THE CENTRAL LONDON DEBATING SOCIETY AND IDEBATE …files.meetup.com/1866611/Project Rwanda - Final...
Transcript of THE CENTRAL LONDON DEBATING SOCIETY AND IDEBATE …files.meetup.com/1866611/Project Rwanda - Final...
-
1
PROJECT RWANDA THE CENTRAL LONDON DEBATING SOCIETY AND IDEBATE RWANDA
05 – 15 DECEMBER 2013
Contents
Introduction page 2
The fundraising campaign page 3
The students page 4
The trainers page 5
Understanding our mission page 6
The training programme page 7-9
The competition page 9-10
Evaluation page 11
Conclusion page 14
The future page 14
Feedback page 15
Acknowledgments page 16
© Central London Debating Society 2014
-
2
Introduction:
The following report is an evaluation of Debate Camp Rwanda 2013, a ten day debate training camp
for Rwandan school children organised by the student-led NGO, Idebate Rwanda, and delivered by
the Central London Debating Society (CLDS). The report is titled Project Rwanda in reference to the
fundraising campaign planned and executed by CLDS to cover the outstanding costs of the camp and
keep it free for all participating students, which is also included in this evaluation.
About Idebate Rwanda and the Central London Debating Society:
- Idebate Rwanda
Idebate Rwanda is a student led NGO that is using debate to change the lives of young
Rwandans and East Africans. Created in October 2012, it aims to give students the tools to
become engaged learners, critical thinkers, and leaders who are effective advocates for
themselves and their communities. In the last 14 months, they have built a network of debate
clubs across the country and host regular competitions designed to continually challenge and
encourage students to improve and refine their debating skills.
- Central London Debating Society (CLDS)
CLDS is a volunteer network which organises fortnightly public debates around London and
runs training programmes in schools and businesses. Started in April 2009 with the aim of
providing a platform for former university debaters with nowhere to practise their debating
skills, the club quickly grew, becoming as much a current affairs forum as a debating society
with over 2000 members. In July 2012, CLDS began its transition into a social enterprise,
securing funds from the business community for debate training workshops in state schools
across south London, while also running workshops for the general public.
Background
Debate Camp Rwanda was created by Idebate Rwanda to provide intensive debate training for their
existing students in preparation for their final competition of the year, the winners of which will
represent Rwanda in a regional competition for all of east Africa next year. CLDS were invited to write
and deliver the training programme by Idebate project manager, Samuel Baker, who joined the club in
August 2013 after arriving in the UK to commence his university education. A team of four volunteers
was quickly assembled, with a cumulative total of over 15 years of debate training experience.
The camp was largely funded by a grant from the Goethe Institut: Liaison Office Kigali. However,
shortly before the camp was due to open, it became clear that Idebate required an additional £2500 if
they were to achieve their goal of keeping the camp free for all participating students. CLDS
subsequently organised Project Rwanda, a campaign to raise the remaining money by staging four
events in 9 days with little more than a month to spare.
-
3
The fundraising campaign
Aims and Objectives
The sole aim of the campaign was to raise £2500 to keep Idebate Rwanda free for all participating
students. It was estimated by Idebate Rwanda that if we failed to do this, each student would be
charged the approximate equivalent of a £10 entry fee, which, though not a debilitating cost by
western standards, they feared would be enough to deter more than a few parents who remained
sceptical about the value of the camp, despite its popularity with their children. We, in CLDS, also felt
strongly that charging students to attend a training
programme designed to help them overcome the
barriers to education they faced already would go
against the spirit of the camp.
The events programme
The original intention was to stage just one event in a
prestigious venue and invite a panel of high profile
speakers to bring in a big crowd of guests and potential
donors. We sent out what can only be described as an
‘SOS call’ to our members, friends, and professional
acquaintances, requesting assistance in securing both the venue and speakers. The level of support
we received was overwhelming and with offers of help flooding in from all quarters, we decided to
stage four events instead of just one – and all within the space of nine days. The events included a
panel discussion on social mobility and another on international development, a master class in public
speaking and debating, and a debate on female representation in Parliament. Each of the events was
a phenomenal success and attended by an average of 40 people, many of whom contributed
generously.
