Do you know the origin and development of college students' English debating competition? The following is the origin and development of college students' English debate competition I collected. Welcome to reading. Please continue to pay attention to the debate column for more information!
The "FLTRP Cup" National English Debate Competition was founded in 1997 and held once a year. This is the largest and highest level oral English competition in China. 20 15 The 17th "FLTRP Cup" National College English Debate Competition was hosted by the Central School Department of the Communist Youth League, the National Federation of Students, Beijing Foreign Studies University (Admissions Office), and undertaken by Foreign Language Teaching and Research Press and China Education Television. After more than ten years of brand accumulation and unremitting efforts, the authority, scale and brand influence of the FLTRP Cup English Debate Competition have been recognized by English teachers and college students all over the country and enjoyed a high reputation in colleges and universities. Over the past ten years, more than 65,438+0,000 colleges and universities have carefully trained and selected outstanding talents to participate in the competition.
1997-200 1 year, the initial scale of the competition was limited to inviting teams from 8- 16 universities across the country to directly participate in the competition, and Appleyard, the elegant wife of the then British Minister to China, was invited as the host of the competition. Shanghai Jiaotong University (Weibo) won the first FLTRP Cup. In the following years, Beijing Foreign Studies University, Fudan University and university of international business and economics won the championship respectively. The final debate involved many social issues, such as:
1997 The disadvantages of the exam outweigh the advantages.
200 1 The opportunity cost of graduate study for college students is too high.
With the rapid expansion of the reputation of the competition, more and more schools are eager to join the "FLTRP Cup". The preliminary competition system of the competition area is produced by the sports meeting. There are 6-8 competition areas in China every year, and each competition area can accommodate 12 teams to register. As a result, the number of participants has greatly increased, which greatly meets the needs of college English learners and stimulates everyone's enthusiasm.
At the same time, the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, the Ministry of Education (Weibo) and cultural celebrities began to pay attention to and attend the FLTRP Cup finals. In 2002, sir. William Ehrman, then British ambassador to China, attended the final and delivered a speech. In 2003, Mr. Zhang Jianmin, then director of the Translation Office of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, and Ms. Yang Lan, president of Sunshine Media Group, participated in the evaluation and presented trophies to the winning teams.
The depth and breadth of the debate also keep pace with the times. For example,
Cities helped to improve the quality of life in 2003.
Nationalism is a positive signal in 2004.
In 2005, "FLTRP Cup" boldly took the first step towards the international competition system, and it was transformed into the American parliamentary style (also known as AP), which is the general mode of the national college students' debate competition. After four years of continuous promotion and training, FLTRP has finally familiarized English learners with the competition system, honed their language and exercised their thinking! Since then, China, the champion, runner-up and third runner-up sponsored by FLTRP Cup, has won many awards in various international and intercontinental debates!
The contest has also embarked on the road of commercial cooperation. High-end brands such as Casio (Shanghai) Co., Ltd. and Cambridge University Press have successively become sponsors of the FLTRP Cup. The contest has reserved excellent human resources for partners and also rooted a good corporate image in the hearts of college students.
Debate competition highlights the true nature of "parliamentary system" and closely fits the current affairs and policy news that contemporary college students pay attention to. For example,
The company believes that in 2005, advertising is a hurdle, not a hurdle.
This House believes that China should establish English as the official language in 2007.
In order to match the FLTRP Cup Debate Competition with the "Olympics in Debate"-the World University Debate Competition, after 20 15 large-scale pre-competition training, FLTRP Cup in by upper a stairs adopted the most advanced competition system in the world, namely the British parliamentary style. At this point, the competition system and schedule have been truly internationalized and will be maintained for a long time.
The FLTRP Cup continues to receive strong support from the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and the British Embassy in China. Mr. Li Zhaoxing, former foreign minister, personally attended the final and delivered a speech, affirming the importance and practicability of English debate in oral learning and critical thinking. The vast number of English debate lovers are deeply encouraged!
Over the years, the competition has become the cradle of outstanding university graduates. Many excellent debaters of the FLTRP Cup are now struggling in the front-line positions of large companies and enterprises. The debater can be found in the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, the European Chamber of Commerce, the Global Times and Reuters. This year, the "FLTRP Cup" will pay more attention to talent reserve and training, and continue to take social development as its own responsibility and contribute!
BP rule
Brief introduction of the BP competition system of the17th National College English Debate Competition
1. Debate team
In each round of the British parliamentary debate competition, there are four debate teams, each with two people. The team that supports the debate is called "positive" and the team that refutes the debate is called "negative". The pros and cons form two teams to make opening statements and concluding statements respectively. Each team needs to compete with the other three teams, and finally it will be decided by 1 4.
2. The order of the contestants' speeches
Each contestant should speak in the following order:
The address and time of the speaker.
The first debater "Prime Minister" or "Square Leader" will be put forward in the opening statement for 7 minutes.
The first debater, the "leader of the opposing side", made an opening statement for 7 minutes.
The second debater, "Deputy Prime Minister" or "Leader No.2 of Zhengfang", will be put forward in the opening statement of Zhengfang for 7 minutes.
The second debater, "the second leader of the opposing side", made an opening statement for 7 minutes.
The third debater of the positive closing statement (that is, the first debate of the positive second team) is a "positive member" for 7 minutes.
The opposing party's summary statement of the third debater (that is, the first debate of the opposing party group) is "opposing party members" for 7 minutes.
3. Speaking time
Each debater has 7 minutes to speak. The time for debaters to ask questions should be between the second and sixth minutes. "Question" refers to our own views on the argument being stated by the speaker when the other party speaks.
