⏱ 5–7 min
Debate is not about being the loudest or the most confident. It's about making the better argument — and being willing to have yours taken apart in public.
Debate is
Structured disagreement with a purpose: to test ideas under pressure until the better argument survives.
The key word is structured. Informal arguments collapse into emotion and interruption. Formal debate has rules — and rules force precision.
Argument (informal)
Emotional, reactive
No structure, no time limits
Goal: to "win" or not back down
Personal — about the person, not the idea
Evidence optional
vs
Debate (formal)
Reasoned, prepared
Clear structure and time limits
Goal: to persuade the audience
Impersonal — about the idea, not the person
Evidence required
"You can be completely wrong about a topic and still win the debate — if your argument is better constructed. This is both unfair and the whole point."
In formal debate you are often assigned a position you don't hold. This is intentional. The goal isn't to express your opinion — it's to build the strongest case for a position. Understanding the best version of an argument you disagree with is one of the most important things you can learn to do.
Before we go further — take a side on today's motion. You'll be asked to argue the opposite later.
⏱ 8–10 min
The most common mistake: a claim without support, or evidence without connection. PEEL fixes both.
P
Point
Your claim in one clear sentence. The position you are defending. Everything else exists to support this.
Schools should have the right to monitor students' social media activity.
E
Explain
The reasoning. Why is your point true? This is the logical mechanism — not a fact, but the logic connecting the claim to reality.
Schools have a duty of care to their students. When online bullying or radicalisation originates in private messages, the school is the first institution capable of early intervention.
E
Evidence
A statistic, case study, expert opinion, or concrete example. This is what makes the argument believable rather than just logical.
A 2022 UNESCO report found that 1 in 3 young people globally has experienced cyberbullying, with peak vulnerability between ages 13–16 — precisely the school age group.
L
Link
Connect back to the motion explicitly. Don't assume the audience can see it — close the loop.
This is precisely why monitoring powers are necessary: not to invade privacy, but to protect students at the exact moments when they are most at risk.
Common mistake
Skipping the Explain step. Evidence without reasoning is just a statistic — the audience has to do your argumentative work for you. Always explain why before you explain what.
Build one complete PEEL argument for your assigned side. Each layer in its own box.
⏱ 6–8 min
Most students rebut by restating their own argument more loudly. That is not rebuttal. Rebuttal means engaging directly with what was said — and showing exactly where it fails.
①
Acknowledge
Name what was said before you attack it. This shows you were listening — and prevents the charge of attacking something they didn't argue.
"My opponent argues that…" "The Proposition claims that…"
②
Challenge
Identify the weakest point — a faulty assumption, insufficient evidence, or a logical gap — and target it precisely.
"But this assumes that…" "The problem with this is…" "The evidence doesn't show…"
③
Rebuild
After challenging their argument, restore the ground for your own. Show why the failure of their point strengthens yours.
"This actually supports our case, because…" "Far from proving their point, this shows that…"
Here is a full rebuttal in action:
ACKThe Proposition argues that schools have a duty of care that extends to students' online lives, and that monitoring is necessary to discharge this duty.
CHALBut this conflates two entirely different things: a school's responsibility to respond to harm it becomes aware of, and a school's right to actively surveil private communications in search of potential harm. No law, no precedent, and no ethical framework equates these two obligations.
REBThe Proposition's duty of care argument is real — but it proves too much. It would justify monitoring private conversations in bedrooms. If we reject that, as we all do, the question is where to draw the line — and the Proposition has not told us.
Write a rebuttal to this argument using the three-step structure.
Argument to rebut
"Young people have a right to a private space to develop their identity without institutional surveillance. Social media, for many students, is that space. Monitoring it removes the only zone of freedom young people have."
⏱ 6–8 min
The Greeks named three modes of persuasion two and a half thousand years ago. They still describe everything that happens in a debate.
Ethos
Credibility & Authority
You persuade through who you are — your knowledge, experience, and trustworthiness as a speaker.
"As someone who has experienced cyberbullying directly, I can tell you the harm is not theoretical."
Pathos
Emotion & Empathy
You persuade through what the audience feels — connecting your argument to values, fears, hopes, and shared human experience.
"Imagine a 14-year-old reading messages about herself at 2am, with no adult even aware it is happening."
Logos
Logic & Evidence
You persuade through the strength of your reasoning — statistics, logical structure, clear causation, and verifiable facts.
"40% of documented school bullying cases had an online component that began outside school hours — yet schools had no visibility."
The skill is in the balance. A speech that is purely logical feels cold. A speech that is purely emotional is easily dismissed as manipulation. Strong debaters weave all three — but they also make choices. Which mode is doing the real work here, and is that the right call for this audience?
Read this speech extract. Identify which persuasion mode is carrying the most weight — then decide whether that was the right choice.
Speech extract
"Last year, a 15-year-old in Baden-Württemberg took her own life after months of targeted harassment in private group chats. Her teachers saw nothing — because they had no visibility and no mechanism to see anything. Her parents found out three days after she died. If one school in that district had monitoring systems in place, there is a real possibility she would be alive today. We cannot continue to treat privacy as more important than survival."
A debate audience is specifically looking for holes in the logic — which makes pure pathos a vulnerability as well as a weapon.
⏱ 4–5 min
A Point of Information (POI) is an interruption you offer to the opposing speaker during their speech. They can accept or decline. If accepted, you have roughly 15 seconds to deliver a pointed question or challenge.
Rules for offering a POI
When to offerAfter the first minute and before the last minute of a speech. Never during protected time.
How to offerStand, raise a hand or say "Point of Information." Wait to be accepted or declined.
If declinedSit immediately. No reaction, no argument.
If acceptedSpeak for no more than 15 seconds. One point only. Then sit.
What makes a good POI
Target a contradiction"You said X in your opening, but you just claimed Y — which is true?"
Challenge the evidence"Does that statistic include cases outside the age range you mentioned?"
Expose a gap"If monitoring is only for extreme cases, who defines what counts as extreme?"
What to avoidLong speeches disguised as questions. Interrupting to repeat your own argument. Asking questions you can't follow through on.
As the speaker receiving a POI
You control whether to accept. Accept 1–2 POIs per speech — it shows confidence. Always acknowledge before responding: "I'll take that point." Then answer it, or explicitly set it aside: "I'll return to that — but first…"
⏱ 20–25 min total
Today's Motion
This House Believes that schools should monitor students' private social media to prevent harm
Proposition — YES
Opposition — NO
Round 1 — PEEL + Rebuttal only
3 min
Prep
Each side prepares one PEEL argument. Assign a first speaker. No frame-breaking yet — PEEL and rebuttal only.
2 min
Prop opens
Proposition presents. Opposition may offer POIs after 30 seconds.
2 min
Opp opens
Opposition presents — must rebut before making their own argument.
3 min
Open debate
Any speaker may contribute. Rebuttal, new arguments, POIs. No frame-breaking yet.
End of Part One
Both sides argued well. Neither side landed a decisive blow.
That's not a failure — that's the point. You were both operating inside the same frame. Both arguments assumed the debate is about whether monitoring is justified. Neither side questioned whether the school's jurisdiction extends to private digital space at all.
Sit with that. We'll name it in Part Two.