Donations
In total, the campaign raised £2550. A breakdown of the
donations made revealed that over 30 people contributed
variable amounts of between £5 and £25 with several very
generous donations of between £50 and £100. However,
we reserve our greatest thanks for the following
organisations and individuals who were largely responsible
for us hitting our target by making donations of £500 each.
o Morgan Stanley
o The College of Public Speaking
o Karen Mottart
Acknowledgments
Listed at the end of this document are all the people and organisations who made Project Rwanda
possible by opening up their venues, speaking at our events, introducing us to their contacts, donating
their money, and offering their advice. We remain eternally grateful for their support.
-
4
The students
Attendance
In total, 140 students attended Debate Camp Rwanda, the
majority of whom were in their final or penultimate year of high
school. Most of the students originated from the capital city of
Kigali, but some also heralded from the more distant regional
provinces of Rwanda.
Language
Almost all of the students spoke, read, and wrote English at a
level close to that expected of their UK counterparts even though the government of Rwanda only
changed the national language from French to English four years ago.
Gender balance
The gender balance of the camp was approximately 60% female and 40% male, an approximate
reflection of the nation’s Parliament and the population as a whole. The classes were mixed, while
dormitories, bathrooms, and showering facilities were single-sex.
Socio-economic background
The socio-economic background of the students was broadly the same and can be characterised as
middle class. This was largely due to the fact that access to the debate camp was dependent on three
key factors: 1) enrolment in secondary education - currently only 28% of children of eligible age attend
high school in Rwanda (UNICEF); 2) proficiency in spoken English, with which only a handful of
schools are able to comply due to a dearth in qualified English teachers; and 3) awareness of the
Idebate training programme, which was confined mainly to schools in and around the capital, Kigali.
Expanding the programme to include a broader cross-section of society is one of Idebate’s top
priorities for 2014.
Religion
Rwanda is a devoutly religious country, with Catholicism being the national faith, and the students at
debate camp were no exception. Indeed, one of the key challenges the students faced was a reliance
on biblical references and anecdotes even if they had no bearing on the issue being debated. This
reflected the observation made by Idebate that whilst several students clearly possessed an aptitude
for impassioned rhetoric, the ability to critically appraise their own ideas and those of others was still
in an early stage of development.
Career aspirations
Out of the students in their final year of secondary school, almost all of them were in the process of
applying to study abroad in continental Europe, the UK, or the US. Their professional goals ranged
from scientific research, to aviation engineering, to politics. In a society that remains overwhelmingly
reliant on subsistence farming, this marked a radical departure from the expectations of past
generations and millions of their peers. It was immediately clear, therefore, that we were indeed
working with the future business, academic, and political leaders of Rwanda, which placed on us an
additional responsibility to achieve our aims and objectives.
-
5
The trainers
Tony Koutsoumbos
Founder of the Central London Debating Society, Tony created CLDS in 2009 after failing to find a
London based debating club open to non-students. He has been debating for 11 years and after
running a series of intermittent training workshops for CLDS, he founded his own social enterprise in
July 2012 and has since delivered three debate training series for young professionals and weekly
training workshops for two independent schools and Tower Hamlets Youth Council in London. In 2014
he will be delivering a new debate training programme for state schools in south London, sponsored
by Thomson Reuters, to demonstrate how debating can improve social mobility in low-income areas.
Jack Watling
Jack is an investigative journalist reporting for Reuters, the Guardian and New Statesman. He has
covered stories from smuggling and corruption in the Fishing industry, the extent of technically
insolvent companies operating in the UK, the challenges of ethical investment and social issues
including homelessness and disability. Jack has been competing as a
debater since high school and joined CLDS as a debate trainer in 2011.
Jack was responsible for drafting the curriculum material for the CLDS
debate programme used at Debate Camp Rwanda.
Jordan Anderson
Originally from Florida in the United States and now an employee of the
American Embassy in London, Jordan is something of a global celebrity
in the world of competitive debating, where he enjoys a stunning track
record as a speaker and tournament judge. During his time at SOAS
University, he won numerous inter-varsity competitions, facing down the
best student debaters from across the world. He also has previous
experience of mentoring school pupils in debating and has been an
active member of CLDS since its inception in 2009.
Gwyn Redgers
Gwyn has been a member of the Association of Speakers Clubs for some 30 years and during this
time has frequently run speaking courses. He was the National President of the Association for the
year 2008/9 and also founded the College of Public Speaking, a speaker training company. In
addition, he has been a member and Officer both of the Society of Cogers debating group and the
Sylvan Debating Club, as well as a member of CLDS. Most recently, he has established and now runs
a Speaking & Debating Group within the U3A (University of the Third Age) in London.
