Debate Reaction / for management class - Research Paper Example

Debate Reaction Paper The reaction paper on the debate presented by team 3 on the topic “Are Personality Tests Good Predictors of Employee Performance?” is hereby presented to comment as well as assess the main points that were covered by the team members from contending arguments and to relay one’s personal opinion as to which side won the debate. Two members, Gregory (Clay) Gordon and Miguel Alvarado argued that personality tests are good predictors of employee performance (YES). On the contrary, Samantha Adams and Alonzo Quinonez contented that personality tests are not good predictors of employee performance (NO).

Assessment of Arguments Upon closer evaluation of both arguments, it is hereby deduced that the criteria needed to assist in coming up with a decision on which side wins the debate are as follows: (1) structure of the presentation; (2) clarity of arguments supporting the side being contended; (3) clarity of rebuttal to counter the contentions of the other party; and (4) the provision of appropriate, credible and authoritative support. According to Quinn (2005), “every argument must include a number of components: (1) a label; (2) theoretical reasoning and explanation; (3) substantiation; (4) at least one ‘tie-back’; and (5) an internal structure that is clear and simple, and which assists rather than impedes the persuasive value of your argument” (p. 86). Therefore, using these criteria, the following assessments are hereby summarized: Criteria for AssessmentYESNOStructure of PresentationClear and appropriately structured with label, theoretical reasoning, substantiation but no tie-back or conclusionClear and appropriately structured with label, theoretical reasoning, substantiation; and tie-back or conclusionClarity of Arguments to Support SideArguments appropriately support contentions, except Alvarado’s IC statement that counters support.

All arguments are supportive of their contentions.Clarity of RebuttalsNo rebuttal statement providedNo rebuttal statement providedProvision of Credible Support through SourcesThere were 4 citations noted for their arguments.There were 5 citations noted for their arguments As shown, the No group conformed to the needed components of an argument for debate, as well as the provision of theoretical reasoning, explanations through examples, and with support through citations, as required. Likewise, as indicated, more support was provided by the No members, as compared to the Yes team.

Finally, although both teams did not provide any rebuttal arguments, there was one argument from the Yes team that contradicted their original statement. This therefore weakened their position.Personal Opinion on Who Won the Debate Based on the assessment of the arguments, using the criteria abovementioned, it is hereby deduced that the side which asserted that personality tests are not good predictors of employee performance (NO) won the debate for the following reasons: (1) their structure of presentation followed the logical and more comprehensive structure; (2) their arguments were appropriately supported through reasoning and explanation; (3) their arguments were aptly substantiated with cited support from secondary sources; and (4) a concluding portion provided the needed tie-back to assert conformity to their original point of argument.

Work CitedQuinn, Simon. "Debating." 2005. learndebating.com. 22 September 2012 .