【Teaching Practice Report】

Challenges and Adaptive Strategies to Teaching English
Debate Online
Andrew Warrick
Abstract
Rikkyo University implemented a new 14-week English Debate course for all first year students in the 2020 Fallsemester. At the same time, the ongoing COVID-19 pandemic resulted in many classes being conducted online, with
the newly created English Debate course among them. Online learning environments can present many challenges
for students, and among them is cognitive overload. Information overload is an ever-present problem in second
language classes, and this can be compounded when these classes are taught online. In an effort to improve student
outcomes by reducing cognitive overload, several course and lesson design principles were employed. This paper
reflects on the strategies used to reduce cognitive overload among students in an online English Debate course at
Rikkyo University with the aim of improving overall student retention. Finally, conclusions are drawn from thesestrategies that can serve to inform the future creation of course materials for English Debate, as well as using online
learning spaces.
Keywords: cognitive overload, online instruction, course design

Introduction
Due to the global COVID-19 pandemic, many universities in Japan switched to online instructionin the Spring 2020 semester in order to reduce the risk to students and university staff of contracting
the disease. With the pandemic still ongoing, Rikkyo University allowed only a limited selection ofclasses to resume face-to-face instruction in the Fall semester. However, English Debate, a newly
introduced class for all freshman students, would be conducted online. The course was designed tohave 20 students meet once a week for 100 minutes over the 14 week Fall semester, with the aim ofteaching them how to argue a position in a debate, refute the ideas of the opposing side, as well as thinkcritically and apply research to support their opinions. When the English Debate course was originallyconceived, it was intended for students to meet on campus and for lessons to be conducted in person.
The very nature of a debate class, wherein participants must present arguments to, and listen to thosegiven by, an opposing side requires inter-person communication among teams of students. Under
normal circumstances, this fact could already make the class difficult to run smoothly depending on
students’ willingness to communicate, for as Osterman (2014) found, Japanese university students canhesitate to communicate with each other in class for a variety of reasons. However, the circumstancespresented by COVID-19 meant that the class had to be adapted to an online teaching environment.
At the same time, with English Debate being a new class, teachers had to build a curriculum anddesign lessons from the ground up in order to meet the objectives of the course. The combinationof creating a syllabus and lesson plans for an entirely new course with teaching a debate class in an
online learning environment presented a distinct set of challenges that had to be considered andresolved in tandem, while ensuring that course goals were met.
Online classes meant Internet connectivity issues, both for students and for myself, and on
several occasions, Wi-Fi problems resulted in stuttered or dropped connections to Zoom, the online23

多言語教育実践ジャーナル

第1巻 （JOURNAL OF MULTILINGUAL PEDAGOGY AND PRACTICE, VOL. 1）

conferencing platform I used for my classes. Students would also connect to Zoom lessons late, oremail me and say they had no Internet and thus would have to miss class. Another problem with online
classes was in supervising students. Zoom allows for breakout rooms, so that groups of students canwork with their team on a given segment of a debate, but it becomes impossible for a teacher to bein every room at once with only one device. This lead to situations where I would enter a room andfind students with their cameras and microphones turned off, obviously not contributing to their teamor even being engaged in the lesson. With the exception of Wi-Fi genuinely failing, these problems
are not exactly unique to the online teaching environment. Students will come late, or miss classcompletely, with in person lessons as well. Students can also disengage from group work and “turnoff” when in a live class, though it is much easier to see that happening and nudge them back into
participation when sharing a physical classroom with them.
Cognitive load is another problem that exists both in the physical English learning classroom,and the digital one. However, the problems of cognitive load can be compounded by the very natureof the online learning environment. Chen et al. (2011) found that some learners can more easily
feel cognitive overload in an online learning environment because of English skill deficiencies andinadequate computer and technical skills, as well as individual learning styles and preferences.
Students who are using a second language (L2) to perform another task must process content
about that task and understand their L2 simultaneously. The weaker a student’s L2 ability, the moredifficult this becomes. The aim of course design and the creation of lesson materials in the context ofclasses where students perform another task in their L2 is therefore to reduce the cognitive load theyexperience as much as possible.

