The stater . This person will be primarily responsible for stating the position taken by the group. He or she will bring up, point by point, the issues inherent in each part of the argument. A prepared written outline may be quite helpful, but direct reading of a prepared statement will not be appropriate. A conversational presentation of the position in the stater's own words will be much more acceptable. The stater will also be responsible for watching the flow of the arguments. At the end, the stater will summarize, recap, and state which of the points made can be salvaged to ultimately support the team's position.

The prover . The prover will be responsible for citing relevant research to back up any of the statements given by the stater. He or she must have intimate knowledge of the empirical content of the positions taken and should understand the research supporting the side chosen. The prover can do well by looking up outside sources in order to strengthen the stater's arguments. He or she can support points by using survey data gathered in class or outside. Any effort (short of murder) is legitimate for generating support for a position. However, the prover will be "attacked" at some length by the opposition--so he or she had better be able to back up his or her supporting data. It should be empirical and responsible.

The attacker . The attacker will be responsible for probing the opposite team for weaknesses in their arguments. He or she may question data, disprove, counter, and use any rational method to discredit the opposition's position or data. An appreciation for research design and data analysis may help the attacker. It is also strongly suggested that the attacker be very familiar with the articles and materials being used by the opposing team. Unless role-playing is extremely good, personal attacks are considered in poor taste. The questioner may insult one of the authors but should refrain from attacking the student who supports that position.

A given debate might consist of the following points:

Pro--the pro stater makes his or her points.

Con--the con stater defines his or her counterpoints.

Pro--the pro prover brings on his or her evidence.

Con--the con prover delivers his or her data.

Pro--the pro attacker can move in.

Con--the con attacker can respond in kind.

Pro--the pro stater salvages all the undamaged arguments he or she has left and makes a summary.

Con--the con stater salvages all the intact arguments he or she has left and makes a concluding statement.

Other team formats are possible. For example, it would be feasible for the stater and the prover to work together, with each statement being supported by research as it is made. The questioners (pro and con) should restrain themselves until this procedure is over. Each team may lay out its "attack" plan in advance. Members should stick as close to their formats as possible unless it becomes cumbersome when they are rebutted.

The audience . The students not involved in a debate are still a part of the situation. They will get special points for participation (and it will be noted by the professor). Two kinds of audience participation can be expected: clarification and question.

Clarification --If a student is uncertain of a point, counterpoint, interpretation of data, a study, or any other portion of a presentation, the students in the audience can ask for clarification. Whoever is explaining the concept or supporting members on the team should clear the problem up for the student as a teacher would do in any class. Clarification questions should be asked at any time (interruptions are fine).

Question --This kind of audience participation can come after a position is clarified and the research is in. Questioning is appropriate when a student is disturbed by an answer or has data to counter or expand upon a position taken by the panel. Students should be reminded that the panel (pro and con) is primarily responsible for this sort of question, and the audience should wait and see if the panel will develop the response before they question too deeply. Other kinds of audience participation and general discussion will be discouraged after the attackers have completed their jobs.

You will know you are doing a good job if I [the professor] don't have to lead you by the nose to each point. I want you to do this work. My philosophy of education says that students learn by applying their own efforts. I cannot "give" you this kind of knowledge; you must learn these things by thinking and arguing them out for yourselves. There are no correct answers--no blacks and no whites. There are only mixtures of grays. The important point of this course is to find out how you view those gray areas.