When members have been voted 'Best Debate Speaker' a few times, they are given an opportunity to be a Debate Evaluator.

Debate Analysis Worksheet: P.R. Carroll
Did you hear definition of the key terms? What were they?

Can you—as listener—sum up the Prop. & Opp. Arguments in one sentence?
a) Prop
b) Opp
Did the Opposition clash directly with the Proposition?

If a speaker made an assertion was the necessary evidence provided to support it?
Give examples:

Was the logic of the argument clear?

Were the examples and evidence relevant to the specific topic of the motion?
List some of them…

What fallacies did you spot? Give specific example.

O Kurer – Debate Analysis

Logos (appeals to logic)
What were the main arguments of the Proposition and Opposition … was there a clash?

Ethos (trustworthiness)
Did the teams provide evidence to support their arguments? was the evidence anecdotal, or fallacious?
Did the team have:
a) just one main argument, b) a shopping list with little supporting evidence c) 4-6 arguments deliberately divided between the 2 main speakers?

Pathos (appeals to the emotions)
Was the whole team performance coherent? Was there a team slogan that team members used to summarise their main points?
To support the logic, did the teams deliberately use language to emotionally persuade the listener?
Was some of the language too exaggerated?
(Persuasive language, just for the sake of it, should be avoided.)

Paul Imre – Debate Analysis

a. Proposition tools
i. Why, What, When, Who and How
ii. IDEAS framework http://wiki.104londondebaters.club/proposition-approach-l1-information

b. Opposition tools
i. Test the definition … what the proposition need to prove is ….
ii. Establish the Bar
iii. Test logic for inconsistencies (in Policy debates the PETAL framework can be used.
http://wiki.104londondebaters.club/opposition-approach-l1-information