From left to right: Jordan Anderson, Tony
Koutsoumbos, Gwyn Redgers, Jack
Watling
-
6
Understanding our mission
Challenges
Idebate Rwanda highlighted several key challenges of which we would need to be aware when writing
our training programme for the debate camp.
1) The conservative nature of Rwandan culture means that the students attending the camp had
been brought up to believe that the value of one’s opinion is determined by their position in
society and that it was inappropriate for young people to question the wisdom of their elders.
2) The 1994 genocide had made the population immensely
suspicious of free speech, largely due to the role of the media in
co-ordinating the atrocities, and subsequently reluctant to voice
their opinions, especially any considered to be controversial.
3) Debating is very new in Rwanda and remains an unknown quantity
to many, particularly the parents of participating students, who
were sceptical of its value in the run-up to the camp.
4) The participating students had a clear aptitude for public speaking,
but required help on the critical thinking element of debating,
which was preventing them from analysing each other’s ideas in
any real depth.
Aims and Objectives for the CLDS debate trainers
In consultation with Idebate Rwanda, we set ourselves a series of immediate objectives (1-3) that we
expected to achieve during the camp itself and long term objectives (4-6) that we aimed to set in
motion for the future and play a part in realising.
1) Improve the confidence of the students in their public speaking abilities and their willingness
to share their opinions with others.
2) Teach the students how to research a proposal quickly and effectively and anticipate the
arguments for and against.
3) Raise the standard of critical thinking and demonstrate how to critically appraise individual
arguments and entire proposals.
4) Boost the popularity of debating and secure support amongst the students for a second
debate camp in 2014.
5) Prove the relevance of debating to the students’ continued academic, personal, and
professional development.
6) Educate students on the link between critical thinking and good governance by challenging
them to apply the lessons of debate camp to realising the goals of the Rwandan government’s
2020 development strategy.
“…the camp was set up to allow our
students to develop critical thinking skills
and learn how to structure and make great arguments.”
(Jean Michel Habineza,
Program Manager of Idebate Rwanda)
-
7
The training programme
Overview
The programme designed by the Central London Debating Society in consultation with Idebate
Rwanda consisted of a combination of theory, interactive exercises, games, and mock debates for six
days followed by a day of practice debates prior to the 2-day competition that concluded the camp
with a day off in between the two. Each trainer followed a single lesson plan to ensure a consistent
quality of education for all, while retaining the discretion to slightly alter it in accordance with their
students’ needs. Each day consisted of two 3 hour lessons with one 15-minute interval each and an
hour for lunch. This was followed by an hour of physical exercise and then dinner.
Theory
1) Public speaking
Speech delivery and rhetorical devices were the key themes of
public speaking lessons. Students were taught about the
importance of breathing, posture, and enunciation, and how to
convey a broad range of emotions by changing tone. They were
exposed to the speeches of acclaimed historical figures and shown
how to analyse them for their use of rhetorical devices such as: the
rule of three, epiphora and anaphora, alliteration, and apophasis to
name but a few. Finally, they were encouraged to experiment with
impromptu speaking and deterred from writing scripts.
2) Critical thinking
Structure and the burden of proof were the key themes of critical thinking lessons. Students
were taught how to construct a basic policy plan complete with aims and objectives, methods,
stakeholders, and predicted outcomes. They also learnt the basics of speech-writing,
including the use of signposting, how to prioritise their points in order of strength, the
difference between an assertion and an argument, and timing. Finally, they were schooled in
the use of logic and how to analyse arguments for logical flaws and effectively rebut them.
Exercises
1) ‘Show, don’t tell’
This exercise enables the speaker to showcase their best qualities by telling a story about
themselves and asking the rest of the class to guess what attribute they were attempting to
convey. The aim is to demonstrate that giving an example always beats simply making a
claim. The result is a collection of unprompted responses describing an array of positive
qualities, which has the added benefit of convincing the speaker that this is how their
classmates see them, thereby boosting their own self-worth.
“I liked most the experienced coaches that led our way to understanding the
real art of debate, people that really loved what they were doing”
(Derrick Murukezi, student)
-
8
2) Group policy planning
In order to fully understand the roles of each
individual speaker in a debate, the students worked
in groups to perform the function of a single
speaker. In this setup, there were five groups.
