This study seeks to explore the lived experience of competitors in high school level Oregon Style Cross-Examination Policy Debate in the state of Oregon. To elucidate this experience, between fifteen former competitors, graduating between 2003 and 2010, were interviewed in order to find common themes within the interviewees' experiences. The common themes that emerged from the interviews included establishing a knowledge base, the ability to research, effective use of communication skills, the development of confidence, and political awareness.

<p>The objective for this study is to examine whether it is possible to use the method of reflective equilibrium in order to enhance the usefulness of public debates as a support for political decision-making. Since public debates from political quarters are seen as an important tool for policy-making, the need for a rational assessment of the views put forward in such debates are important. And since reflective equilibrium aims for coherence between judgments on different levels – intuitions, principles and theories, which all are put forward in public debates – the point of departure for this theses is that this method could be useful for the matter of bringing some kind of structure to public debates.</p><p>The analysis in this study shows that there actually are similarities between the method of reflective equilibrium and the course of public debates, since they both are characterized by the fact that viewpoints are mutually scrutinized in the light of one another. Further, it is argued that a more systematic applying of the method of reflective equilibrium would further the justification force of the outcome of public debates, since the method stresses the need of rationality and the importance of taking all relevant opinions into consideration. Therefore, the conclusion is that applying reflective equilibrium to public debates could make the political decision-making more democratic.</p>

The objective for this study is to examine whether it is possible to use the method of reflective equilibrium in order to enhance the usefulness of public debates as a support for political decision-making. Since public debates from political quarters are seen as an important tool for policy-making, the need for a rational assessment of the views put forward in such debates are important. And since reflective equilibrium aims for coherence between judgments on different levels – intuitions, principles and theories, which all are put forward in public debates – the point of departure for this theses is that this method could be useful for the matter of bringing some kind of structure to public debates. The analysis in this study shows that there actually are similarities between the method of reflective equilibrium and the course of public debates, since they both are characterized by the fact that viewpoints are mutually scrutinized in the light of one another. Further, it is argued that a more systematic applying of the method of reflective equilibrium would further the justification force of the outcome of public debates, since the method stresses the need of rationality and the importance of taking all relevant opinions into consideration. Therefore, the conclusion is that applying reflective equilibrium to public debates could make the political decision-making more democratic.

The study aims to examine how censorship and comics have been discussed in three debates. The aim is also to identify discourses and the orders and relations of power constructed in the debates, and to examine how librarians should handle debates about censorship and comics. Selected sources are articles from Swedish newspapers and tabloids about the debates on the Pox-trial, the manga case and the debate about Tintin in Kulturhuset. The results from the analysis indicates that the debates have been dominated by two main discourses: a discourse on freedom of speech and a discourse on social responsibility. Within the discourse of freedom of speech there is a range of perspectives that emphasize: artistic freedom, the need for open and free conversations, a discussion about how the comics are assessed in comparison with other media formats as well as a discussion about moral and moralism. The discourse of social responsibility results in a feminist and anti-porn discourse, a post-colonial and anti-racist discourse and a discourse on the protection of children and young people. Based on these results, the discourses can be analysed in relation to the laws, values and ethical guidelines for libraries. The analysis indicates that libraries and librarians should keep a balance between freeedom of speech and social responsibility. They could keep up to date with research about censorship, comics and various genres in order to make informed decisions about how to handle comics in the libraries. The librarian should also assess the comics on the same bases as literature, music, film and other cultural expressions.

This thesis aims at investigating the conflict development of Swedish foreign policy debates during 1989-2000. It is rather assumed that the Swedish foreign policy debates have been highly characterized by a large consensus. Despite that, there have been certain occurrences where the political parties have flushed into party struggle and shown disagreements over the party frontiers. This has raised questions about the range of conflict and consensus in such debates where I have studied the political parties' backchats. I have studied situations where the political parties replicate each other in order to investigate the range of consensus and controversy that exists within different foreign policy areas. The purpose has been to determine if Swedish foreign policy has undergone substantial changes during the 1990s and transformed into a more conflict-ridden foreign policy in contrast to earlier post-war era. The empirical analysis reveals that the foreign policy of Sweden has undergone minor changes over time. The period of 1990s consists of a larger amount consensus than conflict and more controversy within internationalistic issues instead of national interests issues during the post-war era. The parties that are most given to politicize within different foreign policy issues are the Social Democrats, the Moderate Party and the Left-wing Party during the 1990s.

