2012 Australasian Debating Competition in New Zealand

2012 Australasian Debating Competition in New Zealand

Dive into the Moment 

with Intellectual Curiosity

                                                                                                         

                                                                                                                                                Written by Hyo Jeong Kim

Hello, Dear lovely KIDA Readers! 

Ahead of the Austral stories, you might remember that our first volume KIDA Talks had an interview with Monash University. Christopher Bisset, Amit Golder (whom we covered in the article) and Mandeline Schultz of Monash 1 got the 2012 Australs championship. It is no wonder since we all know well how they tenuously prepare for the debating competitions. 

It has been past several weeks since 2012 Australasian Debating Championship (2012 Australs) has ended, which were a sequence of hectic days packed with the fierce debating rounds. Australs 2012 was participated by 88 teams from the 30 universities over Australasian countries.

2012 Australs was hosted by the Victoria University situated in Wellington, the capital of New Zealand. Wellington is the center of economics and administration of New Zealand. Skyscrapers are embroidering Wellington rather than the green or running sheep what you might expect to see.

Watching a witty video before the motion release is always a big joy to debaters  
photo courtesy by 2012 Australs

Just to look back on New Zealand university debating history, the oldest debating society in New Zealand is Otago University, founded in 1878. Following that, Auckland Debating Society was founded in 1887. To briefly mention an interesting episode, 1891 Auckland University’s debating competition motion was “Should suffrage be extended to women?”, which may have helped the world—first granting of national women’s suffrage in 1893. Victoria University Society was formed in 1899.

When I arrived in New Zealand, my body has long been accustomed to the sizzling weather of Korea that it took quite a while to adapt to the nose-freezing weather of the southern hemisphere. (Tip! For those who might tilt their head wondering why suddenly this author mentions the cold weather, the weather of the southern and the northern hemisphere is different. Do you still cannot believe me? Then look over your little sister's elementary school science book  just to make sure.) 

However, the passion of debaters was more than enough to melt down the severe coldness. When the rain drizzled down the outside of the window in July 8, KIDA debaters arrived in Kiwi’s country, New Zealand. It was a long hour itinerary that everyone seemed fatigued. 

Chief Adjudicator Stephen Whittington 
photo courtesy by 2012 Australs

Before the main rounds began, Pre-Australs had run on 6th and 7th of July. It was a practice debating rounds which provided chances for rookie debaters to get the knack of the debating rules and trained debaters to peep into their rivals’ eloquent speeches. The participation fee was only 10 NZ$ per a team. Next year if our readers are planning for the Malaysian 2013 Australs, you should definitely give it a shot.

This year, three teams from each different debating society from KIDA participated in 2012 Australs; DAE, EDIS and Solbridge which broke through the competitive ESL (English as a Second Language) break. (Listed in alphabetical order)

2012 Australs was held following this schedule. The 8 debating rounds had run on 9th, 10th, 11th of July and then one day break for 12th, following 13th and 14th for main Rounds and grand finals. 

2012 Australs Opening Ceremony- DAE with Japanese, Malaysian delegates

The topics for each debating rounds were like followings

Round 1
1) TWS ban eating contests.
2) That sporting leagues should never suspend players for off field behaviour.
3) That developing nations should not host international sporting events.


Round 2
1) That the government should not receive any revenue from gambling beyond standard taxation.
2) TWS require individuals to disclose that they carry STIs even if protection is used.
3) That individuals should be required to pass drug tests in order to receive welfare benefits.

Round 3
1) TWS grant higher-level primates more rights than other animals.
2) That doctors should be required to perform medical procedures even when it conflicts with their beliefs.
3) That employers should be allowed to discriminate on lifestyle factors (such as smoking and obesity) when hiring.

Round 4
1) That NATO should invite former Eastern Bloc states to be members.
2) That the UN should establish a standing military force.
3) That the US should impose retaliatory tariffs on China for currency manipulation.

Round 5
1) That the state should provide incentives for individuals to grow their own produce and buy locally.
2) TWS adopt a vegetarian diet.
3) TWS celebrate the growth of the fat pride movement.


