Second Affirmative Duties
Refute ALL major arguments of the first negative speaker. Unaddressed arguments may be lost [conceded].Develop details that show how the affirmative plan will work and support them with additional evidence.
Second Negative Duties
Conduct an all-out attack on the workability and practicality of the affirmative plan.If the affirmative team has failed to address an issue, claim that they have lost this issue [conceded the issue].
Rebuttal Duties
Persuasively summarize the most convincing arguments. New arguments may not be introduced during rebuttals.
How judges determine the winner
Judges use five voting issues to determine the winner:- [Significancy] Is the affirmative proposal [mandate] able to produce a substantial change?
- [Harm] Does the affirmative plan cause any harms?
- [Inherency] Is the present system able to fix the problem?
- [Topicality] Are both sides arguing within the scope of the resolution?
- [Solvency] Is the affirmative plan feasible and able to solve the problems within a reasonable time?
[Burden of Proof] The affirmative team must prove their case. In case of a tie, the negative team wins.
[Breaking a plank] The negative team wins, if they break any one of the affirmative team's planks.
[Dropping an argument] If a team does not address an opponent's argument, it concedes and loses it.
Judges rate each speaker for analysis, delivery, and decorum. Logical, emotional, trustworthy, and eloquent speech and language are expected.
Advisor: Mr. Albert Kilpatrick email:
Woodbury High
Debate Team
/ Attention all students: Would you like to hone your public speaking and research skills in a competitive environment? Are you interested in U.S. public/domestic policy or the issue of governmental oversight? If so, you are invited to join Woodbury High’s 2015-16Debate Team.
Debate classes and practice debates are held after school on Wednesdays during September, October, and November. Interscholastic debates are held on Wednesday afternoons from December through February at a designated High School (TBD).
Throughthe South Jersey
Debate League
Participating schools: Bordentown, Northern Burlington, Cherokee, Cherry Hill East, Eastern, Moorestown, Moorestown Friends, Seneca, Shawnee, Lenape,Woodbury, Washington Township, and Willingboro High Schools.
2015-2016 Debate Topic
Resolved:The United States federal government should substantially curtail its domestic surveillance2014-2015Resolved: The United States federal government should substantially increase its non-military exploration of the earth’s oceans.
2013-2014Resolved:The United States federal government should substantially increase its economic engagement toward Cuba, Mexico, or Venezuela.
______
Debate Format
A debate is a contest between two sides with opposing views. A two-person affirmative team presents a unique and original plan that supports the resolution. A two-person negative team defends what is going on today [status quo] or shows that the affirmative plan will not work. The negative team does not propose a counter plan.Constructive Speech / 8 minutes / First Affirmative
Cross Examination / 3 minutes / Second Negative
Preparation Time / 2 minutes
Constructive Speech / 8 minutes / First Negative
Cross Examination / 3 minutes / First Affirmative
Constructive Speech / 8 minutes / Second Affirmative
Cross Examination / 3 minutes / First Negative
Constructive Speech / 8 minutes / Second Negative
Cross Examination / 3 minutes / Second Affirmative
Preparation Time / 2 minutes
Rebuttal / 4 minutes / First Negative
Rebuttal / 4 minutes / First Affirmative
Rebuttal / 4 minutes / Second Negative
Rebuttal / 4 minutes / Second Affirmative
/
First Affirmative Debater's Duties
Hand identical copies of a summary of the affirmative plan to the judge and negative team before the first speech.
State the resolution and define its key words.
Show that the current situation [status quo] causes significant problems [harms] and needs to be changed. It helps to show that an obstacle [inherent barrier] prevents the present system from solving the problem.
Present a plan that has the following provisions [planks]:
[Mandate] A solution that is better than the current situation
[Funding] A method to fund the plan.
[Administration] Who is responsible to carry out the plan?
[Enforcement] Who is responsible to assure that the plan works? What penalties or incentives will be employed?
The affirmative team must provide evidence that supports its assertions.Cross Examination Duties
Ask questions that test the quality of the opponent's evidence and expose weaknesses in the opponent's arguments.- Is the source qualified? trustworthy? biased? up to date?
- Are statistics accurate? up to date?
- Expose assertions not supported by evidence.
- Obtain admissions that damage the opponent's case.
Attack the need for change and defend the current situation.
If necessary, challenge the definitions of terms. They cannot be challenged after the first negative speech.
Use the five judging issues to attack the affirmative plan:
- [Significancy] There is no need to change current policy or the affirmative plan does not make a substantial change.
- [Harm] The plan creates new problems.
- [Inherency] An existing mechanism can solve the problem.
- [Topicality] The plan does not fully address the resolution.
- [Solvency] The plan is too small, too costly, or unable to solve the problem in a reasonable time.