.Our wages have been ____ recently.A.risenB.raisedC.arousedD.arisen3.A new problem has ____.A.risenB.raisedC.arousedD.arisen4.He ____ her mothering instincts.A.roseB.raisedC.arousedD.arose5.He ____ at 6:30 a.m. as usual.A.roseB.raisedC.arousedD.arose6.The river ____ by two feet after the heavy rains.A.roseB.raisedC.arousedD.arose1.The wind is __A__.起风了.A.risingB.raisingC.arousingD.arising2.Our wages have been __B__ recently.最近我们的工资提高了.A.risenB.raisedC.arousedD.arisen3.A new problem has __D__.出现了一个新问题.A.risenB.raisedC.arousedD.arisen4.He __C__ her mothering instincts.他激起了她的母爱本能.A.roseB.raisedC.arousedD.arose5.He __D__ at 6:30 a.m. as usual.他像平常一样早晨6点半起床.A.roseB.raisedC.arousedD.arose6.The river __A__ by two feet after the heavy rains.暴雨使河水水位升高两英尺.A.roseB.raisedC.arousedD.arose◣词语大辨析◢-§(21)"争论,争吵"argue,debate,discuss,dispute,quarrel都含有一定的"争论"之意argue指一方坚持自己的意见,立场和观点,通过争论企图说服对方(argue with sb. about/over sth.)debate多指公开,正式场合进行的辩论或严肃的争论,双方各自陈述理由,"交锋""往返"的意味较强discuss指为了解决问题或弄清对方的观点而进行的讨论,磋商dispute指持续,激烈的争论,语气较强,有”相持不下,未得解决”的意思(in dispute在争论中)quarrel争吵,争论,含与人发生口角的意思1.I ____ with my flat-mate about who should do the housework.A.discussedB.debatedC.arguedD.quarreled2.What we are ____ about is not survival but the quality of life.A.disputingB.deducingC.discussingD.debating3.They are ____over foreign policy.A.disputingB.discussingC.arguingD.debating4.They hold a fierce ____ as to whether their company should restore the trade relationship which was broken years ago.A.debateB.clashC.disagreementD.contest5.What he said just now had little to do with the question under ____.A.debateB.discussionC.disputionD.arguement6.The case was fully ____ before agreement was reached.A.quarreledB.arguedC.debatedD.contested1.I __D__ with my flat-mate about who should do the housework.我和我同住一个单元的人关于谁应做家务吵了一架.(quarrel with sb. about sth.与某人发生口角)A.discussedB.debatedC.arguedD.quarreled2.What we are __A__ about is not survival but the quality of life.我们所争论的不是生存问题而是生活质量问题.A.disputingB.deducingC.discussingD.debating3.They are __C__ over foreign policy.他们正就外交政策进行辩论. (argue with sb. about/over sth.)A.disputingB.discussingC.arguingD.debating4.They hold a fierce __A__ as to whether their company should restore the trade relationship which was broken years ago.他们就公司是否应当恢复几年前中断了的贸易关系进行了一场激烈的争论.A.debateB.clashC.disagreementD.contest5.What he said just now had little to do with the question under __B__.他刚才所见讲的与讨论的问题关系不大.(under discussion在讨论中)A.debateB.discussionC.disputionD.arguement6.The case was fully __B__ before agreement was reached.这案件在达成一致意见前进行了充分争论.A.quarreledB.arguedC.debatedD.contested◤词语大辨析◥-§22.arise,arouse,raise,rise四个形近词,你分清了吗?arise vi.突然出现;起床arouse vt.引起,唤醒,激起raise vt.举起,提高,较多地被用于具体的场合,如举手,举杯,升旗等;有时也用于提高工资,提高工作效率等rise vi.上升,升高,上涨等,大多用于抽象或比喻的场合,如太阳,蒸汽,产量的上升,有时也用于具体场合,如人的起立,河水的上涨等1.The wind is ____.A.risingB.raisingC.arousingD.arising2.Our wages have been ____ recently.A.risenB.raisedC.arousedD.arisen3.A new problem has ____.A.risenB.raisedC.arousedD.arisen4.He ____ her mothering instincts.A.roseB.raisedC.arousedD.arose5.He ____ at 6:30 a.m. as usual.A.roseB.raisedC.arousedD.arose6.The river ____ by two feet after the heavy rains.A.roseB.raisedC.arousedD.arose1.The wind is __A__.起风了.A.risingB.raisingC.arousingD.arising2.Our wages have been __B__ recently.最近我们的工资提高了.A.risenB.raisedC.arousedD.arisen3.A new problem has __D__.出现了一个新问题.A.risenB.raisedC.arousedD.arisen4.He __C__ her mothering instincts.他激起了她的母爱本能.A.roseB.raisedC.arousedD.arose5.He __D__ at 6:30 a.m. as usual.他像平常一样早晨6点半起床.A.roseB.raisedC.arousedD.arose6.The river __A__ by two feet after the heavy rains.暴雨使河水水位升高两英尺.A.roseB.raisedC.arousedD.arose◣词语大辨析◢-§(21)"争论,争吵"argue,debate,discuss,dispute,quarrel都含有一定的"争论"之意argue指一方坚持自己的意见,立场和观点,通过争论企图说服对方(argue with sb. about/over sth.) debate多指公开,正式场合进行的辩论或严肃的争论,双方各自陈述理由,"交锋""往返"的意味较强discuss指为了解决问题或弄清对方的观点而进行的讨论,磋商dispute指持续,激烈的争论,语气较强,有”相持不下,未得解决”的意思(in dispute在争论中)quarrel争吵,争论,含与人发生口角的意思1.I ____ with my flat-mate about who should do the housework.A.discussedB.debatedC.arguedD.quarreled2.What we are ____ about is not survival but the quality of life.A.disputingB.deducingC.discussingD.debating3.They are ____over foreign policy.A.disputingB.discussingC.arguingD.debating4.They hold a fierce ____ as to whether their company should restore the trade relationship which was broken years ago.A.debateB.clashC.disagreementD.contest5.What he said just now had little to do with the question under ____.A.debateB.discussionC.disputionD.arguement6.The case was fully ____ before agreement was reached.A.quarreledB.arguedC.debatedD.contested1.I __D__ with my flat-mate about who should do the housework.我和我同住一个单元的人关于谁应做家务吵了一架.(quarrel with sb. about sth.与某人发生口角)A.discussedB.debatedC.arguedD.quarreled2.What we are __A__ about is not survival but the quality of life.我们所争论的不是生存问题而是生活质量问题.A.disputingB.deducingC.discussingD.debating3.They are __C__ over foreign policy.他们正就外交政策进行辩论. (argue with sb. about/over sth.)A.disputingB.discussingC.arguingD.debating4.They hold a fierce __A__ as to whether their company should restore the trade relationship which was broken years ago.他们就公司是否应当恢复几年前中断了的贸易关系进行了一场激烈的争论.A.debateB.clashC.disagreementD.contest5.What he said just now had little to do with the question under __B__.他刚才所见讲的与讨论的问题关系不大.(under discussion在讨论中)A.debateB.discussionC.disputionD.arguement6.The case was fully __B__ before agreement was reached.这案件在达成一致意见前进行了充分争论.A.quarreledB.arguedC.debatedD.contested◤词语大辨析◥-§22.arise,arouse,raise,rise四个形近词,你分清了吗?arise vi.突然出现;起床arouse vt.引起,唤醒,激起raise vt.举起,提高,较多地被用于具体的场合,如举手,举杯,升旗等;有时也用于提高工资,提高工作效率等rise vi.上升,升高,上涨等,大多用于抽象或比喻的场合,如太阳,蒸汽,产量的上升,有时也用于具体场合,如人的起立,河水的上涨等1.The wind is ____.A.risingB.raisingC.arousingD.arising2.Our wages have been ____ recently.A.risenB.raisedC.arousedD.arisen3.A new problem has ____.A.risenB.raisedC.arousedD.arisen4.He ____ her mothering instincts.A.roseB.raisedC.arousedD.arose5.He ____ at 6:30 a.m. as usual.A.roseB.raisedC.arousedD.arose6.The river ____ by two feet after the heavy rains.A.roseB.raisedC.arousedD.arose1.The wind is __A__.起风了.A.risingB.raisingC.arousingD.arising2.Our wages have been __B__ recently.最近我们的工资提高了.A.risenB.raisedC.arousedD.arisen3.A new problem has __D__.出现了一个新问题.A.risenB.raisedC.arousedD.arisen4.He __C__ her mothering instincts.他激起了她的母爱本能.A.roseB.raisedC.arousedD.arose5.He __D__ at 6:30 a.m. as usual.他像平常一样早晨6点半起床.A.roseB.raisedC.arousedD.arose6.The river __A__ by two feet after the heavy rains.暴雨使河水水位升高两英尺.A.roseB.raisedC.arousedD.arose。
《英语辩论》-课程教学大纲
《英语辩论》课程教学大纲一、课程基本信息课程代码：16231002课程名称：《英语辩论》英文名称：Debating In English课程类别：通识课学时：32学分：2适用对象：法学（企业法务，粤港澳大湾区法务）；工商管理（创新管理）考核方式：考试先修课程：《英语演讲》二、课程简介《英语辩论》课程是高校英语课堂内外训练学生英语口语，改善学生的思变能力和创造力，提高学生对英语的实际运用能力的有效手段。
将英语辩论引入课堂，能有意识地把语言形式与社会语境结合起来，最大程度地减少母语文化因素的干扰，创造良好的环境，培养具有批判性思维能力的符合21世纪要求的应用型人才。
本课程将辩论引入英语教学，不但可以培养学生的语言表达能力，更是培养学生批判性思维最有效的途径。
尤其是本教材采用的辩论形式——议会制辩论，乃是当下国际通行的一种校际辩论模式，其特点是重策略性辩论，充满思辨乐趣。
本课程采用理论传授与实际操练相结合；教师讲解和学生参与相结合；教师点评和学生试评相结合的教学方法。
本课程授课内容主要包括两大块，均采用多媒体、互动式授课。
第一部分包括英语辩论课程的理论教学，采用范例录像观摩和阐释理论知识点相结合的方法；第二部分包括学生操练并辅助以课堂讨论及对学生操练和作业进行评析(自评、互评和教师点评相结合)等方法，考查方法采用课堂参与和考试相结合。
Debating in English is a course to train and improve students’ oral English skill, to change their critical thinking and creativity, and an effective approach to enhancing students application of the practical skill in the society. By introducing the skills of English debating, students can combine the form of language with social context and reduce the Chinese cultural elements impact on English. Parliamentary debate is adopted in this course to cultivate students language expressions as well as critical thinking. The teaching methods focus on combining theories with practice, teacher lectures and student participation, teacher comments and student responses. The course is multimedia-based and interactive.The assessment emphasizes both class participation and the final exam.三、课程性质与教学目的通过本课程的学习,使学生全面、系统地掌握英语演讲和辩论的理论知识与艺术特点以及在现实交际生活的作用及在一定程度上实现相关专业与外语专业之间的复合、交融和渗透,使学生从语言的单一性向知识的多元化、宽厚型方向转化,并且提高学生综合应用英语的能力和综合素质的培养。
政策性辩论（Policydebate）
政策性辩论（Policy debate）Chinese Debate network policy debate Promotion Alliance Declaration(Guo Yukuan, Zhang Xuesen, drafters: Zhang Aiping, Hong Yiwei, Zhang Xiufeng. The main content was at the seminar on the promotion and development of policy debate held in Shanghai Univer in December 14, 2006, which was reached by the debating community at many universities at home and abroad. )Since the beginning of 1993 the "Singapore words", the debate has brought a fresh wind to the society, not only a single value judgment of its advocacy, and show the debaters style and eloquence, for the time China, the audience is very interesting. Therefore, the debate competition among college students is popular among all walks of life, and has trained a large number of debate enthusiasts and excellent debater, and bred a variety of different debate community.In the process of development and popularization of Chinese debate, the mass media represented by CCTV has played a very important role. However, due to the need of "Mandarin" and the purpose of television programs, organizations have different degrees of modification and change of the motion system, and evaluation criteria, which increases its performance of components. Now it seems that the performance of the tournament style depends on the ability of oral expression, resulting from the debaters selection and training to develop a framework are too much emphasis on debating skills and field effect, the debate is flashy and superficial, and often see sophistry and avoid problems is filled in the debate on the track. Theperformance debate becomes more and more divorced from the original meaning of debate and loses the core of value of reason