Round 6
1) That developing nations should prohibit families of current or former politicians from running for office.
2) TWS make voting mandatory.
3) TWS ban all political campaign contributions.

Round 7
1) TWS introduce a tax on financial transations.
2) That EU should create a common fiscal authority.
3) That governments should not fund reconstruction in areas that are prone to natural disasters.


Round 8
1) That where gay marriage is legal, religious institutions should be forced to conduct marriage ceremonies for gays.
2) TWS force victims of domestic violence to testify in court.
3) TWS criminalise prostitution.




This year, Johanna McDavitt and Daniel Wilson co-convened the Australs 2012. Johanna is a Vice President of Victoria University Debating Society and Daniel has judged the ESL Grand Final in Korea Australs. This year’s Chief Adjudicator was Stephen Whittington who is an experienced debater for being the Australs finalist three times and Ely, Toshi, Ravi, Stephe were the other core adjudicators.

Daniel Wilson, co-convener for 2012 Australs 
photo courtesy by Victoria University

Before the main rounds began on July 14th, there was a Women’s Night which celebrates the achievements of female debaters. Women’s Debate was held at Parliament of New Zealand under the motion that “THW allow the entrapping of the police to catch criminals.”

Johanna McDavitt, co-convener for 2012 Australs
 photo courtesy by Victoria University

Following are the motions of the main rounds.

Octos Motions

1) TWS repeal the individual mandate for healthcare in the
2) TWS set term limits for US Supreme Court justices.
3) That the US should declare an amnesty for all illegal immigrants.

Quarters Motions
1) That the death of print media is bad for journalism
2) That law enforcement should turn a blind eye to drug use and sale in designated areas.
3) That families whose children perform well in school should receive bonus welfare payments

ESL Semi Motions
1) That media outlets should be allowed to report on the details of suicides.
2) That the media should not report on the private lives of politicians.
3) That there should be a minimum Body Mass Index (BMI) for women on television

Semi Final Motions
1. That we should have a one state solution for Israel and Palestine
2. That the West should suppress pro-democracy movements which are against the West's strategic interests
3. That we should only grant amnesty to dictators at the conclusion of conflicts

Final Motion 

That we should introduce good samaritan laws

Other Grand Final Motions

1. That we should introduce a system of school vouchers

2. That the state should stop subsidising monogamous relationships.

Left, adjudicator Abel Lam with Solbridge, EDIS

Solbridge broke into ESL break which pick 4 teams out of ESL teams. Though they could not step into Grand Finals, the news that they broke into ESL semi-finals brought hope for the Korean debaters. Seo Yoon Lee, from Solbridge said,  

“When I could not break into 2012 Australs, I was very disappointed. However, I learned a lot through this 2012 Australs and it was definitely a great chance to me. It might be unforgettable since 2012 Australs is my team member Daniel (obba)’s last chance to participate into Australs.”

2013 Australasian Debating Championships will be hosted by UT Mara, Malaysia. The participation fee will be set at RM1,600 (equivalent to USD 505). The adjudicators will include Sebastian Templeton (New Zealand), Imran Rahim (Singapore) as well as Tasneem Elias (Qatar). Next? 


It is your turn to dive into the exciting moment.


END.

What Happened in UADC, Stays in UADC

What happened in UADC, Stays in UADC

KIDA DPI Report: United Asian Debating Championship 2012

Interviewed and Edited by Jya Hyun Albert Lee

Korea has been largely under-represented in the international debate scene outside of the Northeast Asian arena. While Korea has hosted All Asians (predecessor of UADC) and Australs before and many teams were able to participate due to the geographical proximity, fewer number of societies send teams to international tournaments hosted outside of Korea. This year, however, Korea’s presence in UADC (United Asian Debating Championship), hosted by Multimedia University in Malaysia, was more visible than ever, sending Deputy Chief Adjudicator of the tournament, a total of three Korean debate societies, and a debater who participated in the adjudication test debate. Talks Online has interviewed some of UADC participants to find out what UADC this was like, and what Korean debaters need to do to step up in the international debate scene.

