Viewing archives for Debating & public speaking

It is just two years since Sudhamshu Gummadavelly and Ashwin Sridhar won the Elizabethan Union Dinner Debate as sixth-formers in the School’s 450th anniversary year.

Now the young alumni, who both left the School in 2023, have repeated the feat, successfully opposing the motion – This House believes social media is harming our democracy – which was proposed by Year 13’s Saim Khan and Zaki Mustafa.

The motion generated extensive debate, with many boys contributing from the floor to this, the 58th annual debate. A relaxed, convivial evening, it gives senior boys an opportunity to experience the sort of occasion they may later encounter at university and beyond.

Headmaster Neil Enright said: “This was a very high-quality debate from both teams, with many judicious, thoughtful contributions also coming from the floor. With contributors proving responsive to the points made by others, it made for an intellectually exciting discussion.

“Our thanks go to all those involved, particularly our returning OEs, who I am sure enjoyed the opportunity to relive past glories as a winning team once again!

The debate was chaired by Year 13’s Rohan Kumar, with the toasts at dinner presided over by 2024’s Chanakya Seetharam, also of Year 13.

Here is a summary of points made during the debate:

Saim (proposing) stated that fake news reached 1,500 people six times faster than true news in a study and pointed out the centralised control of social media channels by figures such as Elon Musk and Mark Zuckerberg.

Ashwin (opposing) gave examples of social media being used to expose truth in the face of state oppression and propaganda and its use in giving a voice to the voiceless, citing the #MeToo movement.

Zaki (proposing) waxed historical, pointing to the story of Emperor Nero blaming everyone else when Rome burned in AD64, the salient point being that he was able to control the flow of information and thus turn people against each other. In like fashion, social media gives a platform to neo-Nazis and other extremists peddling misinformation and hate, such as those behind the January 6th riots in the US, and is not infrequently misused by national actors, such as China and Russia. Far from being neutral, it is the platforms which decide which material goes viral and who is silenced. Social media is purposely addictive and – with anger generating clicks – divisive.

Sudhamshu (opposing) countered that misinformation was entirely possible without social media, suggesting, in fact, that the proposers had promulgated misinformation in their speeches! The power of social media, he said, is that it is a conversation – two-way communication, able to be answered. In a world without social media, people would be less able to challenge politicians directly and governments would find it easier to control the populace.

Points and questions from the floor included:

• Is more free speech necessarily good? Much of the debate online is lazy and low quality.
• The tone online is often argumentative, which provokes people to reinforce their own views, leading to entrenchment and retreat to separate groups.
• Social media is used to organise violence, such as mosque attacks and attacks by the English Defence League.
• Counter examples were given of social media exposing corruption, particularly in developing countries.
• With algorithms driving social media, what you see is determined for you.
• Echo chambers were not a side effect, but the driving purpose of social media – pushing your own beliefs back at you.
• On social media you can publicly comment on and critique things. By contrast, if you send an email or letter to a newspaper, its staff will decide whether to publish it.
• Head of English Robert Hyland asked: “Who guards the guards?” Traditional media has editorial boards and regulators, but social media does not. However, his caveat was that perhaps the proposers were living in the past, harking back to what democracy used to be. Does it not evolve, with social media showing the robustness of that evolution?

The end result of the debate was a vote of 40% in favour of the motion, with 58% against, and 2% abstaining. Thus, the narrow lead for the proposition at the outset of the debate was overturned.

Earlier, a three-course dinner, with a vegetarian option was served.

• Click on the thumbnails to view the images.

QE was named as one of the top-performing schools at the Dubai International Academy Model United Nations conference, with three of QE’s delegates picking up awards.

The seven sixth-formers joined around 800 other delegates from across seven countries for the three-day debating event.

Headmaster Neil Enright said: “I congratulate our students for taking the initiative and organising this visit, for the preparation they did ahead of taking part in the debates, and for the level of their performance in the debates: they did the School proud!”

The long-established DIAMUN annual conference is affiliated to The Hague International Model United Nations, which specifies standards and procedures. It was held at the Dubai International Academy’s Emirates Hills campus, with a social event on the evening of the second day organised at the Jabal Ali resort.

Delegates came from more than 50 schools in Mauritius, Philippines, Qatar, Rwanda, UAE, Uganda, and the UK for the conference, which, like all Model United Nations (MUN) events, is closely modelled on the work of the real United Nations.

QE’s experienced MUN group, all from Year 13, were: Saim Khan, Koustuv Bhowmick, Chanakya Seetharam, Hari Kumarappan, Kanusan Naveendran, Uday Dash, and Kyshaan Ravikumar.

The delegation as a whole won a certificate recording QE’s honourable mention as a top-performing school.

Koustuv won a Best Delegate award for his work with the Arab League – one of the conference’s special committees.

