Debate II: Speaker Responsibilities Doris L. W. Chang

Presentation Outline Speaker Order and Responsibilities (Goodnight 22-31) 1st AC (affirmative constructive speech) 1st NC 2nd AC 2nd NC 1st NR 1st AR 2nd NR 2nd AR Tips on Debate Practices (Manish Vij) In-class Informal Debate Practice

Speaker Responsibilities (Goodnight 22) 1st AC Presents reasons for change (contentions or advantages) and solution 1st NC Challenges aff. Def. of terms, topicality, refutes aff. contentions or advantage 2nd AC Rebuilds aff. Case, refutes neg. arguments, extends remaining aff. arguments. 2nd NC Refutes aff. plan-workability, solvency, disadvantages 1st NR Refutes, extends, develops case arguments introduced by 2nd AC 1st AR Responds to all negative arguments (2 NC & 1 NR) 2nd NR Extends negative arguments on case or plan. Choose “Voting Issues” in conclusion. 2nd AR Answers negative’s objections extended by 2nd NR, and re-establish the aff. case.

1st AC--Strategy Strategy: --to present the strongest possible case for the proposition --to leave the affirmative in a strong offensive position

1st AC: Duties A brief, pleasant introduction that capsulize the affirmative’s approach The resolution (proposition) Definition of key terms in the proposition Aff. justification for change Aff. Plan Plan Advantages Brief summary of the aff. Case.

1st AC: Outline Introduction Statement of the resolution Definition of terms Inherency Significance Presentation of the plan Solvency of the plan (need case) Advantages of the plan (comparative advantage case; optional for need case.)

1st NC: Strategy To maintain the validity of the present system To take the offensive away from the aff. To expand the debate beyond the arguments presented in the 1st AC speech.

1st NC: Duties A brief intro. and explanation of the negative’s philosophy in the debate The neg.’s organization for analyzing the aff. Arguments. Challenge the aff. Definition of terms. Challenge the aff. topicality Defend the present system by summarizing its aims & effectiveness in meeting its goals. Show that the aff. failed to justify its proposal to change the present system Briefly summarize the neg. position in the debate.

1st NC: Outline Introduction & statement of the neg. philosophy. Challenge aff. definition of terms with counter-evidence & quote of authority Challenge topicality: carefully explain why the aff. case does not fall within the bounds of the resolution. Structure each refutation State the aff. point to be refuted, using aff. Labels State your position relative to the aff. Contention Present evidence for the neg. point Explain C’s impact on the aff. Case Restate your position. Restatement of the neg. philosophy or summary of the neg’s overall impact on the aff. Case.

2nd AC: Strategy to uphold the aff. burden of proof, to remain on the offensive and to narrow the range of arguments.

2nd AC: Duties Give a brief introduction Prove that the aff. case justifies the topic by re-establishing the aff. def. of terms and topicality, if challenged. Reestablish the aff. Justification for change. Prove that the harm exists, is significant, and is likely to grow worse if nothing’s done Demonstrate that the harm is caused by the present system. (or prove the advantages are unique to the aff. plan. Review aff. arguments that haven’t been attacked so far. Briefly summarize

2nd AC: Outline Intro.: Overview of the debate thus far Show the relationship between aff. case and neg. philosophy Defend def. of terms or topicality, if needed Re-establish the aff. Inherency, answer neg. refutation Attack any neg. constructive materials Use aff. contentions to refute its philosophy or defense of the present system. Summarize, emphasizing arguments dropped by the neg. and arguments carried by aff.

2nd NC: Strategy To outline plan workability and solvency problems and disadvantages to adopting the aff. plan.

2nd NC: Duties Outline the 2nd NC speech plan, road map Show why the aff. proposal is unworkable Challenge the aff. justification for change Show why the aff. plan will not solve the problems. Detail the disadvantages of the aff. plan—provide well-developed disadvantages with supporting evidences Briefly conclude. (prove disadvantages outweigh advantages if adopting the aff. proposition).

