The 7th International Universities Debating Championship in Doha, Qatar saw over 100 universities from 50 countries competing, with Georgetown University in Qatar (GU-Q) Arabic debate team securing third place. Moza AlHajri (SFS’26) was named Best Speaker among the participants. GU-Q shared their five secrets to excel in debate: diligent preparation, structured arguments, quick thinking, effective collaboration, and constant learning.
Preparation is key for the GU-Q team, with only 20 minutes to prepare for each debate round. Moza emphasizes the importance of leveraging prior knowledge and real-world examples to build solid cases quickly. The team also stays current with global news to handle a wide range of topics effectively.
Structuring arguments clearly is another essential aspect of debating, according to Moza. In competitive debates, outlining points and responding to the other side’s arguments is crucial. The team uses the PEEL framework to ensure concise and easy-to-follow arguments. It is also important to assume that the audience is unfamiliar with the topic and build the argument slowly and clearly.
Adaptability is a key strength of the GU-Q team, as they anticipate opposing arguments and prepare responses in advance. This allows them more time during the debate to think of responses to unexpected points. Quick refutation is essential, as picking up on keywords and noting the other team’s arguments is crucial to responding correctly.
Building a strong team is vital for success, as Salman Al Emadi describes the GU-Q Arabic Debate team as a “well-oiled machine” where each member knows their roles and complements each other’s skills. Collaboration during preparation time ensures a unified view of the case and strategy, with each team member having a specific speaker position requiring different skills during the debate.
Continuous learning and improvement are also key for the GU-Q team, as constructive feedback from adjudicators helps them identify weak points and focus on improvement. Even when winning, they evaluate their performance after each debate to learn from their mistakes. Learning from different judges provides diverse feedback to help refine their skills.