and speculation. This "empty" the debate is no longer attractive, the overall decline of college students debate also want and see.We believe that the debate is not standard Mandarin large city students performing patents, but higher campus cultural melting pot, encourage diversified participation, so that more students benefit from different sub groups of sound can be reflected. The debate is not just the game, but not the outcome of fame utilitarian channels, but to enrich the students' thinking, broaden the students' horizons, as well as a means of increasing overall social understanding. The real significance of the debate, should be able to enhance the capacity of democratic participation of college students; cultivate the ability and interest of knowledge; cultivate dialectical thinking and accept different opinions, habits, and the ability to integrate diverse information and knowledge, thus giving birth to the elite from all walks of life of the society in the future. Therefore, we advocate sincere debate, sincere knowledge, true expression of personal views, sincere response to other people's queries.This year, the "policy debate exchange" held at Shanghai Univer (referring to the debate on policy debate series competition organized by the debating society of Shanghai Univer in from December 10 to 14, 2006). There are many universities of National University of Singapore, Melbourne University, Australia University of Macao, Huazhong Normal University, Fudan University, Shanghai Institute of foreign trade,Shanghai Institute of Political Science and Law and Shanghai Univer debate team conducted more than 10 prospective policy and standard policy debate exchange match. It is a useful attempt and exploration for the new development of Chinese debate. Policy debate is a popular form of debate in western countries, but it has not yet been fully developed in the mainland, and its operability and effectiveness have been controversial and uncertain. The debating Association of Shanghai Univer was one of the earliest societies to contact and promote policy debates. Since its introduction from Taiwan, it has persisted in learning and practicing within the community. The event invited overseas branches of Chinese debate team tried "standard Oregon system" and "policy debate simulation system" and so on the different format, some standard policy or quasi policy debate for the debate. Through exchanges, we are pleased to find that it is feasible to promote and develop policy debates, and that each team can understand and accept the idea of policy debate. From the practice of Shanghai Univer debating society, policy debate can cultivate a group with the expression of critical thinking ability, social care and good oral English debater, to students in campus play a positive role. Therefore,We believe that the policy debate is a correct path to debate and is willing to work together to promote the development of policy debates.To promote the policy debate, it is not the competition system, the form or the rule, but the value and the idea, that is, to advocate sincere debate and to care for the social problems. Specific promotion principles, we sum up as follows:Motion: 1) is the essence of social value of the motion, such as euthanasia ethics; chemical castration for rapists of humanity; 2) the reality of life in the quasi policy debate, such as whether to cancel the bedroom lights system; whether the abolition of compulsory college students extracurricular physical exercise; 3) standard policy resolution. Such as whether our country should set up gambling zones, sports events should be banned tobacco advertising.Definition and argument: 1) in order to avoid war and the definition of semantic analysis, both sides of the debate should be defined and the core issue negotiation topics; 2) for quasi policy resolution and standard policy resolution smaller, the two sides should stand in the policy subject department's position, the demand of the needle to the policy, put forward to solve the new policy or specific opposition; 3) issue should focus on the implementation of the main policy is needed to solve the problem (demand), the new policy is to solve the problem (the root property), the new policy is operational (solution) and comparing the advantages and disadvantages for the implementation of new policy (profit and loss ratio etc.).The criterion of the debater: 1) answer questions honestly and positively; 2) bear the burden of proof, i.e., who put forward the proof; 3) do not provide false evidence or false data.Judges invited: 1) rigorous scholarship of social science scholars, especially law professionals; 2) experienced by the original policy debate community, has many years of experience debate coaches or senior debater.Evaluation criteria: 1) comply with the above principles and ideas; 2) to the logic of the authenticity and feasibility argumentation and argument is the primary criterion, followed by oral expression ability; 3) the race, the judges should first book for the participating parties that debate ideas and their own criteria; 4) with standard reference to Anglo American debate theory.To promote the new development of the debate based on policy debate, we have full confidence and patience. According to the plan, we will use the network or other media to publicize the above ideas and guidelines, looking for like-minded debate lovers; then, the internal in various university debating society or the debate team, learning and promotion; when the policy debate has been welcomed and fans, and have some practical basis. Plans to set up an informal policy debate alliance, with a higher platform for the whole society to understand our understanding. Among them, the promotion of colleges and universities is the most basic and key link, because we are not only to promote a concept of value, but also to get down to study and practice, then played a positive role in the specific campus, then step out to promote the development of. We are not afraid of juvenile or failure, but fear that the debater can not benefit from the policy debate, and worry about the debate of college students on the road of utilitarian performance to the wrong path.Today, advocate the development of honest and speculative debate. We are just a few grains of sand, but as long as we stick to our own ideas and ways, and join hands together, we willeventually converge into a beautiful sunny beach. We take a positive attitude to our thinking, rational attitude construction; we believe that a, xiazichengqi; we expect that our society will be more democratic, prosperous and harmonious civilization. The debate will shed light on the development of modern society, as well as the growth of young students.Policy debate promotion CoalitionDecember 2006。
跟我背CET4核心词汇-debate
跟我背CET4核心词汇:debate debaten. argument，argumentation，disputation，public debate v. consider，contend，deliberate，moot词汇辨析argue，quarrel，debate，dispute，discuss，reason这些动词均含辩论，争辩，说理之意。
argue 指提出理由或证据为自己或自己一方的看法或立场辩护，着重说理、论证和企图说服。
quarrel 指两人之间或两个团体之间不友好的、吵吵嚷嚷地大声争辩某事，尤指吵嘴、吵架。
debate 侧重指看法等对立的双方之间正式或公开的争论。
dispute 侧重对分歧进行激烈或热闹的争辩或争论，带肯定感情颜色，常隐含各持已见或争辩不休意味。
discuss 最常用词，指就某一或某些问题表明观点、看法等，以便统一熟悉，解决问题。
reason 指据理力争以说服对方或求得对问题作更深入到的讨论。
参考例句1. When I left, the men were still debating.我离开时，那些人仍在辩论。
2. Class Debate: Does Democracy Matter?课堂辩论：民主重要吗?3. He introduced a question for debate .他提出了一个问题供争论。
双语释义1.N-V AR A debate is a discussion about a subject on which people have different views. 辩论例：An intense debate is going on within the Israeli government.一场激烈的争辩正在以色列政府内部进行。
例：There has been a lot of debate among scholars about this.在学者中有许多关于此问题的辩论。
policy priorities and difficulties -回复
policy priorities and difficulties -回复政策的优先事项和困难在任何一个国家，政府都需要制定一系列的政策来解决社会和经济发展中的各种问题。
然而，由于资源有限和各种利益冲突的存在，政府必须确定优先事项，并克服各种困难来实施这些政策。
本文将逐步回答政策的优先事项和困难的问题。
第一部分：政策的优先事项一、经济发展经济发展是任何国家政府的首要任务之一。
政府应该制定政策来促进经济增长、吸引外国投资、鼓励创新和创业，并提供就业机会。
为了实现这一目标，政府可能需要制定税收和财政政策、制定产业政策、提供基础设施支持等。
二、社会公平社会公平是政府的另一个重要优先事项。
政府应该通过制定教育、医疗、社会保障等政策来确保每个人都能享受到公平和平等的机会。
为了实现这一目标，政府可能需要增加公共支出、改革社会福利制度、提高教育水平、推动性别平等等。
三、环境可持续发展环境可持续发展是政府的另一个重要优先事项。
政府应该制定政策来减少环境污染、保护生态系统、推动可再生能源的使用、促进循环经济等。
为了实现这一目标，政府可能需要加强环境监管、制定环境保护法律、鼓励绿色技术创新等。
第二部分：政策的困难一、利益冲突政府制定政策时，往往会涉及到各种利益冲突。
不同的利益相关方可能对政府的政策有不同的看法和利益诉求，这使得政策制定变得复杂而困难。
政府需要通过协商和妥协来平衡各方的利益，尽量达到最大公约数。
二、资源限制资源有限是政府制定政策的另一个困难。
政府需要根据预算和经济状况来决定投入到不同政策领域的资源。
然而，有时候政府很难满足所有领域的需求，从而需要做出抉择。
这就需要政府进行优先排序，确保资源的最有效利用。
三、政策执行政策执行是政府制定政策过程中的另一个困难。
即使政策制定得很好，如果没有有效的执行机制，政策也很难取得预期效果。
政府需要确保各级政府部门和相关利益相关方都能按照政策要求进行执行，并采取措施来监督和评估政策的实施效果。
Policydebate