Discussion
In this paper, I outline some of the design principles I employed in creating my course plan
and lesson materials for the online lessons of English Debate at Rikkyo University in the Fall 2020semester, with the aim of reducing students’ cognitive load and improving the quality of the learning
experience. Below, I outline four of the strategies I used to reduce cognitive load in my English Debateclasses: “chunking” information, doing pre-task activities, allowing the use of L1 during preparation
activities, and creating opportunities for frequent practice.

Chunking Information
It is very important to introduce new material in small pieces so that students can process it.
Harrelson and Leaver-Dunn describe this as “chunking”, or “grouping information into small,
manageable units” (Harrelson and Leaver-Dunn, 2003). How much each learner can intake at once,or the size of the “chunks” is based on their knowledge and expertise. In the context of an English
debate course, this means that students with a stronger command of English, or prior familiarity withdebates, are able to handle learning more at once. For Rikkyo University’s English Debate classes,
I expected a great deal of variance in this regard based on my prior experience teaching English
Discussion at the university. Even though students are grouped according to TOEIC scores, not all
students have the same prior experience communicating in English.
To make things manageable for students of any level, I structured the pacing of the course andmade introducing content gradual, similar to the English Discussion class of the Spring semester.
Each component of a debate (affirmative and negative team speeches, cross-examination, refutations,24

CHALLENGES A ND A DAP TIVE STR ATEGIES TO TEACHING ENGLISH DEBATE ONLINE

replies, and closing statements) was taught separately in its own lesson. In later lessons, I addedcomplexity to some segments of debate, such as teaching more advanced cross-examinationquestions, but this was always done a little at a time so as not to overburden students with new content
and confuse them. In each lesson of the first half of the course, I introduced three to five pieces ofdebate terminology related to the corresponding stage of the debate the students would learn thatlesson. Following this, I sometimes had students put what they learned into practice by doing workin pairs or small groups, and then finally the students would have a debate, using the terminology
and expressions associated with each stage they had learned up to that point. To also make doing
the early activities and debates easier, I made sure the handouts I created were scaffolded. In theearlier lessons, I provided many hints in the handouts and a partially filled-in template to follow. These
handouts allowed students to concentrate on learning the process of the debate stages and not haveto worry about English grammar or spelling as much. Then, in later lessons, I removed the hints fromthe class handouts and left a blank template. Major and Calandrino (2018) believed that delivering
short and manageable content for learners to consume engages adult learners who want to apply
their knowledge to solve a problem and connect with others. By limiting the instruction portion of myclasses, students had more time to practice and apply the debate skill “chunks” they had learned in agiven class, thereby enhancing their understanding and making the debate skills easier to internalize.

Doing Pre-Task Activities
So that students could spend more class time debating or using skills to practice a particularportion of a debate, I often used a pre-task activity that they would complete outside the classroom.
I did not want students to struggle in class to brainstorm ideas for a particular debate topic, so I
assigned homework whereby students would have to post reasons agreeing or disagreeing with adebate topic on an online debate website: www.kialo-edu.com. After showing students how to createan account and use the website, I put up links on each debate class Blackboard to debate topics on
Kialo. I then asked students to post on both the agreeing and disagreeing side of the topic, so thatno matter what side they were on in the following class, they would be able to draw upon an idea
they had already thought of, as well as those suggested by their classmates. By making the in-classdebate topic of the following class similar to the one students had done as homework, I could reduce
the preparation time spent making opening speeches, and thus allow more time for other parts of thedebate during class.
Research by Tonkin et al. (2019) found that doing pre-task activities like this outside of theclassroom in a flipped teaching style helped reduce the cognitive load of students in the L2 classroom.
With students thinking of reasons that agree and disagree with a debate topic prior to the class,they can feel less pressure to do so in class, and thereby be less intimidated by their peers who may
think of reasons faster than them. This helps create a more balanced learning environment in which
everyone has an idea to share, reducing the hesitation many students may feel in communicating intheir L2 through an online platform such as Zoom.

