The Synthesis of Logic and Technology: An Expert Report on High School Debate Skills and AI Integration

Executive Summary

Competitive debate is an invaluable pedagogical tool, cultivating a suite of competencies that are foundational for academic and professional success. These core skills include the ability to construct logical arguments, engage in rigorous critical thinking, master persuasive communication, and uphold the principles of civil discourse. The traditional framework of debate, with its structured formats and emphasis on human-centric skills, has long served as a laboratory for intellectual development.

However, the advent of artificial intelligence (AI) has introduced a transformative new dimension to this landscape. AI tools can act as powerful catalysts, significantly enhancing the debate preparation process by streamlining research, offering scalable practice with simulated opponents, and providing granular, real-time feedback on public speaking mechanics. Platforms designed for structured argumentation can also facilitate more inclusive and organized collaborative learning environments.

The integration of AI is not without its complexities. The analysis reveals significant ethical and pedagogical challenges, most notably the risks of over-reliance, the potential for academic dishonesty through fabricated sources, and the "black box" problem, where students may accept AI-generated outputs without understanding the underlying reasoning. These challenges underscore a critical pedagogical imperative: to ensure that AI remains a supplement to, rather than a substitute for, genuine critical thinking and original argumentation.

Ultimately, the most effective path forward lies in a synergistic, hybrid model. This approach leverages AI's strengths in efficiency and scalable practice while preserving the irreplaceable role of the human coach. The human coach provides the emotional intelligence, contextual understanding, and mentorship that are essential for holistic development and for guiding students through the complex nuances of intellectual and personal growth. This integrated framework promises to produce a new generation of debaters who are not only formidable competitors but also discerning, ethical thinkers prepared to navigate an increasingly complex, AI-powered world.

Part I: The Core Competencies of High School Debate

Competitive debate is far more than a simple verbal contest; it is a structured discipline that systematically develops a range of high-value cognitive and communicative skills. The foundational principles of argumentation, critical thinking, persuasive communication, and civil discourse form the bedrock of this educational activity, preparing students for future challenges in a wide array of fields.

1.1 The Pillars of Argumentation

A robust argument is built upon a clear, defensible structure. The pedagogical framework most commonly employed in this domain is the Claim-Data-Warrant model.1 A student begins by stating their position, which is known as the

claim. This claim must then be supported by data, which consists of credible proof or evidence such as statistics, facts, or expert opinions.1 The final and most critical component is the

warrant, where the student interprets how the cited data directly supports the claim, thereby forging a logical link between the two.1 This systematic process of articulating and defending a position is the foundation of all effective argumentation.

A key distinction between a mere monologue and a true debate is the element of rebuttal.2 Effective debaters are not just focused on presenting their own case; they must actively listen and respond to their opponents' points. This requires the ability to identify logical fallacies, inconsistencies, or claims that are not adequately supported by evidence.2 A strong rebuttal is based on facts and critical analysis, not on personal attacks or insults.2 The ultimate objective is to dismantle the opponent's arguments with solid, verifiable evidence while maintaining a composed and respectful demeanor.2

Competitive debate also serves as a critical bulwark against the "bad faith" tactics prevalent in public discourse. Common logical fallacies such as ad hominem attacks (attacking the person rather than the argument), strawmanning (misrepresenting an opponent’s position), and Gish Gallops (overwhelming an opponent with a rapid-fire series of weak points) are explicitly prohibited in most formal settings.3 The very structure of a debate, with its clear rules and neutral arbiters, forces participants to engage in productive dialogue. For a debate to be productive at all, it requires a minimum number of shared axioms or a "shared reality" between the participants. When one side is unwilling to have their mind changed or discounts this shared reality, the exercise ceases to be a debate and becomes simply two people talking past each other.3 This formal, structured environment provides a stark contrast to the often-chaotic and unproductive nature of modern political discourse.

