Woodward Academy Novice Curriculum st Semester

Transcription

1 Woodward Academy Novice Curriculum st Semester

2 Woodward Academy Novice Curriculum st Semester Debate Basics

3 Woodward Academy Novice Curriculum st Semester Format of a Debate The Goal of the Affirmative The goal of the affirmative is to persuade the judge that the benefits of the affirmative case outweigh the costs. The Goal of the Negative The goal of the negative is to persuade the judge that the costs of the affirmative case outweigh the benefits. Participants There are four students in each debate: the first affirmative speaker (1A) the second affirmative speaker (2A) the first negative speaker (1N) the second negative speaker (2N) Order of Speeches Speech Time Purpose First Affirmative Constructive (1AC) 8:00 Present the affirmative case and plan. Cross-examination of 1AC by 2N 3:00 Ask questions to gain information, expose weaknesses, etc. First Negative Constructive (1NC) 8:00 Present the negative's first-line arguments Cross-examination of 1NC by 1A 3:00 Same as other CXes Second Affirmative Constructive (2AC) 8:00 Answer the negative's arguments Cross-examination of 2AC by 1N 3:00 Same as other CXes Second Negative Constructive (2NC) 8:00 Extend and further develop some of the negative's arguments Cross-examination of 2NC by 2A 3:00 Same as other CXes First Negative Rebuttal (1NR) 5:00 Extend and further develop the rest of the negative's arguments First Affirmative Rebuttal (1AR) 5:00 Answer the "negative block" the 2NC/1NR Second Negative Rebuttal (2NR) 5:00 Extend the negative's best argument(s)/strategy Second Affirmative Rebuttal (2AR) 5:00 Answer the 2NR, rebuild the affirmative case Introduction to Speeches The debate round is organized into speeches where individual debaters stand to present their arguments. There are two major types of speeches in a debate: - Constructives Constructives are 8 minute speeches where debaters lay out their arguments using evidence to support them. - Rebuttals Rebuttals are 5 minute speeches used to respond to the arguments of the other team and extend and explain the arguments you have previously made. Other Time in the Debate In addition to speeches, debaters also have Cross Examination where they ask questions of the debater who just spoke about his/her speech. This gives the other team a chance to clarify issues and poke holes in arguments. Debaters also have Preparation Time (usually 8 minutes) during the debate. This time can be used before any speech in the debate, but is usually reserved for the time before the 2AC, 2NC, 1AR, 2NR, and 2AR. While you re getting your feet wet in the activity, don t be ashamed to take prep time whenever necessary; use it to talk to your partner, prepare notes, organize your thoughts, and pull relevant evidence from your files.

4 Woodward Academy Novice Curriculum st Semester Content and Organization of the Speeches in a Debate 1. 1AC, 8 minutes this speech introduces the affirmative case including its advantages, the plan, and solvency. 2. Cross-Ex of the 1AC, 3 minutes the second negative debater conducts this cross-examination to clarify the 1AC, poke holes in the 1AC, or set up negative arguments. 3. 1NC, 8 minutes this speech introduces the negative s arguments. This speaker reads topicality and disadvantage shells and case attacks. 4. Cross-Ex of the 1NC, 3 minutes the first affirmative debater conducts this cross-examination much like the previous cross-ex. 5. 2AC, 8 minutes this speech responds to the 1NC arguments and extends the affirmative case. 6. Cross-Ex of the 2AC, 3 minutes this cross-examination is conducted by the first negative debater and is used for clarification and to develop arguments or poke holes in the affirmative s claims. 7. 2NC, 8 minutes this speech is used to extend arguments from the 1NC and respond to the attacks made by the 2AC. The 2NC and 1NR typically split up the arguments from the 1NC (see 1NR notes below). 8. Cross-Ex of 2NC, 3 minutes the second affirmative debater cross-examines the 2NC; again, the goal is to clarify arguments and challenge the negative s claims while setting up your own arguments. 9. 1NR, 5 minutes this speech is the same as the 2NC only shorter. The arguments that the 2NC did not extend are extended in this speech AR, 5 minutes the hardest speech in debate, the 1AR responds to the negative block (the 2NC and 1NR). The goal is to extend the 2AC s arguments and the affirmative case while addressing the negative s arguments NR, 5 minutes the final negative speech crystallizes the debate down to the key issues. The 2NR responds to the 1AR and extends arguments from the negative block, weighing them against the affirmative case AR, 5 minutes the final affirmative speech is much the same as the final negative speech. The 2AR extends the arguments from the 1AR and is only responsible for refuting the arguments that were in the 2NR.

5 Woodward Academy Novice Curriculum st Semester Affirmative Vs. Negative Being Affirmative Think about making a case to your parents that you should be able to do something that you currently aren t allowed to do. What is easy about making that case? What is difficult about making that case? Why is it easy to be affirmative? It is easy to be affirmative because you get to control the focus and direction of the debate. Why is it hard to be affirmative? It is hard to be affirmative because you have to be prepared for a lot of negative arguments. Being Negative Think about an argument with your parents where they are trying to get you to do something and you don t want to do it. What is easy about that type of argument? What is difficult? Why is it easy to be negative? It is easy to be negative because you can choose a variety of attacks to make against the case. Why is it difficult to be negative? It is difficult to be negative because the affirmative gets to choose which case to read, and you need to be prepared to debate against several different cases.

6 Woodward Academy Novice Curriculum st Semester Basic Debate Techniques This is a brief overview of basic debate techniques. We will return to each of these in more detail. Refutation Refutation means responding to arguments that the other team has made in the debate. Debate is a debate rather than a set of individual speeches because debaters have the burden of rejoinder they must specifically reply to the positions advanced by the other team. Evidence Evidence is the building block of competitive debate. In order to bolster the quality of our arguments, we quote excerpts from published works to support our claims. These pieces of evidence are called "cards." In JV and Varsity debate, we will all do research to find evidence. In novice debate, you will use the evidence in the Novice Packet. Flowing In order to respond to the arguments of the other team, debaters need to take notes on what was said in each of the speeches in the debate. This type of note-taking is called flowing. We will show you how to flow in detail, but for now it is good to know that when another debater is speaking, you want to be writing down each argument that he/she makes so that you can respond to it. Speaking Debate teaches students to speak efficiently and persuasively. The very best debaters combine strong arguments and evidence with passionate deliveries and fast, efficient speaking. Learning to speak this way requires practice, and varsity speakers will often be unintelligible to new debaters because they speak so quickly. In time, you will be able to not only understand the quick speech, but also to flow it. Debaters speak quickly because it allows them to make more arguments and expand on arguments in greater depth in a given time period. Nonetheless, debate is not simply a race. The quality of your arguments matters more than the speed at which they are given. If two debaters make the same quality arguments but one of them makes more of them, however, the debater who makes more arguments is more likely to win.

7 Woodward Academy Novice Curriculum st Semester Affirmative Basics First Affirmative Constructive ( 1AC ) The Affirmative gets to introduce the topic and determine the specific subject of the debate in the First Affirmative Constructive or 1AC. In the 1AC, the affirmative presents the case that will be debated in the round. Parts of the 1AC Advantage What s the problem? Describes the current situation ( Status Quo ) and why there s a problem. This is where the affirmative demonstrates that there a benefit to action. Plan What should we do about it? The affirmative s proposal to fix the problem described in the advantage. Solvency How does the plan fix things? Describes what the plan does to eliminate the problem described in the advantage. Other Burdens of the Affirmative Topicality The affirmative is also required to prove that the plan is part of the topic. They do so only when the negative argues that they are not part of the topic. If the affirmative loses topicality (ie. the negative proves that the plan is not part of the topic), the affirmative automatically loses the debate. We will learn about this in more detail when we talk about negative arguments.

8 Woodward Academy Novice Curriculum st Semester Flowing In order to answer the arguments that the opposing team makes, you need to be able to write down what they say in their speeches. In debate, this form of taking notes is called flowing. Flowing allows you to track arguments in a debate as well as see how the debate as a whole develops. Why is it important to flow? - Know what you have to answer - Assess which arguments the other team has done a good job of answering and which they have failed to answer - Determine which are the best arguments to focus on in rebuttals Title of Position Speech #1 Speech #2 Speech #3 1. The First Argument Underline the argument if it is a piece of evidence. Do not underline if it is an analytical argument. 1. Answer to the 1 st arg 2. Answer to the 1 st arg 3. Answer to the 1 st arg 1. Answer to Answer #1 2. Answer to Answer #2 3. Answer to Answer #3 Put arguments right next to the argument they answer. 2. The Second Argument 1. Answer to the 2 nd arg 1. Answer to Answer #1 Leave lots of vertical space between your arguments! 3. The Third Argument 2. Answer to the 2 nd arg 1. Answer to the 3 rd arg 2. Answer to the 3 rd arg 2. Answer to Answer #2 1. Answer to Answer #1 2. Answer to Answer #2 3. Answer to the 3 rd arg What happened here? The team didn t answer the Answer #3. This is called dropping an argument.

