[eDebate] Intl Conference Program Announced

Alfred Snider alfred.snider
Thu Feb 21 14:59:59 CST 2008


CONTENTS:
Preliminary schedule
List of keynote speakers and abstracts of their remarks
Preliminary list of papers

 From Bojana Skrt at bojana.skrt at siol.net

We kindly invite all of you who are interested in debate, argumentation 
and debate as an active method in the classroom to come and join us at 
the 2nd International Conference on Argumentation, Rhetoric, Debate and 
the Pedagogy of Empowerment -- THINKING AND SPEAKING A BETTER WORLD, 
11-13 April 2008, Ljubljana, Slovenia. The conference, organized by 
World Debate Institute at University of Vermont, USA, Zavod za 
_olstvo/Institute for education Slovenia and Za in proti, zavod za 
kulturo dialoga/Pro et contra, Institute for culture of dialogue, 
Slovenia will happen at Univerza v Ljubljani, Fakulteta za upravo 
(Ljubljana University, Faculty for administration), adress: Gosarjeva 
ulica 5, 1000 Ljubljana, Slovenia, http://www.fu.uni-lj.si/en/

The conference welcomes scholars and educators from diverse fields for 
vigorous dialogue and exchange. This conference will unite scholars of 
argumentation and rhetoric, teachers, and organizers of local, national 
and international debating networks to discuss critical thinking and 
advocacy discourse through pedagogy. Please, find the list of almost 80 
abstracts the conference organizers received till February 15th deadline 
and the draft schedule at the end of this message. The final programme 
will be available on March 15th at the Conference websites: 
http://debate.uvm.edu/betterworld.htm and 
http://betterworldconference.blogspot.com/

Those wishing to attend the conference without submitting a paper and 
participate in the discussions are very welcome but must register as 
well. The participation fee is 65 Euros and covers the conference 
sessions and materials, Friday evening reception, Saturday lunch as well 
as a Saturday banquet.. Low cost accommodations must register through 
Bojana Skrt, while all others must be booked by the attendees. You can 
check the list of suggested hotels at the Conference web page. I also 
need to remind you that Slovenia presidency of EU made the Ljubljana 
hotels quite full, so do not wait too long before making a booking.
Please note that registration for admission to the conference and low 
cost housing must be coordinated through Bojana Skrt 
bojana.skrt at siol.net. Registration deadline is 15 March 2008. You can 
find the application form at http://debate.uvm.edu/conf08appform.doc

We prefer the participation fee being paid in cash on arrival when 
registering.

However, if you choose paying the registration fee via bank transfer, 
here are the ZIP bank account's information:
Bank name: Nova ljubljanska banka
Bank adress: Trg republike 2, 1520 Ljubljana, Slovenia
IBAN is the bank account: IBAN SI56020560051711807
SWIFT CODE: LJBASI2X
Bank account holder: Za in proti, zavod za kulturo dialoga, adress: 
Svetosavska 24, 1000 Ljubljana, Slovenia

When paying via bank transfer, please, have in mind that we should get 
the net of 65 EUR, so you are responsible for the payment of bank 
transfer costs. All inquires about application, payment and other 
information should be sent to Bojana Skrt at bojana.skrt at siol.net.

Looking forward seeing you in Slovenia,

Bojana Skrt
Za in proti, zavod za kulturo dialoga/Pro et contra, Institute for 
culture of dialogue, Slovenia
Alfred C. Snider
World Debate Institute at University of Vermont, USA
CONFERENCE DRAFT SCHEDULE
Friday, 11th of April 2008
12.00 ? 14.00 Registration and payment

14.00 Opening
14.30 ? 16.30 Presentations
16.30 ? 17:00 Break
17:00 ? 18.30. Keynote speech 1 and discussion Franz van Eemeren
18:30 ? 19:30 Reception

Saturday, 12th of April 2008

9.30 ? 11. 30 Presentations
11.30 ? 12.00 Break
12.00 ? 13.30 Keynote speech 2 Kate Shuster
13.30 ? 14.30 Lunch (at the Faculty of social science cafeteria)
14.30 ? 16.30 Presentations
16.30 ? 17:00 Break
17:00 ? 19.00 Presentations
19.30 Banquet

Sunday, 13th of April 2008
9.30 ? 11.30 Presentations
11.30 ? 12.00 Break
12.00 ? 13.30 Keynote speech 3 Omar Salahuddin
13.30 Closing ceremony

ROOM 1 ? Argumentation panels
ROOM 2 ? Debate panels
ROOM 3 ? Pedagogy panels
ROOM 4 ? Video room
ROOM 5 ? Live events (debates, round table discussions, etc.
ROOM 6 ? Overflow of panels from three areas

VIDEO ROOM
We will be showing the following videos on a scheduled basis. A number 
of them will be shown twice.

