Open parliamentary debate

from Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

The Open Parliamentary Debate (OPD) is a format, i.e. a specific set of rules, of debating . It sees itself as an academic debate format suitable for tournaments, which combines the sportiness of the parliamentary debate and the realism of the public debate . In Germany it is the most important format alongside the British Parliamentary Style (BPS). The German Debate Championship is held alternately in OPD and BPS. A debateThe OPD format requires nine speakers, six of whom act in two teams of three (government and opposition) and the remaining three act independently as non-attached speakers. The preparation time after announcement of the topic is 15 minutes, the speaking time per parliamentary group speaker is seven and per non-attached speaker three and a half minutes.

The Open Parliamentary Debate creates a synthesis of the two main directions of academic debate formats, the parliamentary debate and the public debate. From the former, she takes on the organization of the speakers in two groups , which represent mutually exclusive positions and owe each other group discipline, as well as the consideration of opposing questions during the speeches. From the latter, she takes on the active integration of the audience with independent speeches at the heart of the debate, aligning the debaters to the audience and taking account of interjections from all participants, which together lead to a more realistic speaking situation than in the parliamentary formats, which are partially detached from the original persuasion goals with unproductive eristics .

The combination of these elements leads to a format in the Open Parliamentary Debate that offers some striking advantages both in club operations and in tournaments. In club operations, the debaters benefit from the opportunity to practice convincing speeches that go beyond mere argumentative conclusiveness and fully reach and move the audience. Pure sham fights are punished immediately by the attentive audience with heckling and by non-party speakers by positioning themselves on the other side. For beginners in the association, the different speaking times of parliamentary group speakers and non-parliamentary groups offer the possibility of easier entry and gradual extension of speaking times. At the same time, different tension arcs and speech structures are trained through this wealth of variants.

The flexibility of the format also enables the integration of nine to twelve participants in club operations and thus an adaptation to the respective rush of speakers in the debate and an almost smooth transition from one debate to several parallel debates. The secret ballot at the beginning of every debate and the open vote at the end also give the speakers a good impression of the effectiveness of their speeches. The audience gets another moment of influence that keeps the debate exciting right through to the end. It should be noted, however, that the decisive team rating at tournaments is mostly taken over by jurors.

Finally, in club operations, the OPD offers the opportunity, if interested, to research the debated topics in advance of the debate and thus to give the arguments more depth. This is done by defining the question a few days before the respective debate.

The rules of the Open Parliamentary Debate also offer some advantages in tournament operations , as competitions in this format are particularly fair and exciting. The integration of non-attached speakers in the tournament, who are recruited in the final round from the best speakers from the teams that have already been eliminated, offers teams and speakers the opportunity to qualify for the final independently of one another. This means that heterogeneous teams are also increasingly possible and tensions within the parliamentary groups are reduced, because: No good speaker falls by the wayside.

The provision of closed decision-making questions (as opposed to open topics in other formats) enables both groups to make optimal use of the short preparation time before the tournament debate and to prepare themselves equally. The symmetrical allocation of the teams participating in a tournament to the positions in the debate ensures a complete balance of possible advantages, difficulties or challenges in government, opposition or as non-attached speakers. Each team competes the same number of times in each position in the preliminary rounds. The influence of the setting or the lot on the tournament result is minimized.

Jurors and presidents as well as the debaters are equally facilitated in fulfilling their respective roles in the tournament, since the former are no longer in the double task of the addressed audience and evaluating third parties. The non-attached speakers and the audience are the addressees of conviction in the debate; the jury maintains its neutrality outside the actual debate.

Finally, the absolute evaluation system in tournament operations ensures that there are no selective pairings and groupings of participants. In an OPD tournament, each team can meet each other and scores only depending on their own performance. Debates with the most varied of pairings take place, the debaters get to know the most diverse debate styles of the stronger and weaker opponents, and in each debate they meet representatives from four other teams. This helps to preserve the spirit of the debating tournaments as a place of competition , exchange and personal development.

Web links