Thesis (Ph. D.)--University of Hong Kong, 2010. / Includes bibliographical references (p. 333-350). Also available in print.

published_or_final_version / abstract / English / Master / Master of Philosophy

Thesis (M.A.)--University of Alabama at Birmingham, 2008. / Additional advisors: David Basilico, Eduardo Neiva, Cynthia Ryan. Description based on contents viewed June 3, 2008; title from title screen. Includes bibliographical references (p. 111-116).

Made available in DSpace on 2016-06-02T20:37:45Z (GMT). No. of bitstreams: 1 3728.pdf: 17477814 bytes, checksum: 96c10eb49f6657020632295b361232b6 (MD5) Previous issue date: 2011-02-02 / A large body of science education literature suggests that argumentation plays a central role in science and should therefore maintain the same centrality in science education. However, opportunities for students to engage in argumentation inside the science classroom are rare. In light of the above, the purpose of this study was to evaluate the potential of a teaching strategy based on the debate on controversial socio-scientific issues to promote argumentation. The strategy involved in-class group work and individual efforts outside the classroom. After receiving science popularization texts on depleted uranium (DU), high school students worked on a set of questions designed to guide them through key chemical, environmental, and economic aspects of the text. The process culminated in a debate between pro- and anti-DU groups. To assess the quality of students argumentation, videotapes of group presentations were collected and analyzed using Toulmin s Argument Pattern and the Argumentation Model of Analysis Applicable to Processes of Resolution of Socio-Scientific Issues. The findings of this work support the idea that the debate based on socio-scientific issues is an effective strategy for enhancing students ability to argument. / Uma vasta literatura em ensino ciências sugere que a argumentação desempenha um papel central na ciência e, portanto, deve ter a mesma centralidade no ensino de ciências. Contudo, as oportunidades de participação dos alunos na argumentação em sala de aula de ciência são raras. Em face do exposto, o objetivo deste estudo foi avaliar o potencial de uma estratégia de ensino baseada em debates polêmicos sobre questões sociocientíficas para promover a argumentação. A estratégia envolveu o trabalho em grupo e esforços individuais dentro e fora da sala de aula. Depois de receber textos de divulgação científica sobre o urânio empobrecido (UE), alunos do ensino médio solucionaram questões destinadas a guiá-los na discussão dos aspectos químicos, ambientais e econômicos do texto. O processo culminou com um debate entre grupos pró-UE e anti-UE. Para avaliar a qualidade da argumentação dos alunos, gravações de vídeo das apresentações dos grupos foram coletados e analisados utilizando o padrão de argumento de Toulmin e o Modelo de Análise de Argumentação Aplicável a Processos de Resolução de Questões Sóciocientíficas. Os resultados deste trabalho apontam que o debate com base em questões sociocientíficas discutidos em textos de divulgação científica é uma estratégia eficaz para estimular a capacidade argumentativa dos alunos.

This thesis is a discursive investigation of contested political discourse. Using Discursive Psychology, I analyse broadcast political debates on the European Union to explore how politicians advocate and defend their political positions in an argumentative context of justification and criticism. Past research in social psychology and cognate disciplines has investigated ideology from a multitude of views. Following a move away from mainstream approaches I demonstrate how some qualitative approaches treat it as a live matter in broadcast political debates. For my data I have chosen the controversial political battleground that is the European Union and what it means for Britain. The contribution of Discursive Psychology comes in highlighting the contested, rhetorical, nature of ideology . In this thesis I draw upon Discursive Psychology to explore how this contestation unfolds as situated practice in multi-party conversations about the EU. Politicians will argue in favour or against the EU, often on the grounds of what the implication is for Britain. In this thesis I argue that Discursive Psychology is best equipped to allow us to study this as an activity; an observable, and contextual, social action. The analytical chapters focus on three interrelated aspects of political argumentation: the construction and use of factual claims (including demonstrations of knowledge statuses ) and counterclaims, the role of overlapping talk, and the function of laughter and derision. The first analytical chapter seeks to elucidate some of the ways in which facts and situated knowledge displays of them are oriented to as an argumentative matter and how they can be challenged. The second analytic chapter illustrates the role played by overlapping talk and challenges in managing the argument at hand. The last analytic chapter focuses on the accomplishment of derision in broadcast political debates, particularly on how derision can be used as form of counterclaim. Ultimately, this thesis demonstrates the usefulness of Discursive Psychology in understanding the discursive dynamics of mobilisation, contestation, and defence of contrasting viewpoints in the service of political argumentation. Discursive Psychology can help social psychologists get a much deeper appreciation of the situated, and discursively dynamic, nature of political argumentation and conflict in talk.