COM 334: Debate Peer Criticism Assignment
Like any speech activity, you improve your debating ability through blend of theory, practice, and imitation. Peer criticism allows you the opportunity to watch and evaluate debating strategies from your position as a member of the audience. Such peer criticism is also extremely helpful to the debater who receives the criticism since the debate itself seems to go by so quickly. Keep this in mind: peer criticism is a part of the learning process like doing the debate is part of the learning process. You will not receive a higher grade on your peer critique if you are really hard on the debater you are critiquing, nor will you raise your grade or the debater’s by providing only positive comments. I view (and will evaluate) these critiques as a part of your progress on the road to nuanced debating. Also, provide a helpful balance of positive and critical comments; you should explain what the debater did well and what the debater could do to improve.
For each peer critique, you have been assigned to evaluate the affirmative or the negative. Use the questions below to guide your peer critique. Your critique will have no impact on the debater’s grade for this debate. There are no make-ups for peer critiques; if you know that you will be absent on a day that you are assigned to complete a peer critique, it is your responsibility to trade your critiquing position with someone in the class. Inform me if you do trade positions. Note, if you do trade critiquing days, you must trade with someone who is critiquing the same persona as you (either aff. or neg.). You should take copious notes during the debate and then type up your comments. Each peer critique is due during the following class session (so if you critique someone on Tuesday, your critique is due Thursday). Completed peer critiques should be typed (12 p. font, double spaced) and run about 500-600 words (roughly 2 pages). The peer critique should be written in paragraph format (no bullet pointed answers). In addition to your name, you should list the debater that you are critiquing.
Questions for the Peer Critiques
Case construction
- Was the debater’s case clear and easy to follow? How could it have been clearer?
- Was the debater’s case convincing? Did the debater effectively construct a solid case build on a clear understanding of the stock issues?
CX
- How well did the debater ask questions?
- How well did the debater answer questions?
Refutation
- Was the debater’s refutation of the negative’s case clear? Did specific charges follow the four-step refutation model?
- Did the debater refute all of the most important aspects of the negative’s case?
Recommendations
- What did the debater do well (be specific)?
- What could the debater do to improve (be specific)?
Evaluation of Peer Critiques
I will grade these peer critiques and then pass them on to the debater. Your peer critique will be assessed on your ability to respond to the assigned questions insightfully, accurately, and constructively. Specifically, I will grade the peer critiques in terms of the following criteria:
Quality of the Critique
- Does the critic address the questions assigned completely, accurately, and constructively?
- Does the critic provide in-depth analysis?
- Does the critic clearly explain her/his critique?
- Does the critic reference specific parts of the debate?
Quality of the Recommendations
- Are the critic’s recommendations for improvement specific and helpful?
- Does the critic clearly explain her/his recommendations for improvement?