Professional Documents
Culture Documents
All Core Skills E Book
Uploaded by
Harish KamalanathanCopyright
Available Formats
Share this document
Did you find this document useful?
Is this content inappropriate?
Report this DocumentCopyright:
Available Formats
All Core Skills E Book
Uploaded by
Harish KamalanathanCopyright:
Available Formats
;(32;/,;(32
Review Copy
Copyright 2006 Gravitas Publishing
Review Copy
Copyright 2006 Gravitas Publishing
;(32;/,;(32
74))',%2(()&%8)1%())%7=
&]%PMQ1IVEPM
%DMONTON !LBERTA
Review Copy
Copyright 2006 Gravitas Publishing
#OPYRIGHT BY !LIM -ERALI
!LL RIGHTS RESERVED .O MATERIAL FROM THIS BOOK MAY BE REPRODUCED IN ANY MEDIA OR
FORMAT BY ANY MEANS MECHANICAL OR ELECTRONIC WITHOUT WRITTEN PERMISSION FROM THE
PUBLISHER EXCEPT FOR BRIEF QUOTATIONS IN REVIEWS AND ARTICLES 0LEASE ADDRESS INQUIRIES TO
CONTACT TALKTHETALKCA OR TO 'RAVITAS 0UBLISHING
!VENUE 3UITE %DMON
TON !LBERTA #ANADA 44 ,
,IBRARY AND !RCHIVES #ANADA #ATALOGUING IN 0UBLICATION
-ERALI !LIM
4ALK THE TALK SPEECH AND DEBATE MADE EASY BY !LIM -ERALI
)NCLUDES BIBLIOGRAPHICAL REFERENCES AND INDEX
)3".
$EBATES AND DEBATING ) 4ITLE
0.! #
4HE ARGUMENTS AND EVIDENCE PRESENTED SHOULD NOT BE TAKEN AS THE TRUE OPINIONS OR
FACTUALLY CORRECT RESEARCH RESPECTIVELY OF THE AUTHOR OR PUBLISHER OF THIS BOOK 4HEY ARE
INCLUDED SOLELY FOR PURPOSES OF ILLUSTRATION NOT FOR PURPOSES OF ADVOCACY OR INFORMATION
4HE TOPICS AND RESOLUTIONS LISTED IN THIS PUBLICATION ARE INTENDED AS SAMPLE ISSUES ONLY
AND SHOULD NOT BE VIEWED AS OPINION DECLARATIONS BY THE AFORESAID PARTIES
0RINTED AND BOUND IN #ANADA BY &RIESENS
0RINTED ON ACID
FREE PAPER
"OOK DESIGN BY /PTAMEDIA
WWWTALKTHETALKCA
Review Copy
Copyright 2006 Gravitas Publishing
Review Copy
Copyright 2006 Gravitas Publishing
Review Copy
Copyright 2006 Gravitas Publishing
8EFPISJ'SRXIRXW
&OREWORD BY 3HIRLEY +ONRAD
$ISCOVER THE !RT OF 3PEECH AND $EBATE
8)
4EVX-6SEH1ET +IEV9TXS8EPOXLI8EPO
)NTRODUCTION
7HY $EBATE IS THE 3PORT OF THE -IND
#HAPTER
'ET 2EADY 4URN /N THE 0OWER OF 9OUR 6OICE
#HAPTER
,IFT /FF 'REAT 'AMES TO 'ET 9OU 3TARTED
4EVX--7TIIGL7EZZ] (E^^PI[MXLE(]REQMG7X]PI
#HAPTER
7HAT 9OU 3AY )NGREDIENTS OF )NTELLIGENT 3PEAKING
#HAPTER
(OW 9OU 3AY )T $ELIVERING WITH 0OISE AND 0IZZAZZ
#HAPTER
,ITERALLY 3PEAKING 3PEECHES WITH #OMMENTARY
4EVX---(MWGSZIV(IFEXI ,S[XS;MRER%VKYQIRX
#HAPTER
.UTS AND "OLTS "UILDING "LOCKS OF $EBATE
#HAPTER
0ROS AND #ONS 3OLID 0OINTS AND 0OWERFUL #ASES
Review Copy
Copyright 2006 Gravitas Publishing
:--
#HAPTER
#LASH WITH )MPACT -ASTERING THE !RT OF THE !TTACK
#HAPTER
/N 4HAT 0OINT .AVIGATING 0ARLIAMENTARY $EBATE
#HAPTER
9ES OR .O #OMMANDING THE #ROSS
%XAMINATION
#HAPTER
&ORAY INTO &ORUMS 3TANDING /UT FROM THE #ROWD
#HAPTER
7ARS OF 7ORDS $EBATES WITH #OMMENTARY
#ONCLUSION
4HE 7ILL TO 7IN WITH %THICS AND 2ESPECT
!PPENDIX !
$EBATE 2ESOLUTIONS
!PPENDIX "
*UDGING #RITERIA
'LOSSARY
"IBLIOGRAPHY
!CKNOWLEDGMENTS
)NDEX
!BOUT THE !UTHOR
:---
Review Copy
Copyright 2006 Gravitas Publishing
4O THOSE WHO HAVE TAUGHT ME THE SPORT OF DEBATE
Review Copy
Copyright 2006 Gravitas Publishing
Review Copy
Copyright 2006 Gravitas Publishing
-VYL^VYK
(MWGSZIVXLI%VXSJ7TIIGLERH(IFEXI
8%/-2+8%0/838,)2)<80):)0
7ERE SURROUNDED BY SPEECH AND DEBATE EVERYDAY AND EVERYWHERE SO
ITS NO SURPRISE THAT WE OFTEN VIEW ORAL COMMUNICATION AS A NATURAL
EFFORTLESS ACTIVITY "UT IS EVERYONE YOU HEAR EQUALLY CLEAR OR EQUALLY
CONVINCING /R DO SOME PEOPLE STAND OUT CAPTURING YOUR ATTENTION
AND SECURING YOUR AGREEMENT
4HERES A BIG DIFFERENCE BETWEEN TALKING EFFORTLESSLY AND COMMU
NICATING EFFECTIVELY 4ALKING TAKES LITTLE EFFORT REQUIRING OTHERS ONLY TO
HEAR WHAT YOU HAVE TO SAY #OMMUNICATING IS MUCH MORE ADVANCED
9OUR AUDIENCE HAS TO BE MOTIVATEDMOTIVATED BY YOU THAT ISTO LIS
TEN UNDERSTAND AND RESPOND FAVORABLY
3IMILARLY THERES A BIG DIFFERENCE BETWEEN STATING YOUR OPINION AND
PRESENTING AN ARGUMENT 3TATING AN OPINION CALLS ON YOU TO SAY WHATS
ON YOUR MIND ESSENTIALLY MAKING CONVERSATION OR GOING WITH YOUR
GUT INSTINCT 0RESENTING AN ARGUMENT CALLS FOR CONVINCING LOGIC CLEAR
STRUCTURE AND CONlDENT DELIVERY ! STRONG ARGUMENT COMPELS OTHERS TO
AGREE WITH YOUR PERSPECTIVE OR TO TAKE THE ACTION YOU WANT
8,)78=0)3*79'')77
)F YOU THINK THAT GREAT SPEAKERS AND DEBATERS ARE DRY THINK AGAIN 4HEY
OFTEN USE HUMOR AND THEY KEEP THEIR AUDIENCES ENGAGED AND INTER
ESTED IN WHAT THEYRE SAYING -OST IMPORTANTLY THEY ENJOY WHAT THEY
DO WHICH BECOMES APPARENT IN THE EXPRESSIVENESS OF THEIR DELIVERY
4HEYRE INTERESTING AND DYNAMIC PEOPLEOR AT LEAST SPEECH AND DEBATE
BRINGS OUT THEIR @CONCEALED PERSONALITIES
Review Copy
Copyright 2006 Gravitas Publishing
<-
4ALK THE 4ALK
'REAT SPEAKERS AND DEBATERS HAVE A VARIETY OF STYLES 3OME ARE POW
ERFUL COMMUNICATORS BECAUSE OF THEIR CONVINCING TONE COMMANDING
STAGE PRESENCE AND PASSIONATE ORATION /THERS ARE JUST AS SUCCESSFUL
BY PRESENTING THOUGHTFUL INTELLIGENT IDEAS WITH A CALM AND METHODI
CAL STYLE %XCELLENT COMMUNICATION SKILLS ARENT EXCLUSIVE TO THE MOST
TALKATIVE AMONG US
$ESPITE THE DIVERSITY OF STYLES THERE ARE CERTAIN TRAITS COMMON TO
ALL EFFECTIVE SPEAKERS AND DEBATERS 4HEY HAVE A SOUND GRASP OF STRUC
TURE MAKING SURE THAT THEIR SPEECHES mOW WELL $ELIVERING CLEARLY AND
CONlDENTLY THEY CAPTIVATE THEIR AUDIENCES -OST IMPORTANTLY THEY
HAVE THE RIGHT ATTITUDE 4HEY WANT TO IMPROVE THEIR SKILLS AND THEY
ENJOY NEW CHALLENGES 4HEYRE ACTIVE LISTENERS WHO STRIVE TO LEARN FROM
WHAT OTHERS HAVE TO SAY
;,=&38,)6#
$EBATING IS ONE OF THE OLDEST AND MOST COMMON ART FORMS &ROM !RIS
TOTLE TO *OHN & +ENNEDY DINNER TABLES TO NATIONAL LEGISLATURES AND STU
DENTS TO SENIORS THE ART OF DEBATE HAS BEEN USED TO DISCUSS COMPETING
VIEWS FOR CENTURIES
4HROUGHOUT YEARS AS A SPEECH ARTS TEACHER )VE SEEN STUDENTS
BECOME CONlDENT COMMUNICATORS AND TALENTED DEBATERS $ISCOVER
ING THE ART OF SPEECH AND DEBATE ISNT EASY )T DOES TAKE HARD WORK
AND DEDICATION !ND WHATS THE RESULT )VE WITNESSED HUNDREDS OF
YOUNG LEADERS UNEARTH THEIR VOCAL POTENTIAL TO ACHIEVE SUCCESS IN THEIR
SCHOOLS COMMUNITIES AND CAREERS
4HE CASE FOR ACHIEVING EXCELLENCE IN SPEECH EXTENDS MUCH FUR
THER THAN COMPETITION 9OULL GAIN A POWERFUL LIFE SKILL GUARANTEED TO
IMPROVE YOUR PERFORMANCE EVERY TIME YOU COMMUNICATE %FFECTIVE
SPEAKING ENHANCES YOUR PERFORMANCE IN SCHOOL PRESENTATIONS AND
CLASS DISCUSSIONS )T HELPS YOU TAKE CHARGE IN LEADERSHIP POSITIONS AND
MAKES YOU SHINE IN INTERVIEWS FOR JOBS AWARDS AND SCHOLARSHIPS ,ESS
TANGIBLE BUT EQUALLY IMPORTANT IS HOW IT IMPROVES YOUR CONlDENCE
WHENEVER YOU DEAL WITH PEOPLE
,EARNING TO DEBATE WILL HELP YOU BECOME MORE LOGICAL WHEN YOU
EXAMINE ISSUES THOUGHTFUL WHEN YOU COME UP WITH IDEAS AND INSIGHTS
AND CONVINCING WHEN YOU ARGUE YOUR PERSPECTIVE )N ADDITION YOULL
BECOME MORE CONlDENT TALKING ABOUT WHAT YOU ALREADY KNOW 7HAT
USE ARE BIOLOGY CHEMISTRY HISTORY AND LITERATURE IF YOU ARENT COM
FORTABLE ARTICULATING YOUR KNOWLEDGE TO OTHERS )N TODAYS COMPETITIVE
<--
Review Copy
Copyright 2006 Gravitas Publishing
&OREWORD BY 3HIRLEY +ONRAD
WORLD ITS NOT ENOUGH TO KNOW THE RIGHT ANSWER )TS JUST AS IMPORTANT
TO KNOW HOW TO COMMUNICATE YOUR KNOWLEDGE TO OTHERS
46%'8-')1%/)7 %01378 4)6*)'8
3PEECH AND DEBATE CANT BE LEARNED THROUGH READING ALONE )F YOU
WANT TO DISCOVER THIS ART ENJOY 4ALK THE 4ALK AND PUT WHAT YOU LEARN
TO GOOD USE IN YOUR EVERYDAY ACTIVITIES ) CANT EMPHASIZE ENOUGH HOW
IMPORTANT IT IS TO MAKE SPEECH AND DEBATE PART OF YOUR DAILY ROUTINE
0ARTICIPATE IN CLASS DISCUSSIONS DEBATE SOCIAL AND WORLD ISSUES AT THE
DINNER TABLE AND GET INVOLVED IN PRACTICE ROUNDS !LSO YOU SHOULD
JOIN A DEBATE CLUB AND COMPETE IN TOURNAMENTS )F ONE ISNT ALREADY
ESTABLISHED AT YOUR SCHOOL GET A FEW FRIENDS TOGETHER AND START ONE UP
#OMPETITIONS WILL GIVE YOU AN OPPORTUNITY TO PUT YOUR SKILLS TO THE TEST
AGAINST OTHER STUDENTS 9OUR EXPERIENCES MAY EVEN TAKE YOU ACROSS
THE COUNTRY OR AROUND THE WORLD
%NJOY LEARNING SPEECH AND DEBATE AND DEVELOPING YOUR OWN
DYNAMIC STYLE )NDIVIDUALS WHO EXCEL AT THIS POWERFUL AND NECESSARY
SKILL WILL BE A STEP AHEAD IN ACHIEVING SUCCESS
3HIRLEY +ONRAD
&OUNDER AND $IRECTOR
4HE 3PEECH 3TUDIO )NC
Review Copy
Copyright 2006 Gravitas Publishing
<---
Review Copy
Copyright 2006 Gravitas Publishing
Review Copy
Copyright 2006 Gravitas Publishing
Review Copy
Copyright 2006 Gravitas Publishing
96(+4(7!