Resolved ? USA documentary about high school debate
Sixty Minutes ? USA report on urban debate leagues
Svetovci ? Slovenia documentary about World Schools
The Journey ? John Maynard?s piece about youth activism and Eastern Europe
Sample Middle School Debate ? USA seeking permission to show it
Discussion by Middle School teachers ? USA seeking permission to show it
Sample Debate by Teachers ? in nutrition classroom
Others ? let us know if you have ideas

LIVE EVENTS ROOM
We will be staging sample debates in a number of different formats in 
this room. We will also use this room for round table discussions by 
registered attendees who are now organizing some topics and 
participants. Let us know if you are interested. Already agreed ?Is 
debate an answer for rhetoric classes?? and ?Challenges of running a 
debate club.?



KEYNOTE SPEAKERS
Argumentation - Frans van Eemeren, University of Amsterdam, perhaps the 
most noted argumentation scholar in the world.

    /Be Critical!The Need for a Well-Considered Normative Dimension in
    the Study of Argumentation/
    /Some scholars have the mistaken idea that the study of
    argumentation, in order to be a scientific enterprise, should be
    purely descriptive. They shun away from any normative concerns.
    Although descriptive studies, provided that they have a sound
    theoretical basis, are indispensable, it is Frans van Eemeren?s view
    that the study of argumentation cannot do without a normative
    dimension. He explains why he thinks that this is the case and
    argues that the normative dimension and the descriptive dimension of
    the study of argumentation should in fact be integrated, so that in
    the analysis and evaluation of argumentative discourse insights from
    both perspectives can be systematically combined./



Debate - Omar Salahuddin bin Abdullah, MultiMedia University,Malaysia. 
Recognized* as the "father of Asian debating" and recent winner of the 
first distinguished service award by the World Universities Debating 
Championship.

    /Debating in South-East Asia: A road less traveled./
    /One of the less visible legacies of colonialism, in Asian countries
    such as Malaysia, Singapore, the Philippines and Hong Kong, is an
    educational system that, in tandem with traditional classroom
    practices, spawned what might be best termed, ?Classical Debating.?
    This highly stylised precursor for the art and craft of debating
    that we recognise now trained generations of high school students to
    deliver speeches on bland topics, often determined months in
    advance, in competitive matches against other schools with a
    ?tradition and history of debating?. Speeches were usually written
    by teachers, researched by teams of less debate-able students and
    rehearsed until every gesture and pattern of emphasis was perfect.
    Not unsurprisingly, prior to the 1990s, debating was rarely a
    feature of mainstream coursework or co-curricular activity at
    tertiary levels in any of these countries./
    /Small groups of students in institutions such as Ateneo D?Manila
    University in the Philippines and the Singaporean universities
    occasionally tried to rally colleagues to attend one of the major
    international competitions and represent their universities and
    their countries, but these efforts went almost entirely unrewarded,
    and motivation was easily lost amongst the pressures of the Asian
    academe./
    /In 1994, a number of things began to materialize, almost out of
    thin Asian air. The first was an effort by student leaders in
    Nanyang Technological University, Singapore, to generate a debating
    competition that would offer Asian university debaters an
    alternative to the intimidating environments of Worlds (WUDC) and
    Australasians. This small beginning would burgeon into the
    competition and format now recognised as All-Asians./
    /The second unlikely happenstance was a meeting that took place on
    the steps of the old parliament building in Melbourne, Australia,
    immediately prior to the Grand Finals of the World Universities
    Debating Championships in January, 1994. This meeting brought
    together a number of committed educators and a much larger number of
    somewhat disgruntled students ? the latter, for the most part, upset
    by what seemed to them to have been an embarrassing loss of face and
    esteem in failing to present any real opposition for their European
    and American peers. Beneath the portals of a bygone legislative, a
    pact was made that day that Asians would never be so humbled again./
    /This presentation will chart the course of Competitive Debate
    development in South East Asia from that meeting until the present
    day. On this short journey together, we will consider the key
    elements that have raised the profile of debating in the region,
    established debating as a recognised part of the academic curriculum
    and propelled universities in the region into the forefront of
    international competitive debating./


