Republic of the Philippines

CARCAR CITY COLLEGE

Luanluan Street, Poblacion I, Carcar City, Cebu
Tel # 487-0063/487-9077

Subject : English Proficiency 1 (EPRO 1) Discussion and : 13 & 14

Assessment No.
Program : BS Criminology

Topics :  The Role of Debate in Developing Critical Criminological Thinking

 British Parliamentary Style of Debate
Objectives : At the end of this module, you must have:

I. ACTIVITIES

Good day, Criminology students!

Finally, we have reached the last module for this semester! It has been a productive academic
journey with all of you in this course. Let us end this with a bang! Read the synopsis of the article below
and share your scholarly thoughts about it.

Duterte’s War: Drug-Related Violence in the Philippines

President Rodrigo Duterte assumed office in the Philippines in June 2016 and shortly thereafter
declared a ‘War on Drugs’. This ‘war’ refers to the drug policy of the Philippine government, aimed at “the
neutralization of illegal drug personalities nationwide” (Rappler, 2017). The campaign has resulted in the
deaths of thousands of Filipinos, largely the urban poor (Human Rights Watch, 2018). ACLED’s newly
updated data allow several preliminary conclusions: first, anti-drug ‘vigilantes’, which perpetrate roughly half
of the total drug violence reported, are likely supported by or under the control of Duterte’s regime, despite
their unofficial status. Second, publicly available data represent only a small portion of the total extent of the
war on drugs, which in turn indicate that the official death toll is likely a vast underestimate of the total
human cost of this war. And finally, despite stopgap measures, Duterte’s focus on the War on Drugs has
diverted meaningful attention from other political violence issues in the Philippines.

Let us ponder on this question!

Has the "War on Drugs" in the Philippines been effective in reducing drug use and crime, or has
it been counterproductive?

Is the "War on Drugs" in the Philippines a justifiable policy, even with the high number of
casualties, or is it a violation of human rights?

It is fascinating to see how diverse our viewpoints are on President Duterte's drug policy. This
demonstrates the importance of considering multiple perspectives when engaging with sensitive social
issues. There are persuasive arguments from those who agree and those who disagree with this policy.
This highlights the need for careful analysis and critical thinking. Now, let us bring this into a formal avenue
where we can discuss our thoughts in a procedural manner---in a form of debate.

II. ABSTRACTION

According to Mellgren, C., & Ivert, A. (2016) in their article Criminal Policy Debate as an Active
Learning Strategy, the debate format prompted students to actively formulate arguments for and against
criminal policy questions, effectively challenging preconceived notions and confirmation bias. The research
also emphasizes the potential of debates to foster deeper learning, a concept that involves applying
knowledge gained in one situation to other contexts.

In this connection, it is relevant for you, aspirant criminologists to engage in debates to develop
essential skills such as evaluating information, constructing arguments, and communicating effectively,
skills that are transferable to various professional settings.
Page 1 of 5
 The Role of Debate in Developing Critical Criminological Thinking

Debate, often seen as a competitive activity, holds immense value for criminology students, serving
as a powerful tool for academic and professional development. Engaging in debate offers a unique platform
to hone critical thinking skills, refine communication abilities, and solidify understanding of critical
criminological concepts.

Sharpening Critical Thinking

Debate demands a deep dive into research, forcing students to analyze diverse perspectives and
scrutinize evidence. This process compels them to critically evaluate existing knowledge, identify biases,
and formulate well-supported arguments. By engaging with opposing viewpoints, students learn to
challenge their own assumptions and gain a better understanding such as addressing real-world issues.

Mastering the Art of Communication

The dynamic nature of debate requires students to articulate their arguments clearly, persuasively,
and concisely. They must develop the ability to present their ideas in a structured and engaging manner,
tailoring their language to the specific audience and context. Moreover, debate fosters active listening skills,
enabling students to effectively analyze and respond to counterarguments.

Structuring Ideas for Impact

Debate compels students to organize their thoughts into a logical and impactful format. They learn
to identify key points, prioritize arguments, and present them in a clear and concise manner. This ability to
structure ideas is crucial for effective communication in academic writing, presentations, and future
professional settings.

Beyond the Classroom

The skills honed through debate transcend the classroom, proving invaluable in various
professional contexts. Criminologists often engage in public discourse, policy analysis, and advocacy work.
The ability to articulate complex ideas, engage in constructive dialogue, and present compelling arguments
is essential for success in these fields.
British Parliamentary Style of Debate

British Parliamentary (BP) style debate is a dynamic and engaging format that has gained popularity
worldwide. It's a highly structured form of academic debate, often used in university-level competitions, and
is known for its fast-paced nature and emphasis on argumentation and rebuttal. This discussion will delve
into the key elements of BP debate, exploring its structure, roles, rules, and the judging criteria.

The Structure of a British Parliamentary Debate

A BP debate consists of four teams, each with two speakers, divided into two opposing sides:
the Government and the Opposition. Each side is further divided into two benches: an Opening
Team and a Closing Team.

