Spontaneous Argumentation
Spontaneous Argumentation: What is it?
Spontaneous argumentation, or SPARF, is a debate event that requires limited preparation, which introduces students to academic argumentation and debating. During each round of SPARF, students debate a given topic. SPARF can help students become more comfortable with public speaking in front of their classmates or an audience, and it can also help them sharpen their argumentation skills and gain the knowledge needed to prove their points. This form of debate requires minimal research and therefore can encourage students to use their critical thinking skills to articulate points and form their case during an argument. This method of argumentation also deepens students' understanding of the topic through learning many new perspectives on the same subject. SPARF also encourages students to learn about new ways to join Model United Nations, debate clubs, and motivates them to defend themselves effectively and rapidly.[1]
Procedure
How would an individual go about starting Spontaneous Argumentation? Before starting any debate, the first thing to do is choose a topic. This topic must have at least two arguing points for each side of the debate, for and against. Each person's argument should consist of three main arguments (therefore, three people per team is ideal, though it can be more), each different from the others. Each of these arguments must be backed up by evidence, data, or statistics with proper referencing. Students should be given ample time to prepare for the argument. During the argument, the affirmative side will proceed with its first main argument, then the negative side, and so on. Tell each team that each rebuttal should be a direct refutation of the opposing team's main point. For example, once the affirmative side has finished its first main argument, the negative side must first renounce their point based on their evidence and then proceed to state their first main argument. However, this rule changes in the closing statements; the closing statement should be an addition of one or two of the strongest points from the three main arguments, along with a rebuttal of the opponent's main arguments. It should be concise and synthesised.[2]
Strategies
One of the biggest parts of the main arguments is the introduction. The introduction of any persuasive speech is the hook and the explanation backed up by statistics. The first part of the introduction should be a hook to captivate the listener in your speech; be sure to be loud and use the three pillars of persuasion: ethos, pathos, and logos. After a hook, the introduction should summarise the topic and clearly state your stance. When ending an argument, ensure there is a brief reinstatement of your main points. A strong ending is key, and make sure you have the audience/judges listening at all times.
During rebuttals, the first step is to clarify what was said by the opposing side, making their points known to the judges/audience a second time, and then proceed to rebut their point. Be confident during your rebuttal, otherwise nobody will be convinced. You can rebut their point by challenging their logic and/or evidence using data of your own; this is one of the best ways to rebut an argument.
Throughout the debate, remember to be respectful towards the adjudicators, opposing counsel, and audience members, if any. Take note of the other team's points to keep track of rebuttals and ensure that your voice is heard by everyone in the room.[3]
References
This article "Spontaneous Argumentation" is from Wikipedia. The list of its authors can be seen in its historical and/or the page Edithistory:Spontaneous Argumentation. Articles copied from Draft Namespace on Wikipedia could be seen on the Draft Namespace of Wikipedia and not main one.