9 Woodward Academy Novice Curriculum st Semester The Toulmin Model of Argument What Is It? A method of analyzing the argument of others and developing the soundness of one's own argument. Who Is It Named After? Stephen Toulmin is a British philosopher and logician who has held distinguished professorships at numerous universities, including Columbia, Dartmouth, Michigan State, Northwestern, Stanford, and the University of Chicago. He is currently the Henry R. Luce Professor of Multiethnic and Transnational Studies at the University of Southern California School of International Relations. He developed his model of argument because he felt that older models did not adequately reflect the characteristics of everyday arguments. Debaters everywhere are in his debt. Primary Components 1. Claim: the position or claim being argued for; the conclusion of the argument. 2. Grounds: reasons or supporting evidence that bolster the claim. 3. Warrant: the principle, provision or chain of reasoning that connects the grounds/reason to the claim. Secondary Components 1. Backing: support, justification, reasons to back up the warrant. 2. Rebuttal/Reservation: exceptions to the claim; description and rebuttal of counter-examples and counterarguments. 3. Qualification: specification of limits to claim, warrant and backing. The degree of conditionality asserted. How Do We Use It? Every argument should rely on this model. When you are making an argument, state your claim, support your claim with one or more warrants, and ground each warrant with supporting evidence/data. In debate, we most often use expert testimony as our ground/data.

10 Woodward Academy Novice Curriculum st Semester Evidence

11 Woodward Academy Novice Curriculum st Semester What is Evidence? Evidence is the building block of debate. In order to bolster the quality of our arguments, we quote excerpts from published works in order to support our claims. These pieces of evidence are called "cards" because they used to be copied onto notecards. Thanks to advancements in technology, we now process most evidence in Microsoft Word or another software program. Definitions of Evidence 1. Evidence in its broadest sense includes everything that is used to determine or demonstrate the truth of an assertion. Encarta Encyclopedia A thing or things helpful in forming a conclusion or judgment: The broken window was evidence that a burglary had taken place. Scientists weigh the evidence for and against a hypothesis. 2. Something indicative; an outward sign: evidence of grief on a mourner's face. 3. Law: The documentary or oral statements and the material objects admissible as testimony in a court of law. American Heritage Dictionary Types of Evidence 1. Factual Evidence hard evidence Examples Statistics Empirical Studies 2. Testimonial Evidence soft evidence 3. Appeal to Authority: You appeal to authority if you back up your reasoning by saying that it is supported by what some authority says on the subject. Most reasoning of this kind is not fallacious. However, it is fallacious whenever the authority appealed to is not really an authority in this subject, when the authority cannot be trusted to tell the truth, when authorities disagree on this subject (except for the occasional lone wolf), when the reasoner misquotes the authority, and so forth. Although spotting a fallacious appeal to authority often requires some background knowledge about the subject or the authority, in brief it can be said that it is fallacious to accept the word of a supposed authority when we should be suspicious. Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy The Importance of Evidence It proves the truth of an argument. Evidence may be faulty in several ways. Since evidence is an absolutely indispensable element of proof, its absence precludes the possibility of proof: no evidence, no argument. Its mere presence, however, does not automatically certify proof adequacy. An adequate proof requires evidence that is comprehensive, accurate, clear and accepted by the reader or listener. To the extent that evidence fails to meet these requirements, it may be regarded as deficient. Wayne Brockriede (The Register, 1962).

12 Woodward Academy Novice Curriculum st Semester The Anatomy of a Piece of Evidence Taylor Swift is awesome don t be a hater. Daly 10 Sean Daly, Pop Music Critic for the St. Petersburg Times, 2010 ( In defense of Taylor Swift, St. Petersburg Times, March 4 th, Available Online at Accessed ) 5 reasons it's too early to hate Taylor Swift 1. Her voice is thin, but at least it's hers. I'm almost as tired of hearing pop singers Auto-Tuned and digitally spiffed as I am hearing people complain about it. But the truth is that pop voices really aren't allowed to have character anymore. Yes, Swift doesn't have the strongest chops, but you know what? At least she's trying to express herself as naturally as possible. Besides, Auto-Tune is for sissies. 2. She has the best diary in the whole ninth grade. Kudos to Big Machine Records for letting Swift ride her true talent: songwriting. In this day and age of committee-penned pop songs it took four people to write Beyonce's Single Ladies Tay-Tay's tracks tend to begin and end with her. It'll be interesting to see if she can evolve as a songwriter, especially on her third album, due this fall. 3. She's the music biz's brightest hope for a comeback. Although she's very much a "new" pop star, she has allowed a beleaguered music industry which saw sales plummet another 12 percent last year to enjoy some throwback success. Swift is evidence that the problem with the marketplace is not a lack of interest in music but in the pap and pabulum being played. 4. She gives rock stardom a good name. I think it's entirely acceptable for little girls to want to grow up to be rock stars. However, it's not cool for kids especially my kids to want to be Britney Spears or Lindsay Lohan. Swift, on the other hand, manages rockstar panache without the coke habit. My daughters can dream about being the next Taylor Swift all they want. 5. Her songs are really bleepin' catchy. You can bluster about how a Swift song has never earwormed its way into your melonhead, but you'd be lying. Superstars become superstars because at some point they succeed at staggering, exaggerated levels, over and over again. Swift is only two albums old, but she could already release a greatest-hits disc and it would be good. Tag this summarizes the claim being made by the evidence Citation bolded portion is the author s last name and the date of publication; the full citation includes the title of the article, the publication it was taken from, the date of publication, and the URL it was accessed from the information that is included depends on the type of source being cited (book, journal article, web article, etc.) Card Text always include full paragraphs and do not quote the author out of context; the bold and underlined text is the text that would be read aloud in a debate, but the full material is provided so that the full context is known; sometimes the text of evidence is also highlighted to shorten it further; remember, though, that the evidence needs a strong warrant in order to be persuasive underlining or highlighting the evidence down too much can compromise its quality.

13 Woodward Academy Novice Curriculum st Semester Analytical Arguments un-evidenced arguments Evidence Key Terms Block a scripted response to an argument, including evidence and analytical arguments Card a piece of evidence Citation or cite the source the excerpt comes from Cut (verb) the process of excerpting published work and turning it into a card Date the date of publication of the excerpted work Ev or Evidence cards File an argument, composed of many cards and blocks Quals or Qualifications the credentials of the author being quoted Tag the argument being made in a card; the tagline for the claim being made Template the file we use to process debate evidence Where Do We Get Evidence? All novice debaters in Georgia receive the Georgia Forensic Coaches Association Novice Evidence Packet. In the novice division of tournaments in Georgia, students are restricted to reading arguments contained in the GFCA packet. This makes things very easy: you will know in advance what arguments and evidence is available to your opponents so you can brainstorm in advance the arguments you will need to make to answer them. At the varsity level, our evidence is produced by Woodward Academy debaters and coaches. As you progress in your debate career, you will become part of our research team and will help produce the cards and files that our entire squad relies on. What Kind Of Sources Do We Cut? All kinds, but the focus is on scholarly publications. We use Google as well as electronic databases like Ebscohost/Academic Search Premier, JSTOR, Project Muse, Lexis-Nexis, and Proquest. Google News and Google Scholar are also excellent. While the majority of research is done electronically, we also cut books. After you become more familiar with debate, you will receive an introductory lecture about researching that will answer more of your questions and help point you in the right direction.

