The Structure of a Debate Constructive Speeches 1AC: 8 Minutes Cross-Examined by 2NC: 3 Minutes 1NC: 8 Minutes Cross-Examined by 1AC: 3 Minutes 2AC: 8.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
A Firm Foundation: CX Debate Basics (Part I) A N INTRODUCTION TO P OLICY D EBATE - The Minnesota Urban Debate League -
Advertisements

Team Policy Debate Orientation. Volunteers make it Happen! 2 We can’t do this without you. You are making an investment. You are performing a teaching.
Stoa Debate Judges Orientation. Volunteers make it Happen! 2 YOU are here for a very special purpose YOU are making an investment in the future YOU assist.
POLICY DEBATE An Introduction by Rich Edwards Baylor University.
POLICY DEBATE Cross-Examination (CX). POLICY DEBATE  Purpose of policy debate is to compare policies and decide which is best  Affirmative: Supports.
Anatomy of a debate Austin Layton.
Debate Judges Orientation. Volunteers make it Happen! 2 We can’t do this without you. YOU are making an investment. YOU are performing a teaching role.
The Structure of a Debate Constructive Speeches 1AC: 8 Minutes Cross-Examined by 2NC: 3 Minutes 1NC: 8 Minutes Cross-Examined by 1AC: 3 Minutes 2AC: 8.
The Structure of a Debate Constructive Speeches 1AC: 8 Minutes Cross-Examined by 2NC: 3 Minutes 1NC: 8 Minutes Cross-Examined by 1AC: 3 Minutes 2AC: 8.
AUDL Middle School Debate Team Tournament Handbook Debate Tournament Schedule Arrive at tournament & wait in cafeteria. Round 1 Round 2 Lunch Break in.
What is Debate? A debater’s guide to the argumentative universe…
Lincoln-Douglas Debate An Examination of Values. OBJECTIVES: The student will 1. Demonstrate understanding of the concepts that underlie Lincoln-Douglas.
Debate I: Basics & Formats
Introduction to Debate -Affirmative- To access audio: Skype: freeconferencecallhd and enter # Or call and enter # © L.
Team Policy Debate Orientation
Lincoln Douglas Value Debate Orientation. Volunteers Make it Happen! 2 We can’t do this without you. You are making an investment. You are performing.
Most important things Keep your personal views outside the room Debaters must adapt to you Be honest about your judging experience.
Debate Terminology Words every debater needs to know!
ORDER AND PURPOSE OF THE SPEECHES
FLOWING RONALD BRATT CAPITOL DEBATE
Three Different Debates Cross Examination or Policy (team) Focus is on depth of research, 1 topic/ year, governmental policy. Topic : Resolved:
Lincoln - Douglas Debate. History… Abraham Lincoln Vs Stephen Douglas Topic: – Slavery Douglas: Citizens should decide for themselves Honest Abe: Slavery.
LINCOLN DOUGLAS DEBATE. Table of Contents  What is it  LD Debate Structure  Terms to Know  Constructive Arguments  Affirmative  Negative  Cross.
Getting Started in CX Debate Julian Erdmann. What is CX debate? Team debate made up by two students from the same school. They will defend either Affirmative.
AN INTRODUCTION COMPETITION DEBATES. DEBATE Debate is essentially the art of arguing a point, policy or proposition of value. When participating in a.
Introduction to Policy Debate The Forensics Files.
Team Policy Debate Orientation. Volunteers make it Happen! 2 We can’t do this without you. You are making an investment. You are performing a teaching.
Debate The Essentials Ariail, Robert. “Let the Debates Begin.” 18 Aug orig. published in The State, South Carolina. 26 Sept
Debate Ch. 18 Group One.
Individual Policy Debate Orientation. Volunteers Make it Happen! 2 We can’t do this without you. You are making an investment. You are performing a teaching.
Lincoln-Douglas Debate. Resolutions: The resolution is a statement with which one contestant must agree (affirm) and the other contestant must disagree.
Judging Policy Debate Rich Edwards & Russell Kirkscey June 2015.
Hays Watson Head Debate Coach UGA.  It is the counterpoint to the Affirmative – instead of Affirming a particular course of action (i.e. the resolution),
Basic Structure of a Round. a) Before the Round Pre-flowed arguments.
Lincoln Douglas Debate Orientation
Affirmative vs. negative
Debate Orientation.
Team Policy Debate Orientation
Introduction to the Negative
Policy Debate Speaker Duties
LD Debate Study Information
Types of Debate Lincoln/Douglas Public Forum Policy
Debate I: Basics & Formats
Team Policy Debate Orientation
Lincoln Douglas Debate Orientation
Lincoln Douglas Debate Orientation
Debate Judges Orientation
Lincoln Douglas Debate
Analyze a problem Conduct research Utilize principles of argumentation
ORDER AND PURPOSE OF THE SPEECHES
Debate Orientation.
Debate Orientation.
Debate: The Basics.
Lincoln Douglas Debate Orientation
Debate Orientation.
Lincoln Douglas Debate Orientation
POLICY DEBATE An Introduction by Rich Edwards Baylor University.
ORDER AND PURPOSE OF POLICY SPEECHES
Team Policy Debate Orientation
Team Policy Debate Orientation
Informative, Persuasive, and Impromptu Speaking all rolled into one!
POLICY DEBATE An Introduction by Rich Edwards Baylor University.
Team Policy Debate Orientation
Lincoln Douglas Debate Orientation
Team Policy Debate Orientation
Lincoln Douglas Debate Orientation
A Firm Foundation: CX Debate Basics (Part I)
Building Affirmative Case Template
Getting To Know Debate:
Team Policy Debate Orientation
Presentation transcript:

