by Seth Davis
20 November 2025
Since The Atlantic rang the essay’s knell three years ago, educators have struggled to mourn. Despite a cottage industry of AI-detection schemes, writing a B-level paper takes minutes, and classrooms face a crisis.
But we in communication studies have, for over a century, practiced academic debate—an alternative to the academic essay that AI can’t break—with robust theory, established pedagogy, and documented returns in student comprehension, confidence, and career pay grade. I’ve used it for major assignments in my Argumentation class. I’ve coached colleagues in other departments on doing the same for theirs.
In the AI era, academic debate offers a workable alternative to the academic essay.
Academic debate is much more controlled and logical than the glib politicians the term may conjure. MIT’s OpenCourseWare provides a breakdown of the format. Students—alone or in teams of up to three—are assigned the Affirmative or Negative of a controversial resolution (e.g., Pluto is a planet; The United States Federal Government should abolish the death penalty; Francis Bacon wrote the works commonly attributed to William Shakespeare). They research arguments pro and con for weeks in advance, submitting their work to the instructor as evidence of their preparation. On debate day, students alternate between presenting cases (“constructions”) for their side, responding to questions (“cross-examination”) from their opponents, and summarizing ("rebuttals") points thus far.
Winning a debate requires understanding all sides of the issue—something AI can't game. In my first semester teaching Argumentation, I witnessed one student whose written assignments matched the default format of ChatGPT, including short headed sections, too many lists, and phrases vapid as a PR email. Head buried in his notes, he ended his final debate by ignoring all opposing claims and contradicting his debate partner. This AI-dependent student sank his team.
Academic debate requires a different, complementary skill set from academic writing. Public speaking is terrifying. I still prepare for presentations by going outside and belting Chappell Roan’s “HOT TO GO!” (with matching choreography) to shake out the nerves. But, having taught public speaking at Pitt for three years, I’ve seen how a supportive learning environment can bring even the most anxious students out of their shells. I’ve gotten shy students laughing in Schenley Plaza as they yell, “Birds! Aren’t! Real!” Thinking on one’s feet is also an acquired skill. That’s why Pitt offers an Argumentation class. Perhaps it should be mandatory.
The more we teach debate, the more we foster confidence, listening, and critical thinking. The more we continue a pedagogy that raised Plato and Shakespeare (who I still believe wrote his own plays). Tomorrow, as machines dominate writing, we must teach our students to speak.