This article will feature interviews of the following individuals:

Hyewon Rho, Deputy Chief Adjudicator, KU (Korea University)

Hye Won Lee, Debater, EDiS

JuSeung Daniel Yi, Debater, SDS (Solbridge Debating Society)

Jan Galas, Adjudicator, CUDS (Chungang University Debating Society)

Namchul Kim, CUDS

The Two Hyewons, Rho on the right and Lee on the left

Hyewon Rho

Korea University – Division of International Studies, Senior

Newly appointed Vice President of KIDA 2012; Former Director of DPD of KIDA 2012

Served as the Deputy Chief Adjudicator at MMU UADC 2012

Tell us your general feeling towards UADC

Last year at Macau UADC 2011, our team broke to the Octofinals with six wins, ranking 8^th out of the entire tournament.  We were extremely honored and thankful to have the entire Korean delegation come watch our debate and cheer for us.  Even though we lost on a split, I left the tournament with great memories and a want to return. 

This year, my UADC experience was entirely different.  I was not a participant but rather a DCA, meaning that I had more workload and pressure coming from all sides.  Especially since Northeast Asia is a region that is relatively less represented, I felt incredibly honored to be representing Northeast Asia in the adjudication core. This was my first experience to be part of an Adj Core of an international tournament and it was phenomenal. I met so many interesting and different people. I learned so much from the Adj Core, the speakers, the adjudicators and the organizers. Furthermore, because Korea only sent a total of five teams to this year’s UADC, I felt that the Korean delegation as a whole were able to grow closer as a group. I loved getting to know the younger generation EDiS girls as well as Solbridge – a society that was always near but never close enough. As one of the older ones in the group, I feel extremely blessed to have met so many sweet juniors who are passionate about debate. Plus, they listen to me really well. So that was just awesome.

The Chief Adjudication Panel of UADC 2012

What do you think about the current Korean participation in UADC?

I think Northeast Asia, especially Korea, is doing pretty well overall. Although we did not have any teams breaking this year, we had strong speakers that received above average scores across the tab. I think a lot of students take UADC as a burden because it is a long tournament that requires one to skip school for a week and because it’s usually organized somewhere in Southeast Asia, the flight fare is also expensive.  However, I think if the Korean debating community wants to be recognized more and treated with more respect at international tournaments, we need to step out of our comfort zone (i.e. Northeast Asian Open) and move onto a larger stage and start creating records there. We’ve had two Korean DCAs in the past including myself (the other being Ah Young Kim from EDiS) and we’ve had a breaking team. I think it’s time to have more teams and adjudicators breaking and more importantly, more participants just being there!

What are the things that you think Korea can improve to ensure future success in UADC?

What I’ve noticed about some ‘celebrity’ teams at UADC was that they know how to set up a case in an extremely smooth and logical manner. In other words, they know what they want and how they’re going to get it. I think we Korean debaters lack in setting up cases in terms of setting goals and explaining the mechanism in achieving that goal. I think if we want to do better in the future, we first need to observe stellar debaters (especially the good first speakers) set up and clash with cases. Moreover, I think the Korean community as a whole needs more exposure to diverse types of topics and motions. I don’t think we necessarily lack knowledge about particular things, but rather we simply don’t have exposure to the diverse pool of motions that’s out there. Tournaments are not all about International Relations issues. Some need a philosophical background and some need clear ideas about society and its components. 

Advice for Korea Debate community

I’m extremely proud of the Korean community and where we’re at. I love the fact that there is an absence of rivalry feuds, political conflicts and the like within our debate community. I love the fact that we cheer for any Korean team or adjudicator that has made the break. I wish this ‘team spirit’ would continue on.  On the other hand, I wish we could get more competitive! KIDA has been organizing lots of practice sessions and workshops in which teams can get more of a competitive edge – I hope the Korean debating community takes advantage of such programs and get into a more ‘serious’ mode about debating. We need to start showing the Asian, Australasian, GLOBAL debating community that we’re serious stuff that they can’t mess with. J

Right before the break night party, all EDiS girls dressed up

 

Hyewon Lee, EDiS
 

I'm originally from EDiS but am currently serving as the President of KIDA. I've been to all the UADCs from its very first one in Thailand, second one in Macau and third and this one in Malaysia. 3rd MMU Malaysia UADC too, was a priceless experience which reaffirms and explains my habitual return to UADC every year. 

