Abstract
Purpose. The purpose of this study was to identify how those debaters who advance to the highest levels of competition at the World Universities Debate Championship identify and fill gaps in their declarative knowledge base, and to determine what role coaches play in this process. Methodology. This study used qualitative interviews to explore the following questions: 1. What role do leaders, such as coaches or mentors, play in debaters' research process? 2. How do debaters who make it past the preliminary rounds at the World Universities Debate Championship identify gaps in their knowledge? 3. What study behaviors and skills do debaters who make it past the preliminary rounds at the World Universities Debate Championship exhibit? Findings. A total of 11 themes emerged that answered the research questions and interview questions. Some themes provided insight to multiple research questions: (a) absence of formal coaching; (b) discussion, interaction, and receiving and giving support among peers and veterans stood in for formal coaching; (c) perceived lack of mentorship behaviors; (d) absence of formal research practices; (e) motivated to learn by innate curiosity; (f) importance of a wide knowledge base; (g) strategies for identifying knowledge gaps; (h) recurring and useful sources; (i) emancipation from case files; (j) vetting material for use in debate rounds; and (k) debaters look up to other debaters. Conclusions. Much of debater behavior is incongruent with self-directed learning theory; however, there is some overlap. Recommendations. Research should investigate how learners emancipate when there is no guidance from leaders. It should be discovered whether people with certain interests, inclinations, and curiosities seek out debate; if individuals who join debate adopt interests, inclinations, and curiosities; or if some combination of the two occurs. Self-directed learning theory's scope needs expanding to look at learners' postemancipation behavior. More should be done to understand the effectiveness of using interaction to vet information and learning strategies. Research should determine how media credibility is evaluated by successful debaters. More research should be done on motivations to participate in learning for debate. There is an opportunity to discover how leadership emerges and is distributed in student-run debate unions.