Macbeth Debates
English II Honors
Introduction:
There are many aspects of Shakespeare’s play that present many unanswered questions, some of which
scholars have argued over for years. Many directors have presented theatregoers with various interpretations
because of the many possibilities. This is, in part, what keeps Shakespeare so fresh and exciting. You must
keep in mind there are no definitive answers to these questions. However, you must be able to justify your
views. A good verbal argument can be most gratifying.
Each group will have its responsibilities for making the debates work and be enjoyable for all. You
should select your area of study based on your interest, not your friends’.
Each member of a group involved in litigation must help in the preparation of documentation, for all
arguments must be supported. Each person must participate in the presentation by presenting arguments,
answering questions from the other groups or the judges, or asking questions of the other groups. Once
completed, members must write a reflection and follow-up analysis.
Each judge must write two responses. The first is to be handed in before the debates begin. It is to
present your views on the questions at hand and why you have these positions. The second response is due after
the debates have been presented. This paper must contain your decisions on who won the debates and why
(there does not need to be consensus). You must include the specific arguments that influenced your thinking.
Roles:
Group A Macbeth is responsible for his own downfall. (free will)
Group B Lady Macbeth is responsible for Macbeth’s downfall. (outside forces)
Group C The three witches are responsible for Macbeth’s downfall. (fate)
Group D Macbeth is responsible for Lady Macbeth’s demise. (outside forces)
Group E Lady Macbeth is responsible for her own demise. (free will)
Judges
Procedure:
Day One: Preparation.
Groups A-E: Brainstorm on your own reasons to support/refute your topic. Then, with your group
begin to compile an argument that supports your topic using specific evidence from the text and logical
reasoning. Anticipate what the other groups might say to defraud your argument and prepare counter
evidence. Assign roles and parts as each member of the group must participate.
Judges: Brainstorm your own reactions to the questions: Who is responsible for Macbeth’s downfall
and why? Who is responsible for Lady Macbeth’s downfall and why? Find specific textual evidence to
support your ideas. Begin to think of questions to ask each group regarding their assigned topic.
Day Two: Present A-C
Group A
C-X by B & C
Group B
C-X by A & C
Group C
C-X by A & B
Prep for rebuttal
Rebuttals
Judges
8 minutes constructive argument
3 minutes each group
8 minutes constructive argument
3 minutes each group
8 minutes constructive argument
3 minutes each group
3 minutes
3 minutes each group
10 minutes questioning time
Day Three: Present D-E
Group D
C-X by E
Group E
C-X by D
Prep for rebuttal
Rebuttals
Judges
8 minutes constructive argument
3 minutes each group
8 minutes constructive argument
3 minutes each group
3 minutes
3 minutes each group
10 minutes questioning time
During C-X—When you are cross examining, you may only ask questions. While you are being cross
examined, you may only answer questions.
During rebuttals you may NOT bring up new arguments for your position, but you may bring up new evidence
to support a previously made argument.
This is worth 100 points each and will serve as your assessment for Macbeth.
Macbeth Debates
Litigants
Novice
Generally
paraphrased from
the text
Apprentice
A few specific
quotes from the
text
Practitioner
Accurately chosen
quotes from the
text
Notes (will be
collected)
Arguments
1-2 pages of notes
3-4 pages of notes
5-6 pages of notes
Based solely on
minimal
knowledge of play
(ex. plot only)
Based solely on a
good
understanding of
play (ex.
characterization)
Logic and
reasoning
Argument relies
solely on weak
evidence or
personal opinion
Argument relies
solely on good
evidence
Use of time by
group
C-X
Less than four
minutes
No valid
questions/ uses
time to plead
group’s case
4-6 minutes
Based on a strong
understanding of
the play,
Shakespeare’s
intent and
considered,
response &
analysis
Arguments
demonstrated solid
evidence
combined with
strong reasoning
6-7 minutes
Follow-up
analysis
None
Sources
A couple of
questions that
don’t seem to have
real purpose or
focuse information
acquired that is not
used in rebuttal
One paragraph of
individual
reflection
Valid questions
with focus
answers acquired
to set up for
rebuttal
One page paper
assessing the
strengths and
weaknesses of the
group’s
performance
Expert
Precise and
accurate quotes +
1 documented,
academic, &
critical source
6+ pages of notes
Based on a
thorough
understanding of
the play,
Shakespeare’s
intent and
persuasive
analysis
Arguments use
both quality
evidence and
strong reasoning
Uses all of the
time effectively
Logical setup of
questions and
answers acquired
provide
ammunition for
rebuttal
Two page paper
analyzing the
strengths and
weaknesses of all
the groups in your
debate
Macbeth Debates
Judges
Novice
Generally
paraphrased from
the text
Apprentice
A few specific
quotes from the
text
First reflection
paper (due the
first day of
presentations,
should address
both Macbeth and
Lady Macbeth’s
downfall)
C-X questioning
Based solely on
opinion
1-2 paragraphs,
Based on opinion
and a couple of
specific references
for support
No questions
A couple of vague
questions
Second reflection
paper (due the
next class after
presentations,
should address
both days of
debate)
Shows no real
understanding of
the litigation
presented
1-2 paragraphs,
Shows some
understanding of
the litigants’
arguments
Sources
Practitioner
Accurately chosen
quotes from the
text
Expert
Precise and
accurate quotes +
1 documented,
academic, &
critical source
1.5 pages, Based
2 + pages Based
on evidence and
on evidence and
some reasoning, in reasoning for each
text citations used argument,
demonstrates
original analysis,
in text citations
used
3 logical questions 4+ logical
which show
questions which
insights into the
show insights into
play and into
the play and
litigants’
litigants’
presentations
presentations
1/5 pages, Shows
2+ pages, Shows
insight into the
clear insights into
litigants’
the litigants’
arguments and the arguments, the
play’s possible
play’s possible
intents specific
intents delivering
references given
a specific and
persuasive
conclusion,
specific in text
references given