Debater: As a pedagogical practice

Answer choices

1. A

   Bad Description3% picked this

   concedes one of the major assumptions on which the debater's

   The respondent doesn't concede a major assumption of the debater's argument. The debater's key claim — that person-to-person hierarchy is bad for learning — is neither granted nor addressed by the respondent. Instead, the respondent shifts to a different sense of "hierarchy."

   3%
2. B

   Bad Assumption6% picked this

   takes for granted that teaching methods that are effective in mathematics are also effective in

   The respondent uses math as an illustration of the simple-to-complex order, but doesn't need to assume that math methods generalize to other disciplines — the claim is that all teaching has the simple-to-complex structure. The flaw isn't about the math example; it's the shift in what "hierarchy" means.

   6%
3. C

   Bad Objection2% picked this

   fails to consider the possibility that some characteristics of lecturing other than

   The respondent isn't arguing that hierarchy is the only weakness — the respondent is arguing that hierarchy is a strength. Whether other characteristics are weaknesses isn't the issue, and considering them wouldn't fix the actual flaw, which is the shifted meaning of "hierarchy."

   2%
4. D

   Correct80% picked this

   applies a key concept to a different aspect of education than the aspect to which

   Why this is right

   This is the move precisely. The debater applied "hierarchy" to people (lecturer vs. student). The respondent applies "hierarchy" to subject matter (simple before complex). Even if both are real, they're hierarchies of different things — and the respondent's point about subject-matter ordering doesn't bear on whether person-to-person hierarchy is good or bad. The respondent has applied the key concept to a different aspect of education than the debater applied it to.

   Skill tested: Flaw · how this choice captures the argument's function is the move to repeat next time.

   80%
5. E

   Bad Assumption9% picked this

   takes for granted that the conceptual structure of mathematics is sufficiently representative of the conceptual structure of at

   The respondent claims all teaching follows the simple-to-complex pattern, with math just as an example. The respondent doesn't need to assume math's conceptual structure represents other disciplines — that's a stronger claim than the argument requires. The actual flaw is the shift in what "hierarchy" means.

   9%