+)%694838%0/8,)8%0/
4EVX-
Review Copy
Copyright 2006 Gravitas Publishing
Review Copy
Copyright 2006 Gravitas Publishing
0U[YVK\J[PVU
;L](IFEXIMWXLI7TSVXSJXLI1MRH
&ROM HOCKEY PLAYERS DRIVING TOWARD THE NET TO SKIERS GLIDING DOWN
A HILL ATHLETES PUT THEIR BODIES TO THE TEST EVERY TIME THEY COMPETE
4HEY DO SO IN THEIR THIRST FOR VICTORY 3OME DElNE VICTORY AS REACHING
THEIR PERSONAL BEST SUCH AS BEATING THEIR SCORING RECORD FROM THE YEAR
BEFORE OR ACHIEVING THEIR FASTEST EVER RACING TIME /THERS SEE VICTORY AS
RISING ABOVE THE COMPETITION AND ASCENDING TO THE TOP OF THE PODIUM
#AN THE SAME BE SAID FOR DEBATERS !T lRST THE COMPARISON SEEMS
FRIVOLOUS $EBATE DOESNT REQUIRE PHYSICAL PROWESS ! DEBATER CANT GET
INJURED IN THE HEAT OF COMPETITION AT LEAST WE HOPE NOT !ND A DEBAT
ER DOESNT PUT HIS OR HER BODY THROUGH A GRUELING PHYSICAL TEST
4HE SPORT OF DEBATE EXISTS IN THE MIND )T REQUIRES MENTAL PROWESS
AS OPPOSED TO PHYSICAL PROWESS !NY INJURY IS TO ONES INTELLECTUAL PRIDE
AND SENSE OF BEING RIGHT ! DEBATER EXERTS MENTAL ENERGY AND USES THE
POWER OF THE VOICE NOT THE STRENGTH OR AGILITY OF THE BODY
)TS A SPORT OF THE MIND BECAUSE YOU PLAY TO REACH A HIGHER STANDARD
"ETTER ARGUMENTS "ETTER COUNTER
ARGUMENTS "ETTER STYLE AND STRUC
TURE ,IKE ANY SPORT YOU CAN ALWAYS OUTPERFORM WHAT YOU DID PREVI
OUSLY 4HERES A TOUGHER OPPONENT OUT THERE WHO WILL CHALLENGE YOU TO
DEBATE MORE EFFECTIVELY THAN YOU ONCE THOUGHT POSSIBLE .O CASE AND
NO ARGUMENT WILL EVER BE PERFECT 4HERES ALWAYS SOMETHING GREATER TO
ACHIEVE ! DEBATER NEVER SAYS h4HATS THE BEST ) CAN DOv
)TS A SPORT OF THE MIND BECAUSE YOU HAVE TO THINK ON YOUR FEET AS
THE GAME GOES ON ,IKE MOST SPORTS DEBATE ISNT PREDICTABLE !DAPTA
TION IS THE NAME OF THE GAME 9OU COME INTO IT PREPARED TO ARGUE YOUR
CASE "UT YOURE EQUALLY PREPARED TO CHANGE ON THE mY 9OURE READY TO
POUNCE ON YOUR OPPONENTS WEAKNESSES AND TO PLUG HOLES THAT HAVE
BEEN INlLTRATED BY YOUR RIVALS 4HERE ARE NO @COOKIE
CUTTER TEMPLATES
AND NO RIGID FORMULAS )TS A GAME WITH SIMPLE RULES AND GENERAL STRAT
EGIES FOR SUCCESS 4HE REST IS UP TO YOU
Review Copy
Copyright 2006 Gravitas Publishing
4ALK THE 4ALK
)N THE SPORT OF DEBATE YOUR EQUIPMENT IS YOUR VOICE )TS EQUIPMENT
THAT MUST BE HONED AND OPTIMIZED FOR SUCCESS "UT YOUR VOICE ALONE
WILL NOT MAKE YOU A TOP DEBATER ! GOLFERS DRIVE IS ENHANCED BY HIS
OR HER CHOICE OF CLUBS NOT ACCOMPLISHED BY THE CLUBS ALONE ! HOCKEY
GOALIES PADS HELP TO STOP SHOTS BUT THE REAL TEST IS ONE OF REmEXES AND
ANTICIPATION 3IMILARLY A COMPELLING VOICE CAN ONLY ENHANCE WHAT YOUR
MIND PRODUCES BUT ITS NO SUBSTITUTE FOR GREAT IDEAS
!S YOU STRIVE TO EXCEL AT DEBATE YOULL MAKE MISTAKES ALONG THE
WAY !ND DONT BE TOO HARD ON YOURSELF WHEN YOU DO .OT EVEN THE
WORLDS LEADING DEBATERS PERFORM mAWLESSLY $EBATE ISNT A SCIENCE THAT
YOU CAN PERFECT ,IKE ANY SPORT IF YOU FALL YOUR BEST BET IS TO PICK UP
THE PIECES AND MOVE ON
3O PUT YOURSELF INTO THE MINDSET OF A COMPETITOR AND GET SET TO
TACKLE THE SPORT OF DEBATE
Review Copy
Copyright 2006 Gravitas Publishing
*/(7;,9
+IX6IEH]
8YVR3RXLI4S[IVSJ=SYV:SMGI
#OMING 5P
! STRONG HEALTHY VOICE ALLOWS YOU TO SPEAK CLEARLY AND EFFECTIVELY 4HIS
CHAPTER WILL SHOW YOU HOW TO PREPARE YOUR VOICE AND BODY AND HOW TO
CONTROL YOUR NERVES )T WILL ALSO REVEAL PRACTICAL TECHNIQUES TO HELP YOU
KEEP YOUR VOICE IN TIP
TOP SHAPE
Review Copy
Copyright 2006 Gravitas Publishing
4ALK THE 4ALK
+)87)88374)%/
,IKE AN ATHLETE WHO STRETCHES BEFORE A GAME PREPARING YOUR VOICE
BODY AND MIND IS ESSENTIAL TO PRODUCING STRONG AND CLEAR SPEECH
5NFORTUNATELY MOST PEOPLE DONT ASSOCIATE WARMING UP WITH SPEECH
WHICH IS WHY MOST SPEAKERS DONT WARM UP AT ALL "UT THOSE WHO WANT
TO GIVE THEMSELVES A COMPETITIVE EDGE DONT MISS THIS IMPORTANT STEP
9OURE PROBABLY THINKING THAT IT WOULD
BE RATHER AWKWARD TO WARM UP IN FRONT OF
:\JJLZZ;PW
OTHER PEOPLE 4HANKFULLY YOU CAN AVOID
BEING GLARED AT AS YOU GET YOURSELF READY TO
&IJSVI]SYWTIEOVIPE\
SPEAK 7HETHER YOU WARM UP IN THE CAR IN
]SYVQMRHERHFSH]
AN EMPTY ROOM OR AT HOME A FEW SIMPLE
STRATEGIES AND EXERCISES WILL HELP YOU SPEAK
MORE COMFORTABLY AND EFFECTIVELY
7ALK BEFORE YOU TALK /NE OF THE MOST EFFECTIVE WAYS TO RELAX YOUR
MIND AND BODY IS ALSO THE EASIEST "EFORE YOU SPEAK SPEND A FEW MIN
UTES WALKING SLOWLY IN A ROOM OR HALLWAY )MAGINE HOW FAST YOULL BE
TALKING AND @MATCH IT TO YOUR WALKING SPEED 4AKING A WALK WILL HELP
YOU RELEASE ANY UNNECESSARY TENSION AND CLEAR YOUR MIND OF DISTRAC
TIONS 4HINK ABOUT HOW YOULL WALK TO THE FRONT OF THE ROOM AND WHAT
YOULL DO TO ENGAGE YOUR AUDIENCE "RIEmY RECALL YOUR INTRODUCTION
MAIN POINTS AND CONCLUSION
2ELAX YOUR BODY 3TRESS IN YOUR BODY MAKES IT MORE DIFlCULT TO SPEAK
CLEARLY AND EXPRESSIVELY ,OOSEN YOUR ARMS SHOULDERS AND LEGS IN THE
SAME WAY YOU WOULD IF YOU WERE PREPARING FOR A RUN 4HIS WILL MAKE
YOUR VOICE MORE EFFECTIVE BY FREEING UP ANY TENSION IN YOUR BODY 9OUR
HAND GESTURES AND BODY LANGUAGE WILL ALSO SEEM MORE NATURAL
,OOSEN YOUR JAW ! STRAINED JAW MAKES IT MORE DIFlCULT TO ARTICULATE
AND PROJECT YOUR VOICE EFFECTIVELY 'OOD ARTICULATION HELPS YOU SAY
WORDS AND PHRASES WITH CLARITY AND PRECISION 3TRONG PROJECTION HELPS
YOU CONVEY CONlDENCE AND ENGAGE WITH THE ENTIRE AUDIENCE INCLUDING
THOSE SEATED AT THE BACK OF THE ROOM "EFORE YOU SPEAK TRY DROPPING
YOUR JAW LOOSELY SEVERAL TIMES 4HIS WILL KEEP IT mEXIBLE AND FREE OF
STRAIN WHEN ITS YOUR TURN TO TALK
Review Copy
Copyright 2006 Gravitas Publishing
'ET 2EADY 4URN /N THE 0OWER OF 9OUR 6OICE
4AKE DEEP BREATHS "REATHING DEEPLY BEFORE YOU START TO SPEAK WILL
HELP YOU RELAX )T WILL ALSO PUT YOU IN A FRAME OF MIND TO USE DEEP
BREATHING WHILE YOURE SPEAKING 4HIS WILL ALLOW YOUR SPEECH TO mOW
MORE SMOOTHLY AND NATURALLY
4RY A FEW TONGUE TWISTERS $OING SO WILL HELP GET YOUR ARTICULATORS
READY FOR CLEAR COMMUNICATION )TS COMMON TO STUMBLE OVER A FEW
PHRASES WHEN YOU DELIVER A SPEECH 'OING THROUGH A NUMBER OF TONGUE
TWISTERS IS ONE WAY TO REDUCE HOW OFTEN THIS HAPPENS 4O PRACTICE A
VARIETY OF SOUNDS USE A FEW OF THE TONGUE TWISTERS LISTED BELOW REPEAT
ING EACH ONE AT LEAST THREE TIMES IN A ROW
9ELLOW YO
YO
"LOOD RED BED BUGS
4WO TOOTH SLEUTHS
3HOP SIGN SHINES
7ILD WINTER WIND
3IX SELlSH SHELLlSH
(ICCUP TEACUP
3LAPSTICK SKIT
4OY BOAT
+NAPSACK STRAPS
3IXISH
4RULY RURAL
3TAY CALM $ONT PUT ADDED PRESSURE ON YOURSELF )T WILL ONLY MAKE YOU
MORE NERVOUS BEFORE YOU SPEAK AND DISAPPOINTED IF YOU MAKE ERRORS
4HE BEST WAY TO BE READY TO PERFORM IS GETTING INTO THE RIGHT STATE OF
MIND )F YOU TELL YOURSELF THAT YOURE GOING TO SUCCEED YOU PROBABLY
WILL -OST PEOPLE ARE THEIR OWN WORST CRITICS AND GET NERVOUS BEFORE
DELIVERING A SPEECH "E AN OPTIMIST AND YOULL BE MEASURABLY MORE
COMFORTABLE WHEN YOU SPEAK IN PUBLIC
'330=3962)6:)7
)N SURVEYS PEOPLE OFTEN IDENTIFY PUBLIC SPEAKING AS ONE OF THEIR TOP
FEARS OFTEN AHEAD OF HEIGHTS AND DEATH %VEN IF YOU KNOW EVERYONE
IN THE AUDIENCE ITS NOT UNCOMMON TO HAVE JITTERS BEFORE AND WHILE
YOU SPEAK )TS NORMAL TO BE APPREHENSIVE ABOUT SPEAKING BUT HOW
YOU DEAL WITH IT IS WHAT MAKES ALL THE DIFFERENCE 9OU WANT TO APPEAR
CONlDENT AND RELAXED WHICH WILL IMPROVE THE IMPRESSION YOU MAKE
ON YOUR AUDIENCE
)TS EASY TO TELL WHEN A SPEAKER IS NERVOUS .ERVOUS SPEAKERS OFTEN
SHAKE lDGET STIFFEN THEIR BODIES OR SEEM LIKE THEYRE SIMPLY TRYING TO
GET THROUGH THEIR SPEECH !LTHOUGH EVERYONE DEALS WITH NERVOUSNESS
IN A DIFFERENT WAY THERE ARE A FEW SIMPLE TECHNIQUES THAT YOU MAY lND
USEFUL TO HELP YOU BECOME MORE COMFORTABLE
Review Copy
Copyright 2006 Gravitas Publishing
4ALK THE 4ALK
-EMORIZE THE lRST FEW WORDS 4HERES NOTHING MORE COMFORTING THAN
A GREAT START )F YOU PULL OFF THE lRST LINE OR TWO SOLIDLY YOULL FEEL THAT
YOU HAVE MOMENTUM AS YOU CONTINUE WITH YOUR SPEECH /N THE OTHER
HAND ITS TOUGH FOR MANY SPEAKERS TO RECOV
ER FROM STUMBLES IN THE OPENING PHRASES
:\JJLZZ;PW
'O INTO YOUR SPEECH KNOWING EXACTLY WHAT
YOURE GOING TO SAY AT THE START
4IVJIGX]SYVSTIRMRK
XSKMZI]SYVWIPJIEVP]
'O THROUGH YOUR INTRODUCTION MANY TIMES
QSQIRXYQ
)N ADDITION TO MEMORIZING THE lRST LINE OR
TWO OF YOUR SPEECH ITS ALSO HELPFUL TO KNOW
HOW YOULL DELIVER YOUR INTRODUCTION 4HE INTRODUCTION SETS THE STAGE
BOTH FOR YOU AND FOR YOUR AUDIENCE ! SOLID WELL
DELIVERED INTRODUC
TION IS A GREAT @ICEBREAKER INTO THE REST OF YOUR SPEECH )T GIVES YOU
CONlDENCE RIGHT WHEN YOU BEGIN
+NOW YOUR CONTENT WELL .OTHING BEATS NERVOUSNESS MORE EFFECTIVELY
THAN BEING COMFORTABLE WITH YOUR MATERIAL 5NDERSTAND YOUR TOPIC IN
DETAIL SO THAT IF YOU LOSE YOUR PLACE OR HAVE TO ANSWER QUESTIONS YOU
CAN BE CONlDENT THAT YOU KNOW THE NECESSARY CONCEPTS
0RACTICE OUT LOUD 7HETHER YOU PRACTICE BY YOURSELF AT HOME IN FRONT
OF YOUR FAMILY OR BEFORE A GROUP OF FRIENDS VERBALIZING YOUR POINTS
IS A GREAT WAY TO REDUCE NERVOUSNESS 9OU MAY EVEN WANT TO WATCH
YOURSELF IN THE MIRROR SO THAT YOU CAN SEE WHAT OTHERS WILL BE WATCH
ING AS YOU SPEAK #HECK THAT YOURE GESTURING NATURALLY STANDING WITH
CONlDENT POSTURE AND USING GOOD FACIAL EXPRESSION 4HIS WILL MAKE
YOU FEEL FAR MORE COMFORTABLE AS YOU GO INTO YOUR SPEECH
5SE PAUSES EFFECTIVELY 7HEN YOU GO TO THE FRONT OF THE ROOM GIVE
YOURSELF A MOMENT TO GATHER YOUR THOUGHTS AND TO ESTABLISH A RELAXED
AND CONlDENT STANCE 2USHING INTO YOUR SPEECH IS A SURE WAY TO ACCEN
TUATE ANY NERVOUSNESS )F YOU BECOME NERVOUS DURING YOUR SPEECH
DONT APOLOGIZE OR lLL IN THE SPACE WITH THE COMMON hUMv OR hAHv
0AUSE GET BACK YOUR COMPOSURE GATHER YOUR THOUGHTS AND CONTINUE
YOUR SPEECH WITH CONlDENCE
(AVE CONlDENCE IN YOURSELF )F YOU TELL YOURSELF THAT YOURE GOING TO
DO POORLY THERES A VERY GOOD CHANCE THAT YOU WILL 2EMIND YOURSELF
THAT YOU KNOW YOUR SPEECH AND ARE CONlDENT IN YOUR ABILITY .OT EVEN
Review Copy
Copyright 2006 Gravitas Publishing
'ET 2EADY 4URN /N THE 0OWER OF 9OUR 6OICE
PROFESSIONALS WITH DECADES OF EXPERIENCE DELIVER PERFECT SPEECHES SO
YOU SHOULDNT PRESSURE YOURSELF TO BE PERFECT EITHER
/))4=396:3-')-28-48347,%4)
)MAGINE A SKIER RACING WITH A BROKEN POLE OR A ROWER PADDLING WITH A
SPLIT OAR (OW WELL WOULD THEY DO -OST LIKELY NOT WELL AT ALL !THLETES
IN EVERY SPORT HAVE TO KEEP THEIR EQUIPMENT IN GREAT SHAPE IF THEY
WANT TO PERFORM UP TO THEIR POTENTIAL
"UT WHAT DOES ANY OF THIS HAVE TO DO
>H[JO6\[
WITH EFFECTIVE SPEECH AND DEBATE !CTUALLY
MORE THAN YOU MAY THINK )F YOU WANT YOUR
VOICE TO PRODUCE CLEAR HIGH
QUALITY SPEECH
FOR YOUR LIFETIME ITS ESSENTIAL THAT YOU TAKE
CARE OF IT "UILDING AND SUSTAINING A HEALTHY
VOICE REQUIRES YOU TO PAY ATTENTION TO THE
FOLLOWING PRACTICES IN YOUR DAILY LIFE
%ZSMHLEFMXWXLEX
WXVEMR]SYVZSMGI
!VOID SCREAMING AND SHOUTING 9OU MAY THINK THAT THESE COMMON
PRACTICES ARE HARMLESS SPONTANEOUS REACTIONS TO THE WORLD AROUND US
4HE REALITY IS THAT THEY PUT ENORMOUS STRAIN ON YOUR VOCAL CORDS /VER
TIME THEY REDUCE THE CLARITY OF YOUR SPEECH AND DAMAGE YOUR VOICE
PARTICULARLY THE MUSCLES THAT HELP YOU PRODUCE SOUND )F YOU WANT TO
PROTECT YOUR VOICE AGAINST UNNECESSARY DAMAGE KEEP YOUR SPEECH
WITHIN A NORMAL VOLUME RANGE
$RINK PLENTY OF WATER .OT ONLY WILL YOU IMPROVE YOUR BODYS HEALTH
YOULL ALSO ENHANCE YOUR VOICE BY KEEPING YOUR MOUTH MOIST AND
REDUCING TENSION IN YOUR THROAT %SPECIALLY BEFORE A SPEECH OR DEBATE
SIPPING WATER WILL IMPROVE THE CLARITY OF YOUR VOICE WHEN YOU SPEAK
"REAK THE BAD HABITS OF CLENCHING OR GRINDING YOUR JAW )N ADDITION
TO YOUR DENTISTS VERY WISE ADVICE KEEPING YOUR MOUTH RELAXED FOR
EXCELLENT SPEECH COMMUNICATION IS ANOTHER REASON TO ELIMINATE THESE
UNHEALTHY PRACTICES 3PEAKERS AND DEBATERS NEED TO MANIPULATE THEIR
ARTICULATORS IN ORDER TO WRAP THEMSELVES AROUND SOME OF THEIR MORE
SOPHISTICATED WORDS AND PHRASES !VOIDING THESE HABITS WILL MAKE IT
EASIER FOR OTHERS TO UNDERSTAND WHAT YOURE SAYING
Review Copy
Copyright 2006 Gravitas Publishing
4ALK THE 4ALK
4AKE IN PLENTY OF AIR !IR MUST mOW FREELY AND FREQUENTLY IN ORDER FOR
YOUR VOICE TO FUNCTION AT ITS HIGHEST POSSIBLE QUALITY 4AKING PLENTY OF
PAUSES WILL HELP INCREASE THE AIR mOW !ND DONT TALK TOO FAST AS DOING
SO WILL ONLY MAKE IT HARDER TO GET ENOUGH AIR
$ONT OVERUSE YOUR VOICE WHEN YOURE SICK OR TIRED )LLNESS AND FATIGUE
CAN STRAIN YOUR VOCAL INSTRUMENTS /VER MANY YEARS TALKING EXCESSIVE
LY WHEN YOUR BODY IS WEAK CAN BE DAMAGING ,IMITING HOW MUCH YOU
TALK WHILE YOURE SICK OR TIRED WILL GO A LONG WAY IN REDUCING UNNECES
SARY HARM TO YOUR VOICE
.EVER CLEAR YOUR THROAT HARSHLY $OING SO PLACES UNNECESSARY STRESS
ON YOUR VOCAL CORDS %VENTUALLY YOUR VOICE WILL BE BECOME LESS CLEAR
AND LESS PLEASING TO THE LISTENER $RINKING WATER SWALLOWING OR COUGH
ING GENTLY ARE ALL APPROPRIATE ALTERNATIVES
)F YOU FOLLOW THE TIPS DISCUSSED IN THIS CHAPTER YOULL ENHANCE THE
QUALITY OF YOUR SPEECH AND YOULL FEEL MORE PREPARED AND CONlDENT
WHEN ITS YOUR TURN TO TALK
Review Copy
Copyright 2006 Gravitas Publishing
'ET 2EADY 4URN /N THE 0OWER OF 9OUR 6OICE
#HAPTER +EYS TO 3UCCESS
7ARM UP BEFORE YOU SPEAK 9OULL HELP PREPARE YOUR VOICE FOR
EXCEPTIONAL VERBAL COMMUNICATION AND YOUR BODY FOR EFFECTIVE
NON
VERBAL COMMUNICATION )N ADDITION YOULL PUT YOUR MIND IN
A MORE COMFORTABLE RELAXED MOOD WHICH WILL HELP YOU SPEAK
MORE SMOOTHLY AND NATURALLY
D+EEP YOUR NERVES IN CHECK )TS NATURAL TO BE NERVOUS BUT ITS
EASY TO lX 0LACING YOURSELF IN THE RIGHT STATE OF MIND WILL HELP
YOU OVERCOME ANY JITTERS YOU MAY HAVE %VEN IF YOURE SLIGHTLY
NERVOUS DONT MAKE IT OBVIOUS TO YOUR AUDIENCE
-AINTAIN A HEALTHY VOICE 3IMILAR TO HOW INJURIES TO YOUR
BODY MAKE IT TOUGH FOR YOU TO EXCEL AT SPORTS STRAINING YOUR VOICE
MAKES IT HARDER FOR YOU TO PERFORM AT YOUR PEAK WHEN SPEAKING
AND DEBATING !VOID BAD HABITS THAT HURT THE CLARITY AND EXPRES
SIVENESS OF YOUR VOICE
Review Copy
Copyright 2006 Gravitas Publishing
Review Copy
Copyright 2006 Gravitas Publishing
*/(7;,9
0MJX3
+VIEX+EQIWXS+IX=SY7XEVXIH
#OMING 5P
)T OFTEN TAKES A QUICK AND ENJOYABLE WARM UP TO GET YOUR MIND READY
FOR SPEECH AND DEBATE 4HIS SECTION WILL TELL YOU ABOUT A FEW GAMES
AND EXERCISES THAT WILL HELP PREPARE YOU TO SPEAK 4HESE ACTIVITIES WILL
ALSO INTRODUCE YOU TO SOME COMMON SPEECH AND DEBATE TECHNIQUES
Review Copy
Copyright 2006 Gravitas Publishing
4ALK THE 4ALK
238=3968=4-'%0D&36)( +%1)7
)N ADDITION TO WARMING UP AND PRACTICING YOUR VOCAL SKILLS THERE ARE A
NUMBER OF GAMES AND EXERCISES THAT WILL GEAR UP YOUR MIND FOR SPEECH
AND DEBATE 3OME OF THESE ACTIVITIES SUCH
AS 2APID 3PEAK AND 0ASS THE "ATON CAN BE
:\JJLZZ;PW
DONE WITH TWO OR THREE PEOPLE /THERS SUCH
AS #ROSSlRE AND /N 4HAT 0OINT REQUIRE A LARG
4PE]EKEQIEX
ER GROUP 9OURE ENCOURAGED TO ADAPT THESE
XLIFIKMRRMRKSJE
GAMES TO YOUR SPECIlC SITUATION INCLUDING
TVEGXMGIWIWWMSR
THE NUMBER OF PEOPLE IN YOUR GROUP AND
HOW MUCH TIME YOU HAVE