Policy debateis a form of research-based speech competition in which teams of two advocate for and against a resolution that typically calls for policy change by the United States Federal Government. It is also referred to by institutions such as the Cross Examination Debate Association as cross-examination debate(sometimes shortened to Cross-X, CX, or C-X) because of the 3-minute questioning period following each constructive speech. Affirmative teams generally present a plan as a proposal for implementation of the resolution. However, many teams also partake in alternative forms of argumentative presentation that do not focus on the acceptance or rejection of a specific planStyle and deliverySpeedPolicy debaters' speed of delivery will vary from league to league and tournament to tournament. The fastest speaking debaters in the nation speak from 350 [1] to in excess of 500 words per minute [2][3]. In many tournaments, debaters will speak very quickly in order to read as much evidence and make as many arguments as possible within the time-constrained speech.FlowingDebaters utilize a specialized form of note taking, called flowing, to keep track of the arguments presented during a debate. Conventionally, debater's notes are divided into separate flows for each different argument in the debate round (kritiks, disads, topicalities, etc.). There are multiple methods of flowing but the most common style incorporates columns of arguments made in a given speech which allows the debater to match the next speaker's responses up with the original arguments. Some refer to this as the "civil war reenactment" style of flowing. Certain shorthands for commonly used words are used to keep up with the rapid rate of delivery. For example, the abbreviation 'HR' may be used to denote 'Human Rights'. HR can also stand for "House Resolution." The abbreviations or stand-in symbols can and do vary between debaters.In policy debate, the flow is the name given to a specialized form of notetaking, which enables debaters to keep track of all of the arguments in the round.It incorporates specialized abbreviations and notations to allow debaters to keep up with the rapid speed of delivery inherent in most speeches. As in V for value and C for criterion.TheoryIt is important to note that while there are many accepted standards in policy debate, there is no written formulation of rules. The "theory argument" comes into play here when debaters debate about what is actually best for policy debate.Burdens of the affirmativeStock issuesOne traditional policy debate theory states that the affirmative team must win certain issues, called the stock issues. The affirmative team must demonstrate a harm in the status quo, present a plan that solves the harm, and prove that there is an inherent barrier that prevents the plan from happening in the status quo. While these three issues usually frame the structure of the first affirmative speech, it has become a minority view among debaters that the affirmative must win one hundred percent risk of each issue.Main article: Stock issuesStock issues may also refer to the offering of stock in finance.In the formal speech competition genre known as policy debate, a widely-accepted doctrine or "debate theory" states that the affirmative plan must address certain issues, called the stock issues (or given the easier-to-remember acronym SHITS by debaters). The first four issues must be presented in the affirmative case. The last issue, topicality, need not be included in the affirmative case, but must be defended if the negative team raises arguments. They are (in order of importance):Solvency: The plan should solve for a harm in the status quo or create an advantage over the status quoHarms: The affirmative should demonstrate a harm in the status quo. This stock issue is often labeled incorrectly as an advantage instead. An advantage, more accurately, is the harm and solvency combined in a single structure. Harms and advantages differ in that: harms are only inclusive of the problems of the status quo, while advantages state those problems and state how the advocacy of the affirmative is going to fix those problems.Inherency: The status quo must not be capable of solving the harms asserted in the case. There are three types of inherency:- Structural inherency: Laws or other barriers to the implementation of the plan.- Attitudinal inherency: Beliefs or attitudes which prevent the implementation of the plan.- Existential inherency: The harms exist and res ipsa loquitur, the status quo must not be able to solve the problem. (Also called "structural gap inherency" in some areas, contrasted with "structural barrier inherency".)The affirmative team has the legislative intent of Fiat (Latin for "let it be so") for their plan so the debate focuses around the effects of the plan rather than whether or not the plan could occur. Inherency is often not labelled in the 1AC but rather incorporated into advantages such that it becomes clear why the plan is an advantage over the status quo. The popularization of offense/defense in policy debate effectively squelched debate over inherency because the affirmative will usually win Inherency as a stock issue as long as there is a chance the status quo will not solve the case.Topicality (Topicality is a stock issue in policy debate which pertains to whether or not the plan affirms the resolution as worded. To contest the topicality of the affirmative, the negative interprets a word or words in the resolution and argues that the affirmative does not meet that definition, that the interpretation is preferable, and that it should be a voting issue.The issue of topicality has also been raised in relations to counterplans with judges and debaters arguing that counterplans either should or should not be topical.):The affirmative case must affirm the resolution. The affirmative case must argue within the bounds of the resolution as defined by appropriate definitions. When the resolution appears vague, the probable intent of the resolution is considered and upheld.Significance: The affirmative must be significant. This stock issue has also fallen out of use in part because of the difficulty of defining what is and what is not significant. Generally, any advantage over the status quo makes the plan significant. Some paradigms and regions, however, do not consider this to be a stock issue. It is reasonable to argue that Significance has been subsumed by the option of the Negative to use a Topicality violation on "substantially."An alternate way to list the stock issues, and a possible easier way, is "Significance, Harms, Inherency, Topicality, Solvency" or or the classroom appropriate variant more contemporary, way in which the issues may be addressed in the 1AC is "inherency, harms, solvency" in this model,the significance, or impacts of NOT enacting the case, are added into the harms. Once again, topicality is left as a burden for the negative team to bring up. the final case structure would then look like:- links- internal links- impactsAdvantagesOther external benefits that are created in addition to solving the harms addressed by the affirmative are called advantages. While an affirmative team isn't required to present any advantages in their case in order to fulfill the affirmative burdens, they are often included for strategic reasons to prove the affirmative case is preferable over the status quo. It is difficult to win on the affirmative side without advantages. The negative team will often present disadvantages which contend that the affirmative plan causes undesirable consequences, so the affirmative team often needs countervailing advantage to generate a net positive outcome. It ishelpful to mitigate the disadvantages run by the negative. Like disadvantages, advantages often have exaggerated or unrealistic impacts, such as causing world peace and ending racism forever.The teams may also present a decision calculus for the judge to decide the case: for instance, they may insist that the judge examine the case in a deontological rather than consequentialist framework. A deontological framework implies that the judge should examine certain impacts or actions of the case before other impacts. Consequentialism is a framework in which the "ends justify the means". In other words, as long as something good comes of an action, anything bad done on the way doesn't matter. An example would be if one team says that the judge must prevent famine before anything else but the other team says that they prevent more deaths and that is what the judge should vote on, no matter how those deaths happened.Negation theoryNegation Theory is a theory of how a debate round should be decided which dictates that the negative need only negate the affirmative instead of having to negate the resolution. The acceptance of negation theory allows negative teams to run arguments, such as Topical Counterplans, which may affirm the resolution but still negate the affirmative's specific plan. Main article: Negation theoryNegation Theory is a theory of how a policy debate round should be decided which dictates that the negative need only negate the affirmative instead of having to negate the resolution. OverviewNegation Theory says that the Negative has the right to negate the Affirmative in whatever way they see fit. Thus, if the Negative can prove in multiple ways, no matter how contradictory they are, that the affirmative plan is a bad idea, then, the judge should vote negative. The only exception is if the affirmative can explicitly grant two arguments made by the negative that directly "double turn," explained below.For example, if the Affirmative's plan says that the United States Federal Government should stop disallowing immigrants entry into the country because they have HIV, Negation Theory says that the Negative can say both of these things (also examples):Increased immigration risks increased terrorismThe Aff has a double standard by only allowing HIV-positive immigrants in, and should also allow TB-positive immigrants inEven though these two arguments completely disagree with each other (Letting TB-positive immigrants into the country would increase immigration, thus increasing terrorism, according to the arguments), the Negative can present them both, because, under this theory, it isn't the Negative's job to present a single argument so as not to contradict themselves, but rather to explain how the Affirmative's plan is not the best choice. The affirmative can't grant both of these arguments, because, even though their underlying philosophies are contradictory, they both taken in their totality prove that the affirmative is bad.However, if the negative says the following two things:The plan would lead to draconian immigration restrictions due to fear of crimeIncreased