Plans in LD No Limits Debate Camp.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
(Counter) Plans Because they didn’t limit the topic.
Advertisements

Matt Gomez Debating the Disadvantage (DA). 4 Part One: What is a Disadvantage?
A Firm Foundation: CX Debate Basics (Part I) A N INTRODUCTION TO P OLICY D EBATE - The Minnesota Urban Debate League -
POLICY DEBATE Cross-Examination (CX). POLICY DEBATE  Purpose of policy debate is to compare policies and decide which is best  Affirmative: Supports.
Cross Examination (CX) Debate
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.
Debating Case and Disadvantages CODI 2014 Lecture 1.
POLICY DEBATE Will look like CX on the sign up sheet.
Kris Stroup, Longview Community College Constructing Opposition Arguments 2010 Advocacy Institute International Debate Education Association and Willamette.
Counterplans CODI 2014 Lecture 2. What is a counterplan? A plan offered by the negative to solve some or all of the affirmative’s advantages The negative.
Debate Notes: Arguments Building the Affirmative and the Negative Constructive Arguments.
Introduction to Debate -Affirmative- To access audio: Skype: freeconferencecallhd and enter # Or call and enter # © L.
Counterplans Debate Central Workshop August 30, 2008.
Constructive Speeches (1AC)- 6 MINUTES CX 1A to 2N- 3 MINUTES (1NC)- 6 MINUTES CX- 1N to 1A- 3 MINUTES (2AC)- 6 MINUTES CX- 2A to 1N- 3 MINUTES (2NC)-
Propositions A proposition is the declarative statement that an advocate intends to support in the argument. Some propositions are stated formally, some.
Most important things Keep your personal views outside the room Debaters must adapt to you Be honest about your judging experience.
ORDER AND PURPOSE OF THE SPEECHES
And other things… DISADVANTAGES. BUT FIRST, LETS REVIEW FOR THE QUIZ The quiz on Wednesday will be open note and will cover the two primary topics and.
Counterplans The Negative’s Best Friend The Negative’s Best Friend.
The Stock Issues of Debate 5 Things Every Debater Needs, and Needs to Know!
11/12/2015 Aim: To determine qualities of a good argument Topic: The Stuff of Good Argument.
Week 1. Q. From where did LD debate come? Q. Where policy debate involves federal policy, what does LD involve? Q. LD involves which civilization?
Opposition Strategy NCFA Rookie Debate Camp. Agenda ❖ A Brief Word on Trichotomy ❖ Basic Path to Winning ❖ Opposition Strategies by Position* ❖ Quick.
The Affirmative And Stock Issues By: Matt Miller.
The Disadvantage Provides an added measure to vote against the affirmative plan and vote for the present system.
Debating the Case GDI Glossary Aff case Advantage Offense Defense Card Analytic.
Policy Debate THISPAD.
Affirmative Strategy Austin Layton. Overview At least, take two things from this lecture Main Advantage of Being Aff: Familiarity – Preparation Matters.
POLICY DEBATE Training Tomorrow’s Leaders How to Think Today!
Debate The Essentials Ariail, Robert. “Let the Debates Begin.” 18 Aug orig. published in The State, South Carolina. 26 Sept
Judging Policy Debate Rich Edwards Baylor University July 2013.
Impact Calculus 101 Casey Parsons. What is impact calculus? You might remember on the first powerpoint that something called “impact calculus” was referenced.
 4 th stock issue  Significance means that the issue addressed by the Affirmative team is a major force affecting a large group.  The penalty for not.
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.
POLICY DEBATE. WHAT IS POLICY DEBATE? A structured format for fairly arguing a topic of policy TEAM DEBATE: two teams of two students each 8 speeches.
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 Strategies Dallas Urban Debate League December, 2007.
Constructing Opposition Arguments International Debate Education Association Prepared for IDEA Youth Forum Summer, 2010 Prepared by Robert Trapp Willamette.
REFUTATION. CIVIL DISOBEDIENCE IS JUSTIFIED BECAUSE OF THE GOOD IT CAN DO FOR THE COMMUNITY AS A WHOLE. DURING THE 1960’S, THE CIVIL RIGHTS MOVEMENT DID.
The Affirmative.
BASICS OF BEING AFFIRMATIVE
Affirmative vs. negative
WELCOME TO DEBATE! Negative Basics.
THE AFF – BURDEN AND STRUCTURE
How to be negative Gabi Yamout.
Hegemony (Heg) Economic, military, and political influence a nation has. It’s America’s street cred Soft Power + Hard Power= Heg Amount of Soft + Amount.
Answering the CP Casey Parsons.
Debate: The Basics.
Negative Strategies.
The Affirmative Adapted from:.
BY KENI SABATH FOR NO LIMITS DEBATE CAMP
Introduction to the aff
Policy Analysis in Cross-ex Debate
Wining the DA Casey Parsons.
Introduction to Policy Debate
ORDER AND PURPOSE OF POLICY SPEECHES
DEBATE So you like to argue?.
Welcome to Debate! Cross-examination
Informative, Persuasive, and Impromptu Speaking all rolled into one!
5 Planks of a Plan.
Negative Attacks.
Stock Issues.
Thinking like a Policy Debater
Debate Basics Review.
A Firm Foundation: CX Debate Basics (Part I)
Getting To Know Debate:
Debate.
Introduction to CX Debate: Part II
DEBATE Justification.
Presentation transcript:

Plans in LD No Limits Debate Camp

What a Plan Is Resolutions like Resolved: The United States ought to submit to the jurisdiction of an international court designed to prosecute crimes against humanity. Contain a question of value and a question of policy. “Ought to submit” = issue of morality – what is right and wrong, what we should do. “International court….to prosecute crimes against humanity…” – this is a “plan”. To affirm you must win both parts – we ought to and it should be a international court. To negate, you can defeat either of these propositions.

Elements of a Plan Plans must : Must solve the problem (solvency) Be a warranted response to a warranted problem in the status quo. (need) Must solve the problem (solvency) Must not create more or worse problems than the problems in the SQ it solves. (harms or disadvantages) Necessity of weighing Negative strategy: accept the affirmative case when it demonstrates the problem in the SQ, Offer an alternative plan and win it.

Some things to pay attention to in arguing a plan Use CX to nail down exactly what the negative plan is. (plan text) Be sure the plan is uniquely different from the affirmative/contentional “plan” Be sure to compare your plan to theirs (harms or disadvantages) Offense is in showing your plan is superior It is not enough to show their plan is bad. Remember the ways of weighing Time Magnitude probability

Lets group write a plan for our resolution Resolved: In the United States, private ownership of handguns ought to be banned. Need: guns or use of guns or who has them… Solvency: Resolu = ban them Alternatives ? More, different regulations Advantages over SQ or Aff Economic, political, social, pragmatic,