Tell us your general feeling towards UADC

 
Great experience, loads of fun is such a sure thing needing no explanation so instead, I'm going to focus on the quality of the tournament. I think UADC is certainly the highest Asia level tournament with intense competition. My definition of UADC all comes down to the excellent adjudication pool and definitely challenging rounds. UADC is also same as KNC in that it's Asian Parliament Style but it almost feels like it's a whole different debate style considering their emphasis on analysis and engagement; it's truly a tournament where nothing is proven until you prove it - even the common sense!

Tell us of any extraordinary experience at UADC

 
I was extremely lucky to take part in the test debate (a show debate with 6 speakers all representing different countries). There were debaters from Philippines, Malaysia, Singapore and I was representing Korea/North East Asia as a whole. It was my first time to debate in front of what could've been around 70 adjudicators or more (the test debate was for adj. test) and yes I was very nervous but it was such a fantastic opportunity and great fun.

What do you think about the current Korean participation in UADC?

 
 I think this UADC was the one where even with only three Korean societies our presence in the tournament was definitely vivid. But it would definitely be better if we have more Korea teams coming, the more the merrier and more connection with Asian debaters the better for Korean debate community. 

What are the things that you think Korea can improve to ensure future success in UADC?

 
Training on matter and analysis: I think Korea by its innate culture and language, is one where people tend to be concise and sort of 'get what i mean' without many words or explanations even in our daily lives. The biggest weakness that I felt from myself and other Korean teams were that we "never explain and analyze enough". 

Any last words or advice for Korea Debate community?

I personally think that the crux and highlight of any debate life is this experience abroad; only when you debate with people that have different  cultural mentality with you (especially outside Korea) can you really confidently say that you have 'persuaded' that person. International debate tournaments are definitely worthy of higher cost and missing classes at university and your participation will be one of those moments you look back most to, after your graduation.

JuSeung Yi, SolBridge Debate Society

My name is JuSeung Yi. I go to SolBridge International School of Business and participated in 2012 UADC as a debater. I am also a founder of SolBridge Debate Society and am going to serve as a co-chief adjudicator for the upcoming fall KNC.

Tell us your general feeling towards UADC

Overall, UADC was a great learning experience for me. In every round, I was able to learn from many debaters from Southeast Asia. Not only did they have a unique style, but also they showed descriptive and solid analysis. As well as the debaters, most adjudicators were also great. They provided very detailed feedback. When there was a team of three panels to judge in a round, each of the panels in turn gave his or her perspective and individual feedback on the round.

Tell us of any extraordinary experience at UADC

I don’t know if it would be appropriate to bring this happening up here. But, I will share it anyway, hoping that this will never happen to other teams in any tournaments. On second day, none of my team members including me could hear our alarm clock and woke up late in the morning. Neither debaters nor buses but us were in the hotel. We freaked out and hurried into a cab to the venue which is 50 minutes away. But, one of my members thought the venue was Melaka where the host university’s another campus is located. So, in Korean context, we could’ve ended up in Daejeon instead of going to Bundang. Anyway, we were able to arrive right before the first roll call and debate.

What do you think about the current Korean participation in UADC?

Because this UADC is my first UADC, I don’t know about other UADCs that were held in the past. For this UADC, I think the Korean participation was quite low with only three institutions from Korea participating. It would’ve been better if more teams from Korea participated in UADC.

What are the things that you think Korea can improve to ensure future success in UADC?

I think the very first thing we can do for Korea’s success in UADC is to encourage more debaters and judges from Korea to participate in UADC. More active participation will raise profile of Korean debate community in UADC which is currently dominated by Southeast Asians. I think that will also help Korean teams competing in UADC. Another thing we can improve on is a sort of “knowledge sharing”. Because debaters and adjudicators in UADC have different styles than our style, it would be helpful for debaters to be aware of their styles and perspectives and to share tips on UADC. For me, Hyewon’s sharing experience in UADC was helpful in that it gave a sense of what I needed to expect and focus on for UADC.

