The article explains what is wrong with high school debate today. But if it is going to be made better, we need to have a good idea of what better would be. And

The article explains what is wrong with high school debate today. But if it is going to be made better, we need to have a good idea of what better would be. And for that we need to understand what it is that debate should accomplish. I say the function of debate in a democracy is to inform members of the public so that they can make intelligent political decisions. That being the case, debaters should be thought of as being educators who inform the public about the arguments on each side of an issue, and should be so evaluated. Having a winner and a loser doesn't make, sense. If they both do a poor job of informing, that should be noted, and ditto if they both do well. Perhaps there should be a few prizes in a tournament for the teams that do the best job of informing. Let me add that positions on policy or ethical matters invariably rest at least in part on deeper assumptions about things like human psychology and history. For that reason, these should be addressed in debate. As for learning how to think logically and evaluate evidence, that is all part of what it takes to be a good educator. If anyone disagrees, then they should present their own idea of what is the proper function of debate.