14 Woodward Academy Novice Curriculum st Semester Tournaments

15 Woodward Academy Novice Curriculum st Semester The Anatomy of a Debate Tournament Purpose of a Tournament Debaters attend tournament competitions at other schools in order to test the skills we have learned in practice. Tournaments allow you to compete against other students from Georgia and the United States. Debate tournaments are very fun; however, they are more like a business trip than a family vacation. While we will always have time spent enjoying ourselves as a team, the majority of the daytime hours will be spent participating in debates. Schedule There are three general schedules for tournaments that first year (novice) debaters attend: One Day Local Tournaments One day local tournaments take place on Saturdays. They usually feature four rounds of debate. Each team will participate in all four of these rounds, alternating affirmative and negative so that each team is affirmative twice and negative twice. For example, a team might be affirmative in rounds one and three and negative in rounds two and four. An awards assembly will follow round four. Some of these tournaments also have a final exhibition round for the top two teams in each division, determined by teams records. Example Westminster Novice Tournament: 7:30-8:30AM Registration 8:45-9:00AM Assembly 9:00-11:00AM Round 1 11:00-1:00PM Round 2 1:00-2:00PM Lunch 2:00-4:00PM Round 3 4:00-6:00PM Round 4 6:30PM Awards Two Day Local Tournaments Two day local tournaments take place on Friday evenings and all day Saturday. They usually feature between four and six preliminary rounds. Based on a team s record, they may then advance to the elimination rounds; like a tournament in most sports, elimination rounds feature the top X number of teams with the highest seed debating the lowest seed (and so forth). Teams usually flip for sides before the debate and the loser is eliminated from the tournament. There will be an awards assembly on Saturday, usually before the final elimination rounds. Example Chattahoochee Tournament: Friday 3:15-3:45 Registration in Media Center 4:15 Round 1 6:00 Dinner Break 6:30 Round 2 8:25 Round 3 Saturday 8:00 Round 4 10:00 Round 5 12:00 Lunch Break 12:45 First Elim Round 2:45 Second Elim Round 4:45 Awards Multiple Day National Tournaments Occasionally novices will have the opportunity to attend tournaments outside of Georgia. Due to travel time, these tournaments usually last several days. They are very similar to the two day local tournaments except that they may feature more debates.

16 Woodward Academy Novice Curriculum st Semester Example Vestavia Tournament: Friday 11:00AM Depart Woodward by bus 1:00-3:00PM Registration (coach only) 3:45-5:30PM Round 1 5:30-7:30PM Round 2 8:30-10:30PM Round 3 Saturday 7:45-9:30PM Round 4 11:00-1:00PM Round 5 2:00-3:30PM Round 6 4:00PM Awards 4:30-6:00PM Elimination Rounds 6:30-8:00PM Elimination Rounds 8:30-10:00PM Elimination Rounds Sunday 9:00AM Return to Woodward Academy by Bus

17 The Novice Division The novice division is for first-year debaters only (although it may include second-year debaters with very minimal experience). Therefore, the playing field is very level you will not have to worry about debating an experienced varsity team. In Georgia, novice tournaments feature limited topic areas that confine teams to the arguments contained in the packet. This helps debaters better prepare for debates and encourages more clash. At some novice tournaments in other states, however, the novice division does not feature a case list. If you attend one of those tournaments, you will have to be prepared to debate any topical affirmative case. Pairings Before each debate, the tournament will release pairings or schematics which tell you who you are debating against, whether you will be affirmative or negative, who will judge the debate, and where the debate will take place. They are released between ten and thirty minutes before the debate. When the pairing comes out, you should go to your assigned room and prepare for your debate. SAMPLE DEBATE PAIRING Room Affirmative Negative Judge A116 Chattahoochee KK Alpharetta TW Gibson A120 Johns Creek RS Woodward NS Jordan A112 Woodward SS Houston County DD Lundeen, G. A114 Northview CH Johns Creek BJ Smiley A110 Westminster SW Chattahoochee KL Spiegel A122 Pace Academy AS Alpharetta ES Batterman A118 Carrollton BH Pace Academy HT Miller A128 Marist MS Fayette County RL Grellinger 17

18 Ballots For each debate that you participate in, you will get a ballot that indicates the winner and loser and how many speaker points are awarded to each debater. Points are awarded on a 30 point scale based on the overall skill of the debaters, not necessarily the differential between the two teams. Points are not used to keep score; they are used to communicate how well the judge thought you performed above and beyond the decision. In fact, a team can win with fewer points than the losing team if they have done an overall better job but lost a critical argument. Here is an example ballot that shows that the affirmative from Pace Academy won the debate versus the negative from Lexington High School in Massachusetts: Awards At the end of the tournament there will be an awards assembly. Students earn team awards based on their win-loss record in the tournament. Students earn speaker awards based on their speaker points in the debates, not wins and losses. Students who participate in elimination rounds will typically receive awards for their performance. While we are always excited to see Woodward debaters do well, it is important to remember that respectful competition requires politely clapping for our teammates, not cheering or yelling when they receive awards. It is expected that debaters stand to applaud the top speaker and champion in each division. 18

19 The Anatomy of a Debate Round Who is in the room? There will be at least five people in the room: the two affirmative debaters, the two negative debaters, and the critic/judge. Very rarely, there will also be observers (usually students looking to learn about debate or parents of the other team). Don t fret: you don t have to speak in front of an audience. Who do you debate? You will generally be competing against two high school (and occasionally middle school) students from other local private and public schools. Sometimes schools come from other states as well, but this is less common. In the novice division, all of your competitors will also be new to the activity. The Role of the Judge The job of the judge is to decide who won or lost the debate and how many speaker points to assign to each debater. These are two separate questions; judges generally decide who won or lost the debate and then assess the technical and persuasion skills of each of the students. For this reason, the winning team may occasionally have fewer points than the losing team. The judge will also give verbal comments to each team at the end of the debate where they will tell you who won and lost the debate and why. It is important to carefully write down and save these comments; you should keep a section of your notebook or a document on your laptop for judge comments. Your coaches will often ask you what the judge said for use in future practices, so write everything down! You can ask a polite question if you need something clarified, but it is critically important to remain respectful even if you disagree with a judge s decision. You will be judged by the same people many times over your debate career; you must maintain a professional relationship even when you disagree. Occasionally a judge may decide not to give verbal comments; he/she will instead write a written ballot. If a judge says that they do not give oral decisions, you should thank them and leave the room; you will get your comments and decision later. Judges will sometimes leave the room during preparation time or before the decision; don t worry they will be back! Who judges debates? Most debate critics/judges are either high school teachers or former debaters, usually college-aged. Some judges are more qualified than others but all are deserving of your respect; they get paid very little, receive little hospitality, and sacrifice their Saturdays to help the activity. Always be respectful of your judges. Where do debates take place? Debates take place in high school classrooms. It is very important to be respectful of these rooms. Under no circumstances should you use a teacher s desk, move anything off of a surface, or unplug anything. The only way debate tournaments can take place is if we are respectful of rooms; we expect you to be diligent, even if others are not. Leave the space better than you found it this means throwing away trash, putting back desks, etc. even if you didn t create the mess. It is generally okay to move student desks to create a workspace, but you should not move any teacher materials or use desks that have things on them. 19

20 The Affirmative (Desks/Tables) The Negative (Desks/Tables) Woodward Academy Practice #1 What to do Before the Round When you find your team on the pairing you will see an associated room number. Go there with your evidence: that s where you ll be debating. When you get there, disclose your case if you are affirmative (see Disclosure, below). Then sit down at desks or tables and unpack your evidence, paper, pens, etc. The judge will sit down and do the same. Please see the attached diagram for a better idea of what the room looks like before a debate. You should take out your aff or neg accordion depending on the side. If you are aff, get out the 1AC. If you are neg, take out the 1NC materials that you need for the case that the team said they are reading. (If they didn t disclose, just make sure you have your neg accordion ready so that you can get things out efficiently once the 1AC starts and you know what case they are reading). When everyone is ready, the first affirmative will get up and move to somewhere that s/he can speak from so that both the opposing team and the critic/judge can hear. Then the debate begins. THE LAYOUT OF A DEBATE This is just a general guideline it doesn t matter which side you sit on. Speaking Podium or Desk/Table Critic/Judge (Desk/Table) 20

21 Disclosure When You Are Affirmative When you are affirmative, you should go to the room and immediately tell the other team what affirmative case and advantages you will read. They may also ask to see the plan text; you should show it to them. Even if you have debated the team before and they chose not to disclose, you should always disclose. Disclosure is for the aff only you should not ask the other team what negative arguments they will read. Disclosure When You Are Negative When you are negative, you should go to the room and politely ask the other team what affirmative case and advantages they will read in the debate. Most teams will immediately tell you this information. Some teams choose not to disclose; that s fine. In the novice division you will be prepared to debate all of the possible cases, so if a team does not disclose you should not worry. You should instead think about what you would say to each of the cases. If a team asks you what you will say on the negative, politely tell them that we do not disclose negative arguments. What to do After the Round When the 2AR is finished, the two teams shake each other s hands and exchange well wishes ( good luck or great job, etc.) The debaters then put away their evidence, making sure to keep everything organized. Occasionally the judge may ask to read a piece of evidence from the debate give it to him/her. The judge will then tell the debaters who won and give comments on the debate (see: The Role of the Judge). Once the judge is done talking, and you have taken copious notes on his/her comments, it s time to pack up, clean up the room, and head back to the cafeteria to look for pairings for the next debate. 21

