Judging debate

Tonight I had the joy of being on a panel judging 3 debates. I love debate. In my political economy class I had my students debate. I told the class two things: 1. I have made my political bias clear. Do not assume debating my side will get you a better grade. In fact, I tend to be more critical of those on my side. 2. Debate with passion and facts. Simply stating opinion will get you nowhere as will presenting good arguments with no conviction. Two formers students comment frequently on the blog who are Republican (Karey) and Libertarian (Chip). They can attest that I don't grade on politics.

Tonight's debate topics: Should men and women be in the same class? Should women be allowed to carry cameras/camera phones? Should international students be charged fees?

The third debate topic was boring and the students' efforts reflected that.

The first debate amazed me. I am a strong supporter of coeducation. Men and women need to interact. It's the real world. Exposing women only to their brothers and father does not prepare them for the real world... but that's my western viewpoint. The real world here is different. I still believe coeducation is better but those debating my side did not prevail in the debate format.

The other debate on cameras was also interesting. Some women may not be photographed in any way. To do so would bring shame to the family and possibly hinder her ability to get married. For that reason cameras - and cell phones with cameras - are not allowed. One of the points made on the "allow cameras" side stuck with me: "As a child I enjoyed looking through the photo albums my father had from college. He described it as the best years of his life. Unfortunately, I will have no pictures to remember my university experience."

The photographer in me nearly cried.

The teams were coached by faculty I know. We awarded a winner for each round and an overall winner for the night. For those of us judging there was one clear winner: The team arguing against coeducation. I absolute disagree with their position, but whether or not I agree is not the point. It's a debate. They had the best research. They made the best presentation. They responded to the other side's points and didn't give a pre-rehearsed canned response. On debating points it wasn't even close.

But, wow, you wouldn't have known it given the reaction of my colleagues. Afterwards two of the losing coaches tried to argue why their sides were right (pro-coeducation and con-fees for non-national students). As they explained why their side should have won I said, "I agree with your side. This wasn't a 'who is right' discussion. It was a debate and the other side made their arguments better."

It reminded of a political econ debate in 2004. The topic was Kerry's health care plan vs. Bush's. Kerry's side was demolished. Bush's side didn't win because Bush had a better health care plan (they knew Bush didn't have one and didn't try to pretend otherwise). They basically dedicated their attack on why Kerry's plan was bad. Again, I totally disagreed but my Kerry students couldn't fight back.