2APID 3PEAK
4HE MAIN PURPOSE OF THIS GAME IS TO ALLOW YOU TO PRACTICE SPEAK
ING WITHOUT PREPARATION ALSO KNOWN AS IMPROMPTU SPEAKING )T WILL
ENCOURAGE YOU TO USE EFFECTIVE TRANSITIONS WHICH WILL HELP MAKE YOUR
PHRASING SMOOTHER (ERES HOW 2APID 3PEAK WORKS
s 3TEP #HAIRPERSON WITH CARDS ! #HAIRPERSON HAS A STACK OF TO
CARDS EACH OF WHICH HAS A RANDOM WORD THAT THE PARTICIPANT MUST
INCORPORATE INTO HIS OR HER SPEECH
s 3TEP 0ARTICIPANT STARTS TO SPEAK 4HE #HAIRPERSON SHOWS A RANDOMLY
SELECTED WORD TO THE PARTICIPANT WHO MUST THEN START A SPEECH ON THAT
SUBJECT OR ON A RELATED AREA
s 3TEP &LIPPING TO NEW WORDS 4HE #HAIRPERSON mIPS TO A NEW WORD
EVERY SECONDS AT WHICH POINT THE SPEAKER HAS TO MAKE A LOGICAL
TRANSITION TO THE NEW SUBJECT %ACH SPEAKER GOES THROUGH WORDS OR
APPROXIMATELY THREE MINUTES OF SPEECH
9OULL PROBABLY END UP WITH A RATHER CREATIVE AND HUMOROUS SPEECH
ESPECIALLY CONSIDERING THE RANDOM NATURE OF THE WORD SELECTION )TS
OKAY FOR YOU TO TAKE SOME TIME WHEN TRANSITIONING TO THE NEW POINT
(ERES A CONDENSED EXAMPLE OF 2APID 3PEAK
h;0IZZA= 9ESTERDAY EVENING ) WENT OUT FOR PIZZA WITH MY FAMILY
-Y YOUNGER BROTHER HAD THE MISFORTUNE OF SPILLING HIS POP ALL OVER
Review Copy
Copyright 2006 Gravitas Publishing
,IFT /FF 'REAT 'AMES TO 'ET 9OU 3TARTED
THE TABLE WHICH SADLY DID NOT COME AS A SURPRISE -Y PARENTS TOLD
HIM ;3CHOOL= THAT HE WOULD GET A DETENTION IF HE DID THAT SORT OF
THING AT SCHOOL BUT OF COURSE MY BROTHER TENDS NOT TO LISTEN TO ANY
THING ,AST WEEK HE GOT INTO TROUBLE FOR SPITTING AT ANOTHER STUDENT
;-USIC= IN THE MIDDLE OF HIS MUSIC CLASSv
#ROSSlRE
4HIS GAME ALLOWS YOU TO PARTICIPATE IN A DYNAMIC BACK AND FORTH
DEBATE WITHOUT HAVING TO DELIVER A LENGTHY EXPLANATION FOR EACH ARGU
MENT )T FORCES YOU TO COME UP WITH POINTS ON THE SPOTA KEY SKILL IN
DEBATE #ROSSlRE ALSO GETS YOU USED TO DEBATING BOTH SIDES OF AN ISSUE
WHICH YOULL HAVE TO DO IN A DEBATE TOURNAMENT (ERES HOW IT WORKS
s 3TEP &ORM TEAMS !T THE FRONT OF THE ROOM SPLIT INTO TWO LINES ONE
SIDE ARGUING FOR THE TOPIC AND THE OTHER SIDE ARGUING AGAINST IT
s 3TEP 3ET THE DEBATE 4HE STUDENTS AT THE FRONT OF THE LINES SHOULD
BE FACING EACH OTHER AT THE CENTER OF THE ROOM ! #HAIRPERSON THEN
PRESENTS A STATEMENT FOR DEBATE
s 3TEP 0OINT IN FAVOR 4HE lRST SPEAKER IN FAVOR OF THE STATEMENT
SPEAKS FOR TO SECONDS AND MOVES TO THE BACK OF THE OTHER LINE
s 3TEP 0OINT AGAINST 4HE lRST SPEAKER AGAINST THE TOPIC SPEAKS FOR
TO SECONDS AND MOVES TO THE BACK OF THE OTHER LINE
s 3TEP #ONTINUE THE DEBATE 4HE BACK AND FORTH PROCESS CONTINUES
UNTIL EVERY DEBATER HAS SPOKEN AT LEAST ONCE FOR BOTH SIDES
%ACH TIME ITS YOUR TURN LIMIT YOURSELF TO ONE CLEAR POINT )T CAN BE
A NEW ARGUMENT OR OPPOSITION TO AN ARGUMENT MADE BY THE OTHER
SIDE -AKE SURE TO KEEP THE DEBATE mOWING AS THE GOAL IS TO FORM AND
RESPOND TO ARGUMENTS QUICKLY
/N 4HAT 0OINT
4HIS GAME ALLOWS TWO PARTICIPANTS TO WORK TOGETHER AS THEY REPRESENT
A PERSPECTIVE WHILE EVERYONE ELSE GETS PRACTICE ASKING CHALLENGING
QUESTIONS )TS PARTICULARLY GOOD PRACTICE FOR PARLIAMENTARY DEBATE
Review Copy
Copyright 2006 Gravitas Publishing
4ALK THE 4ALK
WHICH ALLOWS SEATED DEBATERS TO ASK QUESTIONS TO THE PERSON SPEAKING
/N 4HAT 0OINT OPERATES ACCORDING TO THE FOLLOWING PROCEDURES
s 3TEP 'ET INTO TEAMS 4WO PARTICIPANTS GO TO THE FRONT OF THE ROOM TO
ARGUE FOR AN OPINION STATEMENT OF THEIR CHOICE %VERYONE ELSE IS IN THE
AUDIENCE WHICH FORMS THE TEAM DEBATING AGAINST THIS STATEMENT
s 3TEP 4WO SPEAKERS START 4HE TWO DEBATERS ARGUING IN FAVOR OF THE
STATEMENT TALK ONE AT A TIME /NLY THE PERSON HOLDING THE BATON CAN
SPEAK 7HEN THE DEBATER WHO HAS THE mOOR PASSES THE BATON TO HIS OR
HER TEAMMATE THIS INDIVIDUAL CONTINUES THE DEBATE
s 3TEP h/N THAT 0OINTv !NYONE FROM THE AUDIENCE CAN STAND UP AT
ANY TIME AND SAY h/N THAT POINTv AND ASK A CRITICAL QUESTION TO THE TWO
DEBATERS 4HE GAME GOES ON FOR UP TO MINUTES
)TS IMPORTANT THAT THE AUDIENCE STRIKES A GOOD BALANCE BETWEEN ASK
ING ENOUGH QUESTIONS AND NOT BOMBARDING THE TWO DEBATERS WITH
TOO MANY QUESTIONS !LLOW THE SPEAKER TO COMPLETE THE ANSWER AND
TO CONTINUE THE SPEECH BEFORE ASKING ANOTHER QUESTION "ELOW IS AN
EXCERPT FROM A SAMPLE GAME OF /N 4HAT 0OINT ON THE TOPIC h3TUDENTS
HAVE A RIGHT TO PRIVACY IN SCHOOLSv
3PEAKER h! STUDENTS LOCKER SHOULD BE A PRIVATE SPACE TO STORE POS
SESSIONS 7E WOULDNT ALLOW POLICE TO SEARCH ARBITRARILY THE BEDROOMS
OF STUDENTS AT THEIR HOMES ,IKEWISE WHAT A STUDENT KEEPS IN A LOCKER
IS NOBODY ELSES BUSINESSv
!UDIENCE -EMBER ! h/N THAT POINT "UT WHEN STUDENTS ENTER A SCHOOL
ARENT THEY ENTERING A PUBLIC SPACE SUBJECT TO THE RULES AND REGULA
TIONS OF THAT PARTICULAR INSTITUTION v
3PEAKER h#ERTAINLY WHAT THEY DO IN CLASSROOMS AND HALLWAYS SHOULD
BE GOVERNED BY THE SCHOOLS RULES "UT THE VERY NATURE OF A LOCKERA
CLOSED LOCKED AREAMAKES IT A STUDENTS PRIVATE AREAv "ATON GETS
PASSED TO PARTNER
3PEAKER h.OT ONLY THAT BUT ALLOWING SCHOOL OFlCIALS TO SEARCH STU
DENTS LOCKERS IS A SYSTEM THATS VERY PRONE TO ABUSE )N PARTICULAR
THERES NO FORMAL WARRANT PROCESS AND NO LEGAL JUSTIlCATION IS EVER
Review Copy
Copyright 2006 Gravitas Publishing
,IFT /FF 'REAT 'AMES TO 'ET 9OU 3TARTED
REQUIRED BEFORE A SEARCH IS CONDUCTED 4HIS LEAVES STUDENTS WONDERING
WHETHER THEY CAN TRUST SCHOOL OFlCIALSv
!UDIENCE -EMBER " h/N 4HAT 0OINT SIR $ONT YOU THINK THAT SCHOOL OFl
CIALS HAVE A RESPONSIBILITY TO ENSURE THAT DRUGS WEAPONS AND OTHER
BANNED ITEMS ARENT BROUGHT TO SCHOOL v
0ASS THE "ATON
0ASS THE "ATON AIMS FOR THE TYPE OF BACK
AND FORTH mOW SEEN IN #ROSSlRE BUT IT TAKES
PLACE AS A GROUP DISCUSSION RATHER THAN AS A
HEAD TO HEAD BATTLE )T GIVES YOU VIRTUALLY NO
TIME TO PREPARE AN ARGUMENT WHICH SERVES
AS A TRUE TEST OF DEBATING SKILLS 4HE GAME
INVOLVES THE FOLLOWING STEPS
>H[JO6\[
;LIRTPE]MRKHIFEXI
KEQIWFIGEVIJYPRSX
XSKIXS XSTMG
s 3TEP 3TART THE DEBATE %VERYONE IN THE GROUP STANDS IN A CIRCLE AND
JOINTLY SELECTS A TOPIC FOR DEBATE /NE PERSON WHO HOLDS THE BATON
BEGINS THE DEBATE BY MAKING AN ARGUMENT IN FAVOR OF THE STATEMENT
s 3TEP 4HE NEXT PERSON OPPOSES /NCE THE lRST SPEAKER HAS lNISHED
MAKING A SINGLE ARGUMENT THE BATON GETS PASSED TO ANY OTHER PERSON
IN THE CIRCLE 4HIS PARTICIPANT MUST OPPOSE WHAT THE lRST SPEAKER HAS
SAID EITHER DIRECTLY OR WITH A NEW ARGUMENT
s 3TEP 4HE DEBATE CONTINUES 4HE SECOND SPEAKER PASSES THE BATON TO
ANOTHER PARTICIPANT AND THE PROCESS CONTINUES UNTIL EACH PERSON HAS
SPOKEN TWO TO THREE TIMES
9OU WONT KNOW WHEN YOULL BE CALLED TO SPEAK OR WHAT SIDE YOULL BE
ARGUING )TS ESSENTIAL THAT YOU LISTEN CAREFULLY TO THE mOW OF THE DISCUS
SION AND ANTICIPATE WHAT YOU WOULD DO IF YOU HAD TO SPEAK NEXT 4HIS
DYNAMIC AND LIVELY GAME IS SURE TO KEEP YOU ON YOUR TOES "ELOW IS A
SELECTION FROM A SAMPLE 0ASS THE "ATON GAME ON THE SUBJECT h-USEUMS
AND THEATRES SHOULD FUND THEMSELVESv
0ARTICIPANT IN FAVOR h)F PEOPLE TRULY WANT MUSEUMS AND THEATRES
THEY SHOULD BE WILLING TO PAY FOR THEM 7HY SHOULD THE PUBLIC SUBSI
DIZE SOMEONES PERSONAL ENTERTAINMENT v "ATON GETS PASSED ON
Review Copy
Copyright 2006 Gravitas Publishing
4ALK THE 4ALK
0ARTICIPANT OPPOSED h(OWEVER LETS NOT FORGET THAT MUSEUMS AND
THEATRES ARE GOOD FOR THE PUBLIC AS A WHOLE 7E ALL BENElT WHEN WE
PRESERVE AND ENHANCE OUR CULTUREv "ATON GETS PASSED ON
0ARTICIPANT IN FAVOR h7ELL NOT EVERYONE BENElTS EQUALLY 7E EACH
HAVE LIKES AND DISLIKES 4HERES NO VOTE TO DETERMINE WHETHER AN ART
INSTITUTION GETS PUBLIC FUNDING ,ET THE PEOPLE DECIDE WITH THEIR WAL
LETSv "ATON GETS PASSED ON
0ARTICIPANT OPPOSED h9OURE BASING YOUR ARGUMENT ON THE IDEA THAT
MUSEUMS AND THEATRES SHOULD ALL BE COMMERCIAL FOR
PROlT OPERATIONS
) BELIEVE THAT THEY SHOULDNT BE RUN EXACTLY THE SAME WAY AS PRIVATE
COMPANIES 4HEYRE SUPPOSED TO SERVE SOCIETY AS A WHOLE NOT JUST THE
BUSINESS INTERESTS OF AN OWNERv
4RAFlC ,IGHTS
4HE PURPOSE OF THIS GAME IS TO GIVE EVERY PARTICIPANT A CHANCE TO SPEAK
THREE TIMES EACH TIME FOR A DISTINCT PURPOSE 9OULL EITHER HAVE TO MAKE
A POINT RAISE A CONCERN OR REFUTE A POINT MADE BY ANOTHER PARTICIPANT
9OU GET TO DECIDE WHEN YOU WANT TO SPEAK WHAT SIDE YOU WANT TO TAKE
AND HOW TO ARGUE FOR THE PERSPECTIVE OF YOUR CHOICE 4RAFlC ,IGHTS RUNS
ACCORDING TO THE FOLLOWING RULES
s 3TEP #ARDS GET DISTRIBUTED %VERY MEMBER OF THE GROUP HAS A GREEN
CARD A YELLOW CARD AND A RED CARD %ACH CARD CAN BE USED ONLY ONCE IN
THE DEBATE AND CARDS CANNOT BE TRADED BETWEEN PLAYERS 4O TALK YOU
MUST USE THE APPROPRIATE CARD
'REEN IS 'O -AKE A NEW ARGUMENT THAT ADDS TO THE DEBATE
9ELLOW IS #AUTION 2AISE A CONCERN OR QUESTION YOU WANT ADDRESSED
2ED IS 3TOP /PPOSE THE ARGUMENT THAT HAS JUST BEEN PRESENTED
s 3TEP !NYONE BEGINS THE DEBATE 4HE lRST PERSON TO USE A GREEN CARD
STARTS THE DEBATE ! GREEN CARD GUARANTEES THE PERSON USING IT AT LEAST
SECONDS OF UNINTERRUPTED TIME
s 3TEP !NOTHER PERSON INTERJECTS !FTER THIS SECOND PERIOD HAS
EXPIRED ANYONE ELSE CAN USE A CARD ! GREEN CARD GUARANTEES A FRESH
SECOND PERIOD A YELLOW CARD SECONDS TO ASK A QUESTION AND A
Review Copy
Copyright 2006 Gravitas Publishing
,IFT /FF 'REAT 'AMES TO 'ET 9OU 3TARTED
RED CARD SECONDS TO OPPOSE THE POINT MADE PREVIOUSLY )F EITHER A
YELLOW CARD OR A RED CARD IS USED THE ORIGINAL SPEAKER GETS TO CONTINUE
THEREAFTER UNTIL SOMEONE ELSE USES A CARD
s 3TEP 4HE DEBATE CONTINUES 4RAFlC ,IGHTS CONTINUES UNTIL EVERY PAR
TICIPANT IS OUT OF CARDS 4HIS MEANS THAT EVERYONE WILL HAVE RAISED AN
ARGUMENT OPPOSED AN ARGUMENT AND ASKED A QUESTION ALL OF WHICH
ARE IMPORTANT DEBATING SKILLS
$EBATE $UEL
$EBATE $UEL ALLOWS YOU TO GO HEAD TO HEAD AGAINST OTHER COMPETITORS
SPICING UP THE DEBATE WITH SOME HEATED RIVALRY 9OUR GOAL IS TO SUR
VIVE THE BATTLES AS LONG AS YOU CAN BY CONTINUING TO WIN MINI
DEBATES
AGAINST DIFFERENT OPPONENTS "UT YOUR FATE LIES IN THE HANDS OF YOUR
PEERS (ERES HOW TO PLAY $EBATE $UEL
s 3TEP 4AKE YOUR POSITIONS 4HERE ARE TWO DEBATERS STANDING AT THE
FRONT OF THE ROOM FACING EACH OTHER THE #HAMPION AND THE #HALLENGER
%VERYONE ELSE SITS IN THE AUDIENCE AND MAKES UP THE *URY 4HE *URY
MUST ACT OBJECTIVELY !LTERNATIVELY YOU CAN OPT FOR AN INDEPENDENT
*URY THAT DOESNT PARTICIPATE IN THE DEBATE
s 3TEP "EGIN THE BATTLE 4HE #HAMPION WHO IS SELECTED RANDOMLY FOR
THE lRST ROUND GETS SECONDS TO PRESENT AN ARGUMENT ON ANY TOPIC
OF HIS OR HER CHOICE 4HE #HALLENGER THEN GETS SECONDS TO PRESENT A
COUNTER
ARGUMENT
s 3TEP 4HE *URY VOTES !FTER BOTH PEOPLE HAVE THEIR SAY THE *URY BY
A MAJORITY VOTE ELIMINATES THE DEBATER IT BELIEVES LOST THE DUEL 4HE
PERSON LEFT IS THE #HAMPION AND THE PARTICIPANT VOTED OFF BECOMES A
MEMBER OF THE *URY
s 3TEP ! NEW #HALLENGER EMERGES !CCORDING TO A PRE
SET ORDER A MEM
BER OF THE *URY THEN TAKES THE POSITION OF #HALLENGER AND THE PROCESS
STARTS AGAIN 4HE PERSON WHO HAS THE LONGEST CONSECUTIVE RUN AS THE
#HAMPION WINS THE GAME
Review Copy
Copyright 2006 Gravitas Publishing
4ALK THE 4ALK
4HE 'REAT 2ACE
4HIS GAME PITS TEAMS AGAINST EACH OTHER IN A BATTLE OF QUICK THINKING
WHICH IS GREAT PRACTICE FOR THE FAST
PACED WORLD OF COMPETITIVE DEBAT
ING (ESITATION WILL COST YOU DEARLY (ERES HOW 4HE 'REAT 2ACE WORKS
s 3TEP 'ET INTO TWO TEAMS (ALF OF THE PARTICIPANTS FORM ONE TEAM AND
STAND ON ONE SIDE OF THE ROOM AND THE REST OF THE PARTICIPANTS FACE
THEM AND MAKE UP THE OTHER TEAM
s 3TEP 0REPARE FOR THE RACE )N BETWEEN THE TEAMS THERES A TABLE WITH
A BUZZER OR BELL ! MEMBER FROM EACH TEAM STANDS ON EITHER SIDE OF THE
TABLE "OTH COMPETITORS MUST HAVE THEIR HANDS BEHIND THEIR BACKS
s 3TEP 4HE RACE IS ON 4HE #HAIRPERSON ANNOUNCES A STATEMENT FOR
DEBATE 4HE lRST PERSON TO RING THE BUZZER OR BELL HAS TO MAKE AN ARGU
MENT IN FAVOR OF THE STATEMENT WHICH SHOULD LAST FOR APPROXIMATELY
SECONDS 4HE TEAM REPRESENTED BY THIS PARTICIPANT SCORES A POINT )F
HOWEVER THE SPEAKER WAITS OR HESITATES OR IF THE #HAIRPERSON DECIDES
THAT THE ARGUMENT ISNT A VALID POINT THE OTHER TEAM SCORES A POINT
s 3TEP 4HE SPRINT CONTINUES !FTER EACH ROUND A NEW PERSON TAKES THE
POSITION AT THE TABLE +EEP ON PLAYING THE GAME UNTIL EACH PERSON HAS
SPOKEN AT LEAST ONCE OR TWICE IF THERE ARE ONLY A FEW PARTICIPANTS
3URVIVOR
3URVIVOR IS A @WINNER TAKES ALL COMPETITION IN WHICH EVERY DEBATER TRIES
TO OUTLAST EVERYONE ELSE BY PRESENTING THE STRONGEST ARGUMENTS 4O WIN
AT 3URVIVOR YOU HAVE TO PERFORM WELL ROUND AFTER ROUND OR ELSE YOU
MAY GET VOTED OFF THE )SLAND (ERES HOW TO PLAY THE GAME
s 3TEP !LL ABOARD THE )SLAND 4HE #ONTENDERS STAND IN A GROUP AT THE
FRONT OF THE ROOM 4HE *URY SITS IN THE AUDIENCE WHICH CONSISTS ONLY OF
THE #HAIRPERSON AT THIS POINT
s 3TEP 4HE ROUND BEGINS 4HE #HAIRPERSON ANNOUNCES A TOPIC AND
EVERY DEBATER HAS TO PRESENT AN ARGUMENT OF APPROXIMATELY SEC
ONDS FOR OR AGAINST THIS STATEMENT
Review Copy
Copyright 2006 Gravitas Publishing
,IFT /FF 'REAT 'AMES TO 'ET 9OU 3TARTED
s 3TEP 3OMEONE GETS VOTED OFF %ACH MEMBER OF THE *URYONE PERSON IN
THE lRST ROUNDCASTS A VOTE FOR THE DEBATER WHOSE ARGUMENT SEEMED
THE WEAKEST 4HE PERSON WHO GETS THE MOST VOTES IS ELIMINATED FROM
THE )SLAND AND JOINS THE *URY )N THE EVENT OF A TIE THE #HAIRPERSON
CASTS THE DECIDING VOTE
s 3TEP "ATTLE TO THE END !FTER EACH ROUND THE *URY POOL WILL INCREASE
BY ONE MEMBER AND THE #ONTENDER GROUP WILL DECREASE BY ONE MEM
BER +EEP ON PLAYING THE GAME UNTIL ONLY ONE #ONTENDER THE @3URVIVOR
IS LEFT STANDING
4HE GAMES AND EXERCISES DISCUSSED IN THIS CHAPTER ARE A FEW OF THE
WAYS THAT YOU CAN GET INTO THE RIGHT FRAME OF MIND FOR EFFECTIVE DEBAT
ING AND PUBLIC SPEAKING 4HEYRE LIVELY AND ENJOYABLE MAKING THEM
GREAT ACTIVITIES FOR A GROUP OF PEOPLE
Review Copy
Copyright 2006 Gravitas Publishing
4ALK THE 4ALK
#HAPTER +EYS TO 3UCCESS
D,ISTEN TO THE BACK AND FORTH mOW OF ARGUMENTS 5NDERSTAND
ING HOW THE ARGUMENTS SHIFT FROM SIDE TO SIDE IS CENTRAL TO GRASP
ING THE DEBATE %QUALLY IMPORTANT PAY ATTENTION TO WHAT CAUSES
AN ARGUMENT TO GO OFF TOPIC SO THAT YOU CAN AVOID SUCH SITUA
TIONS WHEN YOU DEBATE
D4HINK ABOUT HOW YOU WOULD EXPAND ON THE POINTS -OST OF
THE GAMES REQUIRE VERY BRIEF ARGUMENTS )N AN ACTUAL DEBATE YOU
WOULD HAVE TO EXPAND THESE BRIEF ARGUMENTS INTO MORE COM
PLETE POINTS BY ADDING EXPLANATIONS AND DETAILS
"E FULLY INVOLVED )F YOURE A BEGINNER THESE GAMES WILL HELP
YOU GET COMFORTABLE MAKING ARGUMENTS %VEN IF YOU HAVE SIGNIl
CANT EXPERIENCE THEYLL KEEP YOUR SKILLS SHARP AND PROVIDE GREAT
WAYS TO WARM UP BEFORE YOU DEBATE
D%NJOY YOURSELF 9OULL lND THAT THESE GAMES OFTEN GET RATH
ER LIGHTHEARTED AND HUMOROUS WHICH IS WHY THEYRE GREAT FOR
WARMING UP AND PRACTICING 3O DONT ANALYZE YOUR PERFORMANCE
TOO CRITICALLY %NJOY THE GAMES PARTICULARLY THE INTERACTION WITH
YOUR FELLOW PARTICIPANTS
Review Copy
Copyright 2006 Gravitas Publishing
:7,,*/:(==@!
