Beyond Arguments: Exploring Different Styles of Debate

When we think of a debate, we often imagine two people standing at a podium, trying to outsmart each other with clever arguments. But the world of debating is much richer than that. Over the years, a variety of debate formats have been developed, each with its own style, rules, and purpose. In the Debating for Diversity project, our students are not only practicing debate skills, but also learning how different debate models can be used in schools, communities, and even everyday conversations.

 

  1. Parliamentary Debate – Fast, Dynamic, and Strategic

One of the most popular formats in Europe is Parliamentary Debate, inspired by the British parliamentary system. It usually involves four teams (two on each side), who argue for or against a motion.

Strengths: Fast-paced, encourages teamwork, develops quick thinking.

Best for: Training students to think on their feet, and to adapt to unexpected arguments.

Special feature: Teams do not know the topic far in advance—they have to prepare quickly and rely on creativity and logic.

 

  1. Oxford-Style Debate – Clear, Public-Friendly, and Persuasive

The Oxford format is simpler: one side proposes a motion, the other opposes it, and the audience often gets to vote before and after to see if anyone’s opinion has changed.

Strengths: Very engaging for the audience, clear structure, easy to follow.

Best for: Public events, schools, or civic debates where the goal is persuasion rather than competition.

Special feature: The audience plays a role, making the debate not just about speakers but about convincing the public.

 

  1. Karl Popper Debate – Educational and Team-Oriented

Named after the philosopher Karl Popper, this format was designed specifically for educational settings. Teams of three debaters prepare their cases in advance, with time for cross-examination.

Strengths: Excellent for developing research skills, logical structure, and respectful questioning.

Best for: High school and university classrooms.

Special feature: Balances prepared arguments with spontaneous interaction, teaching students to listen as much as to speak.

 

  1. Public Forum Debate – Accessible and Real-World Focused

Popular in the United States, Public Forum Debate is designed to be understandable to a “citizen judge”—someone without specialized knowledge. Debaters are encouraged to use plain language and real-world examples.

Strengths: Accessible, audience-friendly, directly connected to current events.

Best for: Encouraging civic participation and discussing contemporary issues like climate change or social media

Special feature: Judges are everyday people, which teaches debaters to communicate clearly and persuasively.

 

  1. Lincoln-Douglas Debate – Deep and Philosophical

This one-on-one format focuses on values and philosophy rather than purely practical issues. It’s slower, more analytical, and allows debaters to explore ethical dimensions of a topic.

Strengths: Encourages deep thinking about justice, morality, and democracy.

Best for: Advanced debaters who want to practice depth over speed.

Special feature: Instead of teams, it’s one speaker against another, sharpening individual rhetorical skill.

 

Why Does It Matter?

Each format highlights a different aspect of communication: speed, persuasion, teamwork, or depth. By experimenting with various styles, students in Debating for Diversity are learning that debate is not just a competition—it’s a tool for democracy, empathy, and civic engagement.

Whether they are practicing quick responses in a parliamentary debate, persuading an audience in Oxford style, or exploring minority rights in a Karl Popper round, the goal is the same: to build voices that matter.

As one student recently put it:

Different debate styles are like different languages. Once you learn them, you can connect with more people, and that’s when change begins.

by Iringó Tóth Gödri

Building Bridges in May: Partners Meet to Shape the Future of Debate

In May, the partners of the Debating for Diversity project came together—both in person and online—for a working meeting that proved to be as inspiring as it was productive. Hosted in Cluj-Napoca, the gathering once again showed how international cooperation can flourish even in the face of challenges.

From Slovenia, Rok travelled to Cluj and joined the team on site, while Katarina, representing our Serbian partner, had to remain at home due to the ongoing unrest in Serbia. Yet distance was no barrier: she joined online, fully engaged in discussions and bringing her perspective into every decision.

Planning Ahead: The Forum and the Handbook

The meeting focused on the exciting months ahead. Together, the partners discussed the details of the upcoming International Debate Forum in Slovenia—from the structure of workshops to the selection of topics that will resonate most with young debaters.

Another key point was the Handbook on Organizing Debate Sessions, a publication designed to serve as a practical guide for schools, universities, and youth organizations that want to introduce debating into their activities. Every partner contributed insights from their own national experiences, making sure the handbook reflects diverse approaches while staying useful and accessible.

 

Experiencing Debate First-Hand

During his visit, Rok also had the chance to take part in a debate organized at MCC. Seeing the Romanian students in action was a moment of shared pride for the team. It confirmed that the project’s goals are truly taking root: students are learning to express themselves, challenge each other respectfully, and engage with complex issues in a thoughtful way.

As the partners shared updates on their local debate sessions, one discovery stood out. While debating as an educational tool is still in its early stages in all three participating countries, the Slovenian team highlighted their valuable connections with Italy, where debate has already been institutionalized in schools.

This cross-border knowledge is more than just inspiring—it is practical. By learning from Italy’s example, the partners are beginning to imagine how debating could one day become a regular part of school life in Romania, Slovenia, and Serbia too.

 

More Than a Meeting

What might have looked like just another project coordination session turned into something much more: a moment of genuine exchange, encouragement, and vision. Despite political unrest, despite cultural and linguistic differences, the partners once again proved that they share a common mission—to empower young people through the art of debate.

As the group left the meeting—some logging off from their laptops, others walking out into the streets of Cluj—one thing was certain: the work ahead is ambitious, but together, they are building the foundations of a culture where every young voice matters.

by Iringó Tóth Gödri