Opening Government Prime Minister (PM) and Deputy Prime Minister (DPM)
Opening Opposition Leader of the Opposition (LO) and Deputy Leader of the Opposition
(DLO)
Closing Government Member of the Government (MG) and Government Whip
Closing Opposition Member of the Opposition (MO) and Opposition Whip

The debate unfolds in a specific order, with speakers alternating between the Government and
Opposition benches. Each speaker delivers a speech, typically lasting between five and seven minutes.

Debate Format
Speaker Sequence/Order Time
Prime Minister 1st speaker for 1st proposition 7 minutes
Page 2 of 5
 Leader of Opposition 1st speaker for 1st opposition 7 minutes
Deputy Prime Minister 2nd speaker for 1st proposition 7 minutes
Deputy Leader of Opposition 2nd speaker for 1st opposition 7 minutes
Member of Government 1st speaker for 2nd proposition 7 minutes
Member of Opposition 1st speaker for 2nd opposition 7 minutes
Government Whip 2nd speaker for 2nd proposition 7 minutes
Opposition Whip 2nd speaker for 2nd opposition 7 minutes

The Roles of the Speakers

Opening Teams
Prime Minister (PM) : The PM kicks off the debate by introducing the motion, which is
the topic being debated. They must define any key terms related
to the motion and present the main arguments, or contentions,
in favor of the motion.
Deputy Prime Minister (DPM) : The DPM strengthens the Government's case by rebutting the
Leader of the Opposition's arguments and introducing additional
contentions.
Leader of the Opposition (LO) : The LO refutes the Prime Minister's contentions, introduces the
Opposition's main arguments, and sets the framework for the
Opposition's case.
Deputy Leader of the : The DLO continues to rebut the Government's arguments, builds
Opposition (DLO): upon the Opposition's case, and may introduce additional
contentions.

Closing Teams
Member of the Government : The MG extends the debate by presenting new arguments or
(MG) perspectives on the motion, building upon the Opening
Government's case.
Government Whip : The Government Whip summarizes the debate from the
Government's perspective, highlighting key arguments and
emphasizing the strength of their case. They cannot introduce
new arguments.
Member of the Opposition : The MO extends the debate from the Opposition's perspective,
(MO) presenting new arguments or perspectives and building upon the
Opening Opposition's case.
Opposition Whip : The Opposition Whip summarizes the debate from the
Opposition's perspective, highlighting key arguments and
emphasizing the strength of their case. They cannot introduce
new arguments.

Rules of British Parliamentary Debate

Preparation Time : Teams are typically given 15 minutes to prepare their arguments,
including research time.
Speech Time : Each speaker has a set time limit, usually between five and seven
minutes.
Points of Information (POIs) : Speakers from the opposing bench can offer POIs during the
speeches of their opponents. These are brief questions,
arguments, or rebuttals, lasting up to 15 seconds. The speaker
can accept, reject, or ignore a POI.
Protected Time : The first and last minute of each speech are "protected time,"
during which no POIs can be offered.
Points of Order : These are used to address violations of the rules of the debate,
such as slanderous remarks or offensive outbursts.

Judging Criteria

Judges evaluate the teams based on several factors, including:

Argumentation : The quality and strength of the arguments presented.

Page 3 of 5
 Rebuttal : The effectiveness of refuting opposing arguments.
Clarity : The clarity and persuasiveness of the speaker's delivery.
Engagement : The ability to engage with the opposing team and respond to their arguments.
Style : The overall style and presentation of the speaker.

Judges typically rank the four teams from best to worst, with the team receiving the most "1" votes
declared the winner.

III. ASSESSMENT

IV. APPLICATION

Good job! You successfully accomplished the last module. Keep up the good work!
“For I know the plans I have for you, declares the Lord,
plans to prosper you and not to harm you,
plans to give you hope and a good future.”

Jeremiah 29:11

V. REFERENCES

[1] Team, O. S. (2024, February 10). What is British parliamentary style debate? Oxford Summer School 2025 |
Oxford Scholastica Academy. https://www.oxfordscholastica.com/blog/what-is-british-parliamentary-style-debate/
[2] Trapp, R., Ge, Y., Willamette University, & Dalian Nationalities University. (n.d.). The British Parliamentary Debate
Format. https://projects.unitn.it/nsf/British_Parlamentary_Style.pdf
[3] Mellgren, C., & Ivert, A. (2016). Criminal policy debate as an active learning strategy. Cogent Education, 3(1),
1184604. https://doi.org/10.1080/2331186x.2016.1184604
[4] Kishi, R., Pavlik, M., La Vina, R., & Constantino, M. (2022, July 25). Duterte’s War: Drug-Related Violence in the
Philippines. ACLED. https://acleddata.com/2018/10/18/dutertes-war-drug-related-violence-in-the-philippines/

Prepared by:

DOLLY ANN D. CARACA, LPT, MAED-ET

BAEL Instructor

Validated by:

DR. REYNALDO G. UGBANIEL LEONARDO S. SABELLANO, LPT, MA-Lit.

Dean, College of Criminal Justice Program Chair, BAEL
Page 4 of 5
Page 5 of 5