immigration risks increased terrorismThe affirmative can GRANT both arguments to claim that the plan is still a good idea because it leads to future restrictions on immigration which decrease terrorism. The difference is that, while both of these arguments by themselves would be arguments against the affirmative, taken together they become an argument for the affirmative. This common mistake is known as a "double turn."Some judges are opposed to "negation theory." As with most theoretical issues in debate, teams tend to argue for negation theory when it is to their advantage . when they are negative) and to argue against it when it is not.Negative strategyAfter the affirmative presents its case, the negative can attack the case with many different arguments, which include:①Stock Issues: There are five stock issues often given the acronym SHITS: solvency, harms, inherency, topicality, and significance. The negative can claim that the affirmative does not uphold any of the above burdens. Certain judges believe that the affirmative must uphold each of the issues, or they lose the round. Since the late 1980s, attacks on inherency and significance have fallen out of favor. In some cases, such as when a negative team wishes to win in a Disadvantages debate but has no good solvency turn . nothing that proves that the Affirmative plan actually causes or aggravates the harms the Affirmative team cites), the Negative will attack Significance or Advantages, especially when the Affirmative team cites a critical Advantage or colossally bad Harm. Most debates that are "on-case" (that is, directly responsive to the Affirmative plan), however, are Solvency debates.Topicality: In particular, of the Stock Issues, Topicality arguably sees the most play in technical high school debate. The Negative will attempt to argue that the Affirmative team does not fall under the rubric of the resolution and should be rejected immediately regardless of the merits or advantages of the plan. This is a type of 'meta-debate' argument, as both sides then spend time defining various words or phrases in the resolution, laying down standards for why their definition(s) or interpretation(s) is superior (including arguments such as referring to the amount of argumentative "ground" either team would have under their or the opposing team's definition or interpretation of the resolution), and even spend time discussing what Topicality is and whether or not it is a relevant burden!Most yearly topics have at least one or two commonly run Affirmative cases (such as landmines during a weapons of mass destruction topic, holistic medicine during a mental health topic, racial profiling and reversing the Supreme Court policies that led to internment during a privacy topic, or similar) that are only arguably topical, so Topicality is often justified as a check or deterrent on and against such plans, which usually have quite strategic components (such as critical impacts or advantages normally beyond the scope of the topic). Topicality is also often considered a leveling factor in high school debate: A Negative team that is less well-funded, prepared or skillful or facing a case that they are notprepared for can use Topicality to win, or at least force the Affirmative to spend substantial amounts of time rebutting (in this case, Topicality is known as a "time-suck"). For this reason, many arguments have come into vogue arguing that topicality is theoretically or critically repugnant: Perhaps Topicality as a timesuck is unfair and should be punished, or perhaps language is so vague that the Negative team is simply imperially attacking an unconventional and creative Affirmative, or perhaps the Affirmative is discussing something so important that Topicality should be ignored. Most judges seem to reject these arguments, though they must still be rebutted.Disadvantages: The negative can claim that there are disadvantages, or adverse effects of the plan, which outweigh any advantages claimed. The basic structure of a Disadvantage includes the Uniqueness, or the current situation which indicates that the disadvantage will not occur in the status quo; the link, which states that passing the affirmative's plan would reverse the uniqueness; the internal link, that states the events that would would lead up to the impact, and the Impact, which is the final, often negative, effect of the affirmative plan. In order to outweigh any positive effects of the affirmative case, impacts are often unrealistic and exaggerated, exceeding what would be expected as outcomes of a real world policy action. Both sides are usually guilty of using exaggerated impacts, but in general they are acceptable.Politics: This is a subset of the Disadvantage, but worth noting independently, because of many complex and controversial theory/critical arguments that reference Politics and its admissibility. The general format has to do with other policies in the real world that the plan would ostensibly affect. For example: An Affirmative plan may be such a sharp change or shift from a generally conservative Senate that the Senate feels that it must rally its hardline conservative base with a policy that the Negative argues has titanically bad results (typically nuclear war, ecocidal extinction or similar levels of disadvantage). Politics Disadvantages are unique in a few ways: They typically require up-to-the-moment Uniqueness (as political climates are constantly changing), which generally favors larger or better funded squads as they are more likely to have the resources and time to acquire the newest Uniqueness. Unlike many other Disadvantages, they change substantially from year to year and even month to month, as new bills are considered and others defeated. Further, while most Disadvantages are accepted (at least theoretically if not critically), Politics face common theoretical and critical objections. Many argue that Politics Disadvantages are fiat confusions: They deal with HOW the plan passes, not whether it SHOULD pass. Other arguments allege that the focus or style of Politics Disadvantages lull debaters into an elitist mindset, or distort reality beyond recognition, and should be rejected on those debits. Kritiks ., Critique): The negative can claim that the affirmative is guilty of a certain mindset or assumption that should be grounds for rejection. Kritiks are sometimes a reason to reject the entire affirmative advocacy without evaluating its policy; other times, kritiks can be evaluated within the same framework for evaluation as the affirmative case. Examples of some kritiks include ones against biopower, racism, centralized government or anthropocentric viewpoints. Critiques arose in the early 1990s, with the first critiques based in deconstructionist philosophy about the intrinsicambiguity of language. The affirmative team was forced to prove that language had meaning before their case could be considered.Counterplans: The negative can reject the status quo in favor of a different policy action, which provides better advantages, or fewer disadvantages than the plan, also known as net benefits. The affirmative team may argue against the competition of the counterplan by permuting the CP, that is adopting some portion of the counterplan in addition to their plan. A successful permutation may be grounds to remove the CP from consideration, or grounds to narrow the scope of the debate to only the mutually exclusive part of the CP.Theory: Sometimes the subject matter of the affirmative's case will create an uneven playing field from the beginning. In these cases, the negative can resort to making objections as to the procedure or content of the affirmative case. These objections often are "theoretical" in that they try to make objections based upon what bad can/has come to debate from the infraction, or what would make debate better if it were true. The Affirmative team may also make theoretical objections to negative arguments: For example, some Counterplans or ways of arguing Counterplans face common theoretical objections.Performance: A song, dance, poem, or other method of expression other than rhetoric that is used in the round. For example, a dance about freedom may better represent freedom than actual discourse. This technique was introduced subsequent to 1998. However, in recent times performance arguments have been criticized for being abusive, irrelevant, or bigoted in some way or form. Most judges will agree that some Performance arguments have meaningful weight in a round. For example, if a negative team runs a Kritik, or attack on the Affirmative's permeation of bad mindsets or social beliefs, this could be justified. Kritiks have "alternatives," or other courses of action advocated instead of the minset of the Affirmative that "links" into the Kritik. If an alternative of "breaking down social barriers," for example, was proposed, the Affirmative team might breakdance or do other things to show they are breaking free of society's constraints, thus avoiding the implications of the Kritik.Narrative: A subset of performance arguments, narratives are emotionally delivered speeches generally given at the opening of a speech. They are usually personal in nature, and call for the judge to approve of a specific policy option based on a situation. A case that would solve for world hunger might include a narrative about a starving African child.。
公共政策单词
