National Schools English Debate Championship · Rules

Each debate involves two teams of three speakers. The Proposition team argues the motion, and the Opposition team argues against it. Teams are told which side they will argue only fifteen minutes before each debate, they must prepare for both sides.

Each speaker has five minutes. During the middle three minutes of each speech, members of the opposing team may offer a “point of information”, a short question or comment. The speaker may accept or it.

Speakers may use notes, they may not use phones, laptops or other electronic devices during the debate. Any team breaks this rule will lose the debate.

Judges will score each team on three areas: the content of their arguments, the of their delivery and their strategy, including how well they respond to the other team.

Respect is essential. Speakers may criticise their opponents’ arguments, but personal attacks are not allowed. The aim of debate is not only to win to think more clearly about difficult questions.

What Losing a Debate Taught Me About AI · by Praew Chantawong, Grade 12

When our team was told we would argue in favour of allowing AI for homework, my partner Ohm was unhappy. He believed AI makes students lazy. I was more optimistic, but I had never really thought about the question carefully.

Preparing for the debate forced us to both sides. We read articles, interviewed teachers and asked classmates how they used AI. Some admitted they copied answers. Others used it to explain ideas they did not understand in class, they would never have dared to ask in front of their friends.

In the final, we lost by a single point. The judge told us our arguments were creative, but we needed evidence. She was right. We had relied on personal stories, while the other team had a survey of a thousand students.

What surprised me most was how my own opinion changed. I still believe that banning AI is unrealistic. , I now understand why teachers worry. A tool that can explain can also replace thinking, if students use it carelessly.

Perhaps the real question is not whether students use AI, but they use it. Schools need to teach students how to ask good questions, check answers and do their own thinking. That is a skill no machine can learn us.

Debate did not give me a final answer. It gave me something more : the habit of looking at a question from both sides.

Grand Final Scoresheet · Motion: This house would allow students to use AI tools for homework

Proposition (Nakhon Pathom Phatthana School): Content 34/40 · Delivery 27/30 · Strategy 23/30 · Total 84

Opposition (Bangkok Riverside School): Content 36/40 · Delivery 25/30 · Strategy 24/30 · Total 85

Best speaker of the final: Praew Chantawong (Proposition)

Judge’s comment: An outstanding final. The Proposition’s delivery was the strongest of the tournament, and their point of information on independent learning was excellent. The Opposition won on the strength of their evidence, especially the student survey, and their careful responses to the Proposition’s best arguments.

The Tool That Can Teach or Replace Thinking

Since AI chatbots became widely available, schools around the world have struggled to decide how to respond. Some banned them at first, worried that students would use them to write essays and answer homework questions. Many of those bans were later relaxed, partly because they were difficult to enforce and partly because teachers began to see possible benefits.

Early research suggests that the effects of AI depend heavily on how it is used. In several studies, students who used AI to get hints, explanations and feedback on their own work learned more than students without AI. However, students who used AI simply to produce answers often performed worse on later tests taken without it. They had completed their work, but they had not learned from it.

This finding matches what psychologists have long known about learning. Memory and understanding grow through effort: struggling with a problem, making mistakes and correcting them. A tool that removes all difficulty may also remove much of the learning.

As a result, many educators now argue that the key question is not whether students should use AI, but how they should use it. Some schools are designing assignments that require students to explain their reasoning, compare AI answers with other sources or improve on AI-generated drafts.

There are also concerns beyond learning. AI tools can produce confident but incorrect answers, and they may reflect biases found in the data used to build them. Students therefore need to learn to question the tools, not only to use them.

A note to Praew after the final

Praew,

I know you’re disappointed. So am I. One point! But I wanted to write this down because I don’t think I said it properly yesterday.

When the competition started, I thought this motion was obvious. AI makes students lazy, so it should not be allowed. I only argued for it because we had to.

Then we started interviewing people. I talked to my younger cousin, who has dyslexia and has always found reading difficult. She uses AI to read long texts aloud and to explain difficult words. She told me that for the first time she feels like she can keep up with her class. I had never thought about students like her.

I still think some students use AI to avoid work. But I don’t think the answer is a ban anymore. I think it’s teaching, the way you said in your last speech.

So thank you. We lost the debate, but I think I won something more important. I changed my mind, and I can explain why.

See you at practice on Monday. Next year, we’re winning.

Ohm