1.2 Cultivating Critical Thinking and Information Literacy

Debate training is a potent exercise in critical thinking, pushing students beyond the repetition of facts to a deeper and more nuanced engagement with complex issues.4 It requires students to adopt a position on a topic, explain their beliefs, and support them with research and evidence.4 This process encourages

metacognitive reflection, prompting students to question their own assumptions and analyze why their chosen answer or position is the best one.4 The objective is not to find a single "right" answer but to explore the variety of solutions that might exist and develop the ability to defend one's reasoning.5

This pursuit of reasoned belief necessitates a high degree of information literacy. Debaters must become adept at researching from a wide array of sources, including academic journals, books, and reputable websites, to gain a well-rounded view of the topic.2 A crucial aspect of this training is learning to identify bias, subjectivity, and outright misinformation.4 Educators often use illustrative examples, such as the mythical Pacific Northwest tree octopus, to teach students how to identify falsehoods and critically evaluate the credibility of sources.4 By learning to create their own falsified information, students gain a better ability to recognize it in other contexts and understand that information can sometimes be "too good to be true".4

The systematic nature of this training fosters skills that are highly transferable. The ability to think critically, communicate complex ideas clearly, and handle the pressure of public scrutiny is not confined to the debate hall. The skills developed are a form of "meta-skill" that applies across all disciplines. Numerous individuals who have achieved success in fields as diverse as law, aerospace, engineering, medicine, and computer science have credited their debate training for their professional acumen.7 The ability to propose and defend solutions to difficult policy issues, collaborate effectively with teammates, and articulate ideas with confidence, all cultivated in a debate setting, are foundational for success in the modern workforce.7

1.3 The Art of Persuasive Communication

A strong argument, no matter how logically sound, is ineffective without the ability to deliver it persuasively. Public speaking is a core component of debate that allows students to find and use their voice through oral communication.1 Key oral skills include speaking clearly, maintaining a good pace, and learning to control one's nerves.2 Public speaking analysis tools help students identify and minimize the use of filler words and improve their overall voice and clarity, transforming nervous energy into a powerful delivery.8

The persuasive power of a speaker extends beyond the words themselves to their non-verbal communication. Body language plays a critical role in conveying confidence and conviction.2 A debater is encouraged to maintain good posture, make consistent eye contact with the audience or judge, and use purposeful gestures to emphasize key points.2 The report also highlights a psychological dimension to non-verbal cues, noting that behaviors like folding one's arms across the chest can make a speaker appear "closed and fearful," whereas an open stance can project a sense of security and poise.2

1.4 The Ethos of Civil Discourse

At its heart, debate is an exercise in the polite exchange of ideas.1 The foundation of a productive discussion is the willingness of both sides to maintain an open mind and engage with a shared reality.3 Competitive debate enforces this principle with ground rules that model civility and prohibit ad hominem attacks or interruptions.1 Debaters are taught to listen carefully to their opponents' arguments, manage their emotions, and respond respectfully, even when they disagree with the stance they have been assigned to take.1

The Lincoln-Douglas debate format is a prime example of a discipline where civility is a critical element.9 The focus on values and ethical principles requires participants to engage constructively without resorting to personal attacks or disrespectful behavior.9 The requirement for civility in this format enhances the quality of discourse by fostering a respectful environment where ideas can be exchanged thoughtfully. By concentrating on the substance of arguments rather than the personalities involved, participants can achieve a deeper analysis of opposing views.9 This focus on civil engagement is not merely a courtesy; it is a fundamental skill for participating in a healthy democracy, where reasoned and respectful dialogue is essential for progress.4

The following table summarizes the key competencies of high school debate and their associated foundational skills.

Competency	Foundational Skills
Argumentation	• Constructing arguments using the Claim-Data-Warrant model. • Strategic rebuttal of an opponent's case. • Identifying and refuting logical fallacies and bad faith tactics.
Critical Thinking	• Fostering objective analysis and metacognitive reflection. • Synthesizing diverse perspectives. • Using reasoning to solve problems and defend solutions.
Information Literacy	• Researching from a wide range of credible sources. • Evaluating information for bias and credibility. • Organizing and structuring research logically.
Persuasive Communication	• Mastering public speaking fundamentals (clarity, pace, voice). • Utilizing effective non-verbal cues (posture, eye contact, gestures). • Employing rhetorical devices to connect with an audience.
Civil Discourse	• Maintaining a calm and respectful demeanor under pressure. • Active and focused listening without interruption. • Engaging with an open mind and a shared reality.

