Dr Fiona Mueller and Deidre Clary, whose ambitious new paper published by the Christopher Dawson Centre for Cultural Studies, proposes that debating offers schools an ‘evidence-based approach to addressing multiple official education goals’.
“Taught well, students can learn to debate important issues in ways that enhance their cognitive, intellectual, linguistic, academic and social skills, with profound advantages for post-school study, work and life, and – ideally – for the nation,” they argue.
Mueller and Clary lament the “near-invisible status” of debating in the Australian Curriculum, noting there is no stated requirement for students to learn about it, let alone to practice it.
“Teachers are not confident in using debating, it’s not taught in ITE,” Clary, a former teacher and deputy principal, tells EducationHQ.
“But it could be a really good skill to use right across the curriculum – as much as literacy and numeracy has been used as strategy across the curriculum to improve student achievement.”
As an enduring practice that has survived ten of thousands of years, Mueller and Clary argue that a renewed focus on debating in the classroom, and especially in the senior secondary years, would help to offset the decline in sophisticated English language skills amongst school graduates – a concerning trend they say has been gathering steam for more than a decade.
“…Fiona and I have been really worried about the decline of writing, and in particular, in language proficiency,” Clary shares.
“It’s occurred with not just the (school) students, but also the teachers.”
Having worked in ITE programs in the US and in Australia, Clary says she’s very concerned that many teachers are not able to write well themselves.
“In fact, when we have talked to teachers in the States, for instance, they say, ‘well, one of the last things we want to do as an English teacher is write – we just want to read’.
“If you’re not a good writer, you don’t have the capacity to model that to students.
“And our teachers at the moment are not modelling good practice when it comes to writing.”
A similar generational deterioration in oracy skills is also a huge red flag, the two suggest.
“I noticed that the UK (education system) has started to pick up on oracy, not just about argumentation in terms of being able to be orally competent, [but] orally efficient in terms of arguing and persuading,” Clary says.
And amid a backdrop of technological innovation, our hastening global agenda to teach students so-called ‘21st century skills’ has dislodged a focus on building disciplinary knowledge and foundational language skills – and a tension now exists between the two in our schools, Clary and Mueller say.
“You can understand absolutely why it’s taken off, because there’s something very appealing about the notion of using technology to gather all of that information that once upon a time you needed to spend hours in libraries doing…” Mueller begins.
“It became very appealing, I think, to many, many educators, and certainly technology advocates, to say, ‘Well, let’s not worry too much about the collection of information and the processing and absorption of knowledge the way we used to, because that can all happen in quick time, using our devices.
“‘Now we should be emphasising all these 21st century skills of collaboration, communication, critical thinking, and so on, to prepare us for a world we can’t really see very clearly’.
“And we see [that push] all around us,” Mueller adds.
Clary says that debating offers some “wonderful opportunities” for classroom learning.
The result has been the displacement of “that fundamental human-conscious thought process that was respected for so long,” she notes.
“And which, of course, is at the heart of debating where you have to really know your material, know your facts, be able to produce them, quickly organise them, and express them using sophisticated language.”
The great irony is that debating actually taps into the ‘three C’s’ – critical thinking, collaboration and communication – making it one solution to the ‘knowledge-rich versus 21st century skills’ tension we’re grappling with, Clary and Mueller propose.
“We would just love to see more teachers and schools adopt debating as one strategy for developing both linguistic dexterity – obviously, intellectual rigour, and of course, honing those 21st century skills, because debating can do all of those things,” Mueller says.
Clary notes that debating presents some “wonderful opportunities” for classroom learning.
“And we're not talking about the Oxford-style of debating here, this is more about casual debating,” she clarifies.
“Debating actually is one of those incredible teaching strategies to use, and students do enjoy it, and it can be done in real time.”
Looking at debating from a historical perspective, Mueller says its important young Australians learn how it’s come to be a platform for “espousing Western values and Western ideals, freedom of speech, and the exchange of ideas”.
For Clary, the national curriculum tends to neglect Western values at the expense of showcasing Indigenous histories and perspectives, and content that’s aligned with 21st century skills.
Thus, debating and its place in our modern democracy is largely lost, she suggests.
“I think debating is actually built on a very, very solid foundation. And it’s remained solid and certainly a pedestal, I think, for students and for adults, and it’s a lifelong skill, if I can put it that way,” Cleary says.
And in our current socio-political context, the art and act of debate has perhaps never been more critical, the two argue.
“It’s particularly timely now, given all of the national debates about climate, energy, immigration, and other topics that require that healthy exchange of ideas.
“And for young people in particular, school is that logical place to learn the discipline of research and considered discussion and debate,” Mueller says.
The ability to consider multiple perspectives is a valuable skill that debating sharpens like nothing else, the pair point out.
“History shows us, right back to great wise men like Platos and Socrates, the importance of putting yourself on the opposite side of an argument and trying to make a case for it, and the extraordinary intellectual demands that puts on an individual,” Mueller says.
“And unfortunately, we’re in a time now, I think we all accept, that it’s the squeakiest wheel, the noisiest, loudest voices that dominate.
“So, there isn’t the constant encouragement to weigh up and consider multiple perspectives.
“And taught well, debating does exactly that.”
