Dr Sarah Otner (Associate Professor in Innovation Management) 

Debate is one of the oldest and most enduring forms of education, a dynamic exchange where different ideas come together and evolve into more reasoned arguments. It echoes the curiosity of childhood (“why, why, why?”) and invites learners to explore concepts deeply and playfully. 

What makes debate particularly powerful in teaching is the principle that ideas, not people, are placed in opposition. This distinction creates a space where students can interrogate arguments without fear of personal conflict. Debate becomes a structured space for thinking: a speculative space in which learners push their ideas and practise intellectual agility.  

Why debates are beneficial  

Debates operate within clear formal rules, whether using British Parliamentary Style, Robert’s Rules of Order, Oxford-Style, or instructor generated variations. These frameworks are crucial because they create fairness, keep discussions focused, and help students feel safe enough to take risks. 

Techniques such as side swapping, where students must argue both for and against a motion, help students engage meaningfully with multiple viewpoints. This can help break down entrenched positions, cultivate empathy, and sharpen critical thinking. It can also keep debates energised. Students cannot rely on fixed personal beliefs but must work with the intellectual material in front of them. Importantly, debates give instructors clear visibility of individual contributions, even within group formats: tone, reasoning, responsiveness, listening, and rhetorical strategies are observable. 

Different types of debates

There are many different types of debates. As outlined by the University of Glasgow:  

• Tennis debate: two opposing teams, where students take turns presenting individual arguments within a time limit. If a student cannot contribute a new point or repeats an argument, the “ball is dropped” and the turn passes to the other team. 

• Four corner debate: Students move to the corner of the room representing their viewpoint. Each corner group collaborates to develop arguments supporting their position. 

• Role‑play debate: Students take on the role of different characters. Arguments are made from that stakeholder’s perspective. 

• Fishbowl debate: A small group of “debaters” sit in a central circle. The rest of the class surrounds them and observes while the debaters take turns presenting and responding to arguments. 

• Think‑pair‑share debate: Students first write down their arguments individually. They then discuss with a partner, then with another pair. Groups share refined arguments back to the whole class. 

Challenges of embedding debate in higher education 

Despite the UK’s rich parliamentary tradition, formal debating is not systematically embedded in most higher education curricula in the UK. One of the most significant barriers is that many students, especially those educated in systems outside North America, Germany, and Australia, have never been explicitly taught to debate. They may arrive without foundational skills such as constructing an argument, responding under time constraints, or engaging respectfully with disagreement. In addition, some students may be less comfortable with having their views challenged. These students might need both skills training and discipline-specific instruction in order to thrive.  

From a teaching perspective, debate also presents practical challenges: 

• Quality assurance structures are not built for cocreated, variable, live formats. 

• There are challenges around remaining objective when assessing debates – what is being marked must be made very clear to the student (and the marker). 

• There is no natural resit equivalent for live debating – repeating a live debate rarely replicates original conditions 

• While debate is relatively resistant to academic misconduct, it is not fully AI-proof (e.g., students might script their opening speeches using AI; others might use AI-facilitated listening and summarizing tools). 

• A 50-minute seminar provides limited time for undertaking a debate – students need time to both “warm-up” and reflect & review. 

Supporting students with lower oracy confidence 

How do we support students who lack confidence or skills in speaking? Many may be articulate in writing yet struggle with live argumentation. This highlights the need to scaffold oracy intentionally, ensuring that debate does not exacerbate inequities. 

Getting students used to speaking in class can help. For example, via: 

• A three-minute check-in at the start of class 

• Warm-up questions – How is your article going? What questions do you have before we start? 

• Practice debates on any subject. For example, defend or reject the argument that cats make better pets than dogs.  

• Opportunities to speak in pairs before whole-class contributions 

These small interventions can help build a class community and normalise speaking without pressure. 

Key takeaways 

Embedding debating in the curriculum can: 

• Build oracy and confidence 

• Develop critical thinking and active listening 

• Encourage engagement with diverse perspectives 

• Create energised, student-centred learning environments 

Most importantly, it shows that debate is not about confrontation. Debating is about curiosity, structured reasoning, and the ability to argue ideas from multiple viewpoints, a skill that, in a seemingly increasingly divisive world, feels more important than ever.