2nd NC: Outline Introduction with ref. to the neg. philosophy by 1st NC. Preview 2nd NC speech. Workability: attack specific elements of the aff. Plan. Solvency: prove that the aff. plan cannot achieve the advantages the aff. claimed Disadvantages: develop all attacks to prove that even if the aff. Plan could meet the need, disadvantages outweigh advantages. (see Goodnight 27 for ex.)

1st NR: Strategy To extend the negative’s case attacks To create a complete unit (block) of the neg. position Tips: relate the NR conclusion to the neg. position on case, and its plan objections. --establish that the need doesn’t exist --that even if it did, the plan is significantly unable to meet the need. --that there shall be more disadvantages than advantages.

1st NR: Duties Challenge the aff. def. of terms -- if still unacceptable, drop it if the aff. has adequately defended it. Refute the 2nd AC arguments and extend the neg. explanation why the case is not topical, if it is the case. Choose key points in the 1st NC’s speech, refute aff. objections, explain why the points are the most important arguments in the debate Examine the aff. justification for change again Give a summary of the negative block.

1st AR: Strategy To further the aff. strategies of fulfilling the burden of proof, To validate the aff. plan, To narrow the debate both on case and on plan Tips: in a 5 min. rebuttal speech, spend 2-2.5 min. on plan attacks and the balance on case.

1st AR: Duties Refute the neg.’s plan objections Consolidate as many arguments as possible. Point out the neg. flaws in reasoning, and missing links in arguments. Show how neg. disadvantages are really aff. adventages. Rebuilt the aff. case at major points of attack. Narrow the debate by focusing on key issues and explain why they are important. Consolidate as many 1st NR arguments as possible Briefly summarize the strengths of the aff. case.

2NR: Strategy To identify the case arguments the neg. views as voting issues in order to win the round To demonstrate that the significance of the disadvantages outweighs the advantages or the solvency of the affirmative harm. Tips: the 1st NR & 2nd NR should communicate well. 1st NR could identify the voting issues on the case while 2nd NR could identify those on the plan. The 2nd NR could also begin with the most important voting issues and end with the least important if time is limited. Think, communicate, and stay organized

2nd NR: Duties Give a brief intro. and road map of the speech direction Briefly re-establish topicality and def. of terms challenges, if still applicable. Re-establish key case arguments as voting issues and extend them for the neg. Review plan objections and disadvantages, refute the aff. responses, and show issues the aff. neglected to discuss. Summarize the negative position, call for rejection of the proposition.

2nd AR: Strategy To put the debate in perspective, continue to advance the aff.’s basic strategies in the debate. Tips: Clarify muddled or confused arguments. The 2nd AR should explain what the arguments mean in terms of the context of the debate round. E.g. the 2nd AR might demonstrate why the advantages or solvency of the aff. harm outweigh a disadvantage the neg. may be winning.

2nd AR: Duties Give a brief intro. and road map of the speech Extend answers to plan objections Refute major disadvantages Group neg. arguments where possible Try to center the speech on 3 or 4 major arguments the aff. cas depends on. Explain why if they differ from the key arguments identified by the neg. Review the basic aff. Analysis and call for acceptance of the proposition.

Tips on Debate Practice Voting Issues Tips for individual debaters

The Voting Issues by Manish Vij Aff Neg Significance There's a big problem. The problem is small. Inherency The status quo is not solving the problem. Status quo is solving. Plan Here's our plan to solve the problem. Solvency Here's why our plan solves the problem. Plan does not solve the problem. Advantages In addition to solving the problem, our plan has the following advantages. Advantages are not significant. Topicality Our plan fits under the resolution. The plan does not address the resolution. Disadvantages Our plan does not cause these disadvantages. The plan harms more than it helps.