Group 1 focused on planning a policy and writing a
speech arguing in favour of its implementation.
Group 2 had to plan for the same policy, but then
write a speech opposing it. Group 3 was
responsible for critically appraising Group 1’s
speech and Group 4 did the same for Group 2.
Finally, Group 5 summarised the debate and delivered their verdict.
Games
1) Alley debate
Students formed two lines, standing opposite each other. The first student in line was
presented with a moral dilemma – e.g. whether to pick up a lost wallet – and tasked with
making an argument in favour of it. The student opposite then had to rebut the first argument
and explain why they would not pick up the wallet. The next student on the other side of the
isle (the alley) summarily responded and added their new argument and so on. The purpose
of this game was to introduce students to the skills of rebuttal and impromptu speaking.
2) Balloon debate
Essentially a panel debate, the premise of this game was that the contestants were sharing a
balloon that could not hold their weight and had to make their case to the audience who
decided who should be thrown out (figuratively) and who should stay. The panellists were
tasked with presenting all the arguments as to why only they should be saved and submitting
to a cross-examination by their fellow speakers and the audience. The purpose of this game
was to simulate the pressure and scrutiny of a competitive debate in a fun and supportive
environment.
Mock debates
1. We staged a mock competition on day 3 of the debate camp to gage the initial progress of the
students, which consisted of prepared debates and impromptu speaking. Teams were
challenged to alternate between proposing and opposing different motions and making short
3 minute speeches with minimal preparation. Individual
speakers were tasked with delivering short 2 minute
speeches on an assigned topic followed by longer 4
minute speeches on a topic of their choice.
2. The final day of the training programme was used as a
dress rehearsal for the competition, where students
would debate formal motions under competition rules.
This would be their last chance to receive detailed
feedback from the trainers on how to reach their full
potential in the competition itself.
“I enjoyed having professional trainers that helped us to reach
where we wanted to be and what we wanted to become”
(Joyce Aline, student)
-
9
The competition
Overview
The competition was held in Kigali on the weekend of December 14-15 with the students divided into
teams of three, representing their schools, while unaffiliated students were grouped together so they
could also take part. The tournament began with a group stage, thereby ensuring every team had the
opportunity to compete in at least three debates, before proceeding to the knockout stages. Each
debate lasted approximately 45 minutes, in addition to 20 minutes preparation time, once the teams
had been told the topic to be debated.
The teams
The students were split into two different streams with the members of the Kigali Debate League
contesting the tournament separately from the less experienced remainder. However, all teams
debated the same topics and were judged using the same criteria.
Format
Idebate Rwanda adopted the World Schools Debating format for the competition. Teams consisted of
three speakers with designated responsibilities, each allotted six minutes of speaking time, one of
whom then spoke again for a further three minutes to deliver their team’s final summary speech.
Teams were allowed to cross examine their opponents by raising a ‘point of information’ during the
middle three minutes of their speech.
Debate topics
In keeping with the over-arching theme of the debate camp, all topics selected for the competition
were specific to Rwanda and the major economic, political and social challenges it faces on the road
to its continued development.
List of competition debate topics
Group stages This House Believes Rwanda should put a tax on having more than 2 children This House Believes that running water is more important to Rwanda’s development than electricity This House Believes that Rwanda should put a limit on the number of foreign skilled workers
Knockout stages This House Believes that Rwandan schools should give equal priority to French as well as English This House Believes that political stability is more important than free speech This House supports the complete and total political integration of East African Community members into a single country
“Dedicated coaches, a wonderful staff, and ambitious debaters on the lookout for an opportunity to change the world, THAT made the camp the most beautiful thing ever” Bruce Mirangiwa, student
-
10
Judging criteria
Each student was given a mark out of 30 for their performance in each debate with the average score
being 17 and an outstanding mark being 25 or above. Debaters were assessed using the following
criteria:
1) Signposting
2) Depth of explanation
3) Logical consistency
4) Rebuttal
5) Summarising
6) Teamwork
7) Clarity, pace, and tone
8) Use of language and rhetorical devices
9) Timekeeping
Awards
Team prizes were awarded to the competition
winners from both streams with the winners of the
Kigali Debate League tournament selected to
represent their school and their country at the East
African debating championships in 2014.
Prizes were also awarded to the ten best speakers of
the competition from both streams to ensure they
received due recognition even if their team was not
successful on the whole.
