P.A.T.H
P.A.T.H. stands for...
P - Path
A - Analysis
T - Technique (Evidence)
H - Harms (Impacts)
R.E.P. stands for...
R - Recognize their point
E - Explain the flaw
P - Prove your response
List all five forms of evidence we discussed in class
1. Facts
2. Statistics
3. Research Study
4. Expert Opinion
5. Anecdotal Example
Harms should introduce what kind of impacts?
short-term impacts and long-term impacts
Sell me a tissue using P.A.T.H...
P - Point should state the argument
A - Analysis should explain reasoning
T - Evidence should support reasoning
H - Harms should address the "so what"?
Identify the Flaw
"The opposition claims that longer school days improve learning, but I disagree."
What is No Support?
(Provides no reason or evidence for the disagreement.)
Name the best evidence: A debater wants to prove that vaping has increased among teenagers over the last five years. Which type of evidence would be the strongest?
Statistics (or quantitative data)
A city bans cars from downtown areas. The immediate impact is that some businesses lose customers. Five years later, the city has cleaner air and fewer health problems.
Question: Which impact should a debater emphasize to make the stronger argument, and why?
The long-term impact, because it affects more people over a longer period and may outweigh the short-term inconvenience.
True or False - An argument can skip Analysis if it has strong evidence.
False
When do we introduce refutations?
1. Before presenting your own argument to directly answer the opponent's claim
2. After your own argument to anticipate and defeat objections
3. Between arguments in a debate round
Which source is generally stronger evidence for environmental impacts and explain why?
-A government minister supports a new environmental policy.
-A climate scientist opposes it using peer-reviewed research.
The climate scientist.
A debater says: "Our policy reduces screen time by two hours per week."
Question: Why is this not yet an impact?
Because they have only described an outcome, not why that outcome matters. They must explain the consequence of reduced screen time.
Below is a flawed argument. Rewrite it into a complete, judge-worthy P.A.T.H.
"Fast food should be taxed because people eat too much of it, which is unhealthy."
P - Point should state the argument
A - Analysis should explain reasoning
T - Evidence should support reasoning
H - Harms should address the "so what"?
True or False: A refutation is successful as long as you present a stronger argument of your own, even if you never respond to your opponent's claim.
False
A debater argues: "Banning sugary drinks in schools will reduce childhood obesity."
They have access to the following evidence:
A. A famous nutritionist explains that excessive sugar consumption is unhealthy.
B. A survey of 20,000 students shows that schools with sugary drink bans have lower average obesity rates.
C. A celebrity shares that they lost weight after cutting out soda.
D. A doctor explains how sugar affects the human body.
Question:
Which piece of evidence is the strongest support for the debater's claim, and why are the other pieces less effective?
B is the strongest evidence because it directly connects the specific policy (school sugary drink bans) to the impact being debated (childhood obesity rates).
The nutritionist and doctor are credible, but they mainly explain why sugar can be harmful, not whether banning sugary drinks in schools actually reduces obesity. The celebrity story is relatable but is only one person's experience and cannot prove a broader trend.
Complete this impact chain:
Less access to healthcare → ______ → ______ → ______
More untreated illnesses → higher medical costs/lower quality of life → long-term health consequences.
A speaker claims:
"Giving every student a laptop improves the economy."
Identify TWO missing logical links.
Possible answers:
Question:
Identify all rebuttal flaws being used.
--The Government argues that banning energy drinks in schools will improve student grades because students will drink more water.
The Opposition responds:
"That's wrong because I don't think students will drink more water. Besides, many students already bring water bottles to school anyway. Even if they did drink more water, that doesn't mean their grades would improve. At best, students might be slightly healthier."
1. No support
2. Non-unique
3. It does not follow
4. Mitigation
A debater wants to prove that banning homework improves student well-being.
They have access to:
Question: Rank these four pieces of evidence from strongest to weakest and justify your ranking.
Ranking (Strongest → Weakest)
1. Nationwide survey of 200,000 students
Why: This provides a large sample size and can show broader patterns between homework and student well-being.
2. Psychology professor's research
Why: Expert research can provide strong analysis and scientific explanation for why homework affects well-being. However, its strength depends on the quality, size, and methodology of the research.
3. Country where homework was reduced for five years
Why: This is useful real-world evidence because it shows an actual policy change. However, it may be weaker because many other factors could affect student well-being (culture, education system, healthcare, economy, etc.), making it harder to prove homework reduction was the cause.
4. One student's personal story
Why: An anecdote can make an argument relatable, but one person's experience cannot prove a general trend. It lacks reliability and representativeness.
A judge is deciding between two impacts: one helps millions of people gain education, while the other harms future economic growth. What three questions should the judge ask before deciding which impact matters more?
Magnitude - How big is the impact, and how many people are affected?
Duration - Is this a short-term effect or a long-term consequence?
Probability - Is there a strong causal chain proving this outcome?