Allowing the Use of L1 During Preparation Activities
While students were able to quickly think of ideas for in-class debate topics because of the pretask activity, they still had to discuss with their group which reasons were best. Following this, they
had to think together to come up with examples and do research to support their arguments. This
25

多言語教育実践ジャーナル

第1巻 （JOURNAL OF MULTILINGUAL PEDAGOGY AND PRACTICE, VOL. 1）

meant they had to talk amongst their group to choose the reasons their team would use, and thenwork together to support them. In addition to this, team members would work together again toprepare refutations to the points put forth by the opposing side. I placed the students in each groupin separate breakout rooms in Zoom while they were preparing. While they were preparing supports
for their arguments or making refutations to the other team’s points, I permitted them to use their L1
in order to facilitate the sharing of ideas.
Research by Bruen and Kelly (2014) found that allowing students to use their L1 in the language
classroom can reduce cognitive load during activities, since it allows classmates to explain difficult
concepts to each other more easily. In a debate setting, this can help students explain to theirclassmates certain words they intend to use in the team speeches, or words that were used by the
opposing team in their speech. Ochi (2009) also reported that the use of L1 in the classroom can help
students more easily recall things. In the context of an English Discussion class, this can prove useful,because students make refutations to the arguments of the other team, and being able to recall andexplain the other team’s points is important in doing so.

Creating Opportunities for Frequent PracticeHarrelson and Leaver-Dunn (2003) suggested that frequent practice helps reduce cognitive load
by moving things from short-term memory into long-term memory. As students rehearse particular
debate activities, be it segments of a debate, or even a full debate, the activities become more secondnature and they no longer have to think about what they need to do, or how to do it. This helps them
become more successful at performing those skills, since they can devote more effort to concentratingon what they are doing.
With some preparation done outside of class, and only a short time spent introducing newcontent or reviewing previous material, more English Debate class time can be spent on pair andgroup activities to reinforce debate skills, or actually debating. By allowing time for two full fiveversus-five debates each class, students can complete all portions of a debate every lesson, therebybuilding familiarity with the structure of a debate, as well as improving the analytical and responsive
skills needed to make refutations and replies. Students also listen to the debate of the two otherteams, further reinforcing what they have learned by watching others do it. There is also typicallyenough time in class that I can devote a portion of the beginning to an activity that enhances students’proficiency in a particular segment of a debate, such as researching information quickly to support
ideas, making refutations, or replying to the other team’s refutations. By doing these focused tasks
in addition to a full debate each lesson, students can increase their expertise in debating. Van Gog
et al. (2005) recommended that activities to enhance a certain aspect of a skill should be done in anauthentic context to enhance the whole skill, but this will only work to reduce cognitive load andimprove performance if learners are motivated and make an effort. When applying this principle
to debate instruction, it is therefore important to make activities designed to practice particularelements of a debate as similar as possible to an actual debate, while at the same time making certain
students are not intimidated by their L2. It is here that teachers must be sure to provide meaningful
and constructive feedback, while also keeping student motivation high.

Conclusion
Debating in an L2 can be a daunting task for anyone, because they must work to process the26

