아카데미 토론 평가에 대한 재고찰 - 토론승패와 설득은 일치하는가 -
A study on correlation between debate performance and persuasion ability in Academic debate
0
조회
0
다운로드
10
인용
0
참고문헌
키워드
초록
The intrinsic motivation of debate is to persuade the audience. If the ultimate purpose of debate is for persuasion, the meaning of winning in the debate is as the same as the success of persuasion. However, we, often, could find many cases that the audience are not persuaded even if the debate was quite good. The study focus on this phenomenon. It starts from this simple question. How does effective debate relate to persuasion? Why did the debaters lose in the competition while general audiences are being persuaded? Is this evaluation right? In order to tackle these issues, the experiment was executed in the course called as “How to Debate” at Myungji University in spring semester of 2010. The correlation between debate and persuasion was examined based in-depth analysis of the evaluation of the real debate. This attempt will provide us to rethink about the debate in itself and the relevance of debate evaluation system. Based on the analysis, the ratio of coincident relation between debate evaluation and persuasion performance is the highest percentage of 66%, but the ratio of discord between the two is 34% which cannot be ignored. Therefore, we could say that the persuasion and debate evaluation is not always related with each other. One of the possible reasons is come from the intrinsic characteristics of academic debate which logical persuasion is only privileged. Therefore, in order to mitigate negative aspect of debate evaluation and to improve the fairness of debate competition, it is necessary for debate evaluators to be informed about the characteristic and intention of the academic debate. It is also needed that there should be clear demarcation between common debate and academic debate in the evaluation. Finally, we should reconsider the current practice of academic debate evaluation system which only focused on logical persuasion scarifying other dimension of persuasion.
Abstract
The intrinsic motivation of debate is to persuade the audience. If the ultimate purpose of debate is for persuasion, the meaning of winning in the debate is as the same as the success of persuasion. However, we, often, could find many cases that the audience are not persuaded even if the debate was quite good. The study focus on this phenomenon. It starts from this simple question. How does effective debate relate to persuasion? Why did the debaters lose in the competition while general audiences are being persuaded? Is this evaluation right? In order to tackle these issues, the experiment was executed in the course called as “How to Debate” at Myungji University in spring semester of 2010. The correlation between debate and persuasion was examined based in-depth analysis of the evaluation of the real debate. This attempt will provide us to rethink about the debate in itself and the relevance of debate evaluation system. Based on the analysis, the ratio of coincident relation between debate evaluation and persuasion performance is the highest percentage of 66%, but the ratio of discord between the two is 34% which cannot be ignored. Therefore, we could say that the persuasion and debate evaluation is not always related with each other. One of the possible reasons is come from the intrinsic characteristics of academic debate which logical persuasion is only privileged. Therefore, in order to mitigate negative aspect of debate evaluation and to improve the fairness of debate competition, it is necessary for debate evaluators to be informed about the characteristic and intention of the academic debate. It is also needed that there should be clear demarcation between common debate and academic debate in the evaluation. Finally, we should reconsider the current practice of academic debate evaluation system which only focused on logical persuasion scarifying other dimension of persuasion.
참고문헌 (22)
- 강태완, "토론의 방법" (2003), 커뮤니케이션북스
- 김관규, "2007년(제17대) 대통령선거 TV토론의 설득적 전략 분석", 언론과학연구, 8(2), pp.51~83 (2008), 한국지역언론학회
- 김석우, "교육평가의 이해" (2009), 학지사
- 김연종, "17대 대선 합동선거방송토론회의설득 커뮤니케이션 효과", 스피치와 커뮤니케이션, 16(9), pp.167~206 (2008), 한국소통학회
- 김주현, "진단과 처방의 논증 구조 <비판적 사고와 토론> 수업의 입론문 작성을 중심으로", 수사학, 36(11), pp.363~402 (2009), 한국수사학회
- 김평원, "말하기 평가의 분석 모형 연구", 박사, 교육학, pp.2010
- 박란희, "목소리 구성 요소의 커뮤니케이션 효과에 관한 연구", 스피치와 커뮤니케이션, 29(11), pp.293~327 (2009), 한국소통학회
- 박치완, "신수사학의 관점에서 본 데카르트의 논증과 설득의 문제 - 제6성찰을 중심으로", 수사학, 8(10), pp.86~129 (2009), 한국수사학회
- 배호순, "교육프로그램 평가론" (2008), 원미사
- 안재현, "온라인 매체를 활용한 토론교육의 활성화 방안에 관한 연구", 스피치와 커뮤니케이션, (9), pp.7~30 (2008), 한국소통학회
- 염재호, "정책토론의 논리와 수사 - 사회자의 관점에서 본 시사토론의 설득과 수사", 수사학, 8(2), pp.81~93 (2005), 한국수사학회
- 이두원, "토론자의 디베이트 능력과 수행평가 모델 연구: 아카데미식 정책 디베이트를 중심으로", 커뮤니케이션학 연구, 16(3), pp.83~103 (2008), 한국커뮤니케이션학회
- 이정옥, "토론의 전략" (2009), 문학과 지성사
- 전영우, "토론을 잘하는 법" (2003), 거름
- 전정민, "화법 교육과정의 문제와 개선방안: 설득화법의 원리와 방법", 화법연구, pp.281~300 (2005)
- 조재윤, "말하기 평가 방법간 신뢰도분석 연구－초등학생의 설득하는 말하기를 중심으로－", 국어교육학연구, 49(27), pp.493~515 (2006), 국어교육학회
- 최복자, "토론능력과 토론교육", 화법연구, pp.349~378 (2005)
- 한상철, "토론 비판적 사고를 활용한 토론 분석과 응용" (2006), 커뮤니케이션북스
- 허경호, "정책토론의 방법" (2005), 커뮤니케이션북스
- Austin J. Freeley, "Argumentation and Debate" (2000), Wadsworth
- 오형엽, "이성의 수사학" (2001), 고려대학교출판부
- William L. Benoit, "설득메시지" (2009), 커뮤니케이션북스