This was the debate topic given to the P5 and P6 classes this week. At the invitation of some of my kids I went up to the primary school to witness this weekly event. Yes weekly. Topics such as “Polygamy Should Be Outlawed In Africa” and “Secondary Schools Should Not Be Built in Rural Villages” are given to the fifth and sixth graders to ‘debate’.
According to the teachers, the purpose of the debate is none other than to increase English speaking skills at the school. Now from a western perspective, debates are for learning how to articulate and defend your beliefs. (Or in my experience, thanks to Mr. P, learning how to articulate and defend the point contrary to my belief) Debates are for learning how to research, how to self reflect, and how to persuade the (audience, judges, etc) that your views are the best defended. Or something like that.
Two sides: four boys and one girl on each panel. One chair person, one secretary, one time keeper, and one other boy who just liked to sit by the chair person.
I arrived a bit late but that wasn’t a big deal. When I sat down though you could see the kids sizing me up; they know me as “auntie Le” the one who hugs them, gives them soap, listens to their worries, and who lives at the scary secondary school. What role was I playing today? Thankfully one of my kids from 2006 was the next speaker; utterly comfortable and confident around me, he proceeded with not an ounce of hesitation- with a handmade microphone crafted from a stick and a paper box. The ham got the ball rolling and the kids laughing. From that point on they were utterly free with me. Soon the teachers filtered out and just I and the kids remained. It got a bit ludicrous at times, as the kids observed protocol and addressed eachother as “the honorable so and so” and directed “point of inquiry” or “point of clarification” or “point of support” through the chairman (whose name was “Mission”).
Chair Person Mission was also bouncer, reinforced by DJ/Soldier Isaac, and demanded silence from the audience. I giggled as this lanky awkward boy would stand with a stern face and say “Patience, what are you doing with that ka-boy?” or “Desire, stay down!!” He usually followed his commands with threats such as “Kibondo, if you don’t be silent you will kneel for 25 hours”. The threat was amusing as “kibondo” is a nickname, and the kids all laughed as they tried to remember the real name of their class mate.
The arguments were a bit lacking. The kids are given the topic one week before the debate and are expected to “research” the points. Research consists of asking older siblings at the secondary school for talking points. Statistics are made up. There is a broad generalization of EVERYTHING. And the same five or six points are restated again and again during the course of the 2.5 hour debate.
The “opposers” were the stronger team as it consisted of the head boy, the sports prefect, and two other confident English speakers, my ham kid included. Even if their points were lacking, the fact that they could shout louder and held the positions of power gave them an edge. The “proposers” had only two confident English speakers, so they were often out matched. Another tactic of the “opposers” was to bog down the speaker for the “proposers” with “point of inquiry”.
Apparently according to debate protocol, the opposite side is allowed to demand the definition of any term used by the speaker. “Point of inquiry directed through the chair person” “allowed” “would the speaker explain the term ‘culture’?” If the speaker is unable to define the term, the point is not allowed. The stronger English speakers on the opposers team used this frequently.
Now as a loving aunt, I want to see all my kids succeed. But sometimes that means giving them a dose of their own medicine. I sat next to a sweet girl called Shallon who soon became my accomplice: after head boy or my other ham kid got up to make a point, I would direct point of inquiries through her. (the audience is allowed to ask for clarification too!) The first time it happened, head boy sailed through no problem. The second time however we caught him… he paused, looked at Shallon, confused as to how she could ask such a question. My ham kid stands up, eyes wide, points at me and mouths “YOU!!!” So of course I laughed.
From that point on, when the stronger opposers would ask an unfair point of inquiry, I would give them “the look” and they would catch themselves. The unconfident English speakers were already traumatized having to get up and present an argument, the harassing needed to stop.
Here were the main points:
Proposers: Doweries in Africa Should be Abolished
- It begins a marriage in poverty
- It leads to love as the man and woman have chosen eachother
- Kids eat better because the man has money
- It leads to holy matrimony
Opposers: Doweries in Africa Should Not be Abolished
- It leads to respect as the girls family will respect the boy for being a good provider
- It leads to respect as the girl must do what the boy says now that he paid dowry
- It leads to respect between the mother in law and the son in law
- The kids eat better because if the man doesn’t work, the woman can go home to her family and get food
- It respects African culture
As you can see, the arguments were a bit shallow and redundant, but I was proud of them for being so passionate about the side they were assigned to.
At the end, Chair person Mission stood and said “And now, we will have our Auntie Le come and speak a word of encouragement to us”. Umm… ok…. Yay for impromptu speeches. So while the secretary, time keeper, and chair person tallied the points I stood and spoke to the kids. I told them the importance of knowing what they believed, the importance of being able to articulate their beliefs, and then I defined articulate…. I told them I was proud of them for standing up to defend or challenge the statements made, how thinking for yourself is important. I told them I loved being with them. I told them to keep discovering who they are and what they believe.
Why? Because even if the teachers say that debate is merely for the promotion of spoken English, I believe it can be something more. If these kids can learn to think about their culture, their beliefs, their environment, then maybe they can learn to think outside the box that the UG school system places them in. Maybe they can learn to question. Maybe they can learn to challenge the status quo.
I realize that questioning, challenging the status quo, and self reflecting are hard things. I realize that in so doing there is a huge potential for backlash as questions and challenges are not welcomed in this school structure. I realize it will make life harder for them- at least for a while. Ultimately I believe knowing who they are, what they believe, and why they believe it, will empower them.
Will it happen? Probably not- at least not for the majority of the kids here. I am not giving up on them, I am not limiting them; I am recognizing the reality of life and school in the village. But for the handful that do take it further than route memorization and creepy chanting, life will be different. And for this reason I will continue to speak “words of encouragement” to them every chance I get. Because I know they are special, they are capable, and they can make it.