22 Results Wins and Losses At the end of each debate, one team is awarded a win and the other is awarded a loss. Your overall record is the sum of your wins and the sum of your losses. A team that won two rounds and lost three rounds, then, would be said to be 2-3 in the tournament. The win is given to the team that better persuades the judge about both the quality and importance of their arguments. This is not based on how the judge personally feels about the issues, but rather which team does a better job advancing the arguments in the debate. Points Points are awarded on a 30 point scale based on the overall skill of the debaters, not necessarily the differential between the two teams. Points are not used to keep score; they are used to communicate how well the judge thought you performed above and beyond the decision. In fact, a team can win with fewer points than the losing team if they have done an overall better job but lost a critical argument. Power Matching Many tournaments use power matching to determine which teams will debate each other in debates later in the tournament. This means that each team is paired against another team with the same record. A team that wins the first two debates will be paired against another team that won the first two debates. A team with a 1-1 record will similarly debate another team that has won a debate and lost a debate. This ensures that each team is given competitive debates throughout the tournament. Tournaments that use power matching usually have two random rounds, called presets, as the first two rounds. After that, they begin power matching the debates. Elimination Rounds Some tournaments have elimination rounds in addition to the preliminary debates. Like a tournament in most sports, elimination rounds feature the top X number of teams by win-loss record with the highest seed debating the lowest seed (and so forth). Teams usually flip for sides before the debate and the loser is eliminated from the tournament. Flipping for Sides in Elimination Rounds Unlike preliminary rounds where the side (aff or neg) is assigned for each debate, elimination rounds are flip for sides. This means once the pairing is released, the teams meet at the room and exchange aff information (see Disclosure). Then a coin is flipped. The team that wins the coin flip can choose whether they will be affirmative or negative. If the teams have already debated in the prelim rounds, they will reverse sides for elims; no coin is flipped. 22

23 How To Read Ballots Written Comments In the novice division, most judges provide written ballots that teams receive at the end of a tournament. Ballots include each debater s speaker points as well as (usually) comments and a brief RFD (or reason for decision ). Good debaters use these ballots to improve. The following five tips will help you make the most of your written ballots: 1. Verbal feedback is most instructive. Most judges will disclose the winner and provide comments after the debate. This is the best feedback students will receive because it is immediate and more in-depth than the written ballot. For this reason, it is extremely important to take notes during the judge s decision. The best debaters take very comprehensive notes they flow the decision as completely as possible. These notes allow students to have more productive conversations with coaches and to better adapt to judges in future rounds. As you move up to higher divisions, most judges will not provide written comments. [Note: sometimes ballots are lost and most judges do not write comments in elimination rounds. It is very important to take notes after each debate.] 2. Don t overreact to individual comments. A single debate is a small sample size. So is a single debate tournament. While you should review all judge comments, it is important to place any single set of comments into the larger context of a tournament or series of tournaments. Are you getting the same comment over-and-over again? Is the comment an outlier? Are you mostly being complimented for something that one judge is criticizing you for? It is important to maintain perspective and keep working hard to improve in all areas instead of overreacting to comments. 3. Know the difference between specific and universal advice. After almost every round, judges tell students that they should have done something differently in the debate. Good debaters learn to figure out whether this advice applies only to the specific round or to all rounds. Bad debaters take specific advice and universalize it, doing the thing the judge told them to do in a specific round in every round. Learning the difference between these kinds of advice is difficult and requires asking the judge questions, strong critical thinking, and conversations with coaches. 4. Remember that you don t know everything. Judges will often provide comments or suggestions related to things that we haven t yet covered (or haven t covered in-depth). We are teaching you the fundamentals of debate and are doing so in a particular sequence for a reason. It is okay to file a comment away as something I haven t learned yet but will return to later. As you continue to improve, more and more of your comments will make sense and it will become easier and easier for you to put judges advice into practice. 5. Read all comments, not just the ones directed at you. Obviously, the comments that judges make on your performance are most helpful. But good debaters read and consider the comments that judges give to all participants because the same comments also often apply to them, too. Reading the comments that a judge provides to a negative team, for example, can help you improve on the negative even though you were affirmative in that particular debate. These comments can also tell you which traits of opposing debaters judges liked and disliked so that you can mimic the good qualities and avoid the bad ones. 23

24 Slightly Past the Basics 24

25 Flowing 2.0 Review In order to answer the arguments that the opposing team makes, you need to be able to write down what they say in their speeches. In debate, this form of taking notes is called flowing. Flowing allows you to track arguments in a debate as well as see how the debate as a whole develops. To see a diagram of a flow, see page 7 of the Novice Practice #2 handout. How Many Sheets of Paper One sheet of flow paper is needed for every part of the case and every off-case position. Each part of the case goes on its own flow and each off-case position goes on its own flow. A basic novice 1AC, for example, requires three sheets of paper: one flow for one advantage, one flow for the other advantage, and one flow for the Solvency contention. If the 1NC reads the two disadvantages and answers both advantages and solvency, the total number of pieces of paper required grows from 3 to 5 (with a new one being created for each disadvantage). Always flow the arguments on the correct flow. Sometimes, the other team will not be clear about which position they are addressing. Do your best to follow along and flow in the appropriate place. Flowing Tips 1. Orient the paper vertically and write smaller. While orienting the paper horizontally gives you bigger columns for each speech, it limits the amount of space you have for distinct arguments and makes it harder to keep the arguments organized. Instead, orient the paper vertically and write small enough that you can leave space between arguments. Remember, you need seven columns on your page in order to fit all of the speeches (1AC, 1NC, 2AC, 2NC/1NR, 1AR, 2NR, 2AR). 2. Leave ample whitespace. At the top of every flow, make sure to leave at least a few inches of white space this will enable an overview to be flowed in later speeches. Leave several inches between every argument, too. When everything is crowded together, it is harder to keep track of the arguments. 3. Use shorthand. You do not need to write down everything that the other team says in order to have a solid flow of the debate. Instead, your goal should be to write down the gist of their arguments so that you know what they said and can remember to answer it. In particular, it is helpful to use symbols and abbreviations. 4. Always flow. The only exceptions to this are (1) when you are giving a speech and (2) the 1N should not flow the 2NC (because they should be preparing their 1NR). 5. Practice. Flowing is a learned skill. The more you flow, the better you will be at getting everything down neatly and efficiently. 25

26 The Negative Block The negative block is comprised of the second negative constructive (2NC) and the first negative rebuttal (1NR). It is called the block because it is a large block of time in which the negative gives back-to-back speeches without the affirmative getting to respond. Splitting The Negative Block The strategic value of the negative block is that it gives the negative a chance to develop their arguments in a great deal of depth. In order to make effective use of this structural advantage, the negative must split the block: the second negative should extend some of the negative s arguments in the 2NC and the first negative should extend other arguments in the 1NR. Redundancy between the arguments extended in the 2NC and 1NR negates the benefits of the block. How Should The Arguments Be Divided? Negative teams should establish a plan before the debate for which arguments will be in the 2NC and which will be in the 1NR. Both partners should flow the whole 2AC. After it has concluded, the debaters should discuss with one another during prep time whether to alter the pre-round plan. In most cases, negative teams should stick to the original plan. Sometimes, however, the 2AC will do something to change that calculation (spend a lot of time on a certain position, drop something, read an add-on advantage, etc.). If that happens, it is okay to switch away from the pre-round plan. In those cases, it is important that both partners are on the same page so that they know what to prep. The following are three examples of how a negative block could be divided. Assume that the 1AC was Cuba with a Soft Power Advantage and a Terrorism Advantage. Speech #1 #2 #3 1NC China DA Soft Power Advantage Answers Terrorism Advantage Answers Solvency Answers China DA Diplomatic Capital DA Soft Power Advantage Answers Terrorism Advantage Answers Diplomatic Capital DA Shunning DA Soft Power Advantage Answers Terrorism Advantage Answers 2NC China DA Soft Power Advantage Answers Solvency Answers China DA Soft Power Advantage Answers Solvency Answers Solvency Answers Soft Power Advantage Answers Terrorism Advantage Answers Solvency Answers 1NR Terrorism Advantage Answers Solvency Answers Diplomatic Capital DA Terrorism Advantage Answers Diplomatic Capital DA Kick the Shunning DA 26

