The Public Debate

Warm up the Unit 2 toolkit (framing, concession, figures, calibration) before you perform.

Output: You label one rhetorical move per prompt and rewrite it ONE notch stronger.

Teacher reads three short debate lines. For each you name the move (frame / concede-pivot / figure / hedge), then deliver a one-sentence stronger version using a different move from the same toolkit.

• · 'This isn't about cost — it's about who pays.' → name the move, then reframe again.
• · 'I'll grant the critics their strongest point: enforcement is hard. And yet…' → name the move, then rewrite as a tricolon.
• · 'I'm certain about the direction; less certain about the speed.' → name the move, then dial confidence DOWN one notch.

Turn the long-argument architecture from L9 into a one-page debate spine.

Output: A four-line spine: frame · steelman · pivot · calibrated close.

Choose ONE motion from the list. Pick your side. Build a four-line spine: (1) the frame you'll set, (2) the strongest version of the opposing case, (3) your concession-pivot, (4) your calibrated closing claim. Read it to your teacher; teacher challenges the weakest line.

• · Motion: 'Anonymous political donations should be banned.'
• · Motion: 'University rankings do more harm than good.'
• · Motion: 'Cities should price road use by demand.'

Deliver a 3-minute opening that frames first and lands one figure on purpose.

Output: Two 3-minute openings: you, then teacher. You MUST set the terms in the first 30 seconds and land ONE rhetorical figure cleanly.

You speak first for 3 minutes. Frame the debate in your opening sentence; use ONE figure (anaphora / antithesis / tricolon) on purpose and signal where you'll concede. Teacher then opens the opposing side. No interruption in this round.

Refute by steelmanning and pivoting, not by contradiction.

Output: Two 3-minute rebuttals that each open with the OPPONENT'S strongest point before pivoting.

You rebut teacher's opening. RULES: (a) restate teacher's strongest point better than they did, (b) concede ONE thing you genuinely concede, (c) pivot to the heart of the matter, (d) avoid talking past them. Teacher rebuts yours under the same rules.

If you're in a group: In groups of 4, run as 2v2: each side's rebutter MUST steelman BOTH opposing speakers before pivoting.

Close with calibrated certainty: confident, qualified, no overstatement.

Output: Two 90-second closes that name a confidence level explicitly and refuse a false dichotomy.

You close first for 90 seconds. You MUST: (a) state your conclusion with an explicit confidence level, (b) name ONE thing you'd climb down on, (c) reject any false dichotomy that surfaced, (d) nail the last sentence so it doesn't ring hollow. Teacher closes opposite.

Turn the performance into named, repeatable choices.

Output: A 5-line summary: best frame · best concession · best figure · weakest hedge · one line you'd cut.

Together, rebuild the strongest and weakest moments from the debate. Teacher names two strongest moves from your side and one weakest. You do the same for teacher's side. Then each of you writes one line you'd cut and one you'd keep.

If you're in a group: In groups, a silent Observer leads the review from notes.

Lock in the lesson on the page: the opening paragraph of a published version of your case.

Output: A 150-word op-ed opening handed in.

Write the OPENING 150 words of an op-ed version of your debate case. It must contain: a framed first sentence, one rhetorical figure used cleanly, one concession of the opposing case, and a calibrated stance. Use at least FIVE Unit 2 vocab items naturally.