Logic and Reasoning in Middle School Debate

Rationale

We noticed a trend in our speech and debate classes when students struggled to choose
articles to analyze for current event assignments. Our students lack the knowledge of how to identify bias and logical fallacies in sources. We have identified a skill deficiency where students are not taught to look at sources to understand if they are valid. Students must do all the above to be successful not only in debate, but in life. The ability to deconstruct articles and rate the validity of content is a foundational skill necessary for all subject areas. The new Florida B.E.S.T. standards that cover these topics in middle school English Language Arts are:

• ELA.6.R.2.4: Track the development of an argument, identifying the types of reasoning
  used.
• ELA.7.R.2.4: Track the development of an argument, analyzing the types of reasoning
  used and their effectiveness
• ELA.8.R.2.4: Track the development of an argument, analyzing the types of reasoning used and their effectiveness, identifying ways in which the argument could be improved.

Context

Our participants are students in 6th-8th grade classes of Speech and Debate I, II, and III. We are located at an A-rated public K-8 lab school. Our study will pertain to twenty-nine students, ranging from ages eleven to fourteen years old. The population of this study consists of thirteen boys and sixteen girls. There are fourteen students in sixth grade, six students in seventh grade, and nine students in eighth grade. All students have scored average (level 3) or above average (level 4 and 5) on their Reading high-stakes state testing last year. Four total students (14%) scored a level 3, eleven students (38%) scored a level 4, and fourteen students (48%) scored a level 5 on their respective English language arts assessments. None of the students scored below grade level on state testing, and there are no ELL or ESE students in this group. There are five students with 504 plans. Students have ninety-minute class blocks, which meet every other day on an A/B rotating schedule.

Supportive Literature

Students today face the insurmountable task of analyzing news sources to identify
reliable and unreliable sources to support their claims when writing. One example of
this is the Tree Octopus experiment. Studies in 2006 and 2016 presented students with a bogus website with information about saving the Tree Octopus from extinction and all students in the 2006 study as well as 65% of students in the 2016 study believed the website was a reliable source of information (Pilgrim, et.al. 2019). Understanding bias in the media is only one part of the puzzle. The ability to identify bias through the affiliation of news reporters and authors is only half the battle. In the 21st century classroom, development of reasoning skills to analyze the source of information is essential to the development of reading skills (Macedo-Rouet et.al 2013). In class, debates help students develop skills analyze sources for fallacious information by collaborating with other students and synthesizing and presenting information to support claims (Settlage 2020). Students need exposure to varying sources and perspectives in order to develop skills to evaluate the reliability of information presented to them. Instead of only teaching students argumentation in terms of the pro/con dichotomy, teachers should strive to promote critical thinking about multiple perspectives of arguments in order to promote consensus and collaboration (Christensen-Branum & Jones 2019).

Research Methods

The study took place over six weeks. A pretest was administered before the first
lesson, and a posttest was given at the conclusion of the curricular unit to assess
summative growth. The unit involved targeted lessons on fallacies and
practice identifying them, followed by a series of cold readings of various arguments
which students analyzed to determine their effectiveness. Each lesson and cold read
activity included an exit-ticket where students reflected on their self-efficacy to complete
the task and gave them a space to include any feedback. The curated unit allowed
instructors to evaluate the impact of skill-based instruction for identifying fallacies on
students’ ability to determine if arguments are effective.

Both qualitative and quantitative data were collected for analysis throughout the study to
assess the impact of the fallacy identification activities, by means of Google Forms
surveys, guided Nearpod lessons and practice questions, and researcher journals that
recorded observations and comments throughout each lesson and activity. The pre and posttests included two questions per fallacy taught (nine total fallacies) and one cold read
where students had to identify if any logical fallacies were used and then determine the
effectiveness of the argument based on their analysis.

Results

The results showed statistically significant growth for all grade levels and subgroups.  The average score on the pretest was 30% and the average score on the posttest was 61%. While the gains were significant, students still need more work and support to ensure all students are proficient in their ability to identify logical fallacies and different types of logical reasoning.

Implications

The study is the first piece to the puzzle for successfully teaching students how to effectively analyze arguments and sources. We plan to build on this study and have students analyze arguments presented in sources they use to construct their speeches in debate. Analyzing the source of information is important, but the ability to analyze the argument presented in a source is essential for a successful debate program.

References