公共政策public policy公共利益public interest公共活动public activities公共空间public space公共物品public goods公共权力public power程序性政策procedural policy再分配型政策redistributive policy自我管制型政策self control policy管制性政策regulatory policy政策主体policy subject利益集团interest groups思想库thinktank社会问题socialproblem公众议程public agenda政府议程government agenda政策规划policy planning政策方案Policy scheme目标群体target groups有限理性模型Bounded Rationality Model 渐进主义模型Gradualism model小组意识模型Group awareness model精英理论elite theory制度理论institutional theory博弈理论game theory团体理论Group theory过程模型Process Model价值判断value judgment政策执行policy implementation钓鱼执法entrapment阶梯效应staircase effect破窗效应Broken windows theory政策评估policy evaluation非正式评估unofficial evaluation预测性评估Predictive evaluation帕累托最优Pareto Optimality成本-收益分析Cost-benefit analysis 政策终结policy termination全体一致原则unanimity rule多数决定规则majority rule等级决定原则hierarchy rule光环效应Halo Effect从众效应Bandwagon effect黄灯效应yellow light effect政策合法性policy legitimacy政策听证Policy hearing政策议题Policy issue政策讨论 Policy discussion政策论证 Policy argument政策建议Policy advocacy政策制定 Policy making效益 effectiveness 效率 efficiency 效果 effect政策分析 Policy analysis法治 rule of law法制 rule by law议程设置 Agenda setting公正 Justice立法 Legislation政策输出 Policy output政策影响 Policy impact 邻避效应 not-in-my-backyard公地悲剧 tragedy of the commons囚徒困境 prisoner’s dilemma搭便车 free rider手段与目标 means-ends无差异不作选择，无选择不作决定No difference，no choice. Nochoice, no decision-making.公平equity 平等equality。
WHAT IS DEBATE
WHAT IS DEBATE?Debate is about change. We are constantly engaged in a struggle to make our lives, our community, our country, our world, our future, a better one. We should never be satisfied with the way things are now - surely there is something in our lives that could be improved.Debate is that process which determines how change should come about. Debate attempts to justify changing the way we think and live. In the real world, debate occurs everyday on the floor of the United States Senate and the United States House of Representatives. Debate occurs at the United Nations, the faculty meetings at your school, and at your dinner table. The procedures for these debates may differ, but the process is the same - discussion that resolves an issue which will determine whether change is good or bad. The United Nations debated whether or not the Iraq invasion of Kuwait was good or bad; the faculty meetings debate school policies; you may recently have debated with your parents after dinner about the size of your allowance or when you can begin to drive your own car.In the classroom, we will attempt to"formalize"this debate process.1 . You will work with a partner. You and your partner form a"debate team". Sometimesyou will have to be for the issue (the affirmative) and sometimes you will have to beagainst the issue (negative). In any instance, you will have plenty of time to get ready for the debate.2. You will deliver speeches in a format that is unique to debate. The speeches are calledconstructives and rebuttals. Each person on each team will speak twice. There areaffirmative constructives and negative constructives. There are affirmative rebuttals andnegative rebuttals.3.You will learn rules and techniques that will seem strange to you. The way we learn howto debate may at first seem difficult. But once you take on the challenge, you will begin to understand its relationship to debating. The most difficult part of debate is the first fewweeks, after that it gets easier and easier once you have learned the rules.4.We will debate only one resolution. Most of our emphasis will be on competitive ortournament debating. In order to compete at tournaments and to give the debaters sufficient time to prepare, a standard topic or resolution is used all year. Thousands of high schools at this very minute are researching and debating the very same issues and ideas that you will be. The resolution determines the debate area. From this area there can be thousands of issues so that all of the debates are never the same and are always changing.5.Those students who want to be challenged can participate in debate tournaments againstother high schools during the school year.Developing and Implementing a Debate Activity1.The faculty member introduces the topic or problem.2.Teams are formed (usually 2-3 per team); each team commits to defending or arguing forone side or the other.3.Teams prepare a defense or argument for their position – ideally, this is done based oninformation from the literature. Debate preparation requires students to be able to articulate their position, and argue against the opposing position – thus students must be well prepared on both sides of the argument. The amount of time for preparation should depend on the type of problem posed. Preparation is often done as an out of class assignment for the following class period.4.The debate occurs after the teams have had preparation time. The debate process includesopening arguments, presentation of viewpoints, rebuttal, and summary.Discussion after the debate may be done to explore how the debate process changed the thinking of the students involved.Brief DescriptionTry the standard debate format. Includes adaptations of the format plus ten more strategies for engaging students!Keywordsdebate, role play, Lincoln, constructive, constructor, affirmative, negative, cross-examine, summary, summarize, think-pair-share, inner circle, graphic organizerMaterials Needed•copy of rules of debate (provided)•debate rubric for grading their own and/or peers' debate performances (provided)Lesson PlanThis lesson presents several basic debate formats, including the popular Lincoln-Douglas format. In addition, it provides adaptation suggestions for using debates with whole classes and small groups. Plus, it offers ten strategies teachers can use to make the debate process more interesting to students.In 1859, Senator Stephen A. Douglas was up for re-election to his Illinois Senate seat. His opponent was Abraham Lincoln. During the campaign, the two men faced off in a TheLincoln-Douglas Debates of 1858, a series of seven debates on the issue of slavery. On Election Day, Douglas was re-elected, but Lincoln's position on the issue and his inspiring eloquence had earned him wide recognition that would aid his eventual bid for the presidency in the Presidential Elections of 1860.The basic format of the Lincoln-Douglas debates has long been used as a debate format in competition and in classrooms. The Lincoln-Douglas Debate format is a one-to-one debate, in which two sides of an issue are debated. It starts with a statement of purpose/policy. (For example, School uniforms should be required in all schools.) The debater who agrees with the statement (the Affirmative) begins the debate, which is structured in this way:•Affirmative position debater presents constructive debate points. (6minutes)•Negative position debater cross-examines affirmative points. (3 minutes)•Negative position presents constructive debate points. (7 minutes)•Affirmative position cross-examines negative points. (3 minutes)•Affirmative position offers first rebuttal (4 minutes)•Negative position offers first rebuttal (6 minutes)•Affirmative position offers second rebuttal (3 minutes)Generally speaking, in a Lincoln-Douglas competitive debate, debaters do not know the statement of purpose/policy in advance. The purpose is proposed, and each presenter is given 3 minutes to prepare for the face-off.In the classroom, however, the Lincoln-Douglas debate format is adapted in a wide variety of ways. Following are some of the ways that procedure might be adapted in a classroom setting to involve small groups or an entire class.Adapt the Lincoln-Douglas Format for Classroom or Small Group UseArrange the class into groups of six. Each group will represent one side -- the affirmative or negative -- of a debatable question or statement. In order to involve all six individuals, each member of the team will have a specific responsibility based on the Lincoln-Douglas debate format detailed above. Each team will include students who assume the following roles:•Moderator -- calls the debate to order, poses the debatable point/question, and introduces the debaters and their roles.•Lead Debater/Constructor -- presents the main points/arguments for his or her team's stand on the topic of the debate.•Questioner/Cross-Examiner -- poses questions about the opposing team's arguments to its Question Responder.•Question Responder -- takes over the role of the Lead Debater/Constructor as he or she responds to questions posed by the opposing team's Questioner/Cross-Examiner.•Rebutter -- responds on behalf of his or her team to as many of the questions raised in the cross-examination as possible.•Summarizer -- closes the debate by summarizing the main points of his or her team's arguments, especially attempts by the opposition to shoot holes in their arguments.Note: In the standard Lincoln-Douglas debate format, the negative position isgiven a lengthy rebuttal time in which to refute the affirmative rebuttal and makea final summary argument for the position. Then the affirmative position has abrief opportunity to rebut the rebuttal (offer a closing argument, if you will) --and the debate is over. In this format, adapted for the classroom, both teams offera closing summary/argument after the rebuttals.The six-student team format enables you to arrange a class of 24 students into four equal teams.•If your class is smaller than 24 students, you might adapt the format described above by having the teacher serve as moderator.