Basic Structure of a Round

a) Before the Round Pre-flowed arguments

b) The Affirmative Constructive The student who is affirming will read his or her pre- prepared affirmative constructive Stands and faces judge 6 minutes long

The First Cross Examination 3 minutes max The negative debater will have 3 minutes to ask the aff debater questions Both sides stand in room next to each other FACE JUDGE NOT EACH OTHER DURING CROSS X Negative debater ask questions about the content of the aff case, whether challenging or clarifying, or to set up a position neg is about to read Aff should answer honestly

Prep Time Prep is four minutes Debaters should use a portion of their prep time before each of their speeches after the round has begun Prep time is used to think of responses to opponent’s arguments, decide upon a strategy for the upcoming speech and organize thoughts Recommended: save a minute before your final speech

The Negative Constructive Seven minutes Negative debater will deliver a pre-prepared speech; normally two to three and a half minutes long Respond to the affirmative arguments; first through value structure comparing and contrasting to neg argument then to refute aff’s contentions Sometimes, you can respond to each argument than make overviews to the entire case

The Second Cross- Examination The aff will have three minutes to question the neg The aff should attempt to make the next speech as easy as possible

First Affirmative Rebuttal The aff debater needs to rebuild his or her case by refuting the neg’s responses to the case, extending the aff case and attacking the neg case The aff needs to deal with the value and criteria clash if there is significant difference between the aff and neg frameworks Focus the round and informs judges how they should evaluate the round Aff needs to advance certain arguments and respond to certain neg arguments Use overviews, group similar arguments and respond to grouped arguments

The Negative Rebuttal Six minutes long The negative responds to the attacks the affirmative made against the negative case Resolve the value and criterion clash so the judge has a clear conception of how to evaluate the round Give arguments for why the neg should win the round and why the aff is losing the round The neg may only respond to arguments he or she responded to in the first speech The neg should present “voting issues” or “issues of crystallization.” These are the big arguments which the neg debater thinks he or she is winning that are the reasons to vote for the neg

The Second Affirmative Rebuttal 3 minutes The aff debater should deal with the clash between the value structures and put forward how the aff debater believes the round should be evaluated Give voting issues which advance reasons why he or she is winning the round Debate the negative’s voting issues NO NEW ARGUMENTS IN THIS SPEECH IF you didn’t talk about the issues in 1 AR, even if it was in the AC, you may not talk about it in 2AR