(%>>0);-8,%(=2%1-'78=0)
4EVX--
Review Copy
Copyright 2006 Gravitas Publishing
Review Copy
Copyright 2006 Gravitas Publishing
*/(7;,9
;LEX=SY7E]
-RKVIHMIRXWSJ-RXIPPMKIRX7TIEOMRK
#OMING 5P
4HE lRST STEP TOWARD MASTERING SPEECH AND DEBATE IS TO KNOW HOW TO
BUILD AN INTERESTING RELEVANT AND EFFECTIVE SPEECH 4HIS CHAPTER WILL
SHOW YOU HOW TO ZERO
IN ON YOUR PRIMARY PURPOSE AND HOW TO DEVELOP
AND STRUCTURE YOUR KEY POINTS
Review Copy
Copyright 2006 Gravitas Publishing
4ALK THE 4ALK
;,%8 7=39643-28#
'REEK PHILOSOPHER !RISTOTLE ONCE SAID h! SPEECH HAS TWO PARTS 9OU
MUST STATE YOUR CASE AND YOU MUST PROVE ITv !T ITS CORE THIS IS WHAT A
SPEECH BOILS DOWN TO 3OUNDS SIMPLE 7ELL IT ISNT
"EFORE YOU START TO DEVELOP YOUR SPEECH
YOU NEED TO KNOW WHAT EXACTLY YOURE TRY
+PK@V\2UV^&
ING TO ACCOMPLISH )TS IMPORTANT TO MAKE
YOUR SPEECH RELEVANT TO THE SPECIlC ISSUE
%&VMXMWLPE[]IVSRGI
OR SITUATION !VOID TRYING TO SAY ANYTHING
HIPMZIVIHEWTIIGLXLEX
AND EVERYTHING ABOUT THE SUBJECT )NSTEAD
PEWXIH HE]W
FOCUS ON A FEW MAIN IDEAS AND EXPLAIN THEM
CLEARLY AND COMPLETELY
3PEECHES ARE GENERALLY INTENDED TO INFORM TO PERSUADE OR TO ENTER
TAIN 9OU MAY lND IT NECESSARY TO COMBINE THE TECHNIQUES OF MORE
THAN ONE OF THESE TYPES OF SPEECHES &OR INSTANCE MANY PERSUASIVE
SPEECHES HAVE HEAVY INFORMATIVE CONTENT AS A WAY OF LAYING THE FOUN
DATION FOR THE MAIN ARGUMENTS !ND SOME OF THE MOST CAPTIVATING
SPEAKERS INJECT HUMOR INTO THEIR SPEECHES 5LTIMATELY YOU HAVE TO
CONSIDER YOUR TOPIC YOUR INTENT AND YOUR ENVIRONMENT
)N THE +NOW )NFORMATIVE 3PEECHES
7HEN SPEAKING TO INFORM YOUR MAIN OBJECTIVE IS TO EXPLAIN DETAIL
INSTRUCT OR CLARIFY )N THIS TYPE OF SPEECH THE PRECISION AND CLARITY OF
YOUR IDEAS ARE CRITICALLY IMPORTANT BECAUSE YOURE TRYING TO HELP YOUR
AUDIENCE UNDERSTAND THE ISSUE 'IVEN THE NATURE OF AN INFORMATIVE
SPEECH ITS TEMPTING TO OVERLOAD YOUR LISTENERS WITH FACTS AND DETAILS
!VOID THIS TENDENCY AS MUCH AS POSSIBLE 4HE INFORMATION YOU PRESENT
IS ONLY USEFUL TO THE EXTENT THAT ITS ABSORBED AND REMEMBERED )NFOR
MATIVE SPEAKING SKILLS WILL HELP YOU GREATLY IN DEBATING PARTICULARLY
WHEN YOU HAVE TO PRESENT EVIDENCE AND CLEARLY EXPLAIN CONCEPTS TO
YOUR JUDGES (ERE ARE A FEW EXAMPLES OF INFORMATIVE SPEECH TOPICS
s 4HE )NTERNETS IMPACT ON EDUCATION AND RESEARCH
s #HANGES TO THE SCHOOL DISCIPLINARY POLICY
s 5NITED .ATIONS PEACEKEEPING INVOLVEMENT
s $EVELOPMENTS IN NATURAL ALTERNATIVE MEDICINES
s .EW FRONTIERS IN SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY RESEARCH
Review Copy
Copyright 2006 Gravitas Publishing
7HAT 9OU 3AY )NGREDIENTS OF )NTELLIGENT 3PEAKING
4HE 3ALES 0ITCH 0ERSUASIVE 3PEECHES
9OUR ABILITY TO DELIVER PERSUASIVE SPEECHES IS ESSENTIAL TO DEBATING
4HE PURPOSE IS TO CONVINCE YOUR AUDIENCE ABOUT A SET OF VALUES OR PRO
POSALS AND IN SOME CASES TO INSPIRE OR COMPEL A GROUP TO TAKE ACTION
!N EXAMPLE OF PERSUASIVE SPEAKING YOULL BE FAMILIAR WITH IS A CAM
PAIGN SPEECH FOR STUDENT GOVERNMENT )MPORTANT ATTRIBUTES FOR THIS
TYPE OF SPEAKING INCLUDE A SET OF STRONG ARGUMENTS A CONVINCING TONE
AND A PASSIONATE STYLE OF DELIVERY )F YOU WANT TO CONVINCE OTHERS TO
AGREE WITH YOUR ARGUMENTS ITS VITAL THAT YOU SPEAK WITH CONVICTION
(ERE ARE A FEW EXAMPLES OF PERSUASIVE SPEECH TOPICS
s 4HE MILITARY SHOULD RECEIVE MORE FUNDING
s 3TANDARDIZED TESTS SHOULD BE PHASED OUT
s 3PACE EXPLORATION SHOULD BE STOPPED
s 3CHOOL UNIFORMS SHOULD BE ELIMINATED
s 6OTING SHOULD BE MANDATORY
-AKE 4HEM ,AUGH %NTERTAINING 3PEECHES
! SPEECH TO ENTERTAIN WILL MOST COMMONLY BE DELIVERED AS A SPECIAL
OCCASION SPEECH SUCH AS AN AFTER DINNER SPEECH OR A COMEDY ROUTINE
DURING A TALENT SHOW )N SOME INSTANCES YOU MAY HAVE A PERSUASIVE
INTENT SUCH AS USING HUMOR TO MOCK A POLICY 9OULL TYPICALLY USE
ENTERTAINING SPEAKING STRATEGIES SO THAT YOUR SPEECH TO INFORM OR PER
SUADE WILL BECOME MORE INTERESTING 4O BE ENTERTAINING YOUR ENTIRE
SPEECH NEED NOT BE FUNNY OR ON A HUMOROUS TOPIC )N FACT USING WITTY
WORDS OR A LIGHTHEARTED AND HUMOROUS STYLE CAN BE EQUALLY EFFECTIVE
%VEN THE MOST SERIOUS ARGUMENTS CAN BE ILLUSTRATED USING HUMOR
+)8838,)43-28 =3961%-2-()%
0RIOR TO DECIDING ON YOUR KEY POINTS WRITE
A SENTENCE THAT SUMMARIZES YOUR SPEECHS
GENERAL IDEA 4HIS TOPIC SENTENCE SHOULD BE
YOUR FOCUS WHEN YOU BUILD THE CONTENT OF
YOUR SPEECH 9OURE MUCH MORE EFFECTIVE
WHEN YOU FOCUS ON THE CORE OF YOUR IDEAS
THAN WHEN YOU JUMP AROUND FROM TOPIC
Review Copy
>H[JO6\[
%ZSMHQEOMRKFVSEH
YRJSGYWIHWTIIGLIW
Copyright 2006 Gravitas Publishing
4ALK THE 4ALK
TO TOPIC WITHOUT A STRONG CONNECTION BETWEEN POINTS #ONSIDERING THAT
YOU HAVE LIMITED TIME YOU SHOULD INCLUDE ONLY A FEW WELL
DEVELOPED
POINTS IN YOUR SPEECH
',9623988,)43-287
/NCE YOUVE IDENTIlED YOUR PURPOSE AND YOUR OVERALL THEME THE NEXT
STEP IS TO lND THREE TO lVE MAIN POINTS THAT YOU WANT TO TALK ABOUT
,ESS THAN THREE SEEMS TOO @BARE AND MORE THAN lVE SEEMS TOO @BUSY
"EGIN THIS BRAINSTORMING PROCESS USING A LIST OR A MIND MAP )NCLUDE
EVERYTHING YOU KNOW ABOUT THE TOPIC EVEN IF YOU DONT IMMEDIATELY
THINK ITS RELEVANT OR IMPORTANT
)N A SHORT PERIOD OF TIME YOULL LIKELY lND MANY DIFFERENT POINTS
THAT YOU WANT TO DISCUSS 9OUR NEXT STEP IS TO NARROW DOWN YOUR SPEECH
TO A FEW KEY IDEAS /NE RULE OF THUMB IS TO USE THE 3 SYSTEM OR 3ORT
3ELECT AND 3UMMARIZE
3ORT SIMILAR IDEAS TOGETHER 9OU MAY HAVE LISTED SEVERAL POINTS THAT
CAN BE ADDED AS DETAILS AND EXPLANATIONS FOR A LARGER IDEA
3ELECT ONLY THE MOST ESSENTIAL TOPICS )TS MUCH MORE EFFECTIVE TO
FOCUS ON YOUR PRIMARY PURPOSE THAN TO RAMBLE INTO UNRELATED IDEAS
THAT DECREASE THE OVERALL IMPACT OF YOUR SPEECH
3UMMARIZE EACH TOPIC WITH A TITLE !FTER YOURE DOWN TO THREE TO
lVE POINTS A BRIEF HEADING FOR EACH ONE WILL HELP YOU lND DETAILS AND
WILL ENABLE YOU TO FOCUS YOUR EXPLANATIONS
&6)%/-8(3;2 7869'896-2+=39674))',
/NCE YOUVE COME UP WITH YOUR MAIN IDEAS
THE NEXT STEP IS TO ORGANIZE YOUR SPEECH FOR
MAXIMUM EFFECTIVENESS 3PEECH ORGANIZA
TION ISNT DIFlCULT BUT IT IS VERY IMPORTANT
)T MAKES YOUR SPEECH CLEARER AND YOUR IDEAS
EASIER TO REMEMBER 4HE BASIC ORGANIZA
TION FOR ANY SPEECH EITHER ON ITS OWN OR IN
A DEBATE IS AN INTRODUCTION THREE OR FOUR
CONTENT SECTIONS AND A CONCLUSION
Review Copy
:\JJLZZ;PW
1EXGL]SYVWXVYGXYVI
XS]SYVWYFNIGX
Copyright 2006 Gravitas Publishing
7HAT 9OU 3AY )NGREDIENTS OF )NTELLIGENT 3PEAKING
4HERE ARE MANY DIFFERENT WAYS TO BREAK DOWN YOUR KEY IDEAS
7HICH METHOD YOU SELECT DEPENDS IN LARGE PART ON THE TYPE AND TOPIC
OF YOUR SPEECH )TS IMPORTANT FOR YOU TO THINK CAREFULLY ABOUT HOW
YOU WANT TO ORGANIZE YOUR POINTS BECAUSE YOUR STRUCTURE CAN MAKE
OR BREAK HOW EASILY THE AUDIENCE IS ABLE TO GRASP WHAT YOURE SAYING
(ERE ARE SOME OF THE WAYS TO STRUCTURE YOUR POINTS
4OPICS AND 4HEMES 4HIS IS THE MOST COMMON WAY TO ORGANIZE A
SPEECH 4HE IDEA IS TO DIVIDE YOUR POINTS INTO DIFFERENT SUBJECT AREAS
AND TO FOCUS EACH POINT ON A SINGLE TOPIC ! COMMON PITFALL IS THAT THE
SUBJECT AREAS ARE OVERLY DISTINCT MAKING THE SPEECH SEEM DISJOINTED
"E SURE THAT ONE AREA LEADS SMOOTHLY INTO THE NEXT BY SELECTING AND
ORDERING THE THEMES IN A LOGICAL MANNER (ERES AN EXAMPLE OF ORGANI
ZATION BY TOPIC FOR A SPEECH EXPLAINING HOW MEDIA ORGANIZATIONS HAVE
A SOCIAL RESPONSIBILITY
s 0OINT 4HE MEDIA PROVIDES VITAL ALERTS 9OU COULD TALK ABOUT ADVISORIES
DURING NATURAL DISASTERS AND ALERTS OF MISSING CHILDREN -AKING THIS
POINT YOUR lRST ONE IS LOGICAL BECAUSE BY CLEARLY EXPLAINING A CRITICAL
FUNCTION IT SETS THE TONE FOR YOUR OVERALL MESSAGE
s 0OINT 4HE MEDIA EDUCATES US ON IMPORTANT MATTERS (ERE YOU COULD
DISCUSS MEDIA REPORTING OF HEALTH ISSUES SAFETY TIPS FAULTY CONSUMER
PRODUCTS AND OTHER MATTERS IMPORTANT TO OUR DAILY LIVES )TS A LOGICAL
EXTENSION FROM THE lRST POINT BECAUSE IT DEALS WITH MEDIA FUNCTIONS
THAT ARE CRITICAL TO US PERSONALLY "UT ITS DIFFERENT ENOUGH FROM THE
lRST POINT AS ITS FOCUS IS ON LESS URGENT MATTERS
s 0OINT 4HE MEDIA KEEPS US INFORMED ABOUT CURRENT AFFAIRS 4HIS SEC
TION COULD FOCUS ON OUR DESIRE TO BE INFORMED ABOUT NATIONAL POLITICAL
AFFAIRS GLOBAL POLITICS SPORTS AND OTHER DAY TO DAY EVENTS 4HIS POINT
EXTENDS LOGICALLY FROM THE SECOND POINT )TS SIMILAR IN ITS FOCUS ON
MATTERS OF DAILY IMPORTANCE BUT ITS DIFFERENT IN ITS EMPHASIS ON INFOR
MATION THATS NOT AS ESSENTIAL
4IME AND 0ROGRESSION #HRONOLOGICAL ORGANIZATION IS OFTEN THE EASIEST
FOR THE AUDIENCE TO FOLLOW 0EOPLE NATURALLY THINK IN TERMS OF TIME &OR
EXAMPLE WHAT DO ) NEED TO DO IN THE MORNING THEN IN THE AFTERNOON
AND THEN IN THE EVENING %XTENDING THIS LOGIC TO SPEECH ORGANIZING BY
TIME ALLOWS YOU TO LEAD YOUR AUDIENCE ON AN EASY TO UNDERSTAND PRO
Review Copy
Copyright 2006 Gravitas Publishing
4ALK THE 4ALK
GRESSION "ELOW IS AN EXAMPLE OF TIME
BASED ORGANIZATION FOR A SPEECH
OUTLINING HOW THE LOCAL GOVERNMENT COULD ENCOURAGE RECYCLING
s 0OINT -AKE IT EASY FOR PEOPLE TO RECYCLE 9OU COULD SUGGEST THAT REGULAR
PICKUPS AND FREE RECYCLING BOXES DIVIDED INTO CATEGORIES OF MATERIALS
IS THE lRST STEP IN ENCOURAGING MORE RECYCLING )F ITS NOT CONVENIENT
NOTHING ELSE IS LIKELY TO WORK
s 0OINT ! CAMPAIGN TO MOTIVATE PEOPLE TO RECYCLE MORE /NCE YOUVE
MADE IT CONVENIENT TO RECYCLE A LOGICAL NEXT STEP IS TO TELL THEM WHY
THEY SHOULD EVEN BOTHER ! TELEVISION ADVERTISING OR DIRECT MAIL CAM
PAIGN COULD BE PART OF THIS SECTION
s 0OINT ! LONG
TERM STRATEGY TO INFORM THE PUBLIC .OW THAT YOUVE
ENCOURAGED PEOPLE TO RECYCLE MORE HOW DO YOU MAKE SURE THAT THEY
CONTINUE TO DO SO IN THE LONG
TERM /F COURSE CONTINUING TO MAKE IT
CONVENIENT AND ADVERTISING THAT THEY SHOULD RECYCLE COULD BE PART OF
THE STRATEGY "UT YOU COULD SAY THAT THE NEXT MAJOR STEP IS TO TELL THE
PUBLIC ABOUT THE POSITIVE RESULTS OF ITS COOPERATION
0HYSICAL ,OCATION -ANY PEOPLE ORGANIZE THEIR THOUGHTS ACCORDING
TO WHERE ITEMS ARE OR WHERE SITUATIONS OCCUR 4HE SAME TOOL CAN BE
APPLIED TO SPEECH TOPICS PARTICULARLY WHEN THERE ARE MULTIPLE EVENTS
OR CIRCUMSTANCES HAPPENING IN DIFFERENT AREAS 3AY YOURE TALKING ABOUT
SOLUTIONS TO POVERTY IN VARIOUS PARTS OF THE WORLD
s 0OINT )MPROVING GOVERNMENT SYSTEMS IN !FRICA 9OU COULD ARGUE THAT
BUILDING DEMOCRATIC AND TRANSPARENT GOVERNMENT INSTITUTIONS IS THE
lRST STEP IN ALLEVIATING POVERTY IN !FRICA 4HE INCENTIVES OF DEBT RELIEF
AND AID COULD BE USED TO PUSH FORWARD THESE REFORMS
s 0OINT 2EFORMING ECONOMIC SYSTEMS IN ,ATIN !MERICA %CONOMIC AND
CURRENCY INSTABILITY IN MANY PARTS OF ,ATIN !MERICA COULD BE CITED AS
PROBLEMS IN NEED OF ACTION
s 0OINT "UILDING INFRASTRUCTURE IN 3OUTH !SIA 9OU COULD MAKE THE CASE
THAT THE LARGE BUT MOSTLY POOR POPULATIONS OF 3OUTH !SIA WOULD BEN
ElT FROM INFRASTRUCTURE INVESTMENT $EVELOPMENT OF ROADS SCHOOLS
HOSPITALS AND SANITATION SYSTEMS COULD BE TOUTED AS SOLUTIONS
Review Copy
Copyright 2006 Gravitas Publishing
7HAT 9OU 3AY )NGREDIENTS OF )NTELLIGENT 3PEAKING
0ROBLEM AND 3OLUTION 4HIS ORGANIZATIONAL METHOD IS GREAT IF A PROB
LEM ISNT WIDELY ACCEPTED OR UNDERSTOOD AND IF YOURE TRYING TO ESTAB
LISH THE PROBLEM AS THE BASIS FOR A SOLUTION )TS IMPORTANT THAT YOUR
SOLUTION CLOSELY MATCHES AND DIRECTLY ADDRESSES THE PROBLEMS (ERES
AN EXAMPLE OF THIS TYPE OF SPEECH STRUCTURE IF YOURE ARGUING THAT PHAR
MACEUTICAL COMPANIES SHOULD HAVE TO MAKE MORE OF THE DATA FROM
CLINICAL TRIALS AVAILABLE TO THE PUBLIC