27 When deciding how to divide the arguments, there are several things to keep in mind: 1. Comfort/Competence sometimes one partner is better prepared to extend a particular argument. Ideally, both partners will be equally ready to debate all of the negative s arguments. Realistically, it is smart to delegate positions based on relative levels of comfort/competence. 2. Speech Time the 2NC has eight minutes and the 1NR has five minutes. Because the 2NC has more speech time, they should generally take more arguments or should take the arguments that require more time to extend. On the other hand, the 1NR needs to be more careful about biting off more than they can chew. 3. Prep Time the 1NR has the whole 2NC and the cross-ex of the 2NC to prepare their speech. Arguments which generally require more prep time are therefore usually better fits for the 1NR. 4. Cross-Ex some arguments are better when not subjected to cross-examination. While ideally it would be better to only make arguments that you can vigorously defend in the cross-ex, sometimes it is better to put a weaker argument in the 1NR so that the other team can t confront it directly. There is not a right answer. As long as the 2NC and 1NR take different arguments, the block has been divided and its strategic utility has been maintained. 27

28 Extending Negative Case Arguments A big part of most negative blocks is the extension of case arguments. These arguments are those that the negative presents to dispute the affirmative case; they are also called on-case to differentiate them from off-case arguments like disadvantages. How To Reference Case Arguments When debating case arguments, the reference point to use to signpost in later speeches is the 1NC. Signposting is the process of communicating to the judge which argument is being debated. Debaters signpost broadly by indicating which position/flow they are addressing ( First, the Soft Power Advantage, Next, the Diplomatic Capital DA, etc.) and specifically by indicating which argument on a particular position/flow they are addressing ( Extend 1NC #1, soft power ineffective, etc.). When debating case arguments, the reference point for individual arguments on a particular flow is the 1NC. How To Extend Case Arguments There are three components of an effective extension of a negative case argument: 1. Reference the argument and succinctly explain it. 2. Answer the affirmative s responses to it. 3. Compare it to the affirmative s arguments and impact why it matters. The basic model is: Extend 1NC number [#] [brief argument label] [explanation of the argument] that s [Author from 1NC evidence citation]. They say [brief reference to the 2AC s response], but [answer]. Prefer our evidence [argument]. This [impact]. 28

29 29

30 Cross-Examination Cross-examination is one of the most important parts of debate. Because it is the judge s only opportunity to watch two opposing debaters directly interact with one another, it plays a huge role in how the judge assesses the credibility of the contestants. Moreover, it gives debaters an opportunity to directly challenge their opponents arguments, improving the standing of their own arguments while setting themselves up for later speeches. The Anatomy of Cross-Ex There are four cross-examinations in every debate, one after each constructive speech. The format is as follows: After the 1AC, the 2N cross-examines the 1A. After the 1NC, the 1A cross-examines the 1N. After the 2AC, the 1N cross-examines the 2A. After the 2NC, the 2A cross-examines the 2N. When participating in a cross-ex, debaters stand and face the judge. Cross-ex questions and answers are directed toward the judge, not toward one s opponent the goal is to convince the judge, not to convince the opponent. Only the students that are supposed to be participating in the cross-ex should be involved. While some debaters make a habit of involving themselves in every cross-ex, this hurts the credibility of both partners and reveals weakness to the judge. There are a few exceptions to this general rule: 1. If your partner is asking cross-ex questions and you feel that you need to ask a question, wait for a pause in the cross-ex and politely ask your partner if you can ask a question. This should rarely happen, but sometimes you think of something that you need to know as you are preparing for your next speech. 2. If your partner is answering cross-ex questions and you feel that they are mishandling their response, politely interject and ask if they would mind if you fielded the question. This should almost never happen; the only justifiable interruption is if the person answering the question answered in a way that would cost the team the debate. Unless the mishandling rises to that level, you should stay out of the cross-ex unless invited into it (see #3). 3. If you are answering cross-ex questions and are asked a question that you cannot answer but that you think your partner might be able to answer, it is acceptable to invite them in. Say something like [Name of Partner], I think you can probably do a better job fielding that question than I can would you mind taking that one?. Ideally, this should never happen. If it does happen, it needs to be as infrequent as possible doing this once demonstrates that you are reasonable, but doing it more than once demonstrates that you are unprepared. The Purposes and Goals of Cross-Ex There are four basic purposes (or goals) of cross-examination: 1. Personal Clarification debaters sometimes need to ask questions about what the opposing team has argued in order for them to know what needs to be answered in the subsequent speech. This is the most basic use of cross-ex and should only be used when necessary. 2. Judge Clarification the judge sometimes needs to have important arguments clarified so that they know the differences between the two teams position. Cross-ex can be used to clue the judge in and make the controversies between the two sides more clear. 30

31 3. Argument Building debaters should use the cross-ex to challenge the opposition s arguments and to establish a foundation on which to develop their own arguments. Cross-ex can set up arguments that your side is planning to make in subsequent speeches and can undermine the credibility of the other team s arguments before they get a chance to fully develop them. 4. Impression Formation judges take debaters performances in the cross-ex very seriously. Questions they will ask themselves include: Does the debater seem to know what they are talking about? Does the debater look confident and composed? Do they appear respectful and reasonable or hyper-aggressive and stubborn? These purposes are ordered from least effective to most effective. Strong cross-examinations establish and solidify good impressions, build arguments, and clarify issues for the judge. Weak cross-examinations focus mostly on personal clarification and miss out on opportunities to improve the team s position in the debate. Effective Cross-Ex Demeanor It is important to convey the appropriate demeanor in cross-ex. Always abide by the three C s of CX: Calm Confidence Concentration Cross-ex is a one-on-one battle between two debaters, but it is a battle of credibility and content and not a battle of physicality or loudness. The goals of cross-ex are best achieved by debaters that remain calm, demonstrate confidence, and maintain their concentration. How To Effectively Answer Cross-Ex Questions Good cross-examination responses require preparation. When preparing to answer cross-ex questions, the best method is simply to practice answering as many questions as you can. As you prepare to ask cross-ex questions, you should also practice answering those same questions. If there are certain questions that you often are asked, it can be helpful to write up the perfect answer to the question so that you know what you should say. You don t want to read these written responses in the debate (see the What Not To Do In Cross- Ex heading), but the process of writing them out can help you figure out how best to word your answers. When being asked questions, you should do your best to answer them. When possible, you should refer back to the evidence that you or your partner have read that supports the point(s) you are making. When asked an open-ended question, take the opportunity to explain your answer in detail. There is no time limit for answering a particular question, so the more time that you spend explaining your answers, the less time your opponent has to ask additional ones. Obviously, this can get out of control. You should never filibuster (talk endlessly about things that aren t directly relevant to the question) and you should respect your opponents right to ask another question if they ask to move on. If you do not know how to answer a question, it is okay to say so. It is better to say that you re not sure or do not know than to make something up and be wrong. 31

32 How To Effectively Ask Cross-Ex Questions Asking effective cross-ex questions also requires preparation. Many questions can be brainstormed in advance of the round. Be careful, however, not to read cross-ex questions as if they were from a script (see the What Not To Do In Cross-Ex heading). 1. Ask closed-ended questions ask questions likely to elicit a yes/no answer ( ask for agreement ). Your goal should be to limit the amount of time you allow the respondent to talk about their arguments. 2. Ask follow-up questions cross-ex is composed of lines of questioning, not just individual questions. You should keep pressing your opponent on a given argument instead of giving up and moving on after their initial response. 3. Press for details and evidence the details of the arguments matter most and cross-ex is the time to dig into them. Challenge opponents to justify the conclusions they have drawn from their evidence, not just to point to evidence that they say justifies their claims. 4. Do not dwell on questions sometimes a line of questioning has run its course but the questioner keeps returning to it. It is important to know when no further progress can be made; once that point has been reached, move on. You are not Jack McCoy from Law & Order you will not get your opponent to confess. 5. Maintain a sense of urgency cross-ex should keep the judge s attention. Just like constructives and rebuttals, it is time-pressured you will have more questions than you will have time to ask them, so it is important to keep a fast tempo and avoid long pauses or slowdowns. When deciding what questions to ask, prioritize those that help bolster arguments you will present in subsequent speeches. What Not To Do In Cross-Ex There are several common mistakes to avoid when cross-examining. 1. Don t read or answer questions from a script this gives the appearance of a debater that doesn t really know the arguments and is relying on a script that someone else has written for them. You do want to prepare questions in advance, but you should deliver them naturally. 2. Don t beat a dead horse sometimes a line of questioning is going nowhere. When that happens, move on. 3. Don t be over-aggressive cross-ex is about the arguments, not the debaters. Don t be overly aggressive or attempt to dominate the person you are cross-examining. If the other person is combative or too aggressive, remain calm and don t escalate the situation. 4. Don t nit-pick over minor details while the details do matter, debaters sometimes fixate on trivial ones that aren t essential in the grand scheme of the debate. 5. Don t involve yourself in others cross-examinations all debaters should strive to ask and answer all of the questions during their assigned cross-ex times. Intervening in a partner s cross-ex demonstrates team weakness to the judge. 32