Certificates were issued to each and every student
verifying their participation in the debate camp and
the competition.
“I enjoyed facing the challenges and fears and finally found ourselves
doing and thinking beyond what we thought we could by simply
following the clear methods of our trainer.”
Jessy Nkubito, student
-
11
Evaluation
Overview
The outcome of the debate camp was measured against the listed objectives set by CLDS in
consultation with Idebate Rwanda. Our aim was to fully achieve the immediate objectives of the camp
(objectives 1-3) and make demonstrable progress in achieving the long term objectives of the camp
(objectives 4-6). The assessment of our success was based on the responsiveness of the students to
the training programme, its educational applications, their performance in the debating competition,
and feedback from Idebate Rwanda as well as the students themselves.
Assessment
1) Improve the confidence of the students in their public speaking abilities and their
willingness to share their opinions with others
It was clear on the first day that this was a top
priority as students were initially reluctant to
volunteer for speaking exercises. Exercises such
as ‘show, don’t tell’ were very useful in building up
their self-esteem and they quickly opened up. On
the day of the first mock debates, we had no
trouble in recruiting the 48 students required to fill
the day and remain confident that even more would
have volunteered had the opportunity for them to
speak been available. Furthermore, out of a total of
140 debate camp attendees, almost all of them enthusiastically participated in the competition
with the few exceptions unable to do so only due to pre-existing commitments.
2) Teach the students how to research a proposal quickly and effectively and anticipate
the arguments for and against.
The level of detail and insight displayed by students when given a template with which to
organise their thoughts and structure their policy plans were most impressive. Over the
course of the debate camp, they independently drew up well thought out arguments both in
favour and against: building a railway between Rwanda and the Democratic Republic of
Congo; prioritising technical and vocational skills in the education system; and legislating on
the freedom of expression. These skills were again demonstrated during the competition
where teams were given just 20 minutes to prepare for complex and challenging motions as
listed above.
3) Raise the standard of critical thinking and demonstrate how to critically appraise
individual arguments and entire proposals
Progress was definitely made on achieving this objective and the ability to analyse and
challenge opponents’ arguments, as well as present their own,
is what distinguished the teams who qualified for the knockout
stages of the competition from the rest. However, critical
analysis, concise definitions, and clear signposting remained
areas in need of improvement, particularly in debates where
the speakers were required to compare the value of two
separate policies, proving why one is a better idea than the
alternative.
“It’s good to be with people having the same passion and spirit -
learning becomes more interesting. THANK YOU”
(Jessy Nkubito, student)
-
12
4) Boost the popularity of debating and secure support amongst the students for a
second debate camp in 2014
A long standing objective of CLDS in the UK
is to make debating popular and in a country
such as Rwanda, where debating is still seen
as an unknown quantity, this became doubly
important in order to ensure the continuation
of Idebate Rwanda’s ground-breaking
programmes. We can only rely on informal
feedback from students at this point as
registration for Debate Camp 2014 is not yet
open. However, we can confirm that the only
complaint that Idebate received about the camp is that it finished too soon, while several
students who have stayed in touch with us through social media, such as Facebook,
contacted us directly to express their gratitude for our efforts long after we had returned to
London. Furthermore, to our knowledge, not only are Idebate planning to repeat the camp in
2014, but their intention is to expand it, taking in debate clubs from neighbouring countries
and staging the camp itself in Uganda.
5) Proving the relevance of debating to the students’ continued academic, personal, and
professional development
Our core philosophy as debate trainers is that the value of debating skills lie primarily in their
near ubiquitous application across all areas of a debater’s life. Debate Camp Rwanda offered
both direct and indirect benefits to our students’ lives, including:
a. University applications – the certificates awarded to all participating students offer
proof of extra-curricular study, a key component of the qualifying criteria for those
applying for university scholarships abroad. Debating skills in particular are highly
valued by American colleges.
b. Entrepreneurship – the similarity in structure of policy planning to business planning
makes debate training an invaluable aid to students taking exams in
entrepreneurship, a subject which all Rwandan high school graduates are required to
pass in keeping with the government’s 2020 development plan.
c. Technical and vocational skills – debating is a life skill that bridges the gap
between the academic content of high school education and the need for a workforce
with refined presentation and critical thinking skills. The need for this consolidation of
knowledge and skills has been recognised by the government of Rwanda, which is
rolling out Technical and Vocational schools, known locally as TVETs, across the
country.
d. Conflict resolution – Lead trainer, Jack Watling, has often referred to debating as
the art of disagreeing without being disagreeable. To this end, we coached our
students on how to differentiate a valid argument from a personal attack and how to
identify logical fallacies most likely to lead to conflict if allowed to go unchallenged.
