A Personal Reflection on the Debate Process of Antonia Lombardi, Term Paper Example

Online classrooms, while convenient for students who need alternative ways of getting an education, can sometimes suffer for having a lack of face-to-face contact between students and instructors.  Because of this, I found the debate project to be an excellent way to foster a sense of community through the discussions that stemmed from our individual debates.  In her article “Using the Debate as a Teaching Tool in the Online Classroom,” Kam Jugdev writes that “students learn best when they interact with their peers and when they are asked to apply their learning” (Jugdev, 2004).  I found that the debate and rebuttal process, though performed through PowerPoint, held many of the components of a live debate and helped to foster lively discussion through the online classroom forum.  Although I’m not usually nervous about talking in front of small groups, I find argumentative discussions to be slightly intimidating.  I found that the PowerPoint format helped to alleviate my nervousness because I was able to organize my thoughts and arguments cohesively before hand, rather than worrying that I might forget something crucial in the heat of debate.  However, this might also be a negative (although unavoidable) aspect of conducting debates in an online class; it probably would have been helpful for me to confront my fear of public debate.  In her essay “Using Structured Debate to Achieve Autonomous Student Discussion,” Elizabeth Green Musselman writes that “many students dislike arguing with their peers in the classroom. This can cause problems in class discussions because it typically leaves to the instructor the role of challenging students’ views. Students frequently perceive these challenges as “corrections,” and then shut down” (Musselman, 2004).  It’s been her experience that, after engaging in lively debate, “students subsequently become bolder in their own theses and their critiques of other authors’ arguments in their writing and in regular class discussion” (Musselman, 2004). However, I recognize that online classes have certain limitations that those conducted at brick-and-board institutions do not.

Overall, I found that the debate process helped me to develop both my research skills and my critical thinking abilities.  My specific task for the course debate was to develop and present an argument supporting the position that complementary medicine should not be covered under the Canadian Health Act (CHA).  I found this to be an incredibly challenging project, primarily because I was required to set aside my personal beliefs in order to take a contrary position.  While I strongly believe that complementary medicine would be helpful in alleviating many of the burdens faced by our health care system, I could not let my own opinions color my approach to this assignment.  This was liberating, to a certain extent, because I didn’t have to base my argument on my own experiences or beliefs, but rather on the facts alone.  In her discussion of debate as a learning tool, Musselman writes that “by adopting an analytical persona that is not necessarily their own, students feel freer to take risks” (Musselman, 2004).  In retrospect, my personal beliefs may have helped me construct a solid argument because I was able to anticipate the route that my partner might take in her argument.  However, this was a valuable learning experience because it forced me to carefully consider a variety of different approaches in terms of what points I wished to emphasize in my argument.  For example, given the current budgetary crises across the country, it seems unlikely that the Federal government would have the means to reevaluate the CHA (CTV, 2011).  Through the course of my research, I discovered that the financial argument alone might not be enough to sustain my debate.  A close reading of the Canada Health Act itself gave me further insight into directions that I might take in my argument, leading me to focus on the specific wording of the act in constructing my arguments regarding reasonable access to medical treatment for all Canadians (Health Canada, 2010).

Overall, the biggest obstacle I encountered in this project was in researching the negative aspects of complementary medicine.  It was difficult to find scholarly articles that articulated my position, in part because complementary medicine is seen by many as a positive way to improve an individual’s long-term health (Complementary Medicine, 2007).  This required me to take the approach of acknowledging the positive aspects of complementary medicine, in effect agreeing with my debate partner, but then pointing out that these treatments sit outside of the jurisdiction of the CHA and also must be prioritized in terms of what will result in the best medical care for the majority of Canadians.  The difficulties I encountered in researching and structuring my argument were beneficial to me as a student because they forced me outside of my comfort zone.  As stated by Philipa Marsh in “Enhancing the Space Between Your Ears:  Examining Debates Teaching as a Means of Developing Critical and Academic Thinking” (2009), “debates teaching can offer immense opportunities for students to enhance relevant skills; both for personal development and in a profession context [by encouraging] an individual to consider multiple viewpoints and arrive at a judgement” (Marsh, 2009).  After reflecting on this process, I can see many benefits to learning through debate that will be applicable to my future work as a health care professional, including developing my problem-solving skills and evaluating opinions that are contrary to my own.  The health care field requires its practitioners to be critical thinkers who are open-minded to a variety of different viewpoints.  I can foresee professional situations in the future where I will need to consider the differences and similarities of a particular case in order to critically evaluate the best way to provide care to a client.  As well, I will encounter a variety of viewpoints as a professional in which I will need to exercise tact and good judgement.  As Marsh states, debating “skills are invaluable to the [debate] designer; discussing ideas, problem-solving, working with colleagues” (Marsh, 2009).  My evaluation of the pros and cons of funding complementary medicine through the CHA have assisted me in developing all of these skills, which will make me a more effective health care professional.