s 0OINT 0ROBLEM OF MEDICAL SIDE
EFFECTS %XPLAIN THE EXTENT TO WHICH
DRUGS APPROVED BY GOVERNMENT AGENCIES ARE LATER FOUND TO POSE SERI
OUS HEALTH RISKS )N PARTICULAR YOU COULD USE WELL
PUBLICIZED EXAMPLES
OF DRUGS WHICH WERE RELEASED AND LATER DISCOVERED TO CAUSE HEALTH AIL
MENTS INCLUDING SEVERE ILLNESSES AND DEATHS
s 0OINT 0ROBLEM OF INSUFlCIENT INFORMATION 9OU COULD ARGUE THAT WITH
OUT FULL INFORMATION FROM ALL CLINICAL TRIALS MEDICAL PROFESSIONALS AND
MEMBERS OF THE PUBLIC DONT HAVE ENOUGH OF AN ABILITY TO SCRUTINIZE
DRUGS AND MAKE THEIR OWN JUDGMENTS
s 0OINT 3OLUTION OF MORE PUBLIC INFORMATION 9OUR SOLUTION COULD BE THAT
PHARMACEUTICAL COMPANIES SHOULD HAVE TO RELEASE MORE INFORMATION
TO THE PUBLIC 4HE IMMEDIATE RESULT WOULD BE AT LEAST A PARTIAL SOLUTION
TO THE PROBLEM OF INSUFlCIENT INFORMATION 4HEN YOU COULD ARGUE THAT
IF THIS PROBLEM IS SOLVED AND THERE IS GREATER PUBLIC SCRUTINY OF DRUGS
THE RESULT WOULD BE FEWER MEDICAL SIDE
EFFECTS
"UILDING THE 0IECES 3TRUCTURING %ACH 0OINT
,IKE EACH PARAGRAPH IN AN ESSAY EACH SECTION IN A SPEECH NEEDS TO
HAVE A SOUND STRUCTURE ! GENERAL RULE TO REMEMBER IS TO h#LAIM #OM
MENT #ITE AND #ONCLUDEv FOR EACH SECTION
#LAIM YOUR POINT USUALLY IN A SINGLE SENTENCE 4HIS SERVES AS A
@SIGNPOST TO YOUR AUDIENCE MEMBERS SETTING THE STAGE FOR WHAT YOURE
HOPING TO EXPLAIN TO THEM 9OU WANT YOUR LISTENERS TO BE THINKING TO
THEMSELVES h/KAY WERE ON A NEW POINT NOW AND THATS PRECISELY
WHAT THE POINT IS ABOUT ,ETS SEE WHAT THE SPEAKER HAS TO SAY ABOUT
ITv !N EXAMPLE OF CLAIMING YOUR POINT IS h-Y SECOND POINT IS THAT
IF GENETICALLY
MODIlED FOODS ARE SOLD WITHOUT APPROPRIATE LABELING IT
REDUCES THE CONlDENCE THAT PEOPLE HAVE IN THE FOOD SUPPLYv
Review Copy
Copyright 2006 Gravitas Publishing
4ALK THE 4ALK
#OMMENT ON THE POINT PRESENTING IMPORTANT ANALYSIS AND LOGIC
%XPLAIN IN GREATER DEPTH WHAT THE POINT MEANS OR WHY ITS CORRECT
5SING THE PREVIOUS EXAMPLE YOU COULD SAY h%VERYONE WANTS TO FEEL
CERTAINTY AND SECURITY WHEN THEY PICK UP FOOD FROM THE GROCERY STORE
)F THEY DONT HAVE SUFlCIENT INFORMATION xv
#ITE DIFFERENT PIECES OF EVIDENCE TO SUPPORT YOUR UNDERLYING CLAIMS
4HIS ESSENTIALLY TELLS YOUR AUDIENCE h$ONT JUST TAKE MY WORD FOR IT
4HERE ARE FACTS THAT SUPPORT WHAT )M SAYINGv #ONTINUING WITH THE
ISSUE OF GENETICALLY
MODIlED FOODS YOU COULD STATE h4HE PERCENT
OF GENETICALLY
MODIlED FOODS LABELED AS SUCH IS VERY LOW ESPECIALLY
WHEN COMPARED TO THE PERCENT OF PEOPLE WHO WANT TO KNOW THIS INFOR
MATION )TS BEEN FOUND THAT xv
#ONCLUDE THE SECTION EITHER BY RESTATING THE MAIN POINT IN DIFFERENT
WORDS OR BY EXPLAINING THE IMPORTANCE OF THE POINT TO THE MAIN IDEA
OF THE SPEECH &OR EXAMPLE h4HEREFORE ITS CLEAR THAT THE ABSENCE OF
STANDARD AND ENFORCEABLE LABELING REQUIREMENTS HAS CAUSED UNACCEPT
ABLE HARM TO PUBLIC CONlDENCE IN FOOD PRODUCTSv
#OMPLETING THE 0UZZLE /VERALL /RGANIZATION
4HE ORDER IN WHICH YOU PRESENT YOUR CONTENT SECTIONS IS LARGELY A MAT
TER OF JUDGMENT AND PERSONAL PREFERENCE -ANY SPEAKERS WILL START AND
lNISH WITH THEIR MOST IMPORTANT IDEAS (OWEVER PARTICULARLY IN PER
SUASIVE SPEECHES YOU MAY WANT TO BUILD YOUR POINTS INTO A lNAL IDEA
THAT PROVES YOUR OVERALL THEME
-OST AUDIENCE MEMBERS HAVE GREAT DIF
:\JJLZZ;PW
lCULTY REMEMBERING A POINT THE lRST TIME
THEY HEAR IT !S THE SPEAKER IT MAKES PER
6IMRJSVGI]SYV
FECT SENSE TO YOU BUT YOUR AUDIENCE USUALLY
MHIEW[MXLVIQMRHIVW
NEEDS REMINDERS -ANY COMMUNICATORS FAIL
TO GUIDE THEIR LISTENERS 4HEY ONLY BRIEmY
SUMMARIZE THEIR SPEECH OUT OF FEAR THAT
THEYRE SIMPLY REPEATING THEMSELVES 7ELL
REPETITION WORKS -OST OF WHAT WE LEARN IS REPEATED TO US SEVERAL TIMES
ALTHOUGH OFTEN IN DIFFERENT FORMS AND STYLES (ERES A GREAT FRAMEWORK
FOR MAKING YOUR SPEECH ORGANIZED AND YOUR POINTS EASIER FOR THE AUDI
ENCE MEMBERS TO REMEMBER
Review Copy
Copyright 2006 Gravitas Publishing
,IFT /FF 'REAT 'AMES TO 'ET 9OU 3TARTED
h4ELL THEM WHAT YOURE GOING TO TELL THEMv 0AINT A ROAD MAP FOR
THE AUDIENCE !T MINIMUM TELL THEM IN GENERAL TERMS WHAT THEY CAN
EXPECT TO HEAR FROM YOU ! SPEECH ISNT A MYSTERY NOVEL )F YOU WANT
TO CAPTURE INTEREST AND CREATE UNDERSTANDING TELL YOUR LISTENERS WHAT
PATH YOULL BE TAKING WITH YOUR SPEECH
h4ELL THEMv 4HIS SECTION INCLUDES THE THREE TO lVE MAIN POINTS
OF YOUR SPEECH 4HEY MUST BE DISTINCT SECTIONS WITH SMOOTH TRANSI
TIONS AND LOGICAL ORDERING )N THIS PART YOU CONVEY THE @MEAT OF YOUR
SPEECHTHE POINTS AND SUPPORTING DETAILS THAT DELIVER YOUR MESSAGE
h4ELL THEM WHAT YOU TOLD THEMv (UH "UT DIDNT YOU ALREADY TELL
THEM !CTUALLY THE MOST EFFECTIVE SPEAKERS REMIND THE AUDIENCE OF
THEIR KEY POINTS 4HE CONCLUSION SHOULD TIE THE ENTIRE SPEECH TOGETHER
TAKING A VARIETY OF POINTS AND SUMMARIZING THEM AROUND YOUR CORE
THEME 9OUR AUDIENCE WILL REMEMBER MUCH MORE OF YOUR SPEECH IF YOU
DO A POINT BY POINT SUMMARY
7)%6',-2+*367944368
!FTER YOU HAVE AN OVERALL SKELETON OF YOUR
SPEECH NAMELY THREE TO lVE MAIN POINTS
YOURE READY TO lND THE DETAILS NECESSARY
TO BE EFFECTIVE 4HERE ARE MANY PLACES YOU
CAN LOOK TO lND THIS INFORMATION WHICH ARE
LIKELY THE SAME PLACES YOU WOULD GO IF YOU
WERE WRITING AN ESSAY "ELOW ARE SOME OF
THE PLACES TO SEARCH FOR DETAILS
:\JJLZZ;PW
7XE]SRXSTSJ[LEX W
LETTIRMRKMRXLIRI[W
,IBRARIES WILL LIKELY HAVE INFORMATION ON YOUR SUBJECT )TS NOW EASIER
THAN EVER TO lND WHAT YOURE LOOKING FOR BECAUSE MOST LIBRARIES HAVE
ELECTRONIC SEARCH DATABASES 9OULL ALSO WANT TO LOOK IN ENCYCLOPEDIAS
AND OTHER REFERENCE WORKS FOR ANY RELEVANT DETAILS
4HE )NTERNET IS THE FASTEST AND EASIEST WAY TO lND CURRENT INFORMA
TION ON VIRTUALLY ANY SUBJECT 5NFORTUNATELY ITS ALSO lLLED WITH MANY
UNRELIABLE SOURCES SO YOULL HAVE TO USE YOUR GOOD SENSE AND CRITICAL
JUDGMENT TO SEPARATE FACT FROM lCTION
Review Copy
Copyright 2006 Gravitas Publishing
4ALK THE 4ALK
&AMILY AND FRIENDS WHO WORK IN A lELD RELATED TO YOUR SPEECH TOPIC
OR WHO YOU FEEL WOULD HAVE SIGNIlCANT KNOWLEDGE ABOUT YOUR SUBJECT
ARE ALWAYS EXCELLENT RESOURCES TO CONTACT
463:-2+8,)43-287
-ANY DIFFERENT TYPES OF EVIDENCE CAN BE USEFUL IN BOTH INFORMATIVE
AND PERSUASIVE SPEECHES 4HESE INCLUDE STATISTICS EVENTS QUOTATIONS
REPORTS AND ANALOGIES TO NAME A FEW 9OU SHOULD USE ONE OR TWO PIECES
OF EVIDENCE TO SUPPORT EACH OF YOUR POINTS ALONG WITH CLEAR EXPLANA
TIONS OF HOW THE EVIDENCE PROVES WHAT YOURE SAYING
&LAUNTING THE &ACTS
3TATISTICS ARE TYPICALLY ANYTHING TO DO WITH NUMBERS 9OUR STATISTICS
SHOULD COME FROM RELIABLE SOURCES &OR INSTANCE THE AUDIENCE MEM
BERS ARE MORE LIKELY TO BELIEVE FACTS FROM A STUDY BY A WELL
RESPECTED
UNIVERSITY THAN FROM A SPECIAL INTEREST GROUP THAT THEYVE NEVER HEARD
OF BEFORE NOT TO MENTION THAT THE GROUP MAY APPEAR BIASED "E CARE
FUL NOT TO OVERUSE STATISTICS BECAUSE UNLESS YOURE SPEAKING TO A GROUP
OF ACADEMICS THE AUDIENCE WILL LIKELY GET QUITE BORED )F USED CORRECTLY
HOWEVER STATISTICS AND REPORTS CAN ADD SIGNIlCANT CREDIBILITY DEPTH
AND CLARITY TO YOUR MAIN IDEAS
&OR EXAMPLE (OW MANY PEOPLE DIED FROM CANCER OVER THE LAST
YEAR (OW MUCH MONEY DOES IT COST TO PROVIDE PRESCRIPTION DRUG BEN
ElTS TO EVERY ONE OF THE COUNTRYS SENIOR CITIZENS 7HAT PERCENT OF THE
CITYS TEENAGERS USE ILLEGAL DRUGS
-AKING IT 2EAL
4RUE EVENTS STORIES AND COMPARISONS ARE SOME OF THE EXAMPLES YOU
MAY WANT TO INCLUDE IN ORDER TO ENHANCE YOUR SPEECH 4HEY SHOW THAT
AN ACTION OR CIRCUMSTANCE ACTUALLY DID HAPPEN OR IS TAKING PLACE CUR
RENTLY LENDING CREDIBILITY TO YOUR MAIN IDEAS !ND THEYRE EFFECTIVE AT
SIMPLIFYING OR CLARIFYING YOUR POSITION )F YOU WANT TO USE A HYPOTHETI
CAL EVENT OR STORY MAKE SURE ITS REALISTIC OR ELSE IT WONT ADD ANY REAL
VALUE ! COMPARISON CAN BE USEFUL IN DRAWING CLEAR DISTINCTIONS HELP
ING TO ILLUSTRATE YOUR POINTS (ERE ARE SOME OF THE SPEECH TOPICS FOR
WHICH AN EVENT STORY OR COMPARISON MAY BE EFFECTIVE
Review Copy
Copyright 2006 Gravitas Publishing
7HAT 9OU 3AY )NGREDIENTS OF )NTELLIGENT 3PEAKING
s $RUNK DRIVING )F TRYING TO PROVE THE DETRIMENTAL IMPACT THAT DRUNK
DRIVERS HAVE ON SOCIETY IT COULD BE USEFUL TO TALK ABOUT A RECENT AND
LOCAL TRAGEDY AND HOW IT CHANGED LIFE FOR THE VICTIMS FAMILY
s ,AND MINES )F YOUR OBJECTIVE IS TO DEBATE IN FAVOR OF BANNING THE
PRODUCTION AND SALE OF LAND MINES TRY DESCRIBING THE STORY OF A CHILD
WHO WAS A VICTIM OF A LAND MINE EXPLOSION
s 0OST
SECONDARY EDUCATION ! CAREER LIFESTYLE AND SALARY COMPARISON
OF A STUDENT WITH POST
SECONDARY EDUCATION TO A STUDENT WITH ONLY A
HIGH SCHOOL DIPLOMA COULD BE AN EFFECTIVE WAY TO PROVE THE VALUE OF
CONTINUING EDUCATION PAST HIGH SCHOOL
%VOKING THE %XPERTS
5SED PROPERLY QUOTATIONS FROM FAMOUS PEOPLE OR EXPERTS IN THE lELD
CAN BE VALUABLE ADDITIONS TO YOUR SPEECH &OR EXAMPLE IF YOUR SPEECH
IS ABOUT FREEDOM AND CIVIL RIGHTS YOU COULD QUOTE FROM -ARTIN ,UTHER
+ING *RS h) (AVE A $REAMv SPEECH 7HEN CONSIDERING THE USE OF A QUO
TATION MAKE SURE IT ADDS SUBSTANCE NOT JUST AN ENDORSEMENT !ND
DONT OVERUSE QUOTATIONS BECAUSE THEY REmECT SOMEONES OPINION
RATHER THAN CONCLUSIVE EVIDENCE
-286-+9-2+-2863(9'8-327
4HE lRST TO SECONDS OF YOUR SPEECH ARE IN MANY RESPECTS THE
MOST IMPORTANT BECAUSE THEY GIVE YOU AN OPPORTUNITY TO CAPTURE THE
AUDIENCES ATTENTION )TS YOUR WAY OF SAY
ING h,ISTEN TO WHAT ) HAVE TO SAY v AS WELL AS
:\JJLZZ;PW
ESTABLISHING YOUR MAIN IDEA AND OUTLINING
YOUR STRUCTURE 3TART WITH SOMETHING THAT
8SQEOIERIQSXMSREP
GRABS ATTENTION SUCH AS A STARTLING STATISTIC
GSRRIGXMSRYWIZMZMH
A RHETORICAL QUESTION AN APPEAL TO EMOTION
PERKYEKI
OR A HUMOROUS STORY (ERE ARE SOME EXAM
PLES OF ATTENTION
GRABBING INTRODUCTIONS
s 3TARTLING 3TATISTICS h,AST YEAR ALONE PEOPLE IN THIS CITY WERE MUR
DERED /UT OF THIS ALARMING NUMBER WERE INNOCENT CIVILIANS AND
OF THEM WERE CHILDRENv
Review Copy
Copyright 2006 Gravitas Publishing
4ALK THE 4ALK
s 2HETORICAL 1UESTIONS h$O YOU FEEL UNSAFE THESE DAYS !RE YOU AFRAID
TO WALK OUTSIDE AT NIGHT $O YOU NOW FEAR FOR THE SAFETY OF YOUR YOUNG
CHILDREN WHEN THEY PLAY IN THE FRONT YARD OR GO TO SCHOOL v
s !PPEAL TO %MOTION h4HE CRIMINALS ARE WINNING THE BATTLE AGAINST US
THE LAW
ABIDING CITIZENS OF THIS CITY 4OO MANY OF US ARE INNOCENT VICTIMS
OF CRIMINALS MANY OF WHOM ARE GETTING AWAY WITH VIOLENCE BECAUSE OF
LAX POLICING ,ADIES AND GENTLEMEN ) SAY ITS TIME FOR CHANGE )TS TIME
FOR OUR GOVERNMENT TO POUR IN THE RESOURCES NECESSARY TO MAKE OUR
STREETS SAFER FOR ALL OF USv
s (UMOROUS 3TORY h,ADY !STOR ONCE SAID TO 7INSTON #HURCHILL @7IN
STON IF ) WERE YOUR WIFE )D PUT POISON IN YOUR COFFEE 9OU WOULD EXPECT
THE RECIPIENT OF SUCH A PERSONAL ATTACK TO BE RATHER PHASED AND QUITE
ANGRY "UT IN CLASSIC #HURCHILLIAN FASHION HE INSTEAD QUIPPED BACK
@.ANCY IF ) WERE YOUR HUSBAND )D DRINK ITv
4HERE ARE MANY DIFFERENT WAYS TO ORGANIZE YOUR SPEECHS INTRODUCTION
(OWEVER THERES NO PERFECT STRUCTURE )TS IMPORTANT THAT YOU TRY A
VARIETY OF STYLES AND FORMATS 4O GET YOU STARTED HERES ONE EXAMPLE
OF A FORMAT FOR YOUR OPENING
3TEP 'RAB THE AUDIENCES ATTENTION !S MENTIONED PREVIOUSLY THE
MOST EFFECTIVE INTRODUCTIONS START WITH A @HOOK THAT ENCOURAGES THE
AUDIENCE MEMBERS TO LISTEN TO WHAT YOU HAVE TO SAY 4HIS ATTENTION
GRABBER USUALLY HINTS AT THE TOPIC OR THEME OF YOUR SPEECH
3TEP !DDRESS THE AUDIENCE !LWAYS ACKNOWLEDGE YOUR AUDIENCE