Pedagogy - Kate Shuster, Claremont Graduate School, USA the worldwide 
leader in understanding and applying active methods in the classroom at 
various levels. One of her areas of emphasis has been oral literacy and 
how it can be successfully taught. Kate has eight recent books to her 
credit and a number of important works in submission. She is perhaps 
best known for her efforts to promote debating and critical thinking in 
middle schools.
Known Knowns, Known Unknowns, and Unknown Unknowns: Pedagogy and the 
Importance of Evaluation

    There are things we know about teaching and learning. There are
    things we know we don't know. And there are things we don't know we
    don't know. Without a serious commitment to evaluation and
    assessment, pedagogy and school improvement initiatives are unlikely
    to make any progress on the things we don't know. Drawing from new
    and emerging research in evaluation and accountability, this keynote
    suggests that teachers and researchers must engage in active
    collaboration to identify and replicate successful practices in
    education.



PRELIMINARY PAPERS:

This is a list of submissions. The committees may decide to refuse some 
of them or request rewrites.

ABSTRACTS SUBMITTED FOR PEDAGOGY SECTION

Panagiota Kotarinou, Anastasia Chrisanthaki-Apostolopoulou, Despina 
Koutli, Greece: Using ?debate? in the teaching of Science

Alfred Snider & Bojana Skrt, USA & Slovenia
TEACHING TEACHERS TO USE DEBATE IN THE CLASSROOM

Bojana Skrt, Slovenia
Debate as a subject in school

Yeoman, George, UK
CREATING OR RE-KINDLING A 'THIRST FOR KNOWLEDGE? ABOUT GLOBAL ISSUES, IN 
THE CLASSROOM

DANIELA KOZLOVI_, Slovenia
Debate and skills developing in the philosophy class

Veronika, Hovnik, Slovenia
Philosophy for children through the debate

Ryhdian Morgan, UK
Critical Thinking Skills in the Classroom

Maria Wilrath Soderberg, Sweden
Pedagogical consequences of viewing topoi as habits

Hedvika Dermol Hvala, Slovenia
DEVELOPMENT OF RETHORICAL SKILLS IN PRIMARY SCHOOL PUPILS

Istvan Pusztai Hungary
Unwanted heritage
The reminiscences of the authoritarian political system in Hungary built 
obstacles for practising democratic teaching methods in schools.

Dr. Nena Mijoc, Slovenia
Reciprocal and mutual learning within study circles at the Slovenian 
Third Age University

Ivana Mijatovi_, Serbia
THE IMPOWERING ACTIVE PARTICIPATION IN TECHING QUALITY MANAGEMENT COURSES

Maja Bregar, Slovenia
EXAMPLES OF DEBATES WITH SIX AND SEVEN YEAR-OLDS IN THE FIRST GRADE OF 
NINE YEARS' PRIMARY SCHOOL IN SLOVENIA

Nives Videc, Slovenia
DEBATE WITH SIX AND SEVEN YEAR-OLDS IN THE FIRST GRADE OF NINE YEARS' 
PRIMARY SCHOOL IN SLOVENIA

Darinka Vrabi_ and Alenka Gortan, Slovenia
Does matura exam restrict critical thinking and how a debate can 
contribute to quality of lessons

Andreas Felten, Germany
New Debate-Formats and ?Pre-Debate-Forms? for classroom use

Uve Poom, Tallinn University, Estonia
Factors influencing student reflection in the experiential education 
context: case study of debate education [summary of BA thesis]

Candace Williams, USA
Debate and Plagiarism: Do Current Debate Practices Violate School Honor 
Codes?