33 Rebuttals General Tips for All Rebuttals While each rebuttal has its nuances, there are several general tips that apply to all rebuttals: 1. Provide a roadmap This is true of all speeches except the 1AC. When you are finished prepping, the first thing you should do after standing up and moving to the podium (sometimes an actual podium but more often just a desk at the front of the room the place from where you deliver your speeches) is to provide a roadmap. The roadmap tells the judge and the other participants (your partner and the other team) the order that you will be addressing the positions in the debate. The roadmap is brief; you only provide the labels of the positions, not an in-depth explanation. Example: OK, the order is: the China DA, the Diplomatic Capital DA, the Soft Power Advantage, the Terrorism Advantage, and Solvency. Is everyone ready? When providing the roadmap, make sure you do so slowly enough for everyone to get their flows in order. When you are done, ask if everyone is ready. If no one says anything, pause for a few seconds and then start your speech. 2. Use your evidence The evidence that is read in the constructive speeches forms the foundation for the arguments made in the rebuttals. Draw upon that evidence when making arguments in the rebuttals. When in doubt, return to the evidence doing so will prevent you from getting sidetracked and spending too much time arguing about things that aren t central to the debate. 3. Impact your arguments Remember to answer the so what? question for every argument: so what if the argument you are making is true? The ultimate importance of every argument is dependent upon how well each argument is impacted for the judge. If you think an argument is particularly important, make sure to communicate that to the judge. Do the same if you think one of their arguments isn t particularly important. 4. Provide impact comparisons In addition to impacting individual arguments, it is important to provide the judge with an overall comparison of the impacts on each side. Sometimes, this is a comparison of one impact vs. one impact. Other times, this is a comparison of multiple impacts vs. multiple impacts. When comparing impacts, use the probability, magnitude, and timeframe filters. 5. Maximize prep time It is important to keep as much preparation time as possible saved for the final rebuttals. During prep time, work together with your partner to make decisions about which arguments to extend and to make sure that you are covering all of the arguments made by your opponents. Remember, the rebuttals are for extending, explaining, comparing, and impact existing arguments not for constructing new arguments (that is the goal of constructive speeches). 1NR The 1NR is the least rebuttal-like of the rebuttals. Because it occurs before the 1AR, it is much more like the 2NC than it is any of the other rebuttals. In the 1NR, the negative s job is to extend some of the positions from the 1NC see Splitting The Block for more information about how to choose which positions to extend. You should think of the 1NR like a third negative constructive, except that you have less leeway to make new arguments in this speech than the 2NC does. 33

34 1AR The 1AR s job is to reinforce the affirmative s case by fending off the attacks developed in the negative block. It is a difficult speech because it requires answering 13 minutes of negative arguments in only 5 minutes. The 1AR needs to cover all of the positions that the negative extended in the block. On the case, the 1AR should answer each of the 2NC and 1NR s case attacks. When doing so, the 1AR should rely on 1AC and 2AC evidence to support their arguments. When referencing these arguments, begin with They Say and a brief summary of the negative s arguments. The goal is to explain your arguments efficiently and with citations of your evidence. On the disadvantages, the 1AR should extend 2AC arguments and answer the 2NC and 1NR s responses to them. You do not need to extend all of the 2AC arguments; in fact, it is better to extend only some of them so that you can go into more depth on each one. Reference these arguments based on the 2AC numbering. The 1AR should not answer positions that the negative did not extend. If the negative did not answer one of the advantages, you should point that out but you don t need to spend a lot of time doing so. The 1AR should read new evidence selectively. In general, you should rely on the existing evidence that you and your partner read in the 1AC and 2AC to answer the negative block. Sometimes, however, you will recognize that you haven t yet read a piece of evidence to answer an important negative argument. This usually happens when the negative block goes in-depth on a particular argument, developing it beyond what was initially presented. You should not read evidence that makes new arguments in the 1AR, but in these situations you should read additional evidence to support existing arguments. However, the bulk of the 1AR should be spent extending existing arguments, not reading new evidence. 2NR The 2NR s job is to make the negative s final case against the plan. The goal of the speech is to convince the judge that based on the arguments (and supporting evidence) made in the debate, the disadvantages to the plan s enactment outweigh the advantages. The 2NR should extend one disadvantage. (If the 1NC only included one disadvantage, that is obviously the one that you should go for. If there were two or three disadvantages in the 1NC, you should choose the one that you are winning the most to go for in the 2NR. This is an advanced concept that we will return to at a later practice.) The disadvantage should be covered first. At the very beginning of the speech, the 2NR should say that the disadvantage outweighs the case this provides an overview of the debate. When extending the disadvantage, it is important to answer all of the arguments that were made by the 1AR. You do not need to answer any other arguments, but you should always make sure to explain the thesis of the disadvantage. So while you should not answer no link arguments if the 1AR doesn t not make one, you do want to make sure to extend and briefly explain the link. In addition to a disadvantage, the 2NR should answer every part of the case. If the 1AR extended the Soft Power Advantage and the Terrorism Advantage, the 2NR should go to both of those and extend the negative s attacks. You do not need to extend all of the negative arguments against each advantage, but it is important to invest enough time on each one to defeat it. Sometimes, this means extending only one argument (but doing so indepth). Other times, this requires extending several arguments. The 2NR should also go for Solvency arguments. 34

35 35

36 2AR The 2AR s job is to make the affirmative s final case for the plan. The goal of the speech is to convince the judge that based on the arguments (and supporting evidence) made in the debate, the advantages to the plan s enactment outweigh the disadvantages. The 2AR should start the speech with the Advantage that you are most likely to win and then move on to the other Advantage, Solvency, and then the Disadvantage(s). If they go for multiple disadvantages, it is important to spend enough time on each one to defeat them. When deciding the order, put the best disadvantage before the weaker one(s). At the beginning of the speech, the 2AR should say that the case outweighs the disadvantage(s) this provides an overview of the debate. When answering a disadvantage, the 2AR does not need to go for all of the arguments that were in the 1AR. Never go for arguments that were not extended in the 1AR. It is better to go for one argument well than to go for five arguments poorly. Your goal when answering a disadvantage should be to mitigate it enough that the case outweighs its impact. When debating the case, make sure to answer each argument that the negative extended in the 2NR. You do not need to answer arguments that were not made in the 2NR. 36

37 Debate Speaking Introduction Debate teaches students to speak efficiently and persuasively. The very best debaters combine strong arguments and evidence with passionate deliveries and fast, efficient speaking. Learning to speak this way requires practice, and varsity speakers will often be unintelligible to new debaters because they speak so quickly. In time, you will be able to not only understand the quick speech, but also to flow it. Debaters speak quickly because it allows them to make more arguments and expand on arguments in greater depth in a given time period. Nonetheless, debate is not simply a race. The quality of your arguments matters more than the speed at which they are given. If two debaters make the same quality arguments but one of them makes more of them, however, the debater who makes more arguments is more likely to win. The Importance of Practice Debate speaking is an intense mental and physical activity that requires discipline, concentration, and endurance. The only way to train your mind and body to achieve a fast and clear delivery is to practice, focusing on specific components of your speaking as well as your delivery as a whole. Just as a competitive runner must practice running in order to succeed, a competitive debater must practice their speaking in order to be effective. Daily speaking develops endurance and helps ensure that a debater is in top form at every tournament. Successful varsity debaters practice their speaking at least minutes per day. How To Practice Reading While there are many specialized drills, the most important way to practice debate speaking is to practice like you play. Familiarity with one s blocks and evidence makes it exponentially easier to deliver them quickly, clearly, and persuasively. Make a habit of reading through as many files as possible both silently and out-loud, concentrating on increasing your familiarity with key vocabulary words. The more familiar you become with your evidence, the more likely you will be able to present it persuasively to your audience. Reading through a different file each day when practicing your speaking is an easy way to develop a higher comfort level with more of the arguments in your arsenal. In addition to reading through as many files as possible, it is important to read through key blocks and evidence on a consistent basis. First affirmatives should read their 1AC every day, first negatives should routinely read key shells and frontlines, and second affirmatives and second negatives should practice reading key overviews, frontlines, and blocks. While memorization is not the goal, improved familiarity will enable debaters to deliver their materials at top speed while remaining clear and persuasive. When practicing your speaking, keep a timer handy and track the amount of time it takes to read certain positions or pieces of evidence. Each time you practice, log the amount of time certain arguments took and include any notes that might later be helpful (e.g. had trouble with the impact evidence or was working on enunciation ). By logging your time, you will have an easily accessible reference to track your improvement and to remind yourself about deficiencies you re working to improve. 37