&OR EXAMPLE YOU COULD SAY h,ADIES AND GENTLEMEN xv OR h-R #HAIR
PERSON JUDGES AND WORTHY OPPONENTS xv 5NFORTUNATELY MANY PEOPLE
SPEND TOO LONG ON THIS PART PRESENTING A LAUNDRY LIST OF PEOPLE IN THE
AUDIENCE 4HERES NO NEED TO TAKE UP TIME SAYING FOR INSTANCE h4EACH
ERS PARENTS FELLOW STUDENTS SCHOOL ADMINISTRATORS ELECTED OFlCIALS
ALUMNI AND MOST WELCOME GUESTSv
3TEP 3TATE THE TOPIC OF YOUR SPEECH -AKE IT VERY CLEAR FOR YOUR
AUDIENCE EXACTLY WHAT YOURE SPEAKING ABOUT %VEN IF THE AUDIENCE
KNOWS THE GENERAL TOPIC ITS A GOOD IDEA TO NARROW IT DOWN TO A MORE
CONCRETE SUBJECT IN ORDER TO PROVIDE A SENSE OF FOCUS TO YOUR SPEECH
Review Copy
Copyright 2006 Gravitas Publishing
7HAT 9OU 3AY )NGREDIENTS OF )NTELLIGENT 3PEAKING
3TEP 3TATE YOUR MAIN IDEA OR PERSPECTIVE ! SPEECH ISNT A DRA
MA 9OU SHOULDNT BE LEAVING YOUR LISTENERS IN SUSPENSE HOPING THAT
THEY @GET IT BY THE END 3TATE CLEARLY AND CONCISELY WHAT YOU HOPE TO
ACCOMPLISH 4HIS WAY WHEN PEOPLE ARE LISTENING THEYLL KNOW THAT
YOUR POINTS ARE CONTRIBUTING TOWARD YOUR MAIN IDEA
3TEP /UTLINE THE THREE TO lVE MAIN POINTS OF YOUR SPEECH -ANY
LISTENERS lND IT HELPFUL TO KNOW WHAT IN GENERAL THE POINTS WILL BE
4HIS MAKES IT EASIER FOR THEM TO FOLLOW YOUR SPEECH AS YOU GO ALONG
'%8',='32'097-327
9OUR CONCLUSION DEPENDS LARGELY ON THE PURPOSE OF YOUR SPEECH 4HE
INTENT OF THE CLOSING COULD BE A CALL TO ACTION A WRAP UP OF YOUR ARGU
MENTS A SUMMARY OF YOUR INFORMATIVE POINTS A LINK BACK TO YOUR
INTRODUCTION OR A COMBINATION OF THESE METHODS
7HILE YOUR INTRODUCTION CATCHES THE AUDIENCES ATTENTION THE CON
CLUSION IS THE lNAL @SALES PITCH FOR YOUR CONTENT AND A REMINDER OF
YOUR SPEECHS MAIN POINTS &OR EXAMPLE IF
YOURE SPEAKING IN FAVOR OF MORE FUNDING TO
lGHT GLOBAL POVERTY YOU MAY HAVE OPENED
>H[JO6\[
YOUR SPEECH BY DESCRIBING THE IMAGE OF A
STARVING CHILD IN 3OMALIA 9OU COULD CON
(SR XDVITIEX ]SYV
CLUDE BY SUMMARIZING THE REASONS FOR MORE
MRXVSHYGXMSRMR]SYV
INTERNATIONAL DEVELOPMENT AID REITERATING
GSRGPYWMSR
HOW EVERYONE CAN TAKE LOCAL ACTION TO MEET
THIS OBJECTIVE AND lNALLY PRESENTING THE
IMAGE OF THE YOUNG CHILD IN 3OMALIA BEING GIVEN HOPE FOR A BETTER LIFE
7HATEVER YOU DECIDE MAKE SURE THAT YOU LEAVE YOUR AUDIENCE WITH
A MEMORABLE STATEMENT THROUGH WHICH THEY CAN IDENTIFY AND THINK
POSITIVELY ABOUT YOUR SPEECH
7HEN YOURE MOVING INTO YOUR CONCLUSION MAKE SURE THAT YOUR
AUDIENCE KNOWS YOURE DOING SO 7HILE THE SIMPLEST WAY IS TO SAY h)N
CONCLUSION v THERE ARE OTHER METHODS AS WELL 3AYING FOR EXAMPLE h3O
WHAT HAVE ) DISCUSSED TODAY v OR h4HIS SPEECH ESSENTIALLY COMES DOWN
TO ONE OVERARCHING THEME v WILL GIVE YOUR AUDIENCE A CUE THAT YOURE
MOVING INTO THE lNAL PART OF YOUR SPEECH
Review Copy
Copyright 2006 Gravitas Publishing
4ALK THE 4ALK
71338,%2(7-140)86%27-8-327
7HEN MOVING FROM SECTION TO SECTION YOU NEED A @GLUE TO HOLD THE
SPEECH TOGETHER 2ATHER THAN SHIFTING ABRUPTLY BETWEEN POINTS TIE
YOUR IDEAS TOGETHER TO CREATE A SENSE OF mOW
)N PERSUASIVE SPEECHES EFFECTIVE TRANSITIONS CAN TIE DIRECTLY INTO
THE BUILDING OF ARGUMENTS &OR INFORMATIVE SPEECHES IT MAY BE MORE
DIFlCULT TO lND THIS CONNECTION )NSTEAD YOU MAY WANT TO START A SEC
TION SIMPLY BY SAYING THAT YOURE MOVING ON TO THE NEXT POINT WHILE
REFERRING TO THE PREVIOUS POINT (ERE ARE A FEW EXAMPLES
s 3PEECH TO 0ERSUADE h.OW THAT )VE PROVEN THE BRUTAL NATURE OF CAPITAL
PUNISHMENT ) WILL SHOW YOU HOW ITS A VIOLATION OF A CITIZENS MOST
BASIC CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHTSv
s 3PEECH TO )NFORM h.OT ONLY HAS SPACE EXPLORATION BECOME LESS EXPEN
SIVE ITS NOW MUCH SAFER FOR OUR ASTRONAUTS BECAUSE OF RECENT ADVANCES
IN SHUTTLE TECHNOLOGYv
!S THIS CHAPTER HAS DISCUSSED HAVING STRONG THEMES POINTS AND
DETAILS COMBINED WITH A CAREFULLY PLANNED STRUCTURE LAYS THE FOUNDA
TION FOR AN EFFECTIVE SPEECH )TS IMPORTANT TO BE SELECTIVE AND METHODI
CAL IN DECIDING WHAT IDEAS YOU WANT TO GET ACROSS TO YOUR AUDIENCE
Review Copy
Copyright 2006 Gravitas Publishing
7HAT 9OU 3AY )NGREDIENTS OF )NTELLIGENT 3PEAKING
#HAPTER +EYS TO 3UCCESS
D! GREAT SPEECH IS BASED ON A UNIFYING THEME %VEN IF THEY
DONT REMEMBER ALL OF THE DETAILS YOUR AUDIENCE MEMBERS SHOULD
REMEMBER THIS MAIN IDEA -AKE SURE THAT ALL OF YOUR POINTS RELATE
TO THIS THEME SO THAT YOUR SPEECH STAYS ON TOPIC
D$EVELOP POSSIBLE POINTS BY BRAINSTORMING AND THEN PLACE
THESE IDEAS INTO CATEGORIES 9OULL lND THAT YOUR INITIAL LIST OF
IDEAS CONTAINS POINTS THAT ARE CLOSELY RELATED AND CAN BE GROUPED
TOGETHER !LSO YOU MAY lND THAT SOME POINTS OVERLAP OR DONT
RELATE DIRECTLY TO THE THEME 5SE THIS PROCESS TO NARROW YOUR
SPEECH DOWN TO A CORE SET OF POINTS
2ESEARCH DETAILS TO SUPPORT YOUR KEY POINTS )NCLUDING EVI
DENCE SUCH AS EXAMPLES AND STATISTICS ADDS CREDIBILITY TO YOUR
SPEECH )N ADDITION EVIDENCE HELPS ILLUSTRATE AND ENHANCE YOUR
POINTS MAKING THEM CLEARER AND STRONGER
Dh#LAIM #OMMENT #ITE AND #ONCLUDEv FOR EACH POINT "EGIN
WITH A CLEAR STATEMENT OF YOUR POINT 4HEN EXPLAIN YOUR POINT IN
GREATER DEPTH -OVE ON BY USING EVIDENCE TO SUPPORT THE EXPLA
NATIONS &INALLY CONCLUDE AND TIE THE POINT INTO THE @BIG PICTURE
OR THEME OF YOUR SPEECH 4HIS METHOD WILL IMPROVE THE STRUCTURE
AND COMPLETENESS OF YOUR KEY IDEAS
h4ELL THEM WHAT YOURE GOING TO TELL THEM THEN TELL THEM
AND THEN TELL THEM WHAT YOU TOLD THEMv 3TART YOUR SPEECH BY
LAYING OUT A @ROAD MAP OF WHAT YOU INTEND TO ACCOMPLISH #ON
TINUE WITH THE @MEAT OF YOUR SPEECH NAMELY THE MAIN POINTS
AND DETAILS 4O CONCLUDE REITERATE YOUR MAIN POINTS AND SHOW
HOW THEYVE PROVEN THE THEME -OST PEOPLE NEED REMINDERS IN
ORDER TO UNDERSTAND FULLY WHAT YOUVE SAID
4RANSITION SMOOTHLY BETWEEN POINTS 9OUR SPEECH SHOULDNT
BE SEEN AS ISOLATED CHUNKS OF INFORMATION 2ATHER IT SHOULD BE
SEEN AS A CONNECTED SET OF IDEAS 'OOD TRANSITIONS MAKE IT CLEAR
WHAT YOUVE ACCOMPLISHED AND WHERE YOURE GOING NEXT
Review Copy
Copyright 2006 Gravitas Publishing
Review Copy
Copyright 2006 Gravitas Publishing
*/(7;,9
,S[=SY7E]-X
(IPMZIVMRK[MXL4SMWIERH4M^^E^^
#OMING 5P
/NCE YOUVE PLANNED A GREAT SPEECH THE NEXT STEP IS DELIVERING IT
EFFECTIVELY )N THIS CHAPTER YOULL LEARN ABOUT DIFFERENT SPEECH DELIVERY
STYLES TOOLS FOR VERBAL AND NON
VERBAL COMMUNICATION HOW TO MASK
MISTAKES AND WAYS OF ADAPTING TO YOUR AUDIENCE
Review Copy
Copyright 2006 Gravitas Publishing
4ALK THE 4ALK
8,);3;*%'836
9OUVE PROBABLY BEEN TOLD NOT TO JUDGE A BOOK BY ITS COVER $O YOU
ACTUALLY LISTEN TO THAT ADVICE -ORE LIKELY THAN NOT YOU DECIDE TO PUR
CHASE BORROW OR READ A BOOK AFTER LOOKING AT THE COVER SCANNING THE
TABLE OF CONTENTS AND mIPPING QUICKLY THROUGH THE REST OF IT
4HE SAME IDEA HOLDS TRUE FOR SPEECH AND DEBATE -ANY STUDENTS
SPEND HOURS DEVELOPING EXCEPTIONAL CONTENT ONLY TO DELIVER THEIR
SPEECHES WITHOUT MAKING AN IMPACT -OST PEOPLE HEAR OTHERS TALKING
FOR HOURS EACH DAY WHETHER IT BE TEACHERS PARENTS OR STUDENTS $O
YOU LISTEN ATTENTIVELY EVERY SINGLE TIME SOMEONE IS SPEAKING 0ROBABLY
NOT 9OURE NATURALLY DRAWN TOWARD CLEAR CONVINCING AND INTERESTING
SPEAKERS &OR THESE REASONS ITS WELL WORTH YOUR WHILE TO LEARN AND
PRACTICE THE TOOLS FOR EXCELLENT SPEECH DELIVERY
8,)6-+,8;%=83;6-8)-8
(OW YOU WRITE DOWN YOUR SPEECH IF AT ALL WILL HAVE A SIGNIlCANT
IMPACT ON HOW WELL YOU DELIVER IT 7E EACH HAVE OUR OWN STYLE AND
PREFERENCES SO THERES NO @ONE SIZE lTS ALL METHOD (OWEVER THERE
ARE CLEAR ADVANTAGES TO SELECTING CERTAIN METHODS AND DISADVANTAGES
TO GOING WITH OTHERS "ELOW IS A DISCUSSION OF THE DIFFERENT WAYS TO
DELIVER A SPEECH /UTLINE 3CRIPT -EMORIZED AND )MPROMPTU
"ARE "ONES /UTLINE 3PEAKING
4HIS TYPE OF SPEAKING INVOLVES THE USE OF
:\JJLZZ;PW
AN OUTLINE CONTAINING YOUR MAIN POINTS
!LTHOUGH KEY PHRASES AND PARTS OF THE
9WIERSYXPMRI
INTRODUCTION AND CONCLUSION MAY BE WRIT
VEXLIVXLEREWGVMTX
TEN DOWN WORD FOR WORD THE SPEAKER MUST
KNOW ALL OF THE INFORMATION WELL ENOUGH TO
SPEAK NATURALLY AND CLEARLY -OST SUCCESSFUL
SPEAKERS USE AN OUTLINE BECAUSE IT ALLOWS
FOR MAXIMUM mUENCY AND EASE OF DELIVERY
3OME SPEAKERS WRITE DOWN ONLY lVE OR SIX LINES AS REMINDERS OF
THEIR MAIN POINTS /THERS INCLUDE DETAILS UNDER EACH POINT 4AKE A LOOK
AT THE SPEECH OUTLINES ON THE NEXT PAGE TO GET A FEEL FOR THIS METHOD
Review Copy
Copyright 2006 Gravitas Publishing
(OW 9OU 3AY )T $ELIVERING WITH 0OISE AND 0IZZAZZ
Review Copy
Copyright 2006 Gravitas Publishing
4ALK THE 4ALK
Review Copy
Copyright 2006 Gravitas Publishing
(OW 9OU 3AY )T $ELIVERING WITH 0OISE AND 0IZZAZZ
0UT IT ON 0APER 3CRIPT 3PEAKING
)F YOURE A BEGINNER AT SPEECH AND DEBATE OR IF ITS ESSENTIAL THAT EVERY
PHRASE BE VERY ACCURATE YOU MAY WANT TO CONSIDER A SCRIPT )N THIS
STYLE OF SPEAKING YOU WRITE DOWN YOUR ENTIRE SPEECH WORD FOR WORD
AND YOU USE THE SCRIPT FOR DELIVERY 9OU SHOULD TRY TO MAKE EYE CON
TACT WITH THE AUDIENCE AS MUCH AS POSSIBLE )F YOU DONT IT WILL SEEM
LIKE YOURE TALKING TO THE PAPER MORE THAN YOURE COMMUNICATING AND
ENGAGING WITH THE AUDIENCE !LTHOUGH SCRIPT SPEAKING MAY INITIALLY
SEEM EASIER ITS LESS EFFECTIVE IN TERMS OF mUENCY AND AUDIENCE INTER
EST 4RY SWITCHING TO THE OUTLINE STYLE AS SOON AS POSSIBLE
)F SPEAKING WITH A SCRIPT @ SPACE YOUR WRITING SO THAT ITS EASIER
TO lND YOUR PLACE AS YOU PRESENT 7RITE DOWN YOUR MOST IMPORTANT
PHRASES AND MAIN POINTS IN BOLD FONT UNDERLINED OR ITALICIZED SO THAT
THESE KEY LINES STAND OUT 4AKE A LOOK AT THE EXAMPLES ON THE PREVIOUS
PAGE TO SEE TWO WAYS OF WRITING DOWN A SPEECH WORD FOR WORD
+EEP IT IN -IND -EMORIZED 3PEAKING
)F YOU HAVE A PHOTOGRAPHIC MEMORY OR TOO MUCH TIME ON YOUR HANDS
YOU MAY WANT TO CONSIDER MEMORIZING YOUR SPEECH $ONT MEET ANY OF
THE ABOVE CRITERIA 9OURE NOT ALONE -EMORIZED SPEAKING ISNT RECOM
MENDED FOR MOST PEOPLE .OT ONLY IS THIS METHOD DIFlCULT BUT IT ALSO
MAKES YOU SEEM LESS NATURAL AND RELAXED 9OUR AUDIENCE WILL LIKELY BE
ABLE TO TELL THAT YOURE STRUGGLING TO REMEMBER EACH EXACT WORD
!LTHOUGH MEMORIZING AN ENTIRE SPEECH IS FRAUGHT WITH PROBLEMS
YOU MAY WANT TO MEMORIZE THE MOST IMPORTANT LINES &OR INSTANCE IF
YOU HAVE A FEW LINES THAT YOU HOPE WILL STAND OUT SAYING THEM BY HEART
MAY HELP YOU FOCUS ON MAKING A CONNECTION WITH YOUR AUDIENCE
)N AN )NSTANT )MPROMPTU 3PEAKING
7HENEVER YOURE SPEAKING ON THE SPOT OR WITH LESS THAN lVE MINUTES
OF PREPARATION TIME YOURE SPEAKING IMPROMPTU )MPROMPTU SPEAK
ING SKILLS WILL HELP YOU IN DEBATES BECAUSE YOULL HAVE TO CLASH WITH
YOUR OPPONENTS ARGUMENTS WITHOUT BEING ABLE TO ANTICIPATE EXACTLY
WHAT THEYRE GOING TO SAY !LSO THIS TYPE OF SPEAKING IS A GREAT SKILL TO
HAVE FOR ASKING AND ANSWERING QUESTIONS EITHER AFTER A SPEECH OR AS
PART OF A DEBATE )F YOU PRACTICE IMPROMPTU SPEAKING YOULL BE ABLE TO
COMMUNICATE DYNAMICALLY ON SHORT NOTICE OR EVEN NO NOTICE AT ALL
Review Copy
Copyright 2006 Gravitas Publishing
4ALK THE 4ALK
83307*36834238',()0-:)6=
9OUR VOICE IS A POWERFUL INSTRUMENT FOR COMMUNICATION AND USING IT
CORRECTLY TAKES SIGNIlCANT SKILL AND PRACTICE ! MUSICIAN USES A VARIETY
OF TECHNIQUES TO CREATE QUALITY SOUND JUST
AS A SPEAKER USES THE VOICE TO EXPRESS IDEAS
:\JJLZZ;PW
CLEARLY AND EFFECTIVELY "UT THERE ISNT A SIN
GLE @RIGHT SPEAKING STYLE !LTHOUGH THERE ARE
;LIREWTIEOIV
GENERAL STRATEGIES FOR SUCCESSFUL DELIVERY
GETXYVIW]SYVMRXIVIWX
YOU MUST DEVELOP YOUR OWN STYLE (ERE ARE
XLMROEFSYX[L]