Any last words or advice for Korea Debate community?

In international tournaments, get to know a lot of judges and debaters and talk to them to understand their perspectives on debate. I think that also helps you analyze arguments from different angles to some extent.

Jan Galas, Chungang University Debate Society

I've been in Korea debate circuit for almost 3 yrs now. I came to UADC as an adjudicator for CUDS.

Tell us your general feeling towards UADC

With the Asia’s best debaters and public speakers, UADC 2012 was a great experience for the entire Korean contingent. 

Tell us of any extraordinary experience at UADC

My most memorable experience at UADC was the sleepless soju nights with the Korean contingent and the entire UADC participants. More than anything else, the bond/friendship that was formed/strengthened was the best experience for me. 

   

What do you think about the current Korean participation in UADC?

In terms of number, I think the current Korean participation in UADC was low compared to last year. But in terms of the competition, the contingent put-up a good fight. 

What are the things that you think Korea can improve to ensure future success in UADC?

Increase participation in international debate tournaments and always be receptive to debate trends and new ideas. 

Any last words or advice for Korea Debate community?

Keep the debate culture alive at home (here in Korea) and encourage everyone to take advantage of international debate tournaments-- it's the best place to showcase Korea's debate prowess and also learn from the world's best debaters and public speakers. 

Namchul Kim, Chungang University Debating Society

Tell us your general feeling towards UADC

It was really a good tournament. There wasn’t that much delay, the hotel was nice and quality of the tournament was also good since Roh hyewon was DCA of this UADC. Seriously, it was great honor for Korea to have a DCA in the biggest debate tournament in Korea.

Tell us of any extraordinary experience at UADC

I had really bad luck. My team was bumped up 5 times from round 4 to 8, meaning I had to debate against teams with higher number of wins because my team had high speaker points. But on the brighter side, I spoke with a number of people in the organizing committee and there was much discussion on how to prevent such consecutive bumping up from happening in the future.

What do you think about the current Korean participation in UADC?

I think we should have more participants. Five teams were not enough to bring positive change to Korean debating society. International tournaments are somewhat expensive but if you participate you will get more experience and make more friends not only in Korea Debate but also foreign debaters who are not comparable to little bit of money.

What are the things that you think Korea can improve to ensure future success in UADC?

Korean debaters must read more. I think that is the biggest weakness of Korean debaters. We have great English ability and style but the only thing we do not have is knowledge. Without reading a book and newspaper we can’t catch up with good debaters such as those from NUS(National University of Singapore). And we also need to have competitive debate experience like KNC. I do not think KNC is competitive enough for us to train for international competitions.

Any last words or advice for Korea Debate community?

Korea debating society has improved a lot. But I don’t think that is enough. We are doing very well in Northeast Asia but that should be a starting point rather than an ending point. So all members of Korean debating society should study more and strive to be better.

END.

Unlocking the Secret to Championship: Spring KNC Chamions Interview

Unlocking the Secret to Championship

Talks Interview: Champions of 2012 Spring KNC

Interviewed and Edited by Jya Hyun Albert Lee

Do you still remember? The memories of Spring KNC 2012 are slowly fading away, but your passion for debate is hopefully gaining momentum. We asked the KNC Champions, Grand Champion Team from CUDS (Chungang University Debating Society) and EFL Champion Team from DAE (Debate Association of Ewha), what their secret to championship was. If you hope to break in Fall KNC, here is the masters’ tip to the next Championship.

The Grand Final Round, featuring CUDS as government and EDiS as Opposition.

Grand Champion Team, CUDS(Chungang University Debating Society)

EFL Champion Team Representative, DAE(Debate Association of Ewha)

Would you briefly introduce yourself? Major and your hobby?

Taeyeong: Hello my name is Taeyeong Kim and I am majoring in English Language and Literature at Chung-Ang University. My hobbies are playing soccer, watching soccer and having a good time with my friends.

Seunghwan: My name is Seung-Hwan Hong, and I major in English language and literature. I like music, and I have been playing the piano for quite a while. Taeyeong and Mingeun are sick of my tapping my fingers on the desk while I prep.