38 Specialized Drills In addition to general practice, students can use specialized drills to correct specific flaws. In the same way that a baseball pitcher would use long toss and stretching exercises to rehab their arm after shoulder surgery, a debater can use these drills to rehab their speaking. 1. Breathe Diaphragmatically this allows you to project your voice and maintain a strong, consistent breathing pattern (we will practice it today). 2. Tongue Twisters this is especially helpful for improving enunciation and for correcting particular difficulties (sh vs. s sounds, etc.). 3. Songs/Lyrics these make speaking drills fun and increase the challenge. 4. Random Paragraph Generator / Bad Writing these drills force you to pay close attention to what you are reading so that you do not skip words or say words that aren t there. Other drills like reading backward or reading with a pen in your mouth aren t generally as effective. 38

39 How To Improve At Debate Debate is a challenging activity that s what makes it fun. While there are many things that go into successful debating, there are really just three things that you need to do in order to debate well: 1. You have to know what you re talking about. 2. You have to be ready to tell others what you re talking about. 3. You have to effectively tell others what you re talking about. These three elements of successful debating provide a foundation for self-improvement. If you want to get better at debate, you need to invest some effort into each one. 1. You have to know what you re talking about. The most important thing you can do to improve at debate is to better understand the arguments and evidence on both sides of every issue. Improved understanding of the arguments and evidence results in better constructives, cross-examinations, and rebuttals every other tip is secondary. How do you improve your understanding of the material you will be debating? First and most obviously, read it. Then read it again. And read it some more. When reading, take notes that you can use when writing blocks, asking or answering questions in cross-ex, or delivering a rebuttal speech. Work with a partner and crossexamine one another about the evidence. Ask each other to explain the arguments. If you encounter a question you can t answer, review the materials or do additional research until you can answer it with confidence. Learning to effectively master a set of arguments and evidence is an incredibly valuable and powerful skill that will pay off not only in debate but in school and in life. 2. You have to be ready to tell others what you re talking about. It is not enough to know what you re talking about. While knowledge is important, you also need to be in a position to tell others about that knowledge. In debate, that means having a handle on your materials making sure they are organized, highlighted, and prepared so that you can use them in debates. At this point, you have already been given a number of blocks. You will continue to receive more blocks as the season progresses. You can also create your own blocks independently or with others to share. Coaches will review blocks upon request to provide feedback and help you improve them. Once your blocks are written and your evidence is highlighted, it is important to make sure everything is immaculately organized. During a debate, you have minimal prep time you don t want to spend any of it searching for something. If your materials are well-organized, you can save your prep time for thinking about the arguments and identifying the nexus issues in the debate. 39

40 3. You have to effectively tell others what you re talking about. Even the best knowledge of the topic and the best prepared materials is not enough: you also need to communicate that knowledge and those materials effectively to the judge. This requires practice; in the same way that an athlete practices their sport over-and-over again in preparation for a game, good debaters practice debating in preparation for a tournament. At previous practices, we discussed speaking drills and how to use them to improve. Debaters should practice speaking every day. Good debate speaking is a learned skill the more you practice, the better you will sound and the more comfortable you will be when the pressure is on at a tournament. In addition to reading evidence and blocks, debaters should practice giving rebuttal speeches. The easiest way to do this is to give rebuttal reworks (or redos ) based on the debates that you have at tournaments. In the week after the Alpharetta tournament, for example, you could redo your 2NR from rounds 1 and 3 and your 1AR from rounds 2 and 4. This can be done alone, with a partner, or with a coach. Get your flows and re-flow the debate up to the point where you will be giving the speech. Set a timer and give yourself a certain amount of prep time (the less prep time, the better). When prep time is up, simulate the speech: stand up, give an order, and give the speech. If you are doing the speech by yourself, record yourself so you can watch and listen. For more information about improving at debate, check out So, How Do I Get Better At Debate: Answering Debate s Toughest Question at We cannot insure success, but we can deserve it. Joseph Addison There s no secret to our success. We re simply very thorough. We know exactly what we have to do, and then we do it. We leave nothing to chance. James Madison Copeland Ten-Time National Champion Debate Coach 40

41 Low-Hanging Fruit: Easy Improvements There are many easy ways to improve your speaker points and win more debates. All of these tips fall into the category of acting like a varsity debater, not a novice. The more you can eliminate annoying novice habits, the better chance you will have to earn higher points and wins in close debates. The following are ten easy ways to improve. Each tip concludes with an assessment of the difficulty level involved in implementing it on a scale from zero (not difficult at all) to three (still easy, but a bit harder). 1. Time everything Bring a timer and time every speech (constructives, rebuttals, cross-examinations) and all prep time (yours and theirs). Both debaters should always have a timer going. Keep track on a piece of paper of how much prep each team has left. Difficulty level: zero. 2. Stand still and face the judge during speeches and cross-examinations Always face the judge when you are speaking or cross-exing. Do not face your opponents, the wall, the ceiling, the floor, etc. Stand still don t fidget, walk around, or rock back and forth. Use hand gestures, but only purposefully to convey importance and make connections with the judge. Difficulty level: zero. 3. Sit down and flow When it is not your turn to speak or cross-ex, you should be seated. During speeches, flow (the only exception is that the 1N should not flow the 2NC s/he should be prepping for the 1NR). During prep time, prep. You should never be standing up or walking around during any part of the debate that you are not directly involved in (giving a speech or participating in a cross-ex). Difficulty level: zero. 4. Keep your area organized and tidy Get out only the files you need before the debate and put everything else away. Have your pens, timers, flow paper, and files easily accessible. Have a bottle of water within reach. Keep everything else out of your work space. During the debate, keep your evidence organized neatly so that you know where everything is at all times. Difficulty level: one. 5. Give clear roadmaps When it is your turn to give a speech, begin by providing a clear roadmap. The 1AC does not give a roadmap. The 1NC says the number of off-case positions and then the order of the case. Every subsequent speech uses the title of the off-case and on-case arguments that they are addressing (e.g. the order will be the China DA, the Shunning DA, the Soft Power Advantage, and the Terrorism Advantage ). Difficulty level: one. 6. Use your blocks effectively You have many blocks. Use them! Know where they are and keep them organized so that you can quickly pull them during a debate. Know how long each block takes you to read so that you can cover everything effectively. Difficulty level: one. 7. Speak clearly and confidently Don t mumble or whisper. Don t yell, but be loud enough for everyone to hear you. Clarity is most important, but speak quickly and with a sense of urgency you only have a limited amount of time to speak, so you want to make the most of it. Novice debaters that sound like varsity debaters get higher points and more wins a big part of that is being clear and confident. Difficulty level: two. 8. Demonstrate preparation, not scripting, in Cross-Ex It is good to prepare lines of questioning for the crossexes, but it is bad to read them as if they were a script. Well prepared questions delivered naturally make the judge think you are smart; scripted questions make the judge think you are a mindless robot. Difficulty level: three. 41

42 9. Give effective 2NR/2AR overviews Start your final rebuttal speech by explaining why you have won the debate. This should take between 10 and 30 seconds and should write the ballot for the judge tell them what you think they should say when they say that they voted for you. When negative, this is most often something along the lines of the disadvantage outweighs the case. When affirmative, this is most often something like the case outweighs the disadvantage. When a counterplan or topicality is involved, this can change. But the basic advice is the same: write the judge s ballot for them. Difficulty level: three. 10. Sit down and take notes after the debate Put your flows together and label them with the tournament, round, opponent, side, and judge s name. When the judge discloses and explains their decision, take notes either on a new sheet of paper or on a round report form. Keep these notes with your flows. At the end of a tournament, you should have neatly organized flows and judge notes from every debate. Hold on to these! You can use them to rework speeches and to discuss your debates with the coaches. Difficulty level: zero. 42

43 Speaker Points From the Anatomy of a Debate Tournament section of the handout for Practice #4 (09/11/2012): Points are awarded on a 30 point scale based on the overall skill of the debaters, not necessarily the differential between the two teams. Points are not used to keep score; they are used to communicate how well the judge thought you performed above and beyond the decision. In fact, a team can win with fewer points than the losing team if they have done an overall better job but lost a critical argument. The speaker point scale is generally as follows: extremely impressive performance; likely to win a high speaker award very impressive performance; likely to win a speaker award strong performance, but not quite as impressive good performance, but room for improvement solid performance, but room for improvement lots of room for improvement However, different judges use slightly different scales especially in novice. Most judges curve speaker points for the division they are judging (such that, i.e., a 29.0 in Novice would be a 27.0 in Varsity), but some do not. Some judges tend to give higher points than average; others tend to give very low points (such that, i.e. a 28.2 from one judge is very good while a 28.2 from another judge is not as impressive). As with written comments, it is important not to overreact to speaker points especially small samples (like one round or even one tournament). Instead, look for trends: are your points improving? Do you tend to get higher points on the affirmative or negative? Have you been judged by the same person twice? Did your points from them improve? Even then, speaker points in Novice are not as reliable as they are in Varsity. Good debaters don t obsess over their points and they especially don t obsess over comparing their points to other debaters. Instead, they maintain a longterm perspective and focus on constant improvement through hard work. 43