Part II: The High School Debate Landscape

The world of high school debate is not a monolithic one; it comprises a diverse range of competitive formats, each designed to cultivate distinct skill sets and pedagogical objectives. An understanding of these formats is essential for educators and students to choose the discipline that best aligns with their learning goals.

2.1 A Taxonomy of Competitive Formats

Among the most common competitive styles are Lincoln-Douglas, Public Forum, and Policy debate, in addition to others like team policy and spontaneous argumentation.10 Each format possesses unique strengths and weaknesses that shape the nature of the competition.

Lincoln-Douglas (LD) debate is a one-on-one competition focused on values and ethical principles.9 The topics, which are provided by a national association, often involve philosophical questions concerning morality, justice, and the conflict between individual freedom and the collective good.12 The debate is structured into a series of constructive speeches, rebuttals, and cross-examinations, lasting approximately 45 minutes in total.12 This format appeals to students who enjoy a solo setting and a deep exploration of philosophical questions, challenging them to connect their factual claims to broader moral implications.9

Public Forum (PF) and Policy debate offer a contrasting team-based experience. A key difference lies in the frequency and nature of the topics. PF topics are based on current events and change every month or two, compelling students to be agile researchers and adaptable in their preparation.13 In contrast, Policy debate uses a single topic for the entire year, which allows participants to develop deep, specialized expertise and create complex, detailed cases.13 Another notable distinction is the speaking style. PF is designed to be accessible to a "lay," or non-debating, person, so the rapid speaking style known as "spreading" is far less common.13 Policy debate, by its nature, often involves a very fast speaking pace to fit a greater number of arguments into the allotted time, making it less accessible to those unfamiliar with the format.13

The diversity of debate formats serves a crucial pedagogical purpose. Each style is a unique laboratory for skill cultivation. The frequent topic changes in Public Forum force students to become quick, adaptable researchers who can rapidly synthesize new information. The year-long topic in Policy debate cultivates deep, specialized expertise and fosters complex problem-solving abilities. The focus on values in Lincoln-Douglas pushes students to engage in rigorous philosophical thinking. This suggests that "debate" should not be viewed as a single, monolithic activity but rather as a family of disciplines, each with a unique set of skills to offer. Educators and coaches can therefore select a format that is best suited to their students' specific learning objectives and interests, whether they are focused on broad-based critical thinking or deep, technical expertise.

The table below offers a comparison of these major high school debate formats.

Debate Format	Team Size	Topic Frequency	Primary Focus	Speaking Style
Lincoln-Douglas	One-on-one	Bi-monthly	Values and ethics	Deliberate, philosophical
Public Forum	Teams of two	Monthly or bi-monthly	Current events	Accessible to a lay audience
Policy Debate	Teams of two	One per year	Complex policy changes	Often very fast ("spreading")

Part III: AI as a Catalyst for Debate Skill Development

The integration of artificial intelligence into debate training represents a significant evolution in pedagogical practice. AI tools can act as powerful assistants, augmenting a student's research, providing scalable practice environments, and offering targeted feedback in ways that were previously impractical.

3.1 AI-Powered Research and Brainstorming

The first major application of AI in debate is as a research and brainstorming assistant. Generative AI platforms such as ChatGPT, Gemini, and Claude can save students countless hours of manual research by quickly summarizing complex academic articles, highlighting key points, and helping to identify new angles or counterarguments.15 These tools can serve as a starting point for exploration, allowing students to efficiently access information on a wide range of topics.16

Furthermore, specialized AI debate generators can assist in formulating a structured case, outlining the main points of a debate and even constructing arguments with a clear claim-warrant structure.17 These platforms can also access real-time information to enrich arguments with the most timely data, providing a competitive advantage.17 This use of AI moves the process from a passive search for information to a more interactive and dynamic form of preparation.