Two other QE delegates, Chanakya and Uday, won Best Position Paper awards. Position papers are single-A4 page documents written to outline the views of the country or group the delegates are representing. Chanakya’s was for his paper for the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCC) and Uday’s award was for his work for the Economic and Financial Committee (ECOFIN). Uday also received an honourable mention when it came to selecting the best delegate across all the committees.

And Saim Khan, who afterwards penned a report on the event, was runner-up for Best Delegate for SPECPOL (Special Political & Decolonization Committee). “I lost out by one mark! – 29 to 30 – to the delegate who also ended up winning the Nirav Passi award – best delegate across all committees.

“We chose to arrange this for ourselves as a ‘last hurrah’ MUN – everything from reaching out and emailing the school, to organising flights and accommodation, to getting the absences authorised, was managed entirely independently,” Saim continued.

The group found time for sightseeing, including a desert safari and a visit to Old Dubai. One or more of the group also visited: Museum of the Future; Museum of Illusions; the Burj Khalifa skyscraper;  Aquaventure Water Park; and Kite Beach.

Saim, who managed to procure a full Saudi robe and headgear for the second-day social, particularly relished the multi-cultural nature of the event. “Despite London itself being a rather multicultural city, it was taken to the next level in Dubai – in my committee there were people from four different continents (including a Palestinian-Russian and a French-Indian).”

This experience was not without its lighter moments – Saim tried to learn local styles of wearing the shemagh (traditional headscarf). “According to one Lebanese person, I had at one point worn it in the style of someone about to get married!” said Saim.

“The conference gave an invaluable insight into how the lives of people of similar ages and educational background from around the globe can vary. Whether it was practising my (somewhat rusty) GCSE French with native speakers, picking up Arab phrases from a local Emirati, it was an amazing trip all around.”

The Robert Dudley Studio, QE’s new facility for drama and the spoken word, has been demonstrating its flexibility in a string of events. 

The studio, created from two existing large rooms towards the rear of the Main Building, hosted early rounds of the English Speaking Union’s Schools’ Mace debating contest and of the national Performing Shakespeare competition. 

Two events were held there as part of a new partnership with the English National Ballet, while it was also the venue for a special English lesson exploring dramatic imagery and language. 

Headmaster Neil Enright said: “With the installation of audio-visual equipment, The Robert Dudley Studio has really begun fulfilling its potential for helping us develop oracy in our pupils.” 

At the Mace, the country’s oldest and largest debating competition for schools, a senior QE team – including School Captain Chanakya Seetharam, as well as Zaki Mustafa, and Koustuv Bhowmick, all from Year 13 – took on Haberdashers’ Girls’ School. Other leading schools from North London and Hertfordshire also competed.  The QE team won the event to progress to the second-round heats in January.  

For the Performing Shakespeare competition, every boy in Year 8 learns a speech to perform in class. The 12 winners from across the six Houses fought it out in the School final, held this month in The Robert Dudley Studio (RDS). 

Head of English Robert Hyland said: “There are some things which reading Shakespeare simply as words on the page can never give – so much of the impact of his work comes from how performers have chosen to interpret, following the rhythms and the imagery of the poetry to bring the words to life.  

“Year 8 have done a brilliant job this year in not only choosing a wide range of speeches from across Shakespeare’s plays, but in showing an audience how they understand the text in a way which essay-writing can never replicate.  

The top three performers were:  

• Param Jani, of Underne House, in first place with Is this a dagger I see before me?  from Macbeth 

• Sai Rushil Manchiraju, of Pearce, the runner-up, with Hamlet’s To be or not to be   

• Kavin Rajan, of Harrisons’, who took third place with Henry V’s Once more into the breach dear friends. 

 “The standard overall was very high,” said Mr Hyland. “Param’s speech from Macbeth was a worthy winner, allowing the audience to see and viscerally feel the conflicting emotions and feelings that Macbeth is experiencing at this point in the play.”  

The top two go through to the regional round in the Spring Term.   

The special English lesson held in RDS also focused on Shakespeare, looking at scene 3 from act 3 of The Tempest, where Ariel (under instruction from Prospero) is creating visions for the royal court. Some members of the court are responsible for deposing Prospero from his Dukedom in Milan before the play starts.

Mr Hyland said: “The focus was on the language of the royal court as it was expressing amazement at natural phenomena, and then on how tableaux could be used to depict the key visual moments of the natural world interacting with humanity (Ariel appearing as a harpy, the vanishing banquet, and so on).

“We subsequently returned to the language, thinking about the delivery of the speech which Ariel gives, and what key or words ideas come to light when presented dramatically.”  

Finally, the studio’s versatility came to the fore for the English National Ballet partnership events. 