The timing of the speech begins with the debater's speech; All necessary contents (including explanation, introduction, etc. ) are within the timing range. The timekeeper will prompt the athletes at the following time points:
Time stamp:
Ring once at the end of the first minute (allow to start asking "questions")
Ring the bell at the end of the sixth minute (end of question time)
At the end of the seventh minute (the speaking time is over), ring twice at 7: 00.
After the timeout of 15 seconds (the voice buffer time is over), the bell rings continuously at 7: 15.
After two consecutive rings, the debater has a 15 second "buffer" time, during which the contestant is allowed to summarize the arguments put forward. No new arguments are allowed to be put forward during the "buffer period", and new arguments put forward during the "buffer period" can be declared invalid by the referee. Debaters who continue to speak after the "buffer" time will be deducted by the jury.
Skills of English Debate Competition
On debate
Clarity: avoid using terms that different readers will interpret differently. When we talk to people who basically agree with us, we can use such terms as "countryman" or "liberal" and be reasonably sure that we will be understood. But in the debate, we are talking to people who disagree with us, and they are likely to make different interpretations of these words.
Evidence: quoting authority is not evidence. Quoting the opinions of the majority is not evidence. Any claim that "according to Einstein's point of view …" is not based on objective evidence. Any statement that "most biologists think ……" is not based on objective evidence. Saying, "Bible proverb …" is not evidence. Authority and priority may be wrong, and often wrong. The most frequently asked question in previous debates.
Emotional: Avoid emotional words-words that may produce more heat than light. Of course, the words of racial, ethnic or religious hatred have no place in rational debate. Also, avoid personal attacks. Personal attacks on your opponent are an admission of intellectual bankruptcy. Besides, it is usually useless to slander the group to which your opponent belongs. Try to focus on the objective problem itself. There will be a special problem when discussing social, psychological, political or religious views, because a person's theory about these issues may have some influence on his own lifestyle. In other words, don't say "that's why you are such an undisciplined cripple", but say "I think a person in your position is likely to become an undisciplined cripple, because …"
Causality: Don't make the mistake of asserting causality, and don't make the popular after-the-fact causality fallacy, which claims that event A is the cause of event B because it happened immediately after event B. I know a man whose car broke down on his way to work. She will get out of the car, open the hood, slam it shut, and then the car will start. Singing a song can also effectively make the air resistance dissipate. ) We should also avoid the popular fallacy of proving causality. On average, people who own Cadillac earn more than those who don't. This does not mean that if we provide people with Cadillac, they will have higher income.
Insuendo: Insuendo refers to saying something derogatory to your opponent, but not directly, but by more or less implicitly implying some situations, rumors or popular beliefs. If you want to see some excellent examples of innuendo, look at Rush Limbaugh. Unfortunately, politicians often make insinuations. This is a simple way to take advantage of popular prejudice without making a clear statement, which may be difficult or impossible to resist rational attacks.
Be sure of your facts. What is your information source? If it is a newspaper or magazine, are you sure that the information has not been "tilted" to conform to the political bias of the publication? When it comes to key facts, it is best to verify from multiple sources. Usually international publications will give you a different perspective from your hometown newspaper. Check whether the book you are using is published by a regular publishing company or by some special interest groups such as john burgee Association or religious organizations. These books cannot be trusted to provide unbiased evidence, because the motivation for their publication is not truth, but to advance some political or religious views.
Understand the opponent's argument. It's a good practice to argue with friends and take a position that you disagree with. In this way, you may find some assumptions made by your opponent, which will help your debate. Remember, everyone thinks his position is correct, and everyone has his reasons for thinking so.
Don't blame your opponent for absurd or malicious ideas.
An example of this is the rhetorical question, "Have you stopped hitting your wife?" This infers or assumes that your opponent hit his wife. People often see conservative speakers and writers mention the idea that gay activists want "privileges". If this is true, it would be ridiculous. This is not true, but if it is said as if it is true and well known, it is extremely unfair to those listeners or readers who may not know much about it. It may always be wise to respect your opponent, even if he is not worthy of respect. If he is not worthy of respect, it may soon become obvious enough.
Regression mean (logical degradation): Another frequent source of error is that regression mean is not considered. This is a bit technical, but it is very important, especially in any kind of social or psychological research that relies on statistical surveys or even experiments involving statistical sampling. An example will be used instead of a general statement of the principle (as the statement becomes more and more strict, the principle becomes more and more difficult to understand).
Let's consider the intelligence test.
1. Maybe we have a drug that can improve the IQ of mentally retarded children. So we conducted a thousand intelligence tests and selected 30 people with the lowest scores.
Then, we give these children with low scores our medicine and test them again.
We found that their average IQ score has improved.
4. Is this evidence that drugs improve IQ?
Not necessarily! Suppose we want to prove that smoking marijuana lowers IQ. We selected 30 children with the highest scores from the sample, gave them tetrahydrocannabinol, and then tested it again. We found that the average IQ was low.
Is this evidence that marijuana lowers IQ?
Not necessarily! Any statistician knows that if you measure some attributes of a large group of people, and then choose the people with the highest and lowest scores and do the same measurement again, the average score of the group with the highest score will be lower than that of the first time, and the average score of the group with the lower score will be higher. This is called "regression mean", which is a perfect general statistical principle.
There is no doubt that there are more points to be made here. Suggestions will be appreciated. Larry made the following suggestions:
Use scientific methods. (using scientific methods)
Cite relevant personal experiences. (Reasonably quote relevant personal experience)
Park Jung Su, Bei Bo. (Be polite when debating)
Organize your answers. (beginning, middle, end. (organize your own defense reasonably)
Treat people as individuals.
Cite sources of statistical data and research.
Literacy is very useful. Divide the article into sentences and paragraphs.
Read the post you replied to.
;