【www.myl5520.com--教学设计】
BPdebate
篇一:debate,motion
1、BP制是British Parliamentary（英国议会制）的简称，是仿照英国议会开会议事模式而设计的一系列辩论赛规则的总称，是全世界范围内使用最广泛的辩论规则，世界大学生辩论赛WUDC（The World Universities Debating Championships）及中国辩论公开赛China Open均使用此规则。
2、常见的BP制是四队议会制辩论，每场比赛分正反双方，设“正方上院”、“正方下院”、“反方上院”、“反方下院”四队，每队两人，故可概括为“两方、四队、八人”。
3、胜负评判为排序制，即根据各队表现在四队中排出1、2、3、4名，胜负不以正反方而论，即完全可以出现正方上院第一名而正方下院第四名的情况。
4、BP制的竞赛程序可简单描述为“角色扮演”+“交替演讲”，每位辩手均拥有一个议员角色，均拥有7分钟左右（不同赛事时长不一）发言时长，正反方从上到下交替发言，没有自由辩论等任何快速交替发言环节。
5、BP制有一种特殊的“质询”规则：Point of Information (“PoI”)。PoI允许对方辩手在“非保护时间”（每人发言时间中除开第一分钟和最后一分钟之外的所有时间）示意要求提问，经发言者允许后向发言者提问质询。质询者提问时间计入发言者时长，故针对PoI，发言者有权决定是否接受、何时接受、如何回答等事宜。
6、BP制区别于常见华语辩论赛制的最大特点在于“角色扮演”，如下表：
正方上院第一位发言者 首相(Prime Minister) 正方一辩
反方上院第一位发言者
反对党领袖（Leader of the Opposition）
反方一辩
正方上院第二位发言者debate,motion。
副首相（Deputy Prime Minister）
正方二辩
反对党副领袖（Deputy Leader of the
反方上院第二位发言者
Opposition）
正方下院第一位发言者
政府阁员（Member of Government）
反方二辩
正方三辩
反方下院第一位发言者
反对党阁员（Member of the Opposition）
反方三辩
正方下院第二位发言者
政府党鞭（Government Whip）debate,motion。
正方四辩
反方下院第二位发言者
反对党党鞭（Opposition Whip）
反方四辩
7、除一般的“立我方、批对方”的发言责任外，BP制中每个角色还有其独特的角色责任，对该责任的实现程度构成胜负评判的最大因素。择其精要：
首相
定义优先权：有权对辩题中没有明确的背景、主体、对象等定义要素加以明确，除非该定义明显有悖公众一般认知或故意破坏辩论进行下去的
反对党领袖
副首相 反对党副领袖 政府阁员 反对党阁员
政府党鞭 反对党党鞭
可能性且未说明如此定义的必要性，否则对方不能拒绝该定义。
论点框架责任：必须给出正方上院的论点框架，即使自己无法完全展开，但必须概括介绍
定义接受责任：检查定义是否明显有悖公众一般认知或故意破坏辩论进行下去的可能性且未说明如此定义的必要性，如无，则宣布接受该定义。一旦决定不接受，则比赛即进入“挑战定义”的特殊状态。事实上99%的情况下不会“挑战定义”。
论点框架责任：必须给出反方上院的论点框架，即使自己无法完全展开，但必须概括介绍
论点展开责任：在首相/反对党领袖的框架下展开论点
论点扩展责任：在保持与自己的上院意见原则一致的情况下，必须提出区别于自己的上院的新论点
总结责任：明确指出全场交锋点，并突出本方观点，尤其是本方下院观点的正确性
8、竞赛组织：一般采取赛前30分钟公布辩题、公布各队所处“赛位”（角色）。辩题又称“动议”Motion，一般以“本院认为···”This House···的句式给出。
9、评判方式：比赛结束后评委闭门商议产生排序结论，其后由主评当场宣布结果并解释评判理由。
10、BP制中的特殊习惯：
a.表示支持不用鼓掌，而是敲击桌面
b.采取“扶帽伸手”动作表示要求质询
c.评委中的一位兼做主席，称“议长”
d.发言者须走到舞台中央的发言席发言
e.计时以发言者准备就绪开始讲话起debate,motion。
The British Parliamentary format
1. The Teams
Four teams of two debaters participate in each British Parliamentary debate round. The teams
supporting the motion are referred to as the "Proposition." The teams arguing against the motion are known as the "Opposition" teams. Two teams represent the Proposition: the Opening Proposition and the Closing Proposition. Two teams represent the Opposition: the Opening Opposition and the Closing Opposition. Each of these teams competes against all other teams in the round and will be ranked 1st through 4th at the conclusion of the debate.
