Like most Langmuir Cup events at Trinity College School this year, the highly anticipated House Debates program underwent a makeover of sorts – mostly to accommodate the pandemic, but also to re-imagine the School-wide scoring rubric, ensuring greater fairness and consistency of scoring across campus. The modified format, called “fishbowl debates,” required that houses select two Senior (Grades 11-12) debaters and two Junior (Grades 9-10) debaters and argue either for or against the resolution, in this case that “a vaccine will end the pandemic.”
In each fishbowl debate, student audience members (two from each house competing) make a distanced circle – a fishbowl – while debaters argue their cases inside the fishbowl (circle). Halfway through the debate, audience members ask the debaters questions about the resolution.
On Monday, November 30th, during the afternoon flex block, 10 Senior teams and 10 Junior teams courageously stepped up to the task – taking audiences, facilitators, and judges on condensed (15-minute) intellectual adventures, but nevertheless ones complete with argumentative finesse and enthusiastic oral delivery. This collective effort from all house debaters is not surprising: prior to House Debate day, boarding students were witnessed dutifully practicing their arguments during evening study, day students were heard making quick, last-minute adjustments the morning of the debates, and many debaters had attended online “House Debate Tip” workshops the week before.
Interestingly, every house won a debate in either the Senior or the Junior categories. However, only the top four winners in each category (Junior or Senior) will move forward to round two. Six of the winning houses had argued against the resolution, while four had argued for the resolution.
For Seniors, in round one, the first place goes to Riley Christensen and Luke Vrooman of Orchard House, with 23 out of 25 points. Moreover, Riley’s and Luke’s score was the top of the day. An honourable mention goes to Bethune, just shy of Rigby by a quarter of a point. A close race! The top four Senior winners, then, who will progress to round two, are Orchard, Hodgetts, Bickle and Rigby.
For Juniors, in round one, the first place goes to Marie-Anne Urrutia and Eleanor Harvey of Wright House, with 21 out of 25 points. Intriguingly, Ketchum versus Orchard was a close Junior race with Orchard behind Ketchum by half a point only. An honourable mention goes to Ketchum, just shy of Brent by three-quarters of a point. Burns and Scott tied, earning two of the spots in round two. The top four Junior houses, then, who will progress to round two, are Wright, Burns, Scott and Brent.
Well done to all 40 debaters! Thank you to audience members, facilitators and judges, who made this round of House Debates so meaningful for the entire school community. For everyone who could not attend House Debates this round, thank you for voting in the school-wide poll on the resolution. It looks as though the School is fairly split between agreement and disagreement with the resolution. Finally, thank you to Kyle Munns, Ava Becker, Riley Christensen, Loretta Hu and Isolde Ardies, and residential assistants, Ms. Zoe Walwyn, Ms. Sarah Cumming and Ms. Maya Saunders, who filmed a superb demo video of this year’s House Debate format.
- By Dr. Andrew Woodward, faculty associate
