Self-study
Debater: As a pedagogical practice, lecturing embodies hierarchy, since the lecturer is superior to the student in mastery of the subject. ███ ██████ █████ ████ ████ ████ ████████████ █████ ███ █████████ ██ █████████ ██ █ █████ █████████
███████████ ██ ███████████ ███ ████████ ███ ████████ ███ █████████████ ███ ███ ████████ ███ ████████ ████ ███████ ████ ██████ ██ ████████ ██ ████████ ████████████ ███ ████████ ██████████ ████ ███████ █████████ █████ ███ █████████ ██ █████████ ██ █ █████████
Summarize Argument: Counter-Position
The respondent concludes that hierarchy in lecturing is a strength. He supports this by saying that all teaching and learning involve hierarchy since they move from simple to complex concepts. As an example, he notes that arithmetic must be taught before calculus.
Identify and Describe Flaw
This is the cookie-cutter flaw of equivocation, where the author uses a key term in different ways. The respondent uses "hierarchy" to refer to the order of concepts from simple to complex. But the debater used "hierarchy" to describe power dynamics between lecturers being above students.
Since the respondent applies "hierarchy" differently than the debater, he sidesteps the debater’s whole argument. Simple concepts may need to be taught before complex ones, but this doesn’t address whether those concepts should be taught by a peer or by an authority figure.
16.
The respondent's reply to the █████████ ████████ ██ ████ ██████████ ██ █████████ ██ ███ ███████ ████ ███ ██████████
a
concedes one of ███ █████ ███████████ ██ █████ ███ █████████ ████████ ███████
By saying that all teaching is hierarchical, the respondent does concede that lecturing is hierarchical, but this is a premise, not a major assumption. Regardless, (A) isn’t a flaw in the respondent’s argument; he can concede a claim and still disagree with the conclusion.
b
takes for granted ████ ████████ ███████ ████ ███ █████████ ██ ███████████ ███ ████ █████████ ██ █████ ████████ ███████████
Like (E), the respondent doesn’t assume that moving from simple to complex concepts is effective in other academic disciplines; he explicitly states it. He says that “all teaching and learning must proceed from simple to complex,” and just uses math as an example.
c
fails to consider ███ ███████████ ████ ████ ███████████████ ██ █████████ █████ ████ █████████ ███ ██████████
The respondent is only addressing whether hierarchy is a weakness or a strength of lecturing. Any other potential weaknesses of lecturing are irrelevant.
d
applies a key ███████ ██ █ █████████ ██████ ██ █████████ ████ ███ ██████ ██ █████ ███ ███████ ███████ ██
The respondent uses "hierarchy" to refer to the difficulty of concepts, while the debater uses it to describe the power difference between teachers and students. The respondent never addresses whether the teacher-student hierarchy is a strength because he misapplies the term.
e
takes for granted ████ ███ ██████████ █████████ ██ ███████████ ██ ████████████ ██████████████ ██ ███ ██████████ █████████ ██ ██ █████ ████ █████ ████████ ███████████
Like (B), the respondent doesn’t assume that moving from simple to complex concepts in math is representative of other disciplines; he explicitly states it. Regardless, he still never addresses whether the teacher-student hierarchy is a strength or a weakness.