3.2 Simulated Opponents for Targeted Practice

One of the most transformative applications of AI is its ability to serve as a simulated opponent or "sparring partner" for students.15 Traditionally, students had to rely on coaches or teammates to play the role of "devil's advocate" and practice their cases. This limited the frequency and availability of practice sessions. AI solves this problem by providing a low-stakes, 24/7 practice environment where students can test their arguments, refine their rebuttals, and strengthen their message without waiting for a human opponent.18

Platforms like Symbai.ai are specifically designed for this purpose, engaging students in gamified, distraction-free debates against a neutral AI opponent.19 This AI can argue either side of a motion, forcing the student to engage with different perspectives and strengthen their reasoning.19 Other tools, such as IBM Project Debater and Claude AI, can identify logical gaps and generate robust counterarguments, allowing students to proactively prepare for a wide range of potential challenges.18 The scalable and ever-available nature of these tools democratizes access to high-quality debate training, allowing students without full-time coaches or large teams to hone their skills.

3.3 Real-Time Feedback and Public Speaking Analytics

Mastery of public speaking is a continuous process that benefits from consistent feedback. AI-powered tools offer a new dimension of precision and availability to this process. The Orai app, for example, is an AI-powered coach that provides instant feedback on various aspects of a presentation or speech.8 It analyzes a student's recorded speech and provides detailed feedback on metrics such as pacing, use of filler words, conciseness, clarity, and vocal tone.8 Similarly, the ELSA Speech Analyzer listens to a user's speech and provides immediate feedback, allowing students to practice and self-assess at their own pace and convenience.20

These tools provide the kind of granular, data-driven analysis that is difficult for a human coach to provide consistently. By identifying specific areas for improvement, such as "um" or "like" usage, the AI helps students develop a greater awareness of their speaking habits. The utility of these tools extends beyond the debate floor, as the skills honed—confidence, clarity, and effective delivery—are valuable for any public speaking situation, from classroom presentations to job interviews.20

3.4 AI for Structured Argumentation and Collaborative Learning

AI-driven platforms can also reshape the classroom environment, fostering more organized and inclusive discussions. Kialo Edu is a prime example, serving as a free tool for thoughtful, text-based class discussions.21 The platform’s core feature is an interactive discussion map where students write pros and cons below each other's points, creating a visual representation of the logical flow of an argument.21 This structure helps students understand how different ideas connect and promotes a deeper comprehension of the topic.21

A significant advantage of Kialo is its ability to boost student participation, especially for those who find traditional in-person discussions daunting.21 The text-based format and an anonymous discussion mode allow students to contribute instantly, simultaneously, and at their own pace, building confidence and ensuring that a greater number of voices are heard.21 While large group discussions on the platform can become chaotic with a high volume of new claims, educators can mitigate this by emphasizing quality over quantity, giving students more time to plan their contributions, or dividing students into smaller, more manageable groups with assigned roles.23 The platform’s ability to save and record discussions also provides a gradable record for both teachers and students to review.21

The pedagogical model enabled by these tools represents a shift from teaching students "what to think" to teaching them "how to think".19 By acting as a critical, neutral opponent, AI forces students to engage with their own reasoning and assumptions. It transforms from a simple source of information into a dynamic cognitive sparring partner, encouraging intellectual independence and genuine critical thought.

The following table categorizes AI tools by their primary function in the debate process.

AI Tool Category	Example Platforms	Key Functions
Research Assistant	ChatGPT, Gemini, Claude, Elicit.org	Summarizing articles, brainstorming, suggesting counterarguments, fact-checking
Simulated Opponent	Symbai.ai, IBM Project Debater, Claude AI	Providing a low-stakes practice environment, stress-testing arguments, generating counterarguments
Public Speaking Coach	Orai, ELSA Speech Analyzer, Hemingway Editor	Analyzing pace, filler words, clarity; providing feedback on voice and rhetorical style
Collaborative Platform	Kialo Edu	Argument mapping, organizing discussions, increasing participation, promoting civil discourse

Part IV: The Ethical and Pedagogical Imperatives of AI Integration

While AI offers immense benefits, its integration into the educational landscape, particularly in a discipline as reliant on authentic thought as debate, presents a new and complex set of ethical challenges. A nuanced approach is required to ensure that these tools are used responsibly and that the core objectives of intellectual development are not undermined.

