Thoughts on Fire: Performative Youth Debate as a Form of Critical Civic Interrogation

• In Event: Sheraton Roundtable Session 17
  In Roundtable Session: Rejecting Neutrality and Challenging Inequity: Fostering Critical Youth Civic Engagement Across Informal Learning Contexts

Abstract

Debating controversial topics is central to U.S. political and civic life – consider the spectacle of presidential election season or the daily sparring aired on cable news networks. As a result, it’s no surprise that debate has been proven one of the best practices of civic education (Gould et al, 2011). The more frequently that young people engage in organized discussions about current social issues, the more prepared and motivated they will be to vote and participate in other civic activities as adults (Levinson, 2014). Dialogue has the dual benefits of bolstering academic literacy skills and civic competencies, thereby realizing the historical purpose of public schools to prepare students for both professional and public life (Hess & McAvoy, 2014).

Yet debate as it is traditionally conceptualized – as a highly formalized, competitive back-and-forth of dry policy options – fails to capture the urgency and import of issues affecting young people today, particularly those from minoritized communities.

This paper examines how New York City middle and high school students are transforming debate from a mainstream civic education activity often associated with stodgy politicians into a critical, performative practice of civic interrogation that challenges the nature and purpose of political dialogue. The study explored the literacy practices that students leveraged through their participation in a non-profit community organization called the New York City Urban Debate League (NYCUDL) to address the research question: How does critical debate enable young people to re-negotiate the ground rules of persuasive public speech?

Utilizing a theoretical framework grounded in socio-critical literacy (Gutierrez, 2008) and critical socio-political development (Watts & Flanagan 2007), this mixed methods study involved several data sources. First, surveys of nearly 150 NYCUDL student participants delved into their rhetorical resources and civic identity development. Next, ethnographic observations of extracurricular debate practices and tournaments captured youth literacy performances in action. Finally, interviews with 3 debate coaches and 12 student debaters focused on the ways participants used language to persuade audiences not only about the topic being debated, but about the value of their identities and forms of expression in public life.

Findings indicated that student debaters utilized spoken word (Jocson, 2006) and told personal counter-narratives (Yosso, 2006) that altered the structure and function of traditional policy debate structures in order to claim their right to public space and re-define the terms of persuasion. They re-conceptualized the purpose of debate – moving from seeking a policy win to achieving an ontological affirmation of their humanity. They utilized performative literacies, including dialogue with their opponents, to re-envision debate not as a battle for a zero-sum win, but as a way to discursively construct a more equitable civic sphere that valued marginalized voices.

Students from the NYCUDL study will be present to demonstrate that debate can be a galvanizing force that encourages young people to raise their voices, speak their opinions, and value themselves as citizens as well as scholars. Debate has the potential to civic life in a more critical, compassionate, and collaborative direction for a new generation of citizens.

Author

• Nicole Mirra, Rutgers University