•If your class is larger than 24 students, you might arrange students into more and/or smaller groups and combine some roles (for example, Moderator and Summarizer or Moderator and Questioner/Cross-Examiner).You can apply the Lincoln-Douglas classroom debate adaptations above by having pairs of teams debate the same or different issues. If this is your first experiment with debate in the classroom, it would probably be wise to have both teams debating the same issue, or you can use your most confident students to model good debate form by using the fishbowl strategy described in theAdditional Strategies section below.Additional StrategiesThe following strategies can be used to extend the Lincoln-Douglas debate structure by involving the entire class in different ways:•Three-Card strategy --This technique can be used as a pre-debate strategy to help students gather information about topics they might not know a lot about. It also can be used after students observe two groups in a debate, when the debatable question is put up for full classroom discussion. This strategy provides opportunities for all students to participate in discussions that might otherwise be monopolized by students who are frequent participators. In this strategy, the teacher provides each student with two or three cards on which are printed the words "Comment or Question." When a student wishes to make a point as part of the discussion, the student raises a card; after making a comment or asking a question pertinent to the discussion, the student turns in the card. This strategy encourages participants to think before jumping in; those who are usually frequent participants in classroom discussions must weigh whether the point they wish to make is valuable enough to turn in a card. When a student has used all the cards, he or she cannot participate in the discussion again until all students have used all their cards.•Participation Countdown strategy --Similar to the above technique, the countdown strategy helps students monitor their participation, so they do not monopolize the discussion. In this strategy, students raise a hand when they have something to say. The second time they have something to say, they must raise their hand with one finger pointing up (to indicate they have already participated once). When they raise their hand a third time, they do so with two fingers pointing up (to indicate they have participated twice before). After a student has participated three times, he or she cannot share again as long as any other student has something to add to the discussion.•Tag Team Debate strategy -- This strategy can be used to help students learn about a topic before a debate, but it is probably better used when opening up discussion after a formal debate or as an alternative to the Lincoln-Douglas format. In a tag team debate, each team of five members represents one side of a debatable question. Each team has a set amount of time (say, 5 minutes) to present its point of view. When it's time for the team to state its point of view, one speaker from the team takes the floor. That speaker can speak for no more than 1 minute, and must "tag" another member of the team to pick up the argument before the minute is up. Team members who are eager to pick up on or add to the team's argument, can put out a hand to be tagged. That way, the current speaker knows who might be ready to pick up the argument. No member of the team can be tagged twice until all members have been tagged once.•Role Play Debate strategy --In the Lincoln-Douglas debate format, students play the roles of Constructor, Cross-Examiner, and so on. But many debate topics lend themselves to a different form of debate -- the role play debate.In a role play debate, students examine different points of view or perspectives related to an issue. See a sample lesson: Role Play Debate.•Fishbowl strategy -- This strategy helps focus the attention of students not immediately involved in the debate; or it can be used to put your most skilled and confident debaters center stage as they model proper debate form and etiquette. As the debaters sit center-stage (in the "fishbowl"), other students observe the action from outside the fishbowl. To actively involve observers, appoint them to judge the debate; have each observer keep a running tally of new points introduced by each side as the debate progresses. Note: If you plan to use debates in the future, it might be a good idea to videotape the final student debates your current students present. Those videos can be used to help this year's students evaluate their participation, and students in the videos can serve as the "fishbowl" group when you introduce the debate structure to future students.Another alternative: Watch one of the Online Debate Videos from Debate Central. •Inner Circle/Outer Circle strategy -- This strategy, billed as a pre-writing strategy for editorial opinion pieces, helps students gather facts and ideas about an issue up for debate.It focuses students on listening carefully to their classmates. The strategy can be used as an information-gathering session prior to a debate or as the structure for the actual debate.See a sample lesson: Inner Circle/Outer Circle Debate.•Think-Pair-Share Debate strategy --This strategy can be used during the information-gathering part of a debate or as a stand-alone strategy. Students start the activity by gathering information on their own. Give students about 10 minutes to think and make notes about their thoughts. Next, pair each student with another student; give them about 10 minutes to share their ideas, combine their notes, and think more deeply about the topic. Then pair each student pair with another pair; give them about 10 minutes to share their thoughts and gather more notes?Eventually, the entire class will come together to share information they have gathered about the topic. Then students will be ready to knowledgably debate the issue at hand. See the Think-Pair-Share strategy in action in an Education World article, Discussion Webs in the Classroom.•Four Corners Debate strategy -- In this active debate strategy, students take one of four positions on an issue. They either strongly agree, agree, disagree, or strongly disagree.See a sample lesson: Four Corners Debate.•Graphic Organizer strategy -- A simple graphic organizer enables students to compare and contrast, to visualize, and to construct their position on any debatable question. See a sample lesson using a simple two-column comparison graphic organizer in the Education World article Discussion Webs in the Classroom.•Focus Discussions strategy -- The standard rules for a Lincoln-Douglas style debate allow students 3 minutes to prepare their arguments. The debatable question is not introduced prior to that time. If your students might benefit from some research and/or discussion before the debate, you might pose the question and then have students spend one class period (or less or more) gathering information about the issue's affirmative arguments (no negative arguments allowed) and the same amount of time on the negative arguments (no affirmative arguments allowed). See a sample lesson: Human Nature: Good or Evil?.。
Policy Brief
© OECD 2006South-South Trade: Vital for DevelopmentIntroductionThe most effective way to make trade work for development andpoverty reduction is for countries to agree on much improved market access under the Doha round of talks at the World Trade Organization (WTO). Ambitious trade liberalisation can generate more gains for developing countries than any other area of international economic co-operation or development assistance.These arguments are a familiar theme of the Doha discussion. But while access to OECD markets is clearly a key element in developing countries’ productivity growth, that is only part of the story. Trade between developing countries is also vital – indeed, research clearly demonstrates that if developing countries want to reap the maximum gains from multilateral trade liberalisation, they too need to open up their markets and boost trade among themselves.Trade between developing countries (South-South trade) offers wide scope for specialisation and efficiency gains. At present, barriers to South-South trade are higher than those governing South trade with other partners, and distance-related costs are higher. Recent OECDresearch shows that the potential benefit from freer South-South trade may indeed be at least as large as the gains that developing countries can obtain from better access to rich countries’ markets (North-South trade). There is certainly room for South-South trade to develop – it is estimated that exports from one developing country to another account for just 6% of total world merchandise exports, while South-South trade in services overall makes up just 10% of world total.This not only underscores the importance of a successful conclusion of the current round of WTO negotiations but also the significance of active participation by developing countries. ■How hasSouth-South trade been evolving?What are the gains from more open South-South goods trade?What are the gains from more open South-South services trade?Is South-South trade subject to higher barriers?What prospects for the future?For further information For further reading Where to contact us?2 ■ © OECD 2006South-South merchandise trade has expanded considerably in the past 20 years, albeit from a very small base: it now makes up around 6% of world trade, compared with 3% in 1985. Over that period, South-South merchandise trade grew on average at the impressive rate of 12.5% a year, compared with 7% for North-North trade and 9.8% for North-South trade. But tariff barriers affecting South-South trade are still much higher than those affecting other trade, at an average 11.1% compared with 4.3% for North-North trade.South-South trade has become relatively more important as a share of total merchandise trade involving the South, rising from less than 10% of the total to around 14%. But the bulk of total goods trade involving the South is still accounted for by trade with the North. South-South merchandise trade