4.1 The Risks of Over-Reliance and the "Black Box" Problem

One of the most significant concerns surrounding AI in education is the risk of over-reliance.24 When students become too dependent on technology for tasks they should learn to perform themselves, it can diminish their critical thinking skills and reduce their ability to "think for themselves".24 This mirrors historical debates about the use of calculators or computers in the classroom. AI's efficiency offers a significant "shortcut" to a completed assignment, which creates a fundamental tension between the immediate need for efficiency and the long-term goal of fostering deep, independent learning.25 The potential consequence is the creation of an "under-skilled workforce" that is susceptible to a bias favoring automated suggestions over their own judgment.25

This problem is compounded by the "black box" nature of AI.24 It can be difficult to understand how an AI system arrived at a particular conclusion, which can lead users to uncritically accept flawed or incorrect information.25 Students with limited domain expertise are particularly vulnerable to this, as they may lack the prior knowledge to identify when an AI's suggestions contain subtle errors or fabrications.16 Without proper verification, AI-generated content can introduce inaccuracies that propagate through academic work, undermining learning outcomes.25

4.2 Preserving Academic Integrity and Authenticity

The ethical stakes are particularly high in the realm of academic integrity. AI tools are not always reliable; they can misinterpret data, misrepresent facts, and, in some cases, outright fabricate sources.16 Using AI to generate an entire case or to create false citations is considered academic dishonesty and undermines the fundamental purpose of debate: to develop analytical reasoning and original research skills.16

To mitigate these risks, a clear set of guidelines for AI use is essential.16 Debaters are advised to approach AI-generated information with a healthy dose of skepticism and to cross-check all information with credible sources like academic journals and reputable news outlets.16 AI should be treated as a supplement, not a substitute, for traditional research and original argumentation.16 While AI can help structure arguments, students must write their own speeches and rebuttals to foster authentic critical thought.16 The ethical use of AI in debate demands transparency; if a student uses AI for research or case writing, they should disclose it to their coaches and ensure all information is properly verified.16

The issue of AI integration is not just a technological or pedagogical problem but also a matter of social justice. If AI becomes an essential part of a high-quality education, there is a risk of widening the digital divide between students from different socioeconomic backgrounds who may not have equal access to the necessary devices or internet connectivity.24 This requires careful consideration to ensure that the adoption of these technologies does not exacerbate existing educational inequalities.

4.3 The Invaluable Role of the Human Coach

The challenges of AI integration underscore the enduring and irreplaceable value of the human coach. While AI can analyze data and provide metrics, it lacks the capacity for genuine human connection.27 Human coaches possess a distinct advantage in emotional intelligence, the ability to read non-verbal cues, and the capacity to build a trusting relationship with a student.27 They can perceive and understand the nuances of a student’s emotions, motivations, and aspirations—elements that are often intertwined with their performance and personal growth.28

A human coach provides a kind of contextual understanding that AI cannot replicate. They can consider the intricacies of a student's personal experiences and background, adapting their guidance to unique situations in real-time.29 While AI might offer standardized recommendations based on aggregated data, a human coach can provide tailored strategies rooted in their own decades of lived experience, offering mentorship that is both strategic and emotionally supportive.28 The coach serves as an empathetic guide, helping students navigate difficult emotions and providing a steady presence through the highs and lows of competition.28

The human coach's role is evolving from a mere source of information to a crucial emotional and contextual arbiter. They are the ones who can identify a student's self-doubt, anxiety, or external circumstances that may be affecting their performance.31 The synergy between AI's data-driven insights and a coach's human wisdom is the optimal model for success, with AI handling the quantitative analysis and administrative tasks while the coach provides the qualitative, personalized support and mentorship that leads to lasting transformation.27

The following table presents a direct comparison of the pedagogical benefits of AI in debate against the significant ethical challenges it presents.

Benefits of AI	Ethical and Pedagogical Challenges
Enhanced Research: Efficiently summarizes complex information and suggests counterarguments.	Fabrication and Misinformation: AI can produce unreliable or false content and fabricate sources.
Scalable Practice: Provides a 24/7, low-stakes environment with simulated opponents.	Over-Reliance: Students may use AI as a crutch, undermining their ability to think independently.
Real-Time Feedback: Offers instant, data-driven analysis of public speaking metrics.	Academic Dishonesty: Using AI to generate entire cases or evidence is considered academic dishonesty.
Structured Collaboration: Facilitates organized online discussions and argument mapping.	Authenticity of Thought: Students may rely on AI for structure, losing the skill of crafting their own original arguments.
Increased Accessibility: Can democratize debate training for students without full-time coaches.	Digital Divide: The unequal access to AI tools can widen existing educational inequalities.

