Sign Up        Login

Sign Up 

Symbai Ai Logo - the future of critical thinking education

PracticeSpace

Pilot briefing for NZ secondary schools

Give students more debates — without giving teachers another programme to organise.

PracticeSpace is a closed, school-approved network for regular prepared and impromptu online debates. Students RSVP when available; we handle suitable matching, balanced teams, online rooms, AI-assisted adjudication and individual written feedback.

Schools approve participants and retain visibility, without needing to organise or attend every debate.

Closed, approved network

Students join only through participating schools or approved education partners, with parent or caregiver permission.

Suitable peer matching

Students debate appropriate peers from participating New Zealand schools and partner programmes.

Two weekly programmes

Prepared and impromptu debate windows at predictable times; students RSVP when available.

Simple school oversight

Schools approve students, review participation and feedback, and are contacted when input is needed.

Why PracticeSpace

More practice should not mean more admin.

PracticeSpace gives interested students more opportunities to debate, even when one school cannot field a complete team.

1

Debate without fielding a full team

Students RSVP according to weekly availability. PracticeSpace can form suitable mixed-school teams so more students receive opportunities.

2

Feedback after every debate

AI-assisted adjudication and individual written feedback create a visible record of participation, strengths and improvement.

3

Grow without extra rostering

One annual membership covers approved students, with no new invoice for each student and no per-debate charge.

Student experience

Two regular ways for students to debate

Students may join either programme — or both — according to their interests and weekly availability.

Prepared 3v3 debates

Prepare

A motion and resources are released for preparation during the week.

Debate

Students join a rostered 3v3 prepared online debate.

Improve

Every debate receives adjudication and individual written feedback.

Impromptu 2v2 debates

RSVP

Students opt in when they are available.

Debate

Students receive a short-prep motion and join a rostered 2v2 debate.

Improve

Every debate receives adjudication and individual written feedback.

TWO REGULAR PROGRAMMES. ONE SIMPLE STUDENT EXPERIENCE. RSVP. SHOW UP. DEBATE. IMPROVE.
What we handle

The debating behind the scenes is handled.

Student RSVPs
Suitable team formation
Cross-school rostering
Online debate rooms
Adjudication and feedback
Attendance and issue escalation

PracticeSpace coordinates matching, rooms, adjudication and operational issues, so schools do not need to organise each debate themselves.

School role

School oversight stays simple

Schools only need to

  • Approve participating students and confirm parent or caregiver permission
  • Maintain an appropriate school contact
  • Respond if an issue involving one of their students requires school input

Optional for coaches

Observe debates

Review student feedback

Join coach or club-leader professional development

Use included Symbai Coach tools for school-run debates

Teachers do not need to attend each debate.
New Zealand grounded

Built on Symbai. Shaped by New Zealand debate expertise.

Existing Symbai technology

Symbai’s AI adjudication and written-feedback system already exists. PracticeSpace extends it into a managed network for participating schools.

NZ debate expertise

The adjudication framework has been shaped by Sharuka Wikramanayake, a former coach of the New Zealand National Schools Debating Team.

School-grounded operations

The permissions, rostering and oversight model has been developed by Connor McFadyen, an experienced New Zealand secondary-school Debate TIC.

Annual membership also includes Symbai Coach tools for AI adjudication and feedback in internal school-club debates.

Indicative 2027 membership

Unlock your school’s full debating potential.

Most platforms charge you more as your club grows. PracticeSpace gives you an all-inclusive annual membership so every student who wants to debate can take part.

Starter
$1,200 per year

For smaller programmes and lower expected network usage.

Growth
$3,200 per year

For established programmes with moderate expected network usage.

Flagship
$6,000 per year

For large programmes expected to generate substantial participation.

Schools may fund membership centrally, recover some or all of the cost through a student contribution, or use a blended model. Payment may be upfront or through four instalments. Prices are indicative for 2027.

Low-risk entry

A fair path from interest to participation

Invited schools begin with evidence, experience the programme, then decide.

1

Review your school profile

Your personalised report provides a starting view of programme scale and the likely PracticeSpace fit.

2

Run the school-specific EOI

The EOI link in your report gathers likely participation, availability, year level and experience.

3

Receive an indicative offer

PracticeSpace combines EOI responses, school context, programme data and TIC feedback.

4

Experience the Foundation Programme

The optional $300 Term 4 programme supports onboarding, showcase debates, feedback and planning for 2027.

Coming from your school report?

IMPORTANT NEXT STEP

Return to the debate report tab you opened earlier and launch the student EOI from there. Please use this school-specific EOI—not a separate Google Form—so Symbai can accurately track demand and determine whether the network has reached the participation threshold needed to proceed.

For NZ schools

Give interested students a way to debate more often.

Discuss your school’s programme, likely student demand and the low-risk Foundation pathway directly with Connor.

Book a PracticeSpace conversation
Explore Symbai Coach free

Are you a student or parent? Ask your school’s Debate TIC or club leader to register interest. PracticeSpace access is provided through participating schools and approved education partners.

Pilot information for New Zealand schools. Programme details and indicative 2027 pricing may be refined following the Term 4 Foundation Programme.

Questions schools ask

PracticeSpace FAQ

Who can participate?

Currently, PracticeSpace is for approved New Zealand secondary-school students who join through a participating school or approved education partner.

Can a student sign up independently?

No. PracticeSpace is a closed, provider-approved network and does not offer open public matching. A school or approved partner must approve access and confirm permission.

Does our school need to field a complete team?

No. Students RSVP according to availability, and PracticeSpace can form suitable mixed-school teams where matching and capacity allow.

Do teachers need to attend every debate?

No. Schools approve students, maintain an appropriate contact and respond if school input is required. Coaches may observe debates and review feedback if they choose.

