attack the opposing team but to demonstrate why their interpretation of the motion was more convincing.
Stage 4. Exploring Different Perspectives: Role preparation
To make the debate more engaging, students explored the issue from the perspectives of different social groups and professional roles. Students assigned the role of activists considered how young people could challenge injustice, organise campaigns and raise public awareness. Journalists focused on freedom of expression, access to reliable information and the responsibility to report accurately. Policymakers examined how democratic institutions could support youth participation while balancing different social interests. Historians considered how earlier struggles for freedom could inform contemporary debates. Representatives of different generations explored whether young people and adults had different responsibilities, opportunities and expectations.
Each group prepared a short statement explaining how its assigned perspective approached the motion. Students identified the main concerns, priorities and possible limitations associated with their role.
This activity helped students recognise that public debates involved more than two opposing positions. People could agree on fundamental democratic principles while disagreeing about methods, priorities, responsibilities or the effectiveness of particular forms of activism. The role preparation also encouraged empathy by asking students to consider experiences and perspectives beyond their own. It provided additional material for the debate and helped participants respond to arguments from different points of view.
Stage 5. The Oxford-Style Debate: Presenting and challenging arguments
The classroom was arranged to distinguish clearly between the proposition and opposition teams, with the moderator positioned at the front and the audience seated where they could observe both sides. The moderator introduced the motion, explained the rules and outlined the speaking order. The debate followed a structured format, ensuring that both teams had equal opportunities to present arguments and respond to challenges.