First, a screening for 30 Year 9 boys of the ENB’s and choreographer Akram Khan’s award-winning production of the classical ballet, Giselle, was held in RDS. Then, the boys toured the ENB’s design and rehearsal studios in Canning Town, learning about the many jobs associated with ballet and meeting some of the creative team behind Giselle.   

ENB dancers and a musician later came to QE and gave the boys a two-hour contemporary ballet workshop, testing the RDS’s audio equipment to the full. They explored ways of moving, inspired by the plot, characters and choreography of Giselle – and all to live beats and rhythms. The boys gained an insight into the coordination, balance and agility needed in ballet. 

Assistant Head (Pupil Involvement) Crispin Bonham-Carter said: “It was brilliant to see the studio being used flexibly as both a fantastic surround-sound cinema and then, with the seats retracted, a fantastic dance studio!

“Best of all though was the enthusiasm and energy the boys put into their dancing. Who knows – maybe the next Akram Khan has just learnt his first dance steps? 

“Having a dedicated space for performing arts helps facilitate such work, but also provokes staff to seek out new and creative opportunities for the boys.” 

While the country woke up on Friday to news of a Labour landslide in the General Election, at QE the political landscape looks very different, though still with scant consolation for the Conservatives.

In the School’s mock election, the Liberal Democrats emerged as easily the biggest party, with 21 of the 46 seats in QE’s parliament.

However, since he has no overall majority, the Lib Dems’ Ayaad Salahuddin has already struck a deal with Labour’s Shrey Verma, in second place, so that he can form a coalition government.

Headmaster Neil Enright said: “The mock election seeks to build awareness of the democratic process and get pupils engaged with campaigns, debates, polling and voting. My congratulations go to all the candidates for engaging so enthusiastically in the election process and especially to Ayaad on his victory.”

The run-up to the mock election included a hustings, where parties made their pitches and fielded questions from the audience. All the candidates were drawn from Year 12.

The boys have also been informed by visits in recent months of real politicians from all three leading parties. These were: Sir Vince Cable (former Liberal Democrat Leader and Business Secretary in the Coalition Government); Lord Michael Heseltine (former Conservative Deputy Prime Minister and long-serving Cabinet minister), and Labour’s parliamentary candidate (now new Chipping Barnet MP) Dan Tomlinson, following a previous visit from then local MP Theresa Villiers (Conservative).

Whereas in the country at large, the predictions of the exit poll proved quite accurate, at QE the story was very different: pre-election polling suggested the Conservatives would win, comfortably ahead of Labour, with the Liberal Democrats third. The actual result completely reversed this, giving the Lib Dems 21 seats, Labour 13 and the Conservatives only 7.

John Haswell, Acting Head of History & Politics, said: “The Lib Dems at QE ran a very successful social media campaign and built strong support among the younger year groups, where turnout was also higher.”

In fact, turnout among Year 7 was easily the highest, at almost 80%. Only small numbers of Year 11 cast votes, having recently completed their GCSEs, while Year 13 have already left (and no postal votes were available). One seat was allocated for each of the 46 forms in the School, excluding forms in Year 13.

In contrast to the overall School result, Year 12 gave strong backing to independent candidate Ayan Basharat.

The results were:

• Ayaad Salahuddin – Liberal Democrats – 21 seats (45.6%)
• Shrey Verma – Labour – 13 seats (28.3%)
• Uday Dash – Conservatives – 7 seats (15.2%)
• Arjun Mistry – Green Party – 3 seats (6.5%)
• Rohan Varia – Reform Party – 1 seat (2.2%)
• Ayan Basharat – Independent – 1 seat (2.2%)

Two QE sixth-formers won Top Delegate awards at a Model United Nations conference held at the London School of Economics.

Saim Khan and Chanakya Seetharam were part of a nine-strong group from QE’s Year 12 who took part in the three-day debating event, which simulated the activities of the UN.

Crispin Bonham-Carter, Assistant Head (Pupil Involvement), said: “MUN events not only develop students’ skills in debating but also give them a real understanding of international issues and of how the UN works. The LSE-hosted MUN conference is among the most prestigious, attracting leading schools such as Harrow, Eton and City of London.

“Our party threw themselves into the three days wholeheartedly, playing a full part in the debates and in the social events that were arranged. My congratulations go to Saim and Chanakya for their awards.”

The QE delegates were split among the various committees, including the Security Council. They debated a wide range of topics, including both current conflicts and those of the past, such as the 1956-1957 Suez Crisis.

Saim, a Senior Vice-Captain at QE, later reflected on his experience: “MUN is always an amazing opportunity – as a delegate you become solely a vessel for the opinions of your country, no matter how much they may be at odds with your own personal beliefs. It teaches you the ever-valuable virtues of negotiation and compromise. With other delegates always on the prowl to try and score a hit for themselves at the expense of you and your country, the conference is a true test of wits and cunning!