Is a debate place guaranteed every week?

No. Individual places depend on student RSVPs, suitable matching, participation demand and available network capacity.

What feedback do students receive?

Every completed debate receives AI-assisted adjudication and individual written feedback, creating a visible record of strengths and areas for improvement.

How does our school begin?

Use the student EOI link in your personalised school report or book a conversation with PracticeSpace. There is no purchase commitment to run the EOI.

The Two Most Effective Ways to Improve Critical Thinking

Unified in Symbai

Debating

Hundreds of thousands of students across 60 countries choose to spend their free time in formal debating competitions because it improves their critical thinking skills. 

Formal debating improves:

  • Dynamic reasoning — adapting ideas under pressure

  • Strategic thought — anticipating and countering objections

  • Cognitive discipline — structuring arguments with clarity and purpose

Increases Critical Thinking By Up To 50%

Competitive debate produces greater critical thinking improvement than argumentation courses.
Allen et al. measured the improvement using the Watson–Glaser critical-thinking test — a gold-standard assessment of inference, deduction, and evaluation skills.”
Source

8.6% Critical Thinking Gains In Just 3 Weeks

Students who participated in debate competition showed statistically significant improvements in critical thinking scores after just three weeks.
An 8.6% improvement in critical thinking is the cognitive equivalent of dropping your resting heart rate from 70 to 64 BPM. That's not learning facts or techniques — that's developing lasting cognitive fitness.
Source

9 in 10 former debaters go on to earn at least one advanced degree.

Of 703 National Debate Tournament alumni, over 90% held a graduate or professional degree, and many held multiple advanced degrees.
Of the 703 former NDT debaters; 40% earned master’s degrees (MA, MSc, MBA, MEd, etc.), 20% earned doctoral degrees (PhD, MD, EdD) and many held multiple advanced or professional degrees.
Source
Argument Mapping

Argument mapping has been around for hundreds of years, used by philosophers, scientists, and modern critical-thinking educators to make critical thinking clearer by drawing it out.
 And for good reason: when done well, argument mapping is one of the most effective ways to improve critical thinking and develop sharper logical reasoning.

Argument mapping helps you:

  • Clarify reasoning by revealing the actual structure of your thinking
  • Expose weak links that get lost in normal prose
  • Build precision through visual logic rather than persuasive writing tricks
A simple argument map diagram showing a “Main Claim” at the top supported by a “Reason” and “Evidence,” along with an “Objection” connected to a counter-reason, illustrating the structure of logical argumentation.

Improves Critical Thinking Courses By Over 300%

Critical thinking courses that used argument mapping software saw students improve their critical thinking over 300% more than similar critical thinking courses.
Compared a standard logic class to one using argument mapping software. The mapping group made dramatically greater gains on a standardized critical thinking test, far exceeding typical semester improvements.
Source

One Semester Of Argument Mapping Produces 6-7x MORE Critical Thinking Gains Than One Semester Of Normal University Study

Semester-long CT courses using digital argument mapping consistently produced effect sizes of 0.7-0.85 on standardized critical thinking tests. By comparison, a typical university semester yields just 0.11
Source

9% Critical Thinking Gains In Just Weeks

Five weeks of an argument mapping-led course resulted in an average critical thinking gain of 9%
These gains were achieved with minimal explicit critical thinking teaching. The gains came from interactions with other students within argument mapping software.
Source

 

Debating develops the habits that critical thinking courses try to teach:

  • Dynamic reasoning — adapting ideas under pressure

  • Strategic thought — anticipating and countering objections

  • Cognitive discipline — structuring arguments with clarity and purpose

Increases Critical Thinking By Up To 50%

Competitive debate produces greater critical thinking improvement than argumentation courses.
Allen et al. measured the improvement using the Watson–Glaser critical-thinking test — a gold-standard assessment of inference, deduction, and evaluation skills.”
Source

8.6% Critical Thinking Gains In Just 3 Weeks

Students who participated in debate competition showed statistically significant improvements in critical thinking scores after just three weeks.
An 8.6% improvement in critical thinking is the cognitive equivalent of dropping your resting heart rate from 70 to 64 BPM. That's not learning facts or techniques — that's developing lasting cognitive fitness.
Source

9 in 10 former debaters go on to earn at least one advanced degree.

Of 703 National Debate Tournament alumni, over 90% held a graduate or professional degree, and many held multiple advanced degrees.
Of the 703 former NDT debaters; 40% earned master’s degrees (MA, MSc, MBA, MEd, etc.), 20% earned doctoral degrees (PhD, MD, EdD) and many held multiple advanced or professional degrees.
Source

If debating is the clash of ideas, argument mapping is the architecture that makes clear thinking possible.
 It’s the practice of breaking critical thinking into smaller parts — claims, evidence, objections, and assumptions — and arranging them so the logic becomes visible.

Argument mapping has been around for hundreds of years, used by philosophers, scientists, and modern critical-thinking educators to make critical thinking clearer by drawing it out.
 And for good reason: when done well, argument mapping is one of the most effective ways to improve critical thinking and develop sharper logical reasoning.

Argument mapping helps you:

  • Clarify reasoning by revealing the actual structure of your thinking

     

  • Expose weak links that get lost in normal prose

     

  • Build precision through visual logic rather than persuasive writing tricks

     

These benefits make it a powerful method for anyone looking to enhance critical thinking skills, improve decision-making, or analyze arguments more effectively.

But traditional argument mapping has limits:

  • Pen and paper mapping is slow and quickly becomes cluttered
  • Digital mapping tools speed things up but remain static
  • And because the map never talks back, even skilled thinkers can hit writer’s block when faced with a silent diagram