Mateja Glu_i_ Lenar_i_, Slovenia
TOGETHER IN DIVERSITY ? PROMOTING INTERCULTURAL DIALOGUE IN LANGUAGE 
CLASSES THROUGH DEBATE

Irena Lapanje, Slovenia
Teaching Young Not to Believe Everything

Mirella Ceglar Jurin_i_, University of Koper: , Slovenia
DEBATE AND LANGUAGE, Debate Training as a teaching method

Lara Godec Sozak, Slovenia
Analysis of students' oral presentations in the second year of primary 
education at the Faculty of Education in Ljubljana

Natasa Makovecki, Slovenia
DEBATE (TECHNIQUES) THROUGH THE LENSE OF THE CURRICULUM REFORM OF THE 
UPPER-SECONDARY VOCATIONAL AND TECHNICAL EDUCATION IN SLOVENIA

Vida Von_ina, Slovenia
Critical literacy and motivation for responsible engagement in a community



ABSTRACTS SUBMITTED FOR THE DEBATE SECTION

Ivanka Mavrodieva, PhD, Rhetoric Department, Kliment Ohridski University 
of Sofia, Bolgaria: Debates during the Presidential election campaigns 
in Bulgaria (from 1991 till 2005)

Boris Vezjak, Faculty od Arts, Maribor, Slovenia: Arguments, fallacies 
and media

Steven Woods, Ph.D., Department of Communication, Western Washington 
University: Arguments of Mass Destruction: The Nexus between 
Intercollegiate Debaters Catastrophic Impact Claims and Bush 
Administration Invasion Appeals

Javier Rodr?guez Alc?zar, University of Granada, Spain:
Risk Assessment: the Limits of Expertise and the Role of Public Debate


Kate Shuster , Claremont College, USA: Not Making the Case: A Critical 
Examination of Research Supporting Urban Debate Leagues.

Dea Ajdukovi_, HDD ? Hrvatsko debatno dru_tvo (Croatian Debate 
Association), Croatia: Attitude change and need for cognition in 
debaters and non-debaters

Bo_ena Perko, Kri_e Primary School, Slovenia: Solving conflicts in 
school by means of coeval mediation

Dr Ann Kirson Swersky, Founder and Chairperson, Sia?h vaSig ? The Israel 
Debating Society, Israel: Establishing Parliamentary Debate in Modern Israel

Anna Mojca England Kerr, Debate club of Faculty of social science, 
University of Ljubljana, Slovenia: A comparison between World Schools 
Debate Format and British Parliamentary Debate Format

Karlina Ko_elj, Master of Politology American Studies, Professor of 
English and Slovene at Secondary School for Catering and Tourism Celje, 
Slovenia: I am proud to say: these are my students.

Korry Harvey, Lecturer and Assistant Director of Forensic, Western 
Washington University, Bellingham, WA USA: Beyond Competitive Decision 
Making: A Primer on Civil Discourse and Deliberative Dialogue Methodology

Manolis Polychronides, PhD Candidate, University of Athens, Greece: Does 
debating, as an extracurricular activity, promote democratic values and 
skills? An empirical study in 14 Greek High schools.

Roz?lia Kl?ra Bak?, Sapientia University of Transylvania, Miercurea 
Ciuc, Romania and Gizela Horv?th, Partium Christian University, Oradea, 
Romania: The Religious Icons? Scandal: Radiography of a Public Debate in 
Romania

Rhydian Morgan, UK: The changing nature of rhetoric - looking at the way 
rhetorical styles develop and alter over time

Rhydian Morgan, UK: Zen & the Art of Debating

Miha Gartner, Gimnazija Celje ? Center, Celje, Slovenia: Mentorship of 
debate club.

Veronika Hovnik, Gimnazija Slovenj Gradec, Slovenia: Tekma

Maja Nenadovi_, Fellow of the George Bell Institute, University of 
Amsterdam, PhD Candidate: Giving Back the Voice

Helena Felc, Faculty of administration, University of Ljubljana, 
Slovenia, under ? graduate student: Promotion of a debate club - story 
of success or failure?

Alex Just, Program Director, QatarDebate, Qatar: QatarDebate and the 
future of debate education in the Arab World

Alex Just, Wadham College, Oxford University, UK: William Gladstone: A 
Model British Parliamentary Debater?

Bojan Marjanovi_, Chairman of the Executive board, Croatian debating 
society.Final year student of Sociology, department of Sociology, 
Faculty of Philosophy, University of Zagreb Croatia and Dea Ajdukovi_, 
HDD ? Hrvatsko debatno dru_tvo (Croatian Debate Association), Croatia
Evaluation of Croatian debating society debate program.

Conor Tucker, Student, Colgate University, USA: Rhetoric, Debate, and 
Deliberation: The Colgate Policy Institute

Jerneja Domajnko. Post ? gradute student at ISH, Ljubljana, Slovenia, 
Debating and equal opportunities for everyone.