displays a significant geographicalconcentration in developing Asian countries. What is more, South-South trade mostly involves upper-middle- and lower-middle-incomecountries which account for between 3% and 5% of total world trade; exchanges involving low income countries make up barely 1% of total world trade. This situation is unlikely to change since growth in the value of exchanges involving low income countries shows a significantly slower growth trend than for others. There are also significant differences in the products involved in South-Southmerchandise trade as compared to North-South and North-North trade. Broadly speaking, South-South trade seems to be more concentrated on raw materials and less processed products than either North-South or North-North trade, probably due to differences in factors affecting both the demand and the supply sides.On the trade in services side, the limited data available make itextremely difficult to measure the size and direction of trade flows. A first attempt by the OECD to investigate the nature and scale of such trade indicates that in 2002, South-South total services exports (covering cross-border trade, movement of consumers, and, to a limited extent, the movement of services suppliers) represented around 10% of world services exports. There are however important sectoral differences. For example, while South-South exchanges play an important role in world tourism, certain other services such as air transport are estimated to be still heavily dominated by North-North and South-North flows.As with merchandise trade, significant geographical concentration of South-South services exports is apparent: exports from Asiandeveloping countries represent around 8% of total world exports, and exports to other developing countries account for more than half ofHow hasSouth-South trade been evolving?© OECD 2006 ■ 3their total exports. Similarly, there is some evidence that for certain Asian and Latin American developing countries, trade with otherdeveloping countries exceeds 50% of their total services trade. For the rest, exports to developed countries appear to be more important. The most important conclusion to emerge from this work is thatservices trade between developing countries takes place predominantly at the regional level for cross-border trade; movement of consumers; commercial presence and movement of suppliers. This may be due to the increasing tendency to include liberalisation of services trade in regional trade agreements. ■Research at the OECD suggests that the recent growth in South-South goods trade has not been brought about by the so-called “death of distance” – the large drop in the cost of moving people, objects and ideas around the globe observed in the 1980s and 1990s. The impact of distance-related trade costs has not noticeably diminished over the period and such costs continue to have a much more negative effect on South-South than on North-North trade. Whereas a 10% increase in distance between countries or regions tends to reduce North-North trade by about 10%, the comparable figure for South-South trade is 17%. In both cases, the figures estimated for 2002 are scarcely different from those for 1985. However, given that the distances facing South-South trade are broadly comparable (on average) to those facing North-North and North-South trade, there is considerable scope for increasing South-South trade by reducing distance-related trade costs to levels prevailing for other trade flows.It can also be demonstrated that the importance of a common language for South-South trade increased markedly in the early 1990s (e.g. trade among French-speaking Africa), but remained approximately constant for other trade flows. Hence, ethno-cultural links may have been one factor in the observed growth of South-South trade around that time.The evidence currently available suggests, however, that policy barriers are much more important for South-South merchandise trade than for other trade flows. On average, a 10% tariff cut is estimated to be associated with a 1.6% increase in exports. This could translate into an additional USD 5.7 billion in export earnings a year (based on2002 data). Interestingly, the data indicate that an equivalent reduction in North-North or North-South tariff barriers would have a lesser impact on trade flows. This suggests a considerable scope for tradepolicy to boost trade between low- and lower-middle-income countries, and thus help boost economic development and reduce poverty. Indeed,What are the gains from more open South-South goods trade?4 ■ © OECD 2006model simulations of tariff reductions performed by the OECD suggest that, from a development point of view, liberalising South-South trade is at least as important as tariff-free market access to Northern markets. This seems to be particularly the case for agricultural products, but projected gains from liberalising South-South trade in manufactured goods are also substantial (Table 1).The observed geographical patterns of South-South trade imply that about half of the gains from future South-South tariff liberalisation would be realised by low and middle income countries in Asia.Additionally, most of the gains from South-South liberalisation in Asia would be regional. In other words, countries would benefit most from liberalised trade with their geographical neighbours. One prominent exception to this rule is China which is actually estimated to gain more than twice as much from liberalisation of trade with Latin American, MENA and sub-Saharan countries than from liberalisation with other Asian countries. The picture is slightly different in Latin America and sub-Saharan Africa where regional gains account for respectively 45% and 39% of gains from South-South trade – almost all the remaining gains can be attributed to trade with low and middle income countries in Asia.It also appears, however, that only a part of the potential gains from South-South trade could be realised through regional agreements,mainly in Asia. More generally, many low and middle income countries benefit most from freer trade with similar countries in other regions. This points to multilateral negotiations as an important vehicle for realising the gains from South-South goods trade. ■In the case of services, the elements that influence trade, including policy factors, apply to South-South trade in much the same way that they do to other forms of trade. But the effect of distance onSouth-South trade in services appears to be less strong than for goods trade, according to recent OECD research on foreign direct investmentWhat are the gains from more open South-South services trade?Table 1.WELFARE GAINSFROM A WORLDWIDE REMOVAL OF TARIFFS ON MERCHANDISE TRADE(USD BILLION)Source: OECD (2006a).© OECD 2006 ■ 5(FDI) stocks in services. This is consistent with the idea that the main cost involved in services trade is information, rather than transport which pushes up the cost of goods trade. But the analysis also points to the importance of policy barriers, and implies that countries could increase trade in services across all sectors by relaxing restrictions on foreign establishment.Services liberalisation is also found to have a positive impact onmerchandise exports through cheaper transport, communication, and financial infrastructure. In addition, productivity gains in services which are direct inputs into producing merchandise can increase the competitiveness of firms. In developed countries these effects arecomparatively weaker because the share of manufacturing and supply of exported goods in gross domestic product (GDP) tends to decrease as economies mature. In developing countries, however, service sector performance is a significant factor explaining merchandise exports. Services are particularly important where manufacturing activities are large-scale and require specialised labour, many intermediate inputs, and raw materials from geographically dispersed small-scale suppliers. One significant fact to note is that the impact of lifting restrictions on performance may increase more than proportionally with the scale of the liberalisation measure. This may mean that it is not enough to liberalise moderately in order to achieve an impact on performance if the initial degree of restrictiveness is high. Preliminary results suggest that if services sectors are closed to foreign competition, the improvement of their performance requires a major rather than a small or moderate liberalisation effort. More research is needed to further assess whether a courageous liberalisation effort is required for notable improvement in outcomes, which may particularly benefit goods exports of less developed countries. ■South-South merchandise trade is still generally subject to much higher barriers than North-South or North-North trade. Overall, the barriers facing South-South trade are estimated to be almost three times higher than those facing North-North trade (Table 2). But individual tariff rates vary widely across the South, and the poorest countriesIs South-South trade subject to higher barriers?Table 2.SIMPLE AVERAGETARIFF RATES, 2001, BY EXPORTER AND IMPORTERGROUPSSource: Dihel, Kowalski and Shepherd (2006), calculated from MAcMap data.6 ■ © OECD 2006tend to be those with the highest tariffs. Protection levels increase as the exporter’s income level decreases. This means that bilateral trade between the poorest countries tends to face the highest barriers.In the services area, analysis by sector shows that a high number of developing countries continue to impose restrictions to a level well above the OECD average in banking, insurance, telecommunications, distribution