Conclusion & Future Outlook

5.1 A Framework for Synergistic Integration

The comprehensive analysis indicates that AI is neither a panacea for all the challenges in debate education nor a threat to be avoided. Instead, it is a powerful tool that, when used ethically and responsibly, can serve as a potent catalyst for skill development. The optimal path forward is a hybrid educational model that strategically integrates AI into the curriculum.

This framework is built upon the principle that AI should function as a "supplement, not a substitute" for critical thinking and original argumentation.16 AI platforms can automate time-consuming administrative tasks for educators and provide scalable, consistent practice opportunities for students. For instance, AI can be leveraged for initial research and brainstorming, for low-stakes mock debates with simulated opponents, and for providing granular feedback on public speaking mechanics.8 This frees up the human coach to focus on the high-value, human-centric aspects of their role: building trust, providing emotional support, teaching students how to read non-verbal cues in a live setting, and guiding them through the complex nuances of real-world discourse.28

For this model to succeed, clear guidelines must be established at the institutional and tournament levels to ensure fair competition and prevent abuses such as fabricated sources or plagiarism.16 Educators must also adapt their teaching methods to actively push students beyond a reliance on AI, incentivizing genuine effort and intellectual ownership.32 This may involve requiring students to submit AI prompts alongside their work or designing assessments that cannot be completed by simply relying on a machine-generated output.

5.2 The Future Debater

The future of debate lies in producing a debater who is uniquely equipped to navigate an AI-powered world. This individual will not only be a skilled arguer and persuasive communicator but also a discerning critical thinker who understands the fundamental limitations of technology. They will have the wisdom to identify misinformation, the integrity to preserve originality, and the empathy to engage in civil discourse that is rooted in human connection.

The synergy between AI's analytical capabilities and the human coach's mentorship will create a more complete educational experience. AI will provide the data, and the human coach will provide the wisdom to interpret it. AI will offer a structured, simulated environment, and the human coach will provide the psychological and contextual guidance needed to succeed in the messy, complex, and deeply human world of competition. The debater of the future will be a true polymath, adept at leveraging technology while upholding the intellectual rigor and ethical standards that are the hallmark of a healthy, functioning society.