44 Disadvantages 44

45 Introduction to Disadvantages What is a disadvantage? A disadvantage is an argument advanced by the negative that isolates an undesirable consequence of adopting the affirmative plan. In other words, it is a bad thing that will happen if the plan is passed. The word disadvantage is often abbreviated as Disad or DA. What are the parts of a disadvantage? There are three main parts of a disadvantage: 1. Uniqueness why the impact won't happen absent the plan 2. Link why the plan triggers the impact 3. Impact the bad thing that will result from the plan's adoption Disadvantages sometimes also include internal links (the steps that happen between the link and the impact), brinks/thresholds (explanations of why the plan is enough to trigger the impact), and timeframes (the length of time it will take to trigger the impact), but these are not essential components of the position and are really just subsets of the uniqueness, link, and impact. When are disadvantages read? Negatives read the shell (first-line argument) of a disadvantage in the 1NC. They then extend the disadvantage in the 2NC or 1NR and in the 2NR, depending on how the negative decides to approach the rest of the debate. How do affirmatives answer disadvantages? When answering a DA, affirmatives can do any of the following: contest the uniqueness (the impact will happen regardless of the plan) contest the link (the plan won't trigger the impact) minimize the impact (the bad thing the negative isolates isn't so bad). These are all defensive arguments; they are reasons not to not do the plan (as opposed to reasons to do the plan). The affirmative can also turn the link or the impact. A link turn argues that the plan prevents the DA impact (and that the DA impact would happen in the status quo if the plan is not enacted). An impact turn argues that the impact to the disadvantage is actually good. These are offensive arguments; they try to reasons to do the plan (as opposed to reasons not to not do the plan). How are disadvantages won? In order to win a disadvantage, the negative needs to persuade the judge that the risk of the disadvantage outweighs the risk of the case. In other words, they must prove that the risk of the impact isolated by the disadvantage is more important than the impact to the case isolated by the affirmative. Likewise, the affirmative must prove that the risk of the case outweighs the risk of the disadvantage. 45

46 How are impacts compared? Comparing the impacts of the case with the impacts of the disadvantage is one of the most important parts of a debate. Most of the time, the affirmative will win that there is some benefit to adopting the plan and the negative will win that there is some cost to adopting the plan. The question at the end of most debates is therefore whether the benefits outweigh the costs (in which case the judge will vote affirmative) or the costs outweigh the benefits (in which case the judge will vote negative). There are many ways to compare impacts, but the three most popular methods are as follows: 1. Magnitude which impact is bigger or larger? 2. Probability which impact is more likely to occur? 3. Timeframe which impact will happen sooner? Debaters use these concepts to weigh or compare impacts. 46

47 Answering Disadvantages Identify the DA(s) Being Read In most debates, the 1NC will introduce one or more disadvantages. Each disadvantage should be flowed on a separate sheet of paper. The affirmative s first-line response to a disadvantage is called the frontline. Because it is most often read in the 2AC, it is called the 2AC Frontline in the novice files. Occasionally, the 2NC will introduce one or more disadvantages for the first time. When this happens, the 1AR should read a shortened version of the 2AC frontline to each disadvantage that was read. Even though the frontline is called the 2AC Frontline, it is really just the first response that the affirmative should make to a given disadvantage. How To Know What To Read The 2AC should respond to all disadvantages that the 1NC has read, but not to any other disadvantages. Think of the evidence packet as a toolbox of materials to use in your debates. The only materials that matter are those that are used in the debate; you only need to answer arguments that the other team makes, not arguments that the other team could make. Review of Basic Method For Answering DAs When answering a DA, affirmatives can do any of the following: contest the uniqueness (the impact will happen regardless of the plan) contest the link (the plan won't trigger the impact) minimize the impact (the bad thing the negative isolates isn't so bad). These are all defensive arguments; they are reasons not to not do the plan (as opposed to reasons to do the plan). The affirmative can also turn the link or the impact. A link turn argues that the plan prevents the DA impact (and that the DA impact would happen in the status quo if the plan is not enacted). An impact turn argues that the impact to the disadvantage is actually good. These are offensive arguments; they try to reasons to do the plan (as opposed to reasons not to not do the plan). 47

48 Extending Disadvantages Review of Basics A disadvantage is an argument advanced by the negative that isolates an undesirable consequence of adopting the affirmative plan. In other words, it is a bad thing that will happen if the plan is passed. The word disadvantage is often abbreviated as Disad or DA. An introduction to disadvantages was provided in the notes for Practice #4 09/11/2012. Basic Blueprint Negative teams extend disadvantages in the negative block. It is acceptable for either the 2NC or the 1NR (or both) to extend a disadvantage, but remember to effectively split the negative block (see the notes from Practice #5 09/19/2012). When extending a disadvantage, the negative should provide an overview, answer all 2AC arguments, and extend each component of the DA. Usually, the extension of each component will occur on the line-by-line while answering the 2AC. Sometimes, however, the affirmative will not answer part of the DA. In that case, the negative should extend the part of the DA that the affirmative did not answer in addition to answering all of the 2AC arguments. This can be done as part of the overview or on the line-by-line. The Overview Start by providing an overview that explains the impact to the disadvantage and how and why it outweighs and interacts with the case. The goal of the overview is to explain why the risk of the disadvantage should persuade the judge to vote negative. You do not need to make all of your arguments in the overview that dilutes its value. Instead, you should use the overview to explain why if you win a good risk of your disadvantage, you should win the debate. To do so, you should compare the impact(s) to the DA to the impact(s) to the case and explain how your impacts interact with their impacts: To compare impacts, use the filters we learned in Practice #4 (magnitude, probability, and timeframe). To explain interactions between impacts, think of how the impact to the DA affects the impact to the affirmative case. An example of a disadvantage overview is provided in the supplemental materials for today s practice. The Line-by-Line The model for answering 2AC arguments is similar to the model for debating case arguments. Beginning with the first 2AC argument, the 2NC/1NR should reference the 2AC argument and then answer it. To do so, negative debaters should extend and explain 1NC evidence, use their own analysis, and present additional supporting evidence. 2AC number [#] They say [briefly label their argument], but [answer their argument]. The process of extending case arguments and extending DAs is very similar, but there is a crucial difference to keep in mind. While the negative can selectively extend its case arguments, it must answer all 2AC arguments against a disadvantage. If the negative does not answer one of the affirmative s responses, the affirmative will be able to extend it and severely mitigate or completely eliminate the risk of the DA. See the Dropped Arguments section of today s handout for a longer discussion of this concept. Examples of line-by-line responses are provided in the supplemental materials for today s practice. 48

49 Topicality 49

50 Topicality What is a Resolution? The resolution is the topic for the season. The resolution is a sentence that establishes the topic and delineates the boundaries of the debates. The resolution thus enables students to prepare for the range of arguments they will likely encounter at any given tournament. What if There Wasn t a Resolution? In novice, there are case limits to tell the debaters what affs they can read. In varsity, there are no case limits. The affirmative gets to choose the case. How does that change debate? What would happen if the aff could debate about whatever they want? What is Topicality? Topicality is a debate about whether the affirmative is a part of the topic. Topicality is about the plan affirmatives can discuss lots of things in the debate, but the plan must be part of the resolution 50

51 Why Do We Debate About Topicality? It s usually not black and white it s very rare for the affirmative to be 100% non-topical (or 100% topical). In novice, we mostly debate about topicality to practice for varsity. Topicality is also used strategically even if the plan is topical (like our plan), the negative will use topicality as a strategic argument to beat the affirmative for technical reasons rather than to make sure the aff doesn t stray from the topic. What s the goal of the Negative on T? The goal of the negative is to establish what the topic should include and then prove that the affirmative plan is not part of that topic. What s the goal of the Affirmative on T? The goal of the affirmative is to win that their affirmative is part of the negative s interpretation of the topic or that there is an alternative interpretation of the topic that is better for debate. How Does the Negative Argue Topicality? Establish what one of the words in the resolution means. Explain why the affirmative doesn t meet that interpretation Win that that interpretation is important for debate. How Does the Affirmative Argue Topicality? Argue that the affirmative meets the negative s interpretation. Argue that the topic should be defined differently. (Remind them to do this even if they think they meet the neg s interp). Argue that their interpretation is better than the negative s. Argue that topicality should not be strictly defined err aff, reasonability, etc. 51