Presentation is loading. Please wait.

Presentation is loading. Please wait.

Cross Examination (CX) Debate Overview. Affirmative Case Structure Topicality Topicality Founded on Definitions Founded on Definitions Significance Significance.

Similar presentations


Presentation on theme: "Cross Examination (CX) Debate Overview. Affirmative Case Structure Topicality Topicality Founded on Definitions Founded on Definitions Significance Significance."— Presentation transcript:

1 Cross Examination (CX) Debate Overview

2 Affirmative Case Structure Topicality Topicality Founded on Definitions Founded on Definitions Significance Significance Walls (Harms) frame the issue Walls (Harms) frame the issue Plan/Solvency Plan/Solvency Covers all harms Covers all harms Inherency Inherency Inherent Barrier Inherent Barrier Advantages Advantages Extras (bonus benefits) Extras (bonus benefits)

3 CX Debate CX Debate Topicality

4 Review Affirmative Case Structure Affirmative Case Structure Topicality Topicality Significance Significance Inherency Inherency Solvency Solvency Advantages Advantages

5 Topicality Resolved: Resolved: The United States federal government should substantially increase alternative energy incentives in the United States. Define Define each word Have Have definitions and standards for all terms

6 Example

7 Set a Standard Types Of Standards Types Of Standards Legal definitions Legal definitions Bright line Bright line Framer’s intent Framer’s intent Each word has a meaning Each word has a meaning Make sure you have standards to support

8 Check Your Sources Possible Dictionaries Black ‘s Law Dictionary Words and Phrases Webster’s New World On-line Dictionaries Webster’s New Collegiate STAY AWAY FROM WIKIPEDIA

9 Run To Government Documents Government documents may prove each word has meaning Example: PUBLIC HEALTH ASSISTANCE

10 Apply To Case MAKE MAKE SURE YOUR DEFINITIONS FIT YOUR CASE BECAUSE THE NEGATIVE TEAM WILL PRESENT COUNTER DEFINTIONS

11 Questions ?

12 CX Debate CX Debate Significance

13 Review Affirmative Case Structure Affirmative Case Structure Topicality Topicality Significance Significance Inherency Inherency Solvency Solvency Advantages Advantages

14 Significance Answers the Question: Answers the Question: “What is the Harm in the Status Quo?” “What is the Harm in the Status Quo?” Status Quo Status Quo “The current situation, the problem that the topic is seeking to repair” “The current situation, the problem that the topic is seeking to repair” “The way things are now.” “The way things are now.” (Debating Policies, p. 43) (Debating Policies, p. 43)

15 Significance Harms are: Harms are: Claims about what in the status quo is bad Claims about what in the status quo is bad Quantifiable or Unquantifiable: Quantifiable or Unquantifiable: Quantifiable: Perhaps 50 million people are currently malnourished. Quantifiable: Perhaps 50 million people are currently malnourished. Unquantifiable : Loss of freedom or unethical corporate behavior Unquantifiable : Loss of freedom or unethical corporate behavior Both quantifiable and unquantifiable harms are strong. Both quantifiable and unquantifiable harms are strong.

16 Significance Harm 1 - Title Harm 1 - Title Subpoint A) – Tag Line Subpoint A) – Tag Line Citation Citation Evidence (i.e., “Card”) Evidence (i.e., “Card”) Subpoint B) – Tag Line Subpoint B) – Tag Line Citation Citation Evidence (i.e., “Card”) Evidence (i.e., “Card”) Subpoint C) – Tag Line Subpoint C) – Tag Line Citation Citation Evidence (i.e., “Card”) Evidence (i.e., “Card”) Tag Line 5-7 Word to Summary Citation Author [Title] OR Organization Date URL (if applicable) Rules of Evidence Whole sentences Underline key sentances

17 Example

18 CX Debate CX Debate Inherency

19 Review Affirmative Case Structure Affirmative Case Structure Topicality Topicality Significance Significance Inherency Inherency Solvency Solvency Advantages Advantages