Works cited

1. Teaching Debate Across the Curriculum in Grades 3-12 | Edutopia, accessed September 13, 2025, https://www.edutopia.org/article/teaching-debate-across-curriculum/
2. Mastering the Art of Debate - Creative Energy Options, accessed September 13, 2025, https://ceoptions.com/2024/06/mastering-the-art-of-debate/
3. CMV: The debating skills we are taught in high school debating are idealistic, not actually useful for most real-life debates. : r/changemyview - Reddit, accessed September 13, 2025, https://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/comments/vpf9vm/cmv_the_debating_skills_we_are_taught_in_high/
4. Helping Students Hone Their Critical Thinking Skills - Edutopia, accessed September 13, 2025, https://www.edutopia.org/article/teaching-critical-thinking-middle-high-school/
5. www.edutopia.org, accessed September 13, 2025, https://www.edutopia.org/article/teaching-critical-thinking-middle-high-school/#:~:text=Teach%20Reasoning%20Skills&text=For%20example%2C%20give%20students%20a,when%20listening%20to%20peers'%20perspectives.
6. 10 Debate Tips and Tricks for Students - Essay Writing Service, accessed September 13, 2025, https://myperfectwords.com/blog/debate-writing/debate-tips
7. Debate & STEM - Minnesota Urban Debate League - Augsburg University, accessed September 13, 2025, https://mnudl.augsburg.edu/debate-stem/
8. Orai | AI-powered app for practicing your presentations, accessed September 13, 2025, https://orai.com/
9. Lincoln-Douglas Format - (Speech and Debate) - Vocab, Definition, Explanations | Fiveable, accessed September 13, 2025, https://library.fiveable.me/key-terms/hs-speech-debate/lincoln-douglas-format
10. study.com, accessed September 13, 2025, https://study.com/academy/lesson/understanding-different-debate-formats.html#:~:text=Debate%20competitions%20use%20many%20different,public%20forum%2C%20and%20parliamentary%20debates.
11. A Student's Guide to Classic Debate Competition - Ngin, accessed September 13, 2025, https://cdn4.sportngin.com/attachments/document/0108/6997/Learning_Classic_Debate.pdf
12. An Introduction to Lincoln-Douglas Debate (LD) Find Your Voice, accessed September 13, 2025, https://www.speechanddebate.org/wp-content/uploads/Competition-Events-Guide-LD.pdf
13. Public forum debate - Wikipedia, accessed September 13, 2025, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Public_forum_debate
14. en.wikipedia.org, accessed September 13, 2025, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Public_forum_debate#:~:text=Unlike%20policy%2C%20which%20has%20one,%2C%20or%20non%2Ddebating%20person.
15. Debate With AI, Is It The Right Choice For You? - VersyTalks, accessed September 13, 2025, https://www.versytalks.com/blog/debate-with-ai-is-it-the-right-choice-for-you
16. The Role of AI in Debate: Ethics, Research and Responsible Use - NFHS, accessed September 13, 2025, https://nfhs.org/stories/the-role-of-ai-in-debate-ethics-research-and-responsible-use
17. Free AI Debate Generator: Boost Your Argument Skills, accessed September 13, 2025, https://www.junia.ai/tools/ai-debate-generator
18. Is Your Argument Battle-Ready? AI's Role in Speech and Debate ..., accessed September 13, 2025, https://www.thewritersforhire.com/is-your-argument-battle-ready-ais-role-in-speech-and-debate-training/
19. Ai Debating Tool | Symbai Build Critical Thinking Together, accessed September 13, 2025, https://symbai.ai/
20. ELSA | Speech Analyzer. Instant, personalized feedback on your speech, accessed September 13, 2025, https://speechanalyzer.elsaspeak.com/
21. Kialo Edu: The free tool for thoughtful, inclusive class discussion, accessed September 13, 2025, https://www.kialo-edu.com/
22. Research | The theory and data backing Kialo Edu, accessed September 13, 2025, https://www.kialo-edu.com/research
23. Using Kialo with Large Groups of Students, accessed September 13, 2025, https://support.kialo-edu.com/en/hc/using-kialo-with-large-groups-of-students/
24. AI in Education: Benefits, Challenges, and Ethical Considerations - DataCamp, accessed September 13, 2025, https://www.datacamp.com/blog/ai-in-education
25. Students' Reliance on AI in Higher Education: Identifying Contributing Factors - arXiv, accessed September 13, 2025, https://arxiv.org/html/2506.13845v1
26. 'It Will Stunt My Growth as a Teacher': 3 Arguments Against AI in the Classroom, accessed September 13, 2025, https://www.edweek.org/technology/it-will-stunt-my-growth-as-a-teacher-3-arguments-against-ai-in-the-classroom/2025/09
27. Human Coaches vs AI Models: Effectiveness, Impact, and Dangers - Coachilly Magazine, accessed September 13, 2025, https://coachilly.com/human-coaches-vs-ai-coaches-effectiveness-compared/
28. Why Human Coaching Still Matters in the Age of AI: 5 Benefits You can't replace, accessed September 13, 2025, https://theswflchronicle.com/why-human-coaching-still-matters-in-the-age-of-ai-5-benefits-you-cant-replace/
29. AI Coaching Vs. Humans: What's the Difference? - INTOO, accessed September 13, 2025, https://www.intoo.com/us/blog/ai-coaching-vs-humans-whats-the-difference/
30. Human-Led vs. AI Coaching: Why Personal Approach Wins - Navalent, accessed September 13, 2025, https://www.navalent.com/resources/blog/ai-coaching/
31. Exploring the effects of artificial intelligence on student and academic well-being in higher education: a mini-review - PubMed Central, accessed September 13, 2025, https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC11830699/
32. AI PCs in schools: How they can change the way students learn tech, accessed September 13, 2025, https://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/education/news/ai-pcs-in-schools-how-they-can-change-the-way-students-learn-tech/articleshow/123767161.cms