2. Speaker Order
Each speaker will present a single speech in the order prescribed below.
3. Speech timing
Each speech will be 7 minutes. Points of Information are allowed after the first minute and before the last minute of all speeches.
Timing of the speech begins when the speaker begins speaking; all material—including
acknowledgements introductions, etc.—will be timed. A timekeeper will provide a series of signals during each speech as follows:
Once the double ring has sounded, speakers have a 15-second ?grace period?, during which they should conclude their remarks. The grace period is not a time for new matter to be introduced, and any new matter offered in the grace period may be discounted by the adjudicators. Speakers continuing after this ?grace period? may be penalized by the adjudication panel.
模拟联合国motion标准提法
篇二:debate,motion
2011 NWPU MUN Motion提法
应不应该废除死刑 英语 辩论赛
篇三:debate,motion
Debate motion: wether death penalty should be abolished or not?
A(应保留): Our debate motion today is whether death penalty should be abolished or not. My side insist that it should not.
Death penalty is a legal process whereby a person is put to death by the state as a punishment for a felony. As early as there is a law, death penalty has come into being. Even in modern society, it is still necessary. As all the nations are trying to build a law-governed society, death penalty can work as a powerful legal method to guarantee the stability of society and protect the right of the majority of people. A criminal may stop halfway as soon as he thinks up that death is the most likely outcome of his criminal acts.
B(应废除): While the government should punish the crime,but we should not curb the violence with violence.The right to life is the most essential human rights, all of the rights are on premise of life.Criminals should enjoy life rights as the same as ordinary people.And there is no any evidence show that the incident of cases have inevitable connection with the existing of capital punishment so far. And the death penalty is not more deterrent than life imprisonment. Long terms of Imprisonment have the similar effect in In terms of crime prevention.
A: My opponent say that death penalty cannot deter crime, since there is no obvious increase in crime rate after death penalty is abolished.Many variables make it hard to tell what the exact influence of death penalty has on crime rates. In addition, according to New York Times, there is only one death penalty in 300 murders. Lack of samples also makes the statistics unreliable. So there is no direct proof that can deny the deterrence of death penalty.However, those countries which banned death penalty always have a high democracy index as well as a high human development index.
B: Besides being Influenced by the uncultured homomorphic revenge, death penalty has another problem---- false adjudications. False adjudications cause many innocents dead not only in abroad but also in homeland. According to New York Times' statistics,in late 20 years, about 102 innocents was sentenced to death in the U.S.Our country also has such bloody lessons during the Cultural Revolution.What’s
more, there is no opportunity to remedy the consequences of misjudgment of the death penalty.
A: My opponent also mention erroneous adjudications. But nothing can be perfect. We should not abolish death penalty just because a tiny possibility of erroneous adjudications. Especially when we have other ways to reduce erroneous adjudications, like to investigate more carefully or improve the law.
B: Besides this aspect,every law should suit the people's wish. Abolishing death penalty is the demand of international society and the people.According a survey from china survey,65.8% netizens approved of banning,only 34.1% insisted on remaining. From all the data above,we can draw a conclusion that banning the capital punishment is not only international demand,but also the people's needs.
A: Since we mention the people's needs here,we could not forget the victim and their families' needs .To give up putting an extreme criminal to death so easily is against the equality of life and invades the victims’dignity of life. It's better to protect casualty rights than protect the criminal human rights.
B: If one day the death penalty has no longer necessary, it will be a new chapter of the history of human civilization. of course,it will be a long process.But now,we also need to constantly improve our laws, not to put any innocent person to death execution ground.
