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