and engineering. Restrictions on services in different sectors are measured by a trade restrictiveness index (TRI). Results in banking services for selected countries (Figure 1) show that Asian non-OECD developing countries are the most restrictive group in this sector, followed by Russia and selected Arab countries. ■The economic stakes in the Doha Development Agenda negotiations at the WTO are high. The process of global integration is far from complete and substantial gains from international specialisation remain untapped. Despite the considerable progress achieved in the first eight rounds of negotiations, research shows that there is still ample scope for benefits to accrue from further multilateral tariff liberalisation alone. In terms of shares of gains in national incomes, developing countries as a group stand to gain more from multilateral tariff liberalisation than industrial countries; and these gains depend significantly on the extent to which developing countries themselves open up their markets.An agreement that achieves deeper liberalisation in services wouldgenerate significant additional benefits for all WTO members, including developing countries. What is ultimately at stake in the DDA is whetherWhat prospects for the future?Figure 1.AGGREGATE TRADERESTRICTIVENESS INDEX – BANKINGSource: OECD (2006b).0.51.01.52.02.53.0M a la y s i a I n d i a C h i n a T h a i l a n d R u s s i a S e rb i a M o n t e n e g r o M ac ed o n i a C r o a t i a M o l d o v a A l b a n i a B u l g a r i a R o m a n i aE g y p t M o r o c c o T u n i s i a Z a m b i a J o r d a n C o l o m b i a V e n e z u e l a M e x i c o B r a z i l B o l i v i a C h i l e A r g e n t i n a E c u a d o r P e r u U r u g u a y L a t v i a E s t o n i a L i t h u a n i aFor further information governments will garner the political resolve in support of a shared vision to maintain and strengthen the rule-based trade environmentin which growth, development, poverty eradication, better jobsand improved social and political conditions can be facilitated and encouraged.The analysis of recent trade and macroeconomic trends further suggests that the stakes associated with South-South trade are constantly expanding in tandem with the potential for gains that can be achieved through reforms of trade policies of South countries. This is associated with the fact that countries in the South record generally higher rates of income growth than developed countries and both merchandise and services trade of the South is growing at higherpace as compared to the North. If this trend continues, the balanceof gains from trade policy reforms will continue shifting in favourof South-South trade, making the case for low and middle income countries to participate actively in the multilateral trading system even stronger. ■For more information about the OECD’s work on South-South trade, please contact:Nora Dihel, tel.: + 33 1 45 24 78 11, e-mail: Nora.Dihel@, or Przemyslaw, Kowalski, tel.: +33 1 45 24 17 23,e-mail: Przemyslaw.Kowalski@.© OECD 2006■7© OECD 2006The OECD Policy Briefs are prepared by the Public Affairs Division, Public Affairs and CommunicationsDirectorate. They are published under the responsibility of the Secretary-General.UNITED STATESOECD Washington Center 2001 L Street N.W ., Suite 650 WASHINGTON DC. 20036-4922 Tel.: (1-202) 785 6323 Fax: (1-202) 785 0350 E-mail:washington.contact@ Internet: Toll free: (1-800) 456 6323OECD HEADQUARTERS2, rue André-Pascal 75775 PARIS Cedex 16 Tel.: (33) 01 45 24 81 67 Fax: (33) 01 45 24 19 50 E-mail: sales@ Internet: GERMANYOECD Berlin Centre Schumannstrasse 10 D-10117 BERLINTel.: (49-30) 288 8353 Fax: (49-30) 288 83545 E-mail:berlin.contact@ Internet:/deutschlandJAPANOECD Tokyo CentreNippon Press Center Bldg 2-2-1 Uchisaiwaicho, Chiyoda-kuTOKYO 100-0011 Tel.: (81-3) 5532 0021 Fax: (81-3) 5532 0035E-mail: center@ Internet: MEXICOOECD Mexico CentreAv. Presidente Mazaryk 526 Colonia: PolancoC.P . 11560 MEXICO,D.F . Tel.: (00.52.55) 9138 6233 Fax: (00.52.55) 5280 0480 E-mail:mexico.contact@ Internet:/centrodemexicoOECD publications can be purchased from our online bookshop:/bookshopOECD publications and statistical databases are also available via our online library: 00 2006 4R 1 P 4OECD (2006), Dihel, N., Kowalski, P., Shepherd, B. (2006), “South-South Goods and Services Trade”, in Douglas Lippoldt (ed.), Trading Up: Economic Perspectives on Development Issues in the Multilateral Trading System , OECD, Paris, ISBN 92-64-02559-6, € 59, 253 p.OECD (2006a), “South-South Trade in Goods”, OECD Internal Working Paper, TD/TC(2006)8.OECD (2006b), “Modal estimates of services barriers”, OECD Internal Working Paper, TD/TC/WP(2005)36.“The Doha Development Agenda: What’s at Stake for Business in the Developing World?” International Trade Forum – Issue 2/2003.For further readingWhere to contact us?。
英国议会制辩论常用语精华总结(BP-debate)
Honorable judges, distinguished guests, ladies and gentlemen.....LOGICAL ＆CLEARLYWays to open a debateTo set the framework for our opinion, we believe it is necessary to state…We would like to introduce our stand by giving the following definitions. …In order to effectively debate this topic, we would like to propose….A number of key issues arise which merit (deserve) closer examination.In the first place we would like to make clear that….The main argument focuses on….1.Giving Reasons and offering explanations:To start with…,The reason why...,That's why...,For this reason...,That's the reason why...,Many people think....,Considering...,Allowing for the fact that...,When you consider that...,2. Asking for an opinion from the other partyI would be glad to hear your opinion of …我很乐意听听你对……的意见。
I was wondering where you stood on the question of …我想知道你对……问题怎么看。
英式辩论规则
module 1Academic British parliamentary Debate Parliament（议会）权力和立法机关监督政府The House of common(下议院)650名议员组成，每名有当地人选出代表国家的每个地区。
The house of lord (上议院)The government and opposition政府负责安排两院的事务，执行两院的政策。
反对党批评政府，希望对政策的制定以及立法工作提出建设性意见，以便下次选举时，获得有利的选票Motion（议案）1.motions of value focus on abstract moral and philosophical principalFor example：自由比平等更有价值仁慈的专制是最好的政府模式用一条无辜的性命去拯救10人是道德的。
2.Motions of policy are plans of action to solve an extra problem。
For example：本院主张废除禁止虐待动物的法律本院主张禁止发布错误言论的演讲本院相信欧盟应该为奖励父母生孩子本院将会禁止平民使用核能我们的辩论主要是policy motionsA closed motion（封闭）在议会制辩论中，PM（prime minister首相）被赋予（set the ground for the debate）划定辩论范围的权力，通过定义和解释motion，换句话就是说，PM可以缩小或者扩大辩论的范围。
一个closed motion 解释和定义的范围是固定的。
但是semi motion（半封闭）和open motion 却相对可以自由的定义。
我们不用定义所有的term（概念），当这些概念被观众所知道的。
但这个motion的term大家都清楚的明白时，我们就describe statue quo（现象和背景）或者说存在的问题。
- 1、下载文档前请自行甄别文档内容的完整性，平台不提供额外的编辑、内容补充、找答案等附加服务。
- 2、"仅部分预览"的文档,不可在线预览部分如存在完整性等问题,可反馈申请退款(可完整预览的文档不适用该条件!)。
- 3、如文档侵犯您的权益，请联系客服反馈,我们会尽快为您处理(人工客服工作时间：9:00-18:30)。
Why Debate Just One Resolution?
Accidental Launch US Nuclear Deterrence Nuclear Energy US-Iran War Cyberwar UN Security Council “Peace Process” Camp David Accords North Korea
Where Can Policy Debate Take You?
• Law school • Government • Business
“70% of law school deans recommended participation in intercollegiate debate”
Parcher, Jeffrey. “The Value of Debate.” Adapted from the Report of the Philodemic Debate Society, Georgetown University (1998)
“participation in policy debate provides significant benefits for those entering the professions of law, management… and teaching”
Hobbs, J.D. and Chandler, R.C. "The Perceived Benefits of Policy Debate training in Various Professions." Speaker and Gavel 28 (1991) 4-6.
Matlon, R. J., and Keele, L.M. "A Survey of Participants in the National Debate Tournament, 1947-1980." Journal of the American Forensic Association 20 (1984) 194-205.
Nuclear Proliferation
Iran
Israel & Palestine
Al Qaeda Libya CBWs
Debt Reduction
Terrorism
Nuclear
Democracy Assistance to the Middle East & North Africa
Obama & Congress
• Each debater also participates in two 3-minute cross-examination periods, courtroom style
Why Debate Public Policy?
• Timely, significant issues • Arguments grounded in evidence & research • Gain valuable skills
Trade & Shipping Routes
What’s The Format?
• You debate with a partner • Each debater gives two speeches per debate
– Constructive (9 minutes) – Rebuttal (6 minutes)
Do You Have To Talk Fast?
• No
Is It Fun?
• Work hard, play hard • Long-lasting friendships
99% of former policy debaters recommend that current students engage in policy debate
What About At Cornell?
• • • • Top 5 nationally 1st in the Northeast Success at all levels of experience All are welcome!
Adam Garen – acg68@ Mike Maffie – mdm283@
"Those 4 years in debate were the educational foundation of everything I did. And I don't mean that in some simple form...I'm saying the finest education I got from any of the institutions I attended, the foundation of my mind that I got during those 4 years of competitive policy debate; that is, 90% of the intellectual capacity that I operate with today – Fordham [University] for college, Fordham for the Ph.D., Harvard for law school – all of that is the other 10%." -- John Sexton, President of NYU
What Is Policy Debate?
Teams argue for/against a resolution that describes an issue of public policy
This year’s resolution:
Resolved: The United States federal government should substantially increase its democracy assistance for one or more of the following: Bahrain, Egypt, Libya, Syria, Tunisia, Yemen.
/policy-debate
Political Capital 2012 Elections
Democratization
Modeling Democratic Peace Theory Global Oil Markets
Economic Growth
War
Geopห้องสมุดไป่ตู้litics
Foreign Aid Religion Capitalism Conflict Burnout
How Much Work Is It?
• You get out what you put in • As a team, we collectively do a lot of research • There is a minimum requirement to prepare for tournaments