1st AC Prepared; should sound like oratory Practiced Memorized intro and conclusion Good transitions between cards If you have good ev, don't save it for later - use it here Should lead into 2AC Not too much structure; never beyond I. A. 1. You can preempt Don't define terms (preempt topicality)

1st NC Road map Run plan-side arguments first Disads, topicality, counterplans Use a separate flow pad Next, hit case (inherency, significance, solvency) Don't go card by card; answer red flag issues (crucial to winning the round) Attack the rationale behind cards Don't ask questions; make arguments! Allocate sufficient time to put out case arguments Save evidence for extensions

2nd AC Road map Pull points that 1NC dropped and extend throughout round Answer DAs, topicality, counterplans first Put out at least 7 responses to each disad (analysis ok) Put out turns on disads but don't double-turn (links & impacts) Put out a variety of independent responses Next, at least two-point each case argument Don't drop anything You will have to group Neg arguments

2nd NC Decide who will do what in the Neg Block Road map Bury the Aff: 3-point each response to your disad(s) Extend the parts of the disads that you'll go for Grant a disad you're losing by granting everything that is not a turn: Uniqueness, link, brink Bury 2AC arguments

1st NR Rules: Pick out your round-winner and bury Aff responses Use no prep time unless the disad isn't buried yet Read evidence Write speech during 2NC Pick out your round-winner and bury Aff responses

1st AR Toughest speech in round because it follows the negative block Use 2AC structure to avoid putting out new arguments Road map Answer new disads from 2NC Next, go to old disads, topicality, counterplan If the disads have been buried: Use 2AC structure to refer to 2NC responses Don't go through all Neg responses It takes only one good response remaining to beat a disad Go to case Pull important arguments and cards Don't be too specific and don't explain; there's no time! Beat round-winner by grouping Neg arguments

2nd NR Road map Use all your prep time Ask your partner which arguments to pull during the first or last 30 seconds of cross-ex Beat all Aff responses to disads by grouping Pull specific arguments from 1NR, 2NC Extend disad impacts Go down round-winning stock issue Slime control: remind judge that no new arguments are allowed in 2AR, and if the other team tries to slime, judge should drop them. In last thirty seconds, paint the picture. Write the ballot for the judge. Burden of proof: If the judge has any doubt in his mind on any issue, he should vote Neg. New policies are inherently unknown and risky.

2nd AR Road map Extend; respond to one or two Neg arguments on disads; win one Weigh Aff policy vs. status quo - write the ballot Refer to 2AC structure and to make the debate sound as if it's on your ground In last 30 seconds, paint the picture. Write the ballot for the judge. Risk theory: If voting aff has even a 1% chance of saving a life, the judge should vote aff.

How to Win Rounds Be clear. Judges tune out of murky debates. Sound like you are winning - even if you aren't. It intimidates the other team and helps you with the judge. Keep your options open. Put out a lot of arguments initially, so no one can bury them all. Then focus and find your round-winners.

How to Win Rounds 4. Don't bet the round on a trick. Don't argue in 2AR that response X, when combined with argument Y, turns disad Z and gives you the victory. Judges can't or won't follow it. 5. Simplify at the end. Write the ballot in the last 20 seconds. Make it clear why you win. Aff: compare your policy with the status quo. Neg: go down stock issues and stress that you must only win one.

How to Win Rounds In league, on the Neg, put out case presses/evidence presses, then read evidence. Teams who want an evidence war will drop the presses and just read evidence. This really can make you look good if you play up the dropped presses. This is called Manny and John-style debating, named after Homestead-A 1987-88, M. Varadarajan and J. Riemenschnitter. (They qualed for Nats doing this.) It helps to have a long last name.

How to Win Rounds 7. It's ok to go slightly fast in league. It may even make you look more intelligent. Caveat: That means faster than oratory pace, but not even close to a spread. 8. Humor! Be very cautious and appropriate with this, but if you can get a judge to laugh - and this requires a very delicate sense of appropriateness - the judge is yours.

Your Turn to Practice Divide the class into two debate camps Group 4 members on one team for the following debate practices. Decide which small team will represent your camp each time. Formulate a proposition Decide the debaters and orders Brainstorm for debate preparation, be sure all debaters are clear about his/her responsibilities In-class debate practices.

Works Cited Goodnight, Lynn. Getting Started in Debate. 2nd Ed. Lincolnwood, Chicago: NTC, 1994. Vij, Manish. “Introduction to Team Debate.” April 10, 2006. <http://www.vij.com/debate/ > Online Debate <http://debate.navidot.com/cgi- bin/dbate_m.pl>

Have Fun Debating!