Page 126 - Gonzaga at 60
P. 126
126
GONZAGA AT SIXTY: A WORK IN PROGRESS
some of the more structured elements of argumentaion more common in American debaing.
Essenial to this was the introducion of a Transiion Year Module in Rhetoric, in a format which
remained unil I was redeployed from TY in 2009. Each student would begin with a speech about
an aspect of his life no-one would necessarily know about, through a ilm or music review, to
a posiion on a topical newspaper aricle. Along the way the structure of argument and the
elements of debate were discussed. Speeches would end, as I’ve been told many a Gonzaga
boy’s best man speech now does, with “thank you for your ime”. The course facilitated rather
than demanded – some students certainly got more from it than others – but everyone had to
speak, listen and ask quesions at some point.
The intrinsics were (and are) important; if the student can see where in the overall debate
the speciic argument or presumpion lies then this skill can be applied no mater what the issue.
In this way the student develops the elements of debate rather than a way to win a speciic one.
This carried on into compeiive debaing, where the principles of advocacy were introduced –
a debaing template, if you will – students develop a sense of something not being right with
an argument very quickly. There were several basic ground rules: that the debate would have
to be researched from both sides (which seems like a given but very frequently is not); that no
speeches would be writen in advance, although points and structure would be rigidly prepared;
that opposiion points and rebutal were always welcome and that humour and a sense of the
absurd were essenial throughout. Most important was the noion of what I liked to call ‘geing
in a row’—making sure that if an argument could go either way, we were aware of it and able to
engage with it. There is never any beneit to engineering an unanswerable argument.
This is, for me, what ies educaion together, and certainly what I see happening every
day when Gonzaga funcions as it can: being prepared for the most challenging elements in a
topic, being interested in proving what you say, eager to listen with manners to the other side
and aware of the slight absurdity which lies beneath quite a lot of posturing. Finding in a topic
all that is in it. When Gonzaga fails to funcion it becomes complacent; it packages neatly and
spoon feeds, rather than maintaining the intellectual curiosity and search for excellence which
has established it at the forefront of Irish secondary educaion in the last twenty years.
Recent economic developments (and what self-respecing debater would fail to draw
atenion to the current climate in an argument?) have resulted in something of a blur in the
disincion between the intrinsic value of an educaion and the provision of a workforce that
can bring foreign investment to our shores. While an educated workforce is a very atracive
factor in locaing a business, the mere provision of instruments, tools to use in business, is not
why I signed up to be a Jesuit educator. When I speak of intrinsic value in educaion I speak in
GONZAGA AT SIXTY: A WORK IN PROGRESS
some of the more structured elements of argumentaion more common in American debaing.
Essenial to this was the introducion of a Transiion Year Module in Rhetoric, in a format which
remained unil I was redeployed from TY in 2009. Each student would begin with a speech about
an aspect of his life no-one would necessarily know about, through a ilm or music review, to
a posiion on a topical newspaper aricle. Along the way the structure of argument and the
elements of debate were discussed. Speeches would end, as I’ve been told many a Gonzaga
boy’s best man speech now does, with “thank you for your ime”. The course facilitated rather
than demanded – some students certainly got more from it than others – but everyone had to
speak, listen and ask quesions at some point.
The intrinsics were (and are) important; if the student can see where in the overall debate
the speciic argument or presumpion lies then this skill can be applied no mater what the issue.
In this way the student develops the elements of debate rather than a way to win a speciic one.
This carried on into compeiive debaing, where the principles of advocacy were introduced –
a debaing template, if you will – students develop a sense of something not being right with
an argument very quickly. There were several basic ground rules: that the debate would have
to be researched from both sides (which seems like a given but very frequently is not); that no
speeches would be writen in advance, although points and structure would be rigidly prepared;
that opposiion points and rebutal were always welcome and that humour and a sense of the
absurd were essenial throughout. Most important was the noion of what I liked to call ‘geing
in a row’—making sure that if an argument could go either way, we were aware of it and able to
engage with it. There is never any beneit to engineering an unanswerable argument.
This is, for me, what ies educaion together, and certainly what I see happening every
day when Gonzaga funcions as it can: being prepared for the most challenging elements in a
topic, being interested in proving what you say, eager to listen with manners to the other side
and aware of the slight absurdity which lies beneath quite a lot of posturing. Finding in a topic
all that is in it. When Gonzaga fails to funcion it becomes complacent; it packages neatly and
spoon feeds, rather than maintaining the intellectual curiosity and search for excellence which
has established it at the forefront of Irish secondary educaion in the last twenty years.
Recent economic developments (and what self-respecing debater would fail to draw
atenion to the current climate in an argument?) have resulted in something of a blur in the
disincion between the intrinsic value of an educaion and the provision of a workforce that
can bring foreign investment to our shores. While an educated workforce is a very atracive
factor in locaing a business, the mere provision of instruments, tools to use in business, is not
why I signed up to be a Jesuit educator. When I speak of intrinsic value in educaion I speak in
