1. CROSS-EXAMINATION DEBATE: THE AFFIRMATIVE CASE
Banking
6/12/2018 5
CROSS-EXAMINATION DEBATE: THE AFFIRMATIVE CASE
5.1 Characteristics of CX Debate
5.2 Research and Organization
5.3 Build the Affirmative Case
Chapter 1

2. 5.1 CHARACTERISTICS OF CX DEBATE
Banking
6/12/2018
5.1 CHARACTERISTICS OF CX DEBATE
GOALS
Identify the differences between Lincoln-Douglas debate and cross-examination debate.
Explain how time is used in a CX debate.
Describe the speeches made during a CX debate.
Chapter 1

3. TERMS
policy
constructive speech
rebuttal speech
negative block

5. Differences between Lincoln-Douglas Debate and Cross-Examination Debate
Joining a debate team offers a variety of opportunities and challenges.
Compete individually
Compete as part of a team

6. Fundamental Differences
Focus
LD debates are often referred to as value debates.
Focus on the worth, usefulness, or importance of the resolution
CX debates discuss issues of policy.
Policy
A specific action, implemented by government or society, which often requires changes in laws, rules, or legislation

7. Goal Topic The LD debate focuses on comparing abstract beliefs.
The CX format discusses concrete specifics.
Topic
LD topics change every two months.
CX debates last for an entire school year.

9. Structural Differences
Number of Debaters
An LD debate features two individual debaters debating just each other.
A CX debate features a team of two debaters debating another team of two debaters.

10. Type of Arguments Quantity of Arguments
LD arguments are value focused.
CX arguments focus on the realistic feasibility of a project.
Quantity of Arguments
LD debaters use evidence, examples, and emotional appeal.
CX debaters use evidence.
CX debaters use a higher volume of arguments.

12. Time Use in a CX Debate CX debate About ninety minutes long
Includes about eight minutes of preparation time for each team
Each debater is responsible for:
An eight-minute speech
A three-minute cross-examination
A five-minute rebuttal speech

14. Types of Speeches
Eight speeches are presented during a CX debate.
Each debater presents two speeches.

15. Constructive Speeches
The responsible debater constructs the position
Eight minutes in length
There are four constructive speeches:
First affirmative constructive speech
First negative constructive speech
Second affirmative constructive speech
Second negative constructive speech

16. Rebuttal Speeches Rebuttal speeches
Debaters narrow the debate during these speeches.
May add new evidence, new examples, or new ways of explaining an already established argument
Cannot add new arguments
Five minutes long

17. There are four negative rebuttal speeches.
First negative rebuttal speech
Negative block
The two back to back speeches presented by the negative team
First affirmative rebuttal speech
Second negative rebuttal speech
Second affirmative rebuttal speech

18. 5.2 RESEARCH AND ORGANIZATION
Banking
6/12/2018
5.2 RESEARCH AND ORGANIZATION
GOALS
Describe how to research a topic.
Understand how to organize your materials.
Chapter 1

19. TERMS
brainstorming
research packet
evidence
brief
citation
plagiarism

21. Research the Topic
Research is the key to your success.
You must be able to argue the side of the debate that was assigned to you.

22. Be sure you have the correct wording for the topic. Brainstorming
Identify the Topic
Be sure you have the correct wording for the topic.
Brainstorming
An informal discussion in which you share as many ideas related to the topic as you and your teammates can conceive
When the large topic areas emerge
You have the basis for your research categories

23. Purchase Research Packets
Materials compiled for debaters by universities, individuals, and research consortiums
Costs vary

24. Use reliable Internet sources.
Search the Internet
Use reliable Internet sources.
Reputable sites
Qualified authors
Having other sources that support the information
Current articles
Determine the author’s motives for providing the information.

25. Books provide two advantages.
Read Books
Books provide two advantages.
Explore issues in great depth
Expand your knowledge extensively

26. Peruse Periodicals and Newspapers
Periodicals and newspapers are an excellent source of recent information.
Make sure you use reliable publications.

27. Examine Government Documents
Government documents are public record.
Available at no charge
You may need to extract the specific information you need.

28. Organize the Materials
If you cannot access the information you have researched, it will not help you during the debate.

29. Sort and Organize Evidence
The proof that helps you prove your position
Divide the evidence into two groups.
Affirmative
Negative
Brief
A collection of evidence about a single subject

30. Record Citations Citation
Provides all the bibliographical information needed to find a source
Author’s name
Title of the source
Publication date
Publisher
Internet website (if applicable)

31. Plagiarism
The act of passing off someone else’s words or ideas as your own

32. Update Evidence
The need for updated evidence is always a priority.

33. 5.3 BUILD THE AFFIRMATIVE CASE
Banking
6/12/2018
5.3 BUILD THE AFFIRMATIVE CASE
GOALS
Describe the stock issues in an affirmative case.
Explain how to build the affirmative case.
Chapter 1

34. TERMS stock issue topicality harm significance prima facie inherency
inherent barrier
solvency
plan

36. What Are Stock Issues? Stock issues
The four basic arguments used in every debate
Topicality
Harm
Inherency
Solvency

37. Topicality Topicality
Addresses whether the affirmative case relates directly or indirectly to the resolution to be debated

38. Harm
Harm
An unwanted problem resulting from an action or inaction of the current system
The affirmative debater focuses the debate on a problem that exists in the present system that is not effectively being solved.

39. Significance Prima facie Sometimes used in conjunction with “harm”
Specifying that the harm is significant ensures that the subject of harm caused by the topic is large enough or important enough to warrant discussion.
Prima facie
“at first appearance”
Your argument must be obvious or self-evident enough to convince the judge that you are correct before hearing any arguments from the opposing team.

40. Inherency Inherency Inherent barrier Plan
Whether the status quo, or present system, can solve all the harm(s)
Inherent barrier
When you choose a harm scenario and determine that the status quo cannot solve this harm through current programs
Plan
Your own solution

41. Solvency
Solvency
Addresses whether the affirmative plan can solve the harm
To effectively establish solvency, you need specific evidence that shows that your plan will work.

42. Build Your Affirmative Case
Determine Topicality
Contention I — Introduce Harm Scenarios
Contention II — Prove Inherency
Use two to three excellent pieces of evidence.
Contention III — Establish Solvency
Use three to five excellent pieces of evidence.
A blend of theoretical and factual evidence is best

43. Propose Plan Plan Parts of a plan
Short paragraph that explains the change that you are suggesting
Parts of a plan
Implementation
Funding
Enforcement
Time frame (optional)

44. Contention IV — Identify Advantages
Point out the advantages of choosing the affirmative plan over the status quo.
Use three to five pieces of excellent evidence.