SOME OF THE BASICS WHEN IT COMES TO MAXI
MIZING YOUR VOCAL EFFECTIVENESS
2ATE &OR THE SPEAKER WHOS MUCH MORE FAMILIAR WITH THE SPEECH THAN
THE AUDIENCE MEMBERS THE CONTENT MAY SEEM EASILY UNDERSTANDABLE
WHEN SPOKEN AT A PACE THAT WOULD BE USED FOR EVERYDAY CONVERSATION
(OWEVER WHEN SPEAKING IN PUBLIC YOUR RATE MUST BE SLOW ENOUGH SO
THAT YOUR AUDIENCE CAN CLEARLY UNDERSTAND YOUR IDEAS "E SURE THOUGH
TO KEEP YOUR PRESENTATION mUENT AND LIVELY
!LTHOUGH THERES NO RIGID RULE FOR THE IDEAL
+PK@V\2UV^&
SPEAKING RATE MOST SPEECHES ARE DELIVERED
AT TO WORDS PER MINUTE !LSO YOU
8LI[SVPH WJEWXIWX
GENERALLY DONT WANT TO KEEP A CONSTANT RATE
XEPOIVWTIEOWEXSZIV
THROUGHOUT YOUR SPEECH 3LOW DOWN AT YOUR
[SVHWTIVQMRYXI
KEY POINTS OR WHEN THE CONTENT IS MORE DIF
lCULT FOR OTHERS TO UNDERSTAND
0ITCH !LTHOUGH THERES NO OPTIMAL PITCH FOR PUBLIC SPEAKING VARIETY
IS VERY IMPORTANT NONETHELESS )TS RATHER BORING FOR THE AUDIENCE IF
YOU MAINTAIN A CONSTANT AND MONOTONOUS PITCH THROUGHOUT 2AISE
OR LOWER YOUR PITCH TO ADD VARIETY AND EMPHASIS 4HIS PITCH VARIETY
SHOULD COME NATURALLY IF YOURE COMFORTABLE WITH YOUR SPEECH AND IF
YOU SPEAK EITHER IMPROMPTU OR USING AN OUTLINE
0AUSES )N ADDITION TO HELPING YOU lND YOUR PLACE OR GATHER YOUR
THOUGHTS PAUSES CAN BE USED STRATEGICALLY )TS IMPORTANT TO PAUSE
BRIEmY AFTER EACH OF YOUR KEY POINTS OR AFTER YOU DELIVER VITAL INFORMA
TION SO THAT THE AUDIENCE MEMBERS HAVE AN OPPORTUNITY TO ABSORB THE
CONTENT !LSO PAUSES CAN BE USED TO CREATE DRAMATIC IMPACT AFTER THE
MOST MEMORABLE AND IMPORTANT LINES
Review Copy
Copyright 2006 Gravitas Publishing
(OW 9OU 3AY )T $ELIVERING WITH 0OISE AND 0IZZAZZ
4ONE )TS IMPORTANT THAT YOUR SPEAKING TONE REmECTS THE INTENT OF YOUR
SPEECH &OR EXAMPLE A HUMOROUS SPEECH SHOULD HAVE A LIGHTER MORE
UPBEAT TONE A TRIBUTE TO FALLEN SOLDIERS SHOULD HAVE A MORE SOLEMN
TONE AND A SPEECH TO PERSUADE THE AUDIENCE TO TAKE SOME SORT OF
POLITICAL ACTION SHOULD BE DELIVERED WITH A LIVELY AND PASSIONATE TONE
)N SPEECHES INTENDED TO INFORM EVEN THOUGH THE EXACT TONE IS LESS
IMPORTANT IN TERMS OF REmECTING THE CONTENT YOU SHOULD STILL BE FAIRLY
LIVELY IN ORDER TO MAINTAIN AUDIENCE INTEREST
6OLUME -AKE SURE THAT YOURE SPEAKING LOUD ENOUGH SO THAT THE AUDI
ENCE MEMBERS WHO ARE FARTHEST AWAY FROM YOU CAN HEAR YOU CLEARLY
9OU SHOULD WATCH CAREFULLY FOR REACTION FROM THE AUDIENCE TO DETER
MINE IF ANYONE IS HAVING DIFlCULTY HEARING YOUR SPEECH 6ERY FEW
SPEAKERS ARE TOO LOUD BUT MAKE SURE YOU DONT SEEM TO BE @SHOUTING
AT THE AUDIENCE !LSO YOU DONT NECESSARILY HAVE TO SPEAK AT THE SAME
VOLUME THROUGHOUT 3OME DEGREE OF VOLUME VARIETY IS AN EFFECTIVE WAY
TO DELIVER YOUR SPEECH IN A LIVELY INTERESTING MANNER
%MPHASIS )N ADDITION TO PAUSING YOUR TONE AND VOLUME VARIETY CAN BE
USED TO EMPHASIZE KEY WORDS AND PHRASES IN YOUR SPEECH !NY CHANGE
IN TONE AND VOLUME CAN MAKE A LINE STAND OUT SUCH AS RAISING YOUR
VOICE OR DEEPENING YOUR TONE
#LARITY (OW YOU ARTICULATE WORDS IS CRITICAL IF YOU WANT YOUR AUDI
ENCE TO UNDERSTAND FULLY WHAT YOURE SAYING -AKE SURE THAT YOU ARENT
MUMBLING OR SLURRING YOUR WORDS AND PRACTICE ANY DIFlCULT WORDS
BEFOREHAND SO THAT THEY ARENT MISPRONOUNCED WHEN YOU SPEAK
8,)7392(3*7-0)2')
/N 3EPTEMBER THE DEBATE BETWEEN *OHN & +ENNEDY AND 2ICH
ARD .IXON FOR 0RESIDENT OF THE 5NITED 3TATES MARKED THE lRST TIME THAT
MILLIONS OF PEOPLE WATCHED SUCH A CONTEST ON TELEVISION 4HE DEBATE
WAS RICH IN SUBSTANCE WITH BOTH PARTICIPANTS CONVEYING KEY INSIGHTS
INTO THEIR RESPECTIVE PLATFORMS 2ADIO LISTENERS WERE ALMOST EVENLY
SPLIT ON WHO WON THE DEBATE LEANING SLIGHTLY IN FAVOR OF .IXON 4HE
STORY WAS VERY DIFFERENT WITH TELEVISION VIEWERS 4HEY FAVORED +EN
NEDY BY A WIDE MARGIN (IS YOUTHFUL AND UPBEAT IMAGE TRUMPED THE
MORE TIRED
LOOKING AND PALE .IXON
Review Copy
Copyright 2006 Gravitas Publishing
4ALK THE 4ALK
9ES BODY LANGUAGE DOES MATTER 9OU MAY THINK IT SHOULDNTTHAT
WE SHOULD BE JUDGED ONLY ACCORDING TO WHAT WE SAY )F SO 'REEK PHI
LOSOPHER !RISTOTLE WAS PROBABLY IN YOUR CAMP WHEN HE WROTE IN 2HETO
RIC h4HE BATTLE SHOULD BE FOUGHT ON THE FACTS OF THE CASE ALONEv 4ODAY
THE FACT IS THAT PEOPLE LISTEN WITH THEIR EYES AS MUCH AS THEY LISTEN
WITH THEIR EARS 7E USUALLY THINK OF AUDIENCE MEMBERS AS @LISTENERS
0ERHAPS ITS A GOOD IDEA TO THINK OF THEM AS @VIEWERS AS WELL
%XCELLENT SPEAKERS COMMUNICATE THEIR CONlDENCE WITH THEIR POS
TURE AND MOVEMENT 4HEY DONT ROCK BACK AND FORTH OR FROM SIDE TO
SIDE INSTEAD PLACING THEIR FEET lRMLY ON THE mOOR "UT THATS ONLY WHEN
THEYRE IN ONE PLACE /FTEN THEY MOVE AROUND THE FRONT OF THE ROOM
ADDING COLOR AND EMPHASIS TO THEIR POINTS .EVER ONES TO SLOUCH THEY
STAND WITH CONlDENCEAND THATS WHAT THE AUDIENCE SEES IN THEM
3TRONG COMMUNICATORS ADD EMPHASIS AND STYLE USING GESTURES 4O
ALLOW THEIR HANDS TO MOVE FREELY THEY KEEP THEM OUT OF THEIR POCK
ETS AND OFF THE STAND !LTHOUGH EVERYONE HAS A DIFFERENT NATURAL STYLE
WHEN GESTURING HERE ARE SOME STRATEGIES TO CONSIDER
!VOID POINTING YOUR lNGER .OBODY LIKES HAVING A lNGER POINTED AT
THEM &OR MANY AUDIENCE MEMBERS DOING SO WILL APPEAR TOO FORCEFUL
7HAT IF GESTURING WITH YOUR lNGER IS A HABIT THAT YOUVE FORMED AND
IS A NATURAL PART OF YOUR STYLE !T LEAST BE SURE THAT YOU DONT JAB YOUR
lNGER DIRECTLY AT OTHERS BUT THAT YOU POINT UP DOWN OR TO THE SIDE
,IMIT CLOSED
lSTED GESTURES 4HE @PUNCHING GESTURE LIKE THE lNGER
POINTING GESTURE APPEARS A TAD TOO BLUNT FOR MANY PEOPLE 3OME SPEAK
ERS SEE IT AS A WAY TO SHOW STRENGTH AND CONVICTION 5NFORTUNATELY IT
ALSO MAKES YOU SEEM MORE TENSE AND RIGID IN CONTRAST TO THE MORE
EXPRESSIVE AND LIVELY IMAGE YOU MAY WANT TO PRESENT
$O A @ TO EXPAND YOUR RANGE -OST SPEAKERS RESTRICT GESTURES TO
A VERY NARROW RANGE OF MOTION 4HEIR ELBOWS STAY RIGHT AGAINST THEIR
BODY AND THEIR GESTURES ARE ALWAYS IN FRONT OF THEM OR BESIDE THEM
4HE BEST WAY TO ADD VARIETY TO YOUR GESTURES IS TO USE THE COMPLETE
@ DEGREE RANGE OF MOTION )N PARTICULAR YOU CAN EMPHASIZE YOUR
MOST IMPORTANT POINTS WITH STRONG GESTURES ABOVE YOUR SHOULDERS
5SE A VARIETY OF GESTURES 7E ALL HAVE PARTICULAR TYPES OF GESTURES THAT
WE USE MORE OFTEN THAN OTHERS 4HEYRE PART OF OUR OWN NATURAL STYLE
5NFORTUNATELY IT CAN ALSO BECOME VERY REPETITIVE AND STALE IN THE EYES
Review Copy
Copyright 2006 Gravitas Publishing
(OW 9OU 3AY )T $ELIVERING WITH 0OISE AND 0IZZAZZ
OF AN AUDIENCE MEMBER )F YOU HAVE A CHANCE TO VIDEOTAPE YOURSELF
SPEAKING PLAY YOUR SPEECH IN FAST
FORWARD AND YOULL NOTICE THIS PROB
LEM VERY QUICKLY IF ITS THE CASE WITH YOU $O YOUR BEST TO USE DIFFERENT
GESTURES SO THAT YOUR SPEECH HAS MORE COLOR AND CHARACTER
-OST IMPORTANTLY BE NATURAL 3OUNDS CONTRADICTORY RIGHT 9OUVE
JUST HEARD SEVERAL @RULES FOR EFFECTIVE HAND GESTURES AND NOW YOURE
BEING TOLD TO BE @NATURAL 5NDOUBTEDLY ITS A
TOUGH BALANCING ACT 9OUR GESTURES ARE MOST
>H[JO6\[
EXPRESSIVE AND EFFECTIVE WHEN THEY COME
NATURALLY ESPECIALLY WHEN YOUR BODY IS FREE
(SR XDTPER LERH
OF TENSION AND STRESS 4RY WORKING WITHIN
KIWXYVIWMRXS]SYV
THE FRAMEWORK OF YOUR NATURAL STYLE BUT
WTIIGL
AIM TO ENHANCE YOUR PERFORMANCE ON THE
DIMENSIONS MENTIONED PREVIOUSLY
(=2%1-'()&%8)()0-:)6=
)F YOU LOOK AT A DEBATE SCORE SHEET ITS LIKELY THAT NO MORE THAN A
QUARTER OF THE TOTAL MARKS ARE FOR DELIVERY .ATURALLY THOSE WHO MAKE
EXCELLENT ARGUMENTS BUT WHO ARE LESS COMFORTABLE WITH THEIR DELIVERY
CONCLUDE THAT THEIR SPEAKING SKILLS CANT COST THEM ANY MORE THAN A
FRACTION OF THE TOTAL SCORE
4HEYRE WRONG )N AN IDEAL WORLD THIS WOULDNT BE THE CASE 7E
WOULD JUDGE DEBATERS PRIMARILY BY WHAT THEY HAVE TO SAY "UT EACH OF
US NATURALLY MAKES SUBJECTIVE JUDGMENTS 4HE IMPRESSION YOU MAKE AS
A SPEAKER GOES A LONG WAY IN RAISING YOUR SCORE IN ALL AREAS 0EOPLE SAY
TO THEMSELVES h4HAT DEBATER SEEMS CONlDENT AND SHE REALLY APPEARS
TO HAVE HER HEAD ON HER SHOULDERS 3O ) GUESS HER ARGUMENTS ARE ALSO
QUITE STRONG JUDGING FROM HOW CONlDENTLY SHE PRESENTS THEMv
)N ADDITION TO THE APPEARANCE OF CONlDENCE THE RANGE OF SPEAKING
TECHNIQUES DISCUSSED IN THIS CHAPTER APPLIES TO DEBATE DELIVERY 3EV
ERAL AREAS ARE PARTICULARLY IMPORTANT
9OUR USE OF VARIETY AND EXPRESSIVENESS %VEN TO THE MOST INTERESTED
LISTENER A DEBATE CAN BECOME DRY IF SPEECH AFTER SPEECH IS DEVOID OF
ANY PASSION -AKE SURE YOUR STYLE KEEPS THE JUDGES INTERESTED
(OW CLEARLY YOU PRESENT IDEAS *UDGES HAVE TO GRASP MANY DISTINCT
POINTS SOME OF WHICH MAY BE RATHER SOPHISTICATED )TS IMPORTANT THAT
Review Copy
Copyright 2006 Gravitas Publishing
4ALK THE 4ALK
YOU EXPLAIN IDEAS VERY CLEARLY AND PRECISELY INCLUDING GOOD ARTICULA
TION AND IF NECESSARY SLOWING DOWN YOUR PACE
4HE WAY THAT YOU WRITE DOWN YOUR SPEECH ! DEBATE SPEECH WRITTEN
OUT WORD FOR WORD MAKES JUDGES FEEL LIKE THEYRE AT A PUBLIC SPEAKING
COMPETITION 5SE AN OUTLINE TO SHOW THAT YOURE CONlDENT ENOUGH IN
YOUR IDEAS TO BE ABLE TO EXPLAIN THEM WITHOUT READING FROM TEXT
1%7/-2+1-78%/)7
.OBODY SPEAKS PERFECTLYNOT EVEN SEASONED PROFESSIONALS 7E ALL
MAKE ERRORS AS SPEECH AND DEBATE IS MORE OF AN ART THAN AN EXACT SCI
ENCE 5NFORTUNATELY WE OFTEN LET THE AUDIENCE KNOW THAT WEVE MADE
A MISTAKE THROUGH OUR WORDS EXPRESSION OR BODY LANGUAGE 7ITHOUT
DOING SO MOST PEOPLE WOULDNT HAVE EVEN NOTICED 4HERE ARE A FEW
TOOLS OF THE TRADE THAT MAKE IT EASY TO MASK MISTAKES
$ONT APOLOGIZE 3AYING h/H SORRY WHAT ) MEANT TO SAY WAS xv NOT
ONLY SHOWS UNCERTAINTY BUT ITS ALSO COMPLETELY UNNECESSARY 7HY
SHOULD YOU APOLOGIZE WHEN YOURE THE ONE
MAKING THE EFFORT TO DELIVER A SPEECH 9OUR
:\JJLZZ;PW
CREDIBILITY AS A SPEAKER DEPENDS ON YOUR
ABILITY TO PROJECT CONlDENCE .EVER GIVE THE
4VIXIRHXLEXXLIIVVSV
AUDIENCE A REASON TO BELIEVE THAT YOURE
RIZIVIZIRLETTIRIH
STUMBLING -OST OF THE TIME YOUR MISTAKE
WILL BE SO MINOR THAT IT HAS NO SIGNIlCANT
IMPACT ON YOUR OVERALL MESSAGE
0AUSE 3OMETIMES THE MOST EFFECTIVE RECOVERY TOOL THAT A SPEAKER CAN
USE IS NOT TO SPEAK 4OO OFTEN WE lLL MEMORY LAPSES OR MISTAKES WITH
hUMSv AND hAHS v REVEALING THAT WEVE MADE AN ERROR 7HY NOT JUST
PAUSE FOR A SPLIT SECOND AND COLLECT YOUR THOUGHTS
2ECALL WHAT YOU JUST SAID )F YOURE STRUGGLING TO lND WHERE YOU SHOULD
BE GOING NEXT USE DIFFERENT LANGUAGE TO SUMMARIZE THE THOUGHT THAT
YOUVE JUST lNISHED &OR EXAMPLE YOU COULD SAY h.OW THAT ) HAVE
ESTABLISHED WHY PHYSICAL lTNESS IS ENJOYABLE ) WANT TO MOVE ON TO xv
4HIS TECHNIQUE NOT ONLY GIVES YOU A MOMENT TO COLLECT YOURSELF IT ALSO
SERVES AS A GREAT TRANSITION TO A NEW POINT
Review Copy
Copyright 2006 Gravitas Publishing
(OW 9OU 3AY )T $ELIVERING WITH 0OISE AND 0IZZAZZ
3MILE ! GLUM mUSTERED LOOK IS A BLATANT GIVEAWAY THAT YOURE STRUG
GLING )F YOURE SMILING AND PROJECTING A POSITIVE IMAGE YOULL BE GOING
A LONG WAY IN HIDING ANY MISTAKES
8,)%683*%(%48-2+
!S A SPEAKER YOURE A @SERVANT TO THE AUDI
ENCE 4HEREFORE YOU MUST BE mEXIBLE ENOUGH
TO ADAPT TO THE AUDIENCES REACTION 4HE BEST
SPEAKERS WILL PAY CAREFUL ATTENTION TO THE
NON
VERBAL SIGNALS THAT AUDIENCE MEMBERS
SEND TO THEM AND WILL ADAPT THEIR SPEAKING
STYLE OR CONTENT ACCORDINGLY (ERE ARE A FEW
SITUATIONS WITH SUGGESTED RESPONSES
:\JJLZZ;PW
2SXMGIXLIEYHMIRGI
QIQFIVW JEGMEP
I\TVIWWMSRW
0ROBLEM #OUNTERING CONFUSION 3AY YOUR LISTENERS FACIAL EXPRES
SIONS SUGGEST THAT THEY DONT CLEARLY UNDERSTAND YOUR POINT 4HEYVE
STOPPED WRITING ANYTHING DOWN AIMING TO UNDERSTAND YOU lRST