“Our successes over the weekend included finding a workable, holistic and balanced solution to end decades of ethnic tension and conflict in the Nagorno-Karabakh region in the UNSC, the triumphing of the Egyptian cabinet in the Suez canal crisis (putting an end to Britain’s imperialistic goals), and the liberation of Argentina from its neofascist military regime.”

Saim relished his own role representing Malta (“not necessarily the world’s most geopolitically dominant nation”) at MUN.  “Whilst I had to work much harder to establish my initial credibility and convince other delegates that the Maltese were even worth listening to, by the end of the three days I can confidently say that Malta had become the leader of the free world.”

Chanakya won his award for his work as a ICC Justice at the International Criminal Court. “I loved being able to engage with real issues of international law with people who shared my interest,” he said.

Koustuv Bhomwick found himself at the centre of the Suez Crisis debate, representing the then-Egyptian President Gamal Nasser – “an exhilarating experience!” he said. “

In addition to the debates, the delegates enjoyed a ball hosted by the LSE’s own MUN organisation, as well as campus tours and outreach events hosted by LSE staff.

Kanusan Naveedran said: “We were provided with insightful knowledge into LSE student life.” Zaki Mustafa added that the ball was “an excellent social opportunity”.

While the group were disappointed to miss out on the award for best medium-sized delegation (which went to Eton), they were, said Uday Dash, “extremely grateful to the conference for providing us with a platform to discuss real socio-economic and political matters that drastically affect our world today”.

QE also recently enjoyed team success in South Hampstead High School’s Spring Debate Competition. With delegates drawn from Year 8 to 12, three of the four QE teams won three out of four debates, while one senior team – again comprising Year12’s Uday Dash, as well as Year 10’s Rithwik Gururaj and Orko Ghosh – swept all before them to win overall.

Victory went to the School in this year’s Dinner Debate – the Elizabethan Union’s historic showpiece event.

Combining formal elements with a relaxed atmosphere and plenty of high-calibre debating, the 57th Annual Elizabethan Union Debate saw Year 13 gather in good spirits, enjoying the opportunity to socialise in a different context away from their normal day-to-day routine.

Year 13’s Anish Kumar and Shubh Rathod proposed the motion, This House believes governments are more responsible for climate change than citizens. They were opposed by Old Elizabethans Siddhant Kansal and Mark Markov (both 2015–2022).

Headmaster Neil Enright said: “The Dinner Debate is an event that intentionally bridges the gap from school to university. It blends the formality of black-tie dress, toasts and a traditional Extended Mace debating format with a relaxed atmosphere where the focus is primarily on enjoyment.”

The Elizabethan Union, QE’s debating society, is currently thriving, with debaters enjoying considerable success.

Proposing the toast to the Union, Siddhant Kansal (who was School Captain in 2021) reflected on his time at QE. Regaling his audience with a few anecdotes from his own Sixth Form experience, he also highlighted all the opportunities that were on offer within and beyond the classroom. Whilst QE can occasionally push you hard, it is all worth it and a time you will look back on fondly with great memories, he told the sixth-formers. Siddhant added that QE really does prepare you well for life at university, thanking staff for both pushing him and supporting him.

The debate itself was wide-ranging and packed with content. It was ultimately a victory for the proposition, but by a relatively narrow margin (45% to 37%, with 18% abstaining).

For the School, Anish and Shubh argued that governments have much greater ability to tackle climate change than citizens and should take responsibility for doing so. The role of governments is to protect their citizens, and they are failing in that task if they do not take more significant action. They stressed the importance of government regulation, and gave examples of how quickly action can be taken when there is determination to do so.

The opposition argued that the ability of governments is actually more limited and that big multi-national companies frequently have more influence and impact (and often more wealth). They spoke, therefore, about the power citizens have as consumers in a globalised, largely capitalist, world. Individuals can make choices about what they buy and from where. Mark stated that this power extended to what people eat: he stressed the significant impact of meat-eating on global emissions. The collective impact from these decisions could be profound. The alumni pair also highlighted the power of electorates to put into office people who care about the environment, and said that democratic participation is therefore crucial. They emphasised that, importantly, people do have agency – including everyone who had gathered in the Main School Hall for the debate.

However, the proposition pair noted that much of the world – including many of the largest polluters and contributors to climate change – is not governed democratically. People in those countries have no, or limited, choice in terms of the shape of their government. They argued that it is these governments, rather than their citizens, that have the wrong priorities and are choosing to promote projects and policies that worsen rather than lessen climate change, such as mega-building projects in the Middle East. There was discussion of the US Presidential Election and its potential consequences for climate action, and of the USA’s commitment to the Paris Climate accord.

The floor debate was finely balanced.

• Click on the thumbnails below to view the photos.