We were all very impressed by how quickly the students applied these techniques
during the competition.
-
13
e. General Knowledge – Debating is less reliant on facts and figures than it is on
internal logical consistency. However, they are still necessary. The default level of
general knowledge amongst students on issues ranging from youth unemployment
and poverty, to infrastructure and foreign policy, was exceptional. Moreover, we saw
numerous examples of students using the template policy plans we had designed for
them to identify the holes in their knowledge and undertaking the necessary research.
6) Educate students on the link between critical thinking and good governance by
challenging them to apply the lessons of debate camp to the Rwandan government’s
2020 development strategy
The promotion of good governance is a top priority for
Idebate Rwanda with the intended result of young
Rwandans appreciating the importance of democratic
process as well as the outcome of government policy. To
this end, we anchored the training programme in the
country’s Millennium Development Goals, carrying out
extensive research of our own in advance of the debate
camp to facilitate informed debate on a range of
government policies. We observed, as expected, that the
students – already equipped with a vast amount of
general knowledge of their government’s development
agenda – held contrasting opinions on the virtues of
individual policies. However, what impressed us most
was their willingness to explore alternative perspectives
and change their minds when presented with satisfactory evidence and arguments by their
peers.
“Empowering self-expression will help young minds to
respect various opinions and bring communities together while critical thinking will
help in promoting good governance…”
(Samuel Baker, Project Manager of
Idebate Rwanda)
-
14
Conclusion
Leonard Bernstein said: “to achieve greatness, two things are needed: a plan and not quite enough
time”. Project Rwanda and Debate Camp Rwanda are a testament to this wisdom. Between the day
CLDS and Idebate Rwanda were first introduced to each other to the day we touched down in Kigali,
a mere three months passed, in which 140 students were recruited, three state of the art venues were
sourced, a team of trainers assembled, a 60 page programme written from scratch, and (in the final 4
weeks), £2500 raised to help pay for it all – with astounding results that have made this by far the
proudest achievement in the four year history of the Central London Debating Society.
Out of our six objectives, three were immediately achieved (1-3) and the remainder (4-6) set in motion
with CLDS eager to observe the longer term benefits over the forthcoming year. Most importantly, we
succeeded in our top aim of keeping the camp free for every student and securing their support and
enthusiasm for a repeat of the camp next year.
Aiding Idebate Rwanda, whom it should be noted are all volunteers and students themselves, and
helping them to realise their most ambitious goal yet was its own reward. However, in addition the
camp was a valuable opportunity to test out new material for our on-going training programmes in the
UK, and a once in a lifetime opportunity to donate our time and our efforts to a cause we
wholeheartedly support. The countdown to Debate Camp 2014 begins now.
The future
Idebate Rwanda has confirmed their intention to stage a second debate camp in December 2014 and
are due to begin drawing up their initial plans for the programme in January 2014. They have also
confirmed their desire to continue their partnership with the Central London Debating Society.
CLDS has pledged its support for the next debate camp and has set itself the aim to fully fund the
programme through a combination of fundraising campaigns and corporate sponsorship. This will
begin with a report back event at the London Chamber of Commerce in February with plans for a
commemorative fundraiser to mark the 20th anniversary of the Rwandan genocide in April, already
under way. To this end, CLDS plans to build on its newly formed partnership with Junior Chamber
International (JCI) to raise the profile of Idebate Rwanda and their unique training programme. JCI
Canary Wharf and JCI London in particular are keen to expand on the vital role they played in aiding
Project Rwanda in November
Expanding the programme by reaching out to new countries across the globe and replicating the
success of Debate Camp Rwanda is also a top priority for CLDS. In 2014, we will be working closely
with the JCI in particular to approach local partners, particularly in the developing world, to explore the
viability or similar debate training programmes in their respective countries. So far, CLDS has
received expressions of interest in delivering similar camps from countries in Europe, Africa, and Asia.