Christopher Langone, graduate student Department of Communication, 
Cornell University, USA: Debate and the media

Sam Nelson, Director of Debate, Cornell University: Teaching debate in 
non-traditional places to non-traditional audiences.

Sam Nelson, Director of Debate, Cornell University, USA: What its past 
and present can tell us about its future.

Donald Reape, undergraduate, Cornell University, USA: The case against 
American style policy debate: A personal narrative

Ameila Kermis, undergraduate, Cornell University, USA: Ethos, Pathos, 
Logos in competitive debate: Can they be balanced?

Kyle Rouse, undergraduate, Cornell University, USA: The international 
debating workshop as the ideal vehicle for the learning of World's 
Format Debating: Personal reflections on the 2007 International Debate 
Academy - Slovenia

Kate Shuster, Claremont Mckenna College, California, USA: Middle school 
debate programe.

Donal Carbaugh, professor at Department of communication, University of 
Massachusetts, USA: Debate, Dialogue and Rhetoric as Cultural Discourse: 
Di-ciphering Codes for Communication Conduct

Alfred Snider, University of Vermont, USA
NPPF: COMBINING WRITING WITH ORAL DEBATE

Alfred Snider, University of Vermont, USA
GLOBAL DEBATE: THE STORY OF A DEBATE BLOG

Alfred Snider, University of Vermont, USA
Middle Age Debate Transition: How One Coach Changed Horses in Mid Career

Alfred Snider, University of Vermont, USA
TABULATING A DEBATE TOURNAMENT USING TRPC

John Adams, Director of Colgate University Speaking Union, USA: Statis


ABSTRACTS SUBMITTED FOR ARGUMENTATION SECTION

Lillian Bermejo Luque (Spain) Rhetorical argumentation vs. the rhetorical
dimension of argumentation

Henrik Bohlin (Sweden) Perspectives in critical thinking

Bart Garssen (Netherlands) Ad hominem attacks as derailments of critical
testing


Michael Hoppmann (Germany) On Three Kinds of Argumentative Responses

Lyudmila Kourchak (Belarus) Pragma-Dialectical Theory of Argumentation as a
Background for Analyzing and Criticizing of a Cross-Cultural Business 
Communication.

Irina Oukhvanova (Belarus) The _ausal-Genetic Approach as a Background for
Verification Analysis and Criticism of the Content of a Communicative 
Product (Case Study on Pedagogical Discourse).


Danilo _uster (Slovenia) Some dilemmas of informal logic


Paul van den Hoven (Netherlands) Playing with the Protagonist: Strategic
manipulations with discourse voices


C. Andone (Netherlands) Manouevring strategically by retracting a 
standpoint
in what can be reconstructed as the confrontation stage of a critical 
discussion

Marcin Lewi_ski (Netherlands) The straw man fallacy in the Internet 
discussion
forums

Constanza Ihnen (Netherlands) Exploiting topical potential with practical
argumentation: what do arguers choose when they choose between arguments 
from consequences and arguments from principles or norms?


Roosmaryn Pilgram (Netherlands) Characterising character: Analysing 
appeals to
ethos in a dialectical framework

Satoru Aonuma and Naoto Usui In Defense of Argument Culture: A Rhetorical
(Japan) Criticism of Asiacentric Bias in Intercultural
Communication

Ivan Mikirtumov (Russia) The Arguments driving to the Responsible
Knowledge: Logical Representation

Cristi?n Santib??ez Y??ez (Chile) Metaphorical design from an 
argumentative point
of view

Peter Mesarec (Slovenia) Argumentation and logical fallacies in the
Slovenian presidential election debate

David Cratis Williams (USA) Rhetorical Approach to Problems of Education


Bilal Amjarso (Netherlands) What is persuasive about dealing with 
anticipated counterarguments? A pragma-dialectical study of a form of 
strategic manoeuvring






-- 
Alfred C. Snider aka Tuna
Edwin Lawrence Professor of Forensics
University of Vermont
Huber House, 475 Main Street, UVM, Burlington, VT 05405 USA
Global Debate Blog http://globaldebateblog.blogspot.com
Debate Central http://debate.uvm.edu
World Debate Institute http://debate.uvm.edu/wdi/
World Debate Institute Blog http://worlddebateinstitute.blogspot.com
802-656-0097 office telephone
802-656-4275 office fax




More information about the Mailman mailing list