辩论Debate Reference for the teachers
篇四:debate,motion
Structure of a Debate
A debate, as you are aware, is a discussion in which speakers form two groups, and argue in favour of or against a topic. The topic is called a motion, and the speakers from each group not only give reasons to support their argument, they also counter the arguments made by the members from the opposite group.
A. (From the pros) Those who support the motion (proponents/ proposers or pros, for
short)
? The first speaker rises and states the motion as follows: I move [or I support] the motion that all “out-of-school” youths who dropped out for any reason should be encouraged to return to school.
? They define key terms in the motion. In this case, they need to say what they mean by “out-of-school youths.”
? They give their reasons in support of the motion: for example:
? My first reason for supporting this motion is that today’s youths are tomorrow’s leaders. ? Secondly, they are the…
? Thirdly,…, etc.
? They sum up their argument in support of the motion: In summary, [or to sum up]…
? Restate the motion: I, therefore, repeat [or I, therefore, urge] you all to support the motion that…
B. Opposing the motion
? The opposite team states their opposition to the motion by stating as follows: I oppose the motion that… or I support those who oppose the motion that…
? Like the pros, they define the motion, possibly differently. All those opposing the motion need to agree on their definition of the key term(s) in order to speak as a united team.
? They give their reasons for opposing the motion: for example:
? My first reason for opposing this motion is that not all youths need the kind of education one sees in schools today. Some are better as roadside mechanics, vulcanisers, house helps, etc.
? Secondly, some have lost interest and confidence in schooling.
? Thirdly,…, etc.
? They sum up their reasons for opposing the motion: In summary, [or to sum up]…
? They restate their opposition to the motion: I, therefore, repeat [or I, therefore, urge you all NOT to support the motion] that…
The process
There are two teams, each consisting of two or three speakers. One team (the affirmative) supports the motion, and the other (the negative) opposes the motion. A chairperson controls the proceedings. The speeches and speaking time are divided equally between the two teams.
Each speaker makes a prepared speech to argue his or her case. The teams prepare collaboratively, building up their case. The sides speak in turn, starting with the proposer of the motion followed by his
or her opponent and then the others in like order. Each speaker has a specified amount of time to speak (e.g., three minutes or five minutes).
Then the debate can be opened to the floor, with the speakers standing up to offer points supporting or opposing the motion. Each speaker from the floor is allowed a specified (usually shorter) amount of time (e.g., one minute or two minutes).
Important rules
? The team supporting the motion must not change their point of view. The same goes for the opposition, who must oppose the motion completely (whatever their private opinions may be). ? If a speaker makes a statement, he or she must be able to provide evidence or reasons to support it. ? The facts presented in a debate must be accurate.
Speakers may not bring up new points in a rebuttal speech; that is, one that demonstrates that the opponent was “wrong” or ill informed.
A sample class debate
Motion: A teacher contributes more to the nation than a medical doctor
Pro: Mr Chairperson, distinguished panel of judges, ladies and gentlemen:
I rise to support the motion that teachers contribute much more to the development of the nation than medical doctors do.
First and foremost, without teachers there will be no doctors, to start with. Teachers produce doctors, engineers, governors, bankers, the army officers and police as well as all of the civil servants, to mention a few. They mould character. Many national leaders were teachers at one time or another. Teachers never lose any lives while teaching, but many poor doctors lose their patients.
Con: Mr. Chairperson, distinguished panel of judges, ladies and gentlemen:
They say “health is wealth.” Without doctors who provide good health services, we would not all be here today. My worthy opponent forgot to tell this august audience that when teachers fail ill, they must rush to the doctor. Otherwise, they may never be able to teach anymore; they may be dead or disabled! It is because doctors are more valuable to the nation that they spend a longer time training to make sure that the nation remains very healthy. That is why doctors are better paid than teachers who are clearly less educated. Medical doctors are also always on duty. While teachers are engaged in chalk and talk, doctors are busy saving lives in emergencies all the time. Doctors are smartly dressed in clean white gowns and definitely look more respectable and attractive than teachers who only have a piece of chalk in their hand.