There are several things that I would do differently in the future, should I have the opportunity to engage in debate with my classmates.  I would, perhaps, not get so caught up in the research element of the debate, which I think overwhelmed me slightly with the difficulty of finding a cohesive and coherent argument for my position on complementary medicine.  This was due mostly to the fact that I’d formed preconceptions about how I wished to pursue my argument, and then tried (initially) to make the evidence fit my points.  This wasted substantial time, and in the future I will try to approach a subject with an entirely open-mind so that the research may inform my argument, rather than the other way around.  I also found the medium of debate somewhat limiting.  Using PowerPoint was something I hadn’t done before, so I wasn’t entirely happy with the overall look of my debate and rebuttal.  This is something that will be overcome in the future with more practice, however, and didn’t really affect the overall aspects of my argument.  I also can’t see a way, in an online classroom, that technology could be used to improve upon PowerPoint, which is a fairly simple program that is likely to be understood by a large number of students (even if they have some technological difficulties, as I did).

Overall, I found the debate project to be highly instructive and an excellent academic exercise to help me learn to formulate arguments more effectively.  I especially liked having to incorporate concrete concepts of logic through the identification of my opponent’s logical fallacies.  I hadn’t ever encountered concepts such as the appeal to ignorance, the slippery slope, and hasty generalizations before, and I found that they were a helpful way to formulate a response to my opponent’s points (University of North Carolina, 2007).  The rebuttal component of our debate was also a very engaging way to view some of the errors of my argument, as well as the reality that there is a great deal of similarity between our two positions.  There are both positive and negative aspects to funding complementary medicine under the CHA, and the experience of this debate taught me that there really isn’t a ‘pro’ or ‘con’ side to the argument.  Instead, Canadians would best be served by an integration of both positions through the recognition that although funding complementary medicine through the CHA might represent a great deal of expense and effort, it could, in the long-run, result in superior care for a great number of Canadians.

I’m sure that I will have opportunities to engage in debate again, both formally and informally, over the course of my education and in my professional career.  I feel confident that I have learned a number of valuable critical thinking and analytical skills that will serve me well in both constructing and responding to potentially controversial issues.  I’ve always found it difficult to engage in constructive arguments without letting my emotions overwhelm the points that I’m trying to make.  The structure of this online debate enabled me to set aside both my personal feelings and my reluctance to argue for fear of seeming disagreeable, allowing me to approach the issue of complementary medicine and the CHA in a logical, reasonable, and thoughtful manner.

References

Complementary and Alternative Medicines (2007). Retrieved from http://www.health.gov.bc.ca/library/publications/year/2007/conversationhealth/PartIII/PartIII_ComplementaryandAlternative.pdf

CTV News. (29 May 2011). After 7 years, health accord goals only half met. The Canadian Press. Retrieved from http://www.ctv.ca/CTVNews/Health/20110529/health-accord-goals-110529/

Health Canada. (2010). Canada Health Act.  Retrieved from http://www.hc-sc.gc.ca/hcs-sss/medi-assur/cha-lcs/index-eng.php

Jugdev, K., Markowski, C., & Mengel, T. (2004). Using the debate as a teaching tool in the   online classroom. Online Classroom: Ideas for Effective Online Instruction. Retrieved from http://dspace1.acs.ucalgary.ca/bitstream/1880/44259/1/2004%20online%20classroom%20PM%20debate.pdf

Marsh, P., Arthur, L., Crisp, A., & Dale, J. (2009). Enhancing the space between your ears:    Examining debates teaching as a means of developing critical and academic thinking. Proceedings of the Annual Learning and Teaching Conference 2009. Retrieved from  http://www.ntu.ac.uk/cadq/quality/events/ALTC/84560.doc

Musselman-Green, E. (May 2004). Using structured debate to achieve autonomous student discussion. The Society for History Education. Retrieved from http://www.historycooperative.org/journals/ht/37.3/musselman.html

University of North Carolina. (2007).  Fallacies. Retrieved from http://www.unc.edu/depts/wcweb/handouts/fallacies.html