20 Inherency Answers the Question: Answers the Question: “What’s preventing your plan from happening today (i.e. in the status quo)?” “What’s preventing your plan from happening today (i.e. in the status quo)?” Claim that the status quo will not be changed Claim that the status quo will not be changed As a result, harms will continue indefinitely As a result, harms will continue indefinitely

21 Inherency Inherency – Title Inherency – Title Tag line Tag line Citation Citation Evidence Evidence Tag line Tag line Citation Citation Evidence Evidence 1 to 2 cards 1 to 2 cards Types of Inherency Structural What is preventing your plan …. Attitudinal Who is preventing your plan … Existential No Infrastructure exists to solbe

22 Example

23 CX Debate CX Debate Solvency

24 Review Affirmative Case Structure Affirmative Case Structure Topicality Topicality Significance Significance Inherency Inherency Solvency Solvency Advantages Advantages

25 The Plan Is your proposed course of action to solve for the harms. Is your proposed course of action to solve for the harms. Written in your own words. Written in your own words. Should be simple, straightforward, and take you 30 seconds or so to read. Should be simple, straightforward, and take you 30 seconds or so to read.

26 The Plan Structure: Structure: Plank 1) Agent of Change Plank 1) Agent of Change What agency will make the change? What agency will make the change? Plank 2) Plank 2) What steps must go into implementing this change What steps must go into implementing this change Legislative changes Legislative changes Judicial decisions Judicial decisions Executive agencies/ policy changes Executive agencies/ policy changes

27 The Plan Structure: Structure: Plank XX) Funding Plank XX) Funding Where exactly is the money coming from Where exactly is the money coming from Normal means Normal means Funding source – have evidence on how much and from where Funding source – have evidence on how much and from where Anticipate DAs Anticipate DAs

28 The Plan Structure: Structure: Planks XX) Enforcement Planks XX) Enforcement What agency will implement/enforce this change? What agency will implement/enforce this change? Normal means Normal means Executive department Executive department “All speeches serve to clarify legislative intent” “All speeches serve to clarify legislative intent”

29 Example

30 Solvency The argument that your plan would work. The argument that your plan would work. Responds to questions such as: Responds to questions such as: Will the funding for the plan work out? Will the funding for the plan work out? Will the funding be sufficient? Will the funding be sufficient? Will it solve the harms? Will it solve the harms?

31 Solvency Where the rubber meets the road Where the rubber meets the road Plan-Meets-Need Plan-Meets-Need Does the plan solve for all harms? Does the plan solve for all harms? Does the plan remove the Inherent Barrier Does the plan remove the Inherent Barrier Beyond solvency for the problems, does plan have any other net benefits/harms? Beyond solvency for the problems, does plan have any other net benefits/harms? Plan benefits = Advantages Plan benefits = Advantages Plan harms = Disadvantages Plan harms = Disadvantages Learn to anticipate likely Neg. DAs Learn to anticipate likely Neg. DAs

32 Example

33 CX Debate CX Debate Advantages

34 Review Affirmative Case Structure Affirmative Case Structure Topicality Topicality Significance Significance Inherency Inherency Solvency Solvency Advantages Advantages

35 Advantages Link to plan Link to plan A plank of the plan would result in Advantage A plank of the plan would result in Advantage Not extra-topical Not extra-topical Stay within resolution Stay within resolution Evidence based Evidence based Not solvency/Unique advantages Not solvency/Unique advantages (i.e. economic, efficiency, advances) (i.e. economic, efficiency, advances) Have impacts (importance) Have impacts (importance) Be able to weigh versus disadvantages (DAs) Be able to weigh versus disadvantages (DAs)

36 Advantage Example

37 CX Debate Final Case Requirements

38 Final Case Requirements Requirements Definitions Definitions Harm 1 Harm 1 Harm 2 Harm 2 Harm 3 Harm 3 Inherency Inherency Plan Plan Solvency Solvency Advantage 1 Advantage 1 Advantage 2 Advantage 2 8:00 min. total In page protectors in ½” black binder Time markers printed on bottom of each page 2 Test Grades: Text Time


Download ppt "Cross Examination (CX) Debate Overview. Affirmative Case Structure Topicality Topicality Founded on Definitions Founded on Definitions Significance Significance."

Similar presentations


Ads by Google