CHALLENGES A ND A DAP TIVE STR ATEGIES TO TEACHING ENGLISH DEBATE ONLINE

vocabulary and grammar of their second language, as well as the content of what the other teamis saying in the debate, in order to be able to respond. To help reduce the burden on students, it isimportant for teachers to consider strategies for reducing the cognitive load on their students when
designing their course and creating lesson materials. Key things to consider are breaking course
content into smaller and more manageable chunks, assigning pre-task activities, allowing the use of
L1 during preparation, and creating sufficient opportunities for students to practice and apply what
they have learned so they can improve their skills.
Online instruction can come with many benefits, such as the means for students to quickly
research facts and ideas to support their points, and the means for teachers to create and sharematerials more quickly through the use of their computer than they would otherwise be able to do ina typical classroom. This can make assigning and reviewing online pre-task activities easier and help
students who may struggle to think of several reasons for a given idea, or reasons that run contrary
to their personal viewpoint.
During the age of online instruction, it can be difficult to judge student attentiveness due to their
webcam positioning, the nature of screen sharing, and computer performance issues. At the sametime, it is important to be aware that not all students may be well suited to online learning, and some
may experience mental fatigue more quickly in an online class than in an in-person class as a result of
the draining nature of conferencing software. With this in mind, teachers need to design their online
courses so as to reduce cognitive overload as much as possible among their students, by being more
mindful of the quantity of material covered in a single class.
It can be very easy for language teachers to feel distant and detached from their students and fall
into the trap of overexplaining things because of the inherently less personal nature of online classes.
Webcams make it difficult to see the looks of understanding and looks of confusion on students’faces that many teachers would be able to recognize easily in an in-person class. However, it is stillvital for language teachers to remember their role as a facilitator, and guide the students throughthe learning process while providing targeted feedback so that students understand what they needto do to improve. This will ensure they make a conscious effort with each attempt, which also helps
them move their understanding of the language and skills from their short-term memory to theirinternalized repertoire, thereby reducing their cognitive load.
This paper has looked at some strategies for reducing cognitive load within the context of online
English Debate classes at Rikkyo University, but the overall principle behind these strategies can be
employed in other situations—whether it is teaching another subject or doing in-person classes. Of
course, there are other effective ways of reducing cognitive load in the classroom, such as employing
collaborative learning strategies and scaffolding, but it is beyond the scope of this paper to discuss
those.

27

多言語教育実践ジャーナル

第1巻 （JOURNAL OF MULTILINGUAL PEDAGOGY AND PRACTICE, VOL. 1）

References
Bruen, J. & Kelly, N. (2014). Using a shared L1 to reduce cognitive overload and anxiety levels in theL2 classroom. The Language Learning Journal. 45(3), 368–381. https://doi.org/10.1080/09571
736.2014.908405
Chen, C.-Y., Pedersen, S., & Murphy, K. L. (2011). Learners’ perceived information overload in online
learning via computer-mediated communication. Research in Learning Technology, 19(2), 101–
116. https://doi.org/10.3402/rlt.v19i2.10345
Harrelson, G.L., & Leaver-Dunn, D. (2003). Four tips to manage cognitive overload. International
Journal of Athletic Therapy and Training, 8(1), 47–49. https://doi.org/10.1123/att.8.1.47
Major, A., & Calandrino, T. (2018). Beyond chunking: Micro-learning secrets for effective online
design. FDLA Journal, 3(13). https://nsuworks.nova.edu/fdla-journal/vol3/iss1/13
Ochi, Y. (2009). The role of L1 in facilitating L2 production. Interpreting and Translation Studies, 9,
123–140. http://jaits.jpn.org/home/kaishi2009/pdf/10-ochi.pdf
Osterman, G.L., (2014). Experiences of Japanese university students’ willingness to speak English inclass: A multiple case study. SAGE Open, 4(3). 1–13. https://doi.org/10.1177/2158244014543779
Tonkin, K., Page, S., & Forsey, M. (2019). Managing cognitive load with a flipped language class:An ethnographic study of the student experience. Foreign Language Annals. 52(3), 551–575.
https://doi.org/10.1111/flan.12412
van Gog, T., Ericsson, K., Paas, F., & Rikers, R. (2005). Instructional design for advanced learners:
Establishing connections between the theoretical frameworks of cognitive load and deliberate
practice. Educational Technology Research and Development, 53(3), 73–81. https://doi.
org/10.1007/BF02504799

28