The Structure of a Debate Constructive Speeches 1AC: 8 Minutes Cross-Examined by 2NC: 3 Minutes 1NC: 8 Minutes Cross-Examined by 1AC: 3 Minutes 2AC: 8 Minutes Cross-Examined by 1NC: 3 Minutes 2NC: 8 Minutes Cross-Examined by 2AC: 3 Minutes Rebuttal Speeches 1NR: 5 Minutes 1AR: 5 Minutes 2NR: 5 Minutes 2AR: 5 Minutes

The Stock Issues Topicality: Is it germane? Harm: Is there a significant problem? Inherency: What is causing the problem? Solvency: Can the problem be solved? Disadvantage: Will the solution create more serious problems than the ones it resolves?

Constructive Speaker Burdens 1AC: Present a “Prima Facie” Case Harm, Inherency, Solvency, Plan 1NC: Present the Negative Attack Traditionally attacked the 1AC More recently: Topicality, Disads, Case 2AC: Re-Defends Against 1NC Follows 1NC point-by-point 2NC: Answer 2AC positions Divide positions with the 1NR (division of labor)

Rebuttal Speaker Burdens No new arguments in rebuttal (new evidence OK) 1NR: Answer remaining 2AC arguments 1AR: Answer all 2NC & 1NR arguments 2NR: Extend winning negative arguments 2AR: Answer all remaining negative arguments & claim all affirmative positions that are no longer contested

Cross Examination The speaker completing the constructive speech remains at the podium for questions Both questioner and respondent face the judge The questioner controls the cross examination period What to ask? Set up arguments for later speeches Use all of your time (it’s prep time for your partner)

Keeping a Flow Sheet I. Checks on NSA surveillance authority are inadequate. A. The FISA Court rubber-stamps NSA requests. B. Congressional oversight is meaningless. C. Internal executive agency checks are inadequate to limit NSA power. 1. FISA Court judges are highly distinguished jurists 2. The NSA has been forced to modify many of its requests to meet FISA Court standards. 1. The judges are appointed by the Chief Justice – a Bush Adm appointee 2. They have approved 99.9% of all requests since 1979 Only members of the Intelligence Committees receive the briefings and they have been defenders of the NSA The USA Freedom Act does not significantly limit NSA power – they can still examine metadata stored by phone companies. The privacy advocates are powerless to change policy 1. Congressional committees receive full briefings. 2. Passage of the USA Freedom Act proves Congress takes its role seriously. Privacy advocates are in place in the NSA and all intelligence agencies

Flowsheet Tips Use abbreviations appropriate to the topic (P=PATRIOT Act, S=surveillance, etc.) Use symbols for common claims: (up arrow for increasing, down arrow for decreasing, right arrow for “causes” or “results in”, etc.) Establish priorities: 1. Contention labels first priority, 2. Supoints second priority, 3. Evidence reference third priority (Allard, ‘11), 4. Key words of evidence fourth priority. Teach debaters to ask for missed points (in CX or prep time). Use lots of paper (separate sheets for plan arguments and for case arguments; each big argument should have its own sheet). Line up flowsheet paper with debaters’ “road-maps”

Judging Debates The affirmative team has the “burden of proof” – they must prove each of the stock issues that have been challenged by the negative team. Most judges won’t vote negative on an issue not raised by the negative team (i.e. – do not vote negative on topicality when the negative team has never made a topicality argument) The last two rebuttals are critically important; these issues are the ones the debaters believe to be most important.

The Decision AffirmativeNegative Spkr 1: Spkr 2: Points Ranks Spkr 1: Spkr 2: Points Ranks Judge Name:Div:Rd: In my opinion, the better debating was done by