Mingeun: I'm Min Geun Seo, majoring in B.A. in Chung-Ang University. I Love playing basketball and reading.

Jiyoung, EFL Champion: My name is Ji Young Choi. I am a junior of International Office Administration at Ewha. I am a rookie who started debating since this semester. I like to play the piano or watch the movie when I have some free time.

How did you start debating?

Taeyeong: I started debating in high-school and found it to be one of the most fun activities in my life. Afterwards I continued to do what I found fun.

Mingeun: I first got to know debating through 'Debate in Business class' during my freshmen year. After experiencing a mini tournament in class, I found debating pretty interesting. So I went to meet Logan and asked about CUDS. He told me great things about debating and that it will change my life. Eventually I decided to join CUDS and now a lot of great changes happend, thanks to debating.

How did you decide your team and your respective roles?

CUDS: Every CUDS team goes through the tryout where we rank each member based on the speaker score of each tryout round. Based on those scores we get a total rank where the first person gets to choose their teammate. Then it goes on. Taeyeong chose Seunghwan and Seunghwan chose Mingeun.

As for roles we considered what would bring the best advantage out of each speaker. As Taeyeong was comfortable with substantiating and problem setting he gets PM, while Mingeun can do swift rebuttals and making something sound really good he gets DPM and as Seunghwan can look at the debate on a holistic level, make fun out of people and really clear the debate up he gets Whip.

DAE: We had a tryout-debate to make up a team for KNC. After seeing the debate, we wrote a member of veto and preference according to their debating styles on a piece of paper, and gave it to senior members. Then after they considered it, our president announced the team members. That’s how our team was constructed. And for the roles, since my other teammates were the second and the whip speaker at the Rookie Tournament, which I didn’t participate, they wanted to maintain their roles. So I was to be the first speaker automatically

 CUDS, Champions of Spring KNC 2012

What do you think is the strength of your team?

Taeyeong: We have this thing for making people angry. But above that I believe our biggest strength is in our willingness to win, but if we lose we try to learn from our mistakes, listen to feedback and use that advice to win the next round.
Seunghwan: I think Taeyeong is very structured and eloquent, Mingeun is very critical and keen, and I don't have any of these things, but I can annoy people pretty well.
Mingeun: Youthfulness and a sense of humor.

Jiyoung: We complement each other. Especially Jin Soo Lee, the eldest member, was born to be a debater and was a good mental supporter of our team.

What is your further goal as a debater from now on?

Taeyeong: It is actually to become an experienced senior so I can pass on things I have learned to future debaters. To achieve that I would have to practice to a far greater extent that what I am doing right now.
Seunghwan: In one of the future tournaments I will meet NC in the finals and beat him (If you're reading this NC, let me live).
Mingeun: Make my speech funnier and maybe win another KNC title

Jiyoung: Main breaking is further goal as a team, and my personal goal is to rank as a best speaker.

Chief Adjudicator of Spring KNC, Hyewon Rho, Korea University, ready to be convinced.

Is there any special system or training that we can share together?

There was really nothing special in our training. The only things we did were practice, practice a little more and practice one last time. The amount of practice that we did was we did a mini-tournament during the weekends, went to session every single time, meet up on normal days to case prep and practice speeches and go to most of the adjudication tests to receive feedback and adjudication from more than a hundred adjudicators. We also had our separate team meetings after every single round to fix problems we had within our own speeches.


Debate with which team was unforgettable to you?

Taeyeong: Every single round was memorable. I would show deep respect to every single team that went against us. However if I were to choose one round I personally thought the first preliminary round was unforgettable. It was against UU 3 and it was the round where we lost. The reason why it was memorable was because I thought it was the round where we prepared most comfortably and easily. However, because we lost it we were under some mental collapse but this was the time where we had to bring back our mentality which we did the very next day.

Mingeun: Every single debate was unforgettable but especially EDIS B was the most memorable. We've met EDIS B in the last round of pre-lims and met them again in the grand finals. They were a very tough team and it was very fun to debate with them.

END.