-
15
Feedback from Debate Camp staff and students
“Idebate Rwanda was set up as a way to create a platform for young Rwandans to be able to express
themselves on certain issues that affect their lives. It was also set up as a way to train our students in
the art of debating, imparting in them the skills of public speaking, critical thinking, and research. In
order to accomplish our goal of training our students to become better thinkers, we needed trainers
that were experienced in debate and in teaching argumentation and CLDS was a great organisation
for that. The Camp was a success, the students were enthusiastic, and they learned a lot. Even up to
now, students still call to thank us. In 2014, we are holding 6 tournaments for the Kigali League,
another for East Africa, and finally a camp at the end of the year.”
(Jean Michel Habineza, Program Manager of Idebate Rwanda)
“Rwanda has been a society where self-expression is difficult due to poor governance which also
accounts for the 1994 genocide. Idebate is serving to address such problems by working to ensure
good governance and conflict management. Empowering self-expression will help young minds to
respect various opinions and bring communities together while critical thinking will help in promoting
good governance, considering the fact that our target is young Rwandans - the back bone of
Rwanda's future and the upcoming decision makers and public representatives. We have also worked
to improve the social interaction between young Rwandans, engaging them in our activities
regardless of ethnicity, also an act of reconciling societies and eliminating any type of discrimination.”
(Samuel Baker, Project Manager of Idebate Rwanda)
“I liked most the experienced coaches that led our way to understanding the real art of debate, people
that really loved what they were doing and also the teams we had were really amazing, they promoted
team spirit that made the camp the best place to be!”
(Derrick Murukezi, student)
“Dedicated coaches, a wonderful staff, and ambitious debaters on the lookout for an opportunity to
change the world, THAT made the camp the most beautiful thing ever.”
(Bruce Mirangiwa, student)
“I enjoyed facing the challenges and fears and finally found ourselves doing and thinking beyond what
we thought we could by simply following the clear methods of our trainer. It was so encouraging. I
also loved the motivation. It’s good to be with people having the same passion and spirit - learning
becomes more interesting. THANK YOU”
(Jessy Nkubito, student)
“I enjoyed having professional trainers that helped us to reach where we wanted to be and what we
wanted to become. Before we couldn't really see how strong a debater we could be. Also, the best
thing is that it offers a chance to everyone, not just the people who are used to debating.”
(Joyce Aline, student)
-
16
Acknowledgments
This is our opportunity to say thank you to each and every person who made Debate Camp Rwanda
possible. Several donors requested to stay anonymous, while many more donated generous cash
amounts at our fundraisers without declaring their identity. Please know, all of you, that you have our
eternal gratitude.
The Idebate Rwanda team
Samuel Baker
Jean Michel Habineza
Teta Christine
Jesh Arnold
Alex Kambanda
Nelson Girinshuti
Supporters of Debate Camp Rwanda
(organisations who hosted, promoted, co-
sponsored or participated in Project
Rwanda fundraising events)
Rwanda High Commission UK
Royal Society of the Arts
Junior Chamber International
Morgan Stanley
Parliament Week
City of London School
City of London School for Girls
Brondesbury College for Boys
Regent’s University
College of Public Speaking
UpRising
Salmon Youth Centre
United Nations Association
Royal Africa Society
School of Oriental and African Studies
Sponsors and major contributors
The Goethe Institut
Morgan Stanley
The College of Public Speaking
Karen Mottart
Speakers at Project Rwanda fundraising
events
Andrea Cooper (UpRising)
Mildred Talabi (Salmon Youth Centre)
Hamza King (Brondesbury College)
Samuel Baker (Idebate)
Judith Bunting (Liberal Democrats)
Dr Colette Harris (SOAS)
HE Williams Nkurunziza (RHC-UK)
Charlotte Rose (political journalist)
Shaimaa Khalil (journalist)
Vince Stephenson (COPS)
Linda Kalimba (RHC-UK)
Heather Self (tax expert)
Rafael Tselikas (JCI)
Pritish Behuria (SOAS)
Patrick Gihana-Mulenga (RHC-UK)
Graham Robertson (Morgan Stanley
Individual contributors
Lisa Paxton
Annik Rau
Joasia Popowicz
Rafael Tselikas
David Varga
Adam Grodecki
Debbie Fisher
Ellie Vassy
Mark Worrall
Martyn and Yvette Spencer
Heather Self
Gary Moore
Nick Mason
Jerry Remezo
Janneke van Leeuwen
Ashleena Deike
Tony Hodges
Laura Pictor
Claire Moynihan
Beth Mottart
Emily Penn
-
17