3OLUTION %NGAGING EXPLANATIONS 4HERES NOTHING WORSE THAN CONTINU
ING AS PLANNED WHEN YOUR AUDIENCE DOESNT GET WHAT YOU JUST SAID )N
THIS SITUATION YOU SHOULD REPEAT OR SUMMARIZE YOUR POINT EXPLAINING
WHY IT MATTERS TO THE ISSUE AT HAND 7HEN YOU DO SO MAINTAIN ENGAG
ING EYE CONTACT WITH THE AUDIENCE MEMBERS WHO APPEAR UNCERTAIN
!LSO MOVING FORWARD SLIGHTLY SUGGESTS THAT YOURE TRYING YOUR BEST TO
HELP THEM UNDERSTAND WHAT YOURE SAYING
0ROBLEM 4HEYRE BORED ,ETS FACE IT NOT EVERYONE WILL BE INTEREST
ED IN WHAT YOURE SAYING 3OME PEOPLE WILL HAVE A RATHER DISINTERESTED
EXPRESSION OTHERS WILL SIT BACK AND CROSS THEIR ARMS AND YET OTHERS
WILL START LOOKING DOWN TO THE SIDE OR EVEN AT THEIR WATCHES
3OLUTION 'ET DYNAMIC 4HE MAIN REASON WHY THEY ARENT INTERESTED
IS PROBABLY BECAUSE YOU DONT SEEM INTERESTED 6ARY YOUR PITCH TONE
EXPRESSION SPEED MOVEMENT AND GESTURES TO CREATE SOME INTEREST
$ONT JUST KEEP YOUR EYE CONTACT WITH THOSE WHO ARE LISTENING 4O THE
CONTRARY AIM TO MAKE EYE CONTACT PARTICULARLY WITH THOSE WHO SEEM
BORED -AKE THEM FEEL LIKE THEY SHOULD BE LISTENING
0ROBLEM /PPOSITE OPINION .OT EVERYONE WILL AGREE WITH YOUR
POINTS %VERYONE OF COURSE HAS OPINIONS AND SOMETIMES YOU CAN TELL
THAT SOME AUDIENCE MEMBERS DONT SHARE YOUR VIEWS 4HEY MAY TURN
Review Copy
Copyright 2006 Gravitas Publishing
4ALK THE 4ALK
OR SHAKE THEIR HEADS OR THEY MAY SHIFT THEIR POSTURE 4HESE SIGNALS
REVEAL AGITATION OR DISAGREEMENT AND YOU MUST RESPOND ACCORDINGLY
3OLUTION $ECISIVE DIRECTION 9OU HAVE TWO CHOICES DEFEND YOUR POINT
ASSERTIVELY OR FOCUS PRIMARILY ON OTHER POINTS )F YOU FEEL YOU HAVE
SOMETHING MORE TO SAY ABOUT YOUR POINT THAT MAY CONVINCE THE AUDI
ENCE DONT STOP WITH WHAT YOUVE PLANNED "E DECISIVE IN STANDING UP
FOR YOUR ARGUMENT AS THOSE OPPOSING YOU WILL EITHER BE CONVINCED OR
AT LEAST ACKNOWLEDGE THAT YOU HAVE SOUND BASIS FOR WHAT YOURE SAY
ING !NOTHER STRATEGY IS TO PLAY UP OTHER POINTS AND MAKE THEM THE
MAIN FOCUS OF YOUR CONCLUSION )N OTHER WORDS IF IT SEEMS LIKE THEY
DONT AGREE WITH PART OF WHAT YOURE SAYING DOWNPLAY THESE AREAS
)F YOU WANT TO ENSURE THAT YOUR SPEECH CONTENT IS DELIVERED IN AN EFFEC
TIVE HIGH
IMPACT WAY BE SURE TO PRACTICE THE METHODS EXPLAINED IN
THIS CHAPTER 'REAT DELIVERY LEAVES YOUR AUDIENCE WITH A FAVORABLE
IMPRESSION OF BOTH YOU AND YOUR SPEECH
Review Copy
Copyright 2006 Gravitas Publishing
(OW 9OU 3AY )T $ELIVERING WITH 0OISE AND 0IZZAZZ
#HAPTER +EYS TO 3UCCESS
5SE AN OUTLINE TO DELIVER A SPEECH 7RITING YOUR SPEECH DOWN
WORD FOR WORD MAKES IT TOUGH TO HAVE STRONG EYE CONTACT AND
ENGAGEMENT WITH THE AUDIENCE -EMORIZING YOUR SPEECH MAKES
YOUR DELIVERY SEEM UNNATURAL NOT TO MENTION THE EXTRAORDINARY
AMOUNT OF TIME THAT YOULL HAVE TO SPEND PREPARING !N OUTLINE
WITH YOUR KEY IDEAS PROVIDES HELPFUL REMINDERS AS YOU GO ALONG
WHILE ALLOWING YOU TO SPEAK FREELY AND NATURALLY
0RACTICE EFFECTIVE SPEAKING TECHNIQUES ! MODERATE PACE
WITH WELL PLACED PAUSES MAKES IT EASY FOR THE AUDIENCE TO FOLLOW
YOUR SPEECH 9OUR EXPRESSION TONE AND VOLUME SHOULD REmECT
THE PURPOSE OF THE SPEECH !LWAYS MAKE SURE THAT YOUR LISTENERS
CAN HEAR AND UNDERSTAND WHAT YOURE SAYING AND THAT THEY GET
THE DESIRED MEANING FROM THE WAY YOU SPEAK
%NHANCE YOUR SPEECH WITH SOUND BODY LANGUAGE 9OUR GES
TURES HELP CONVEY THE TONE AND MEANING OF WHAT YOURE TRYING
TO GET ACROSS )N ADDITION TO MAKING YOU FEEL MORE CONlDENT A
SOLID POSTURE MAKES YOU LOOK MORE CONlDENT 2EMEMBER THAT
THE AUDIENCE MEMBERS FORM MUCH OF THEIR IMPRESSION OF YOU
FROM WHAT THEY SEE
D$ONT MAKE YOUR MISTAKES OBVIOUS !POLOGIZING SHOWS
WEAKNESS AND UNCERTAINTY )NSTEAD PAUSE BRIEmY OR REFER BACK TO
WHAT YOUVE JUST SAID TO HELP YOU RECOVER
!DAPT CONSTANTLY TO YOUR AUDIENCE 0AY ATTENTION TO THE
BODY LANGUAGE AND EXPRESSION OF THE AUDIENCE MEMBERS TO SEE
IF THEYRE CONFUSED BORED OR IN DISAGREEMENT 4HEN ADJUST YOUR
CONTENT AND STYLE ACCORDINGLY 9OUR GOAL IS TO @SERVE YOUR AUDI
ENCE AND UNDERSTANDING YOUR @CUSTOMERS IS THE lRST STEP TO GET
TING THE JOB DONE RIGHT
Review Copy
Copyright 2006 Gravitas Publishing
Review Copy
Copyright 2006 Gravitas Publishing
*/(7;,9
0MXIVEPP]7TIEOMRK
7TIIGLIW[MXL'SQQIRXEV]
#OMING 5P
.OW THAT YOUVE READ WHAT IT TAKES TO BUILD A GREAT SPEECH ITS TIME TO
SEE THE PIECES COME TOGETHER 4HIS CHAPTER WILL TAKE YOU THROUGH A FEW
SAMPLE SPEECHES AND THE COMMENTARY WILL DISCUSS WHATS GOING WELL
AND WHAT COULD IMPROVE 4HINK ABOUT THE STYLE AND TONE YOU WOULD
USE TO DELIVER EACH SPEECH
Review Copy
Copyright 2006 Gravitas Publishing
4ALK THE 4ALK
74%')8396-71 6)%0-78-'366-(-'90397#
3PEECH
#OMMENTARY
&OR MOST OF US THE IDEA OF A DREAM VACATION
THATS @OUT OF THIS WORLD COULD INCLUDE AN AD
VENTURE IN $ISNEYLAND A WEEK ON A #ARIBBEAN
BEACH OR A -EDITERRANEAN CRUISE "UT IN
MILLIONAIRE $ENNIS 4ITO TOOK @OUT OF THIS WORLD
A BIT MORE LITERALLY (E BECAME THE lRST PERSON
TO TAKE A VACATION IN SPACE 3OME PEOPLE BE
LIEVE THAT SPACE TOURISM IS JUST ANOTHER FADA
WASTE OF TIME AND MONEY ) COULDNT DISAGREE
MORE 3PACE TOURISM IS THE NEXT FRONTIER IN OUR
QUEST TO EXPLORE THE UNIVERSE 4ODAY )M GOING
TO TELL YOU WHY SPACE TOURISM IS GOOD FOR OUR
DREAM TO DISCOVER THE BIRTH OF A NEW INDUSTRY
AND A VISION OF HUMAN CIVILIZATION IN SPACE
(UMAN CIVILIZATION HAS ALWAYS DARED
TO DISCOVER WHAT WE ONCE THOUGHT WOULD BE
IMPOSSIBLE 7HO WOULD HAVE DREAMED OF mY
ING UNTIL THE 7RIGHT BROTHERS INVENTED THE
AIRPLANE IN THE EARLY S !ND WHO WOULD
HAVE THOUGHT THAT A HUMAN BEING COULD WALK
ON THE MOON BEFORE ASTRONAUT .EIL !RMSTRONG
DID JUST THAT IN 4HERES NO QUESTION THAT
PAST SPACE MISSIONS HAVE TAUGHT US A GREAT
DEAL ABOUT THE UNIVERSE AS WELL AS CREATING
MORE TANGIBLE BENElTS FOR SCIENCE AND TECH
NOLOGY 3PACE TOURISM IS SIMPLY THE NEXT STEP
IN OUR DREAM TO DISCOVER THE WORLD AROUND US
)TS TIME TO ENCOURAGE MORE PEOPLE EXPLORE
THE UNIVERSE EVEN IF ITS FOR NO OTHER REASON
THAN THEIR OWN PERSONAL ENJOYMENT
3O FOR THOSE WHO HAVE THIS DREAM WHAT
WILL IT TAKE TO GET THEM THERE #ERTAINLY WE
COULD NEVER EXPECT GOVERNMENTS TO FUND A
PERSONS DESIRE FOR A VERY COOL VACATION )TS
MY VIEW THAT THE SOLUTION LIES IN THE BIRTH OF A
'OOD PERSONALIZATION OF
THE ISSUE TO OPEN
THE SPEECH
Review Copy
%FFECTIVE PARALLELISM
"LUNT CLEAR OPINION
STATEMENT
! BIT TOO ABSTRACT
AND GENERAL
'OOD USE OF RHETORICAL
QUESTIONS
7HY WOULD WE CARE
HOW THESE PEOPLE SPEND
THEIR MONEY
3MOOTH TRANSITION
Copyright 2006 Gravitas Publishing
,ITERALLY 3PEAKING 3PEECHES WITH #OMMENTARY
SPACE TOURISM INDUSTRY WORKING IN COOPERA
TION WITH THE WORLDS SPACE AGENCIES )F THERE
ARE WEALTHY PEOPLE WILLING TO SPEND HUNDREDS
OF THOUSANDS OF DOLLARS IF NOT MILLIONS OF DOL
LARS TO MAKE THEIR SPACE TRAVEL DREAMS A RE
ALITY WHY PREVENT THEM FROM DOING SO ,ETS
ALLOW INVESTORS AND ENTREPRENEURS TO mOURISH
IN THEIR QUEST TO TAKE ADVANTAGE OF THIS OPPOR
TUNITY 7EVE ALREADY HEARD THAT COMPANIES
LIKE 6IRGIN !IRLINES AND (ILTON )NTERNATIONAL
WANT TO BE PART OF THIS DREAM 3PACE TOURISM
COULD BE THE BIRTH OF A NEW ECONOMIC ENGINE
)F WE ALLOW THE DREAM TO DISCOVER TO COME
TOGETHER WITH THE POTENTIAL FOR PROlT WELL
HAVE COMPLETED THE lRST STEP TOWARD HUMAN
CIVILIZATION IN SPACE 7ELL HAVE LAID THE FOUN
DATION FOR PERMANENT ESTABLISHMENTS THAT WILL
ALLOW MORE AND MORE PEOPLE TO TAKE A HOLIDAY
ON SAY THE MOON OR PERHAPS A SPACE HOTEL
ORBITING OUR PLANET 3URELY THIS VISION MAY BE
DECADES AWAY BUT A SPACE TOURISM INDUSTRY
IS THE lRST STAGE IN MAKING IT COME TRUE )T
WILL PLANT SEEDS OF OPPORTUNITY THAT WILL IN
SPIRE A MISSION REACHING FAR BEYOND JUST A FEW
WEALTHY INDIVIDUALS
-Y FRIENDS WE MUST ALWAYS DARE TO
DREAM AND WE MUST ALWAYS DREAM TO DISCOV
ER 7E MUST EXPLORE THIS NEW FRONTIER MADE
POSSIBLE BY ADVANCED MODERN TECHNOLOGY
!ND WE MUST EMBARK ON A MISSION TO TAKE
TOURISM @OUT OF THIS WORLD
Review Copy
h7ORKING IN COOPERA
TIONv HOW EXACTLY
(OW DO THEY WANT
TO BE hPART OF THIS
DREAM v
$ID YOU EXPLAIN HOW
THEY WOULD hCOME
TOGETHER v
-AKING SWEEPING
GENERALIZATIONS
'OOD LINK BACK TO THE
lRST POINT
%FFECTIVE mOW FROM
hDARE ;TO= DREAM ;TO=
DISCOVERv
'OOD CONNECTION TO
OPENING OF SPEECH
Copyright 2006 Gravitas Publishing
4ALK THE 4ALK
'311)28%6=3274%')8396-7174))',
4HIS WAS A FAIRLY CREATIVE SPEECH LIKELY MEANT FOR A LIGHT INFORMAL OC
CASION 4HE GOAL WAS TO PRESENT A VIEWPOINT ON A CONCEPT RATHER THAN
ON SPECIlC IDEAS
7HAT DID THE SPEECH DO WELL
s 5SE OF VIVID LANGUAGE )T WAS CLEAR THAT ESTABLISHING AN EMOTIONAL CON
NECTION WITH THE AUDIENCE WAS ONE OF THE SPEAKERS MAIN GOALS 4HE
USE OF RICH DESCRIPTIVE LANGUAGE HELPED IN THIS REGARD 0HRASES LIKE
hDARE TO DREAMv AND hBIRTH OF A NEW ECONOMIC ENGINEv ILLUSTRATED SOME
OF THE KEY IDEAS
s #LOSING LINKED TO OPENING 4HE hOUT OF THIS WORLDv EXPRESSION USED TWICE
IN THE INTRODUCTION WAS REPEATED IN THE CONCLUSION h$REAM TO DISCOV
ERv AND hFRONTIERv WERE ALSO USED AGAIN 4HE USE OF SIMILAR THEMES AND
PHRASES AS WELL AS A PERSONAL CONNECTION MADE FOR A GOOD lT BETWEEN
THE INTRODUCTION AND THE CONCLUSION
s 5SE OF RHETORICAL QUESTIONS %SPECIALLY IN THE SECOND PARAGRAPH RHE
TORICAL QUESTIONS ENCOURAGED THE AUDIENCE MEMBERS TO IMAGINE THE
CONCEPTS FOR THEMSELVES 4HIS AIDED THE SPEAKER IN ACHIEVING HIS GOAL
WHICH WAS TO MAKE AN EMOTIONAL CONNECTION
s 4RANSITIONS BETWEEN POINTS 4HE lRST SENTENCE OF THE SECOND AND THIRD
PARAGRAPHS INCLUDED A CLEAR REFERENCE TO THE PREVIOUS POINT 4HIS AL
LOWED THE SPEECH TO mOW SMOOTHLY AND HELPED THE SPEAKER GUIDE THE
LISTENER ALONG A PARTICULAR PATH
7HAT COULD HAVE IMPROVED
s ,ENGTH OF INTRODUCTION COMPARED TO BODY PARAGRAPHS .ORMALLY AN INTRO
DUCTION OF THIS LENGTH WOULD BE APPROPRIATE "UT IN THIS CASE IT WAS
THE SAME LENGTH IF NOT LONGER THAN EACH OF THE MAIN POINTS ! SHORTER
INTRODUCTION OR LONGER BODY PARAGRAPHS WOULD HAVE MADE THE PROPOR
TIONS MORE SUITABLE
s 4OO ABSTRACT AND GENERAL 'RANTED MAKING AN EMOTIONAL CONNECTION
WAS AN IMPORTANT GOAL OF THIS SPEECH (OWEVER MORE CONCRETE FACTUAL
Review Copy
Copyright 2006 Gravitas Publishing
,ITERALLY 3PEAKING 3PEECHES WITH #OMMENTARY
INFORMATION AND DETAILS WOULD HAVE BEEN USEFUL 4HE SPEECH CAME
ACROSS AS @DREAMY MORE THAN PRACTICAL OR REALISTIC
s %XTENDS THE CASE TOO FAR 4HE MAIN THRUST OF THE SPEECH WAS CLEARLY
SPACE TOURISM $ISCUSSING SPACE CIVILIZATION AS WELL APPEARED RATHER FAN
CIFUL AND UNFOCUSED
1)6'/1)'8->%2%2(6-:)6&0-2(2)77
3PEECH
#OMMENTARY
5NBEARABLE ITCHING 3KIN DISlGUREMENT 0ER
MANENT BLINDNESS
7ELCOME TO THE WORLD OF ONE OF THE
MILLION PEOPLE IN THE POOREST OF COUNTRIES WHO
SUFFER FROM RIVER BLINDNESS 7ELCOME ALSO TO
ONE OF THE MOST DAUNTING DILEMMAS FACED BY
A CORPORATION IN MODERN TIMES 4ODAY ) WANT
TO TELL YOU ABOUT THE STORY OF AN !MERICAN
PHARMACEUTICAL lRM MANDATED BY ITS SHARE
HOLDERS TO MAXIMIZE PROlTS BUT MOTIVATED
BY ITS HEART TO HELP HUMANITY ) WANT TO TELL
YOU ABOUT THE STORY OF -ERCK ITS DRUG -ECTI
ZAN AND THE MILLIONS OF PEOPLE WHO NEEDED IT
BUT COULDNT AFFORD TO PAY FOR IT 4O START ) WILL
EXPLORE -ERCKS DILEMMA IN THE S 4HEN )
WILL TELL YOU ABOUT WHAT THEY DID !ND lNALLY
) WILL DISCUSS WHAT THIS MEANS FOR THE FUTURE
OF DRUG DEVELOPMENT AND DISTRIBUTION
-ERCK FACED A TOUGH DILEMMA IN THE
S HAVING TO DECIDE WHETHER TO SPEND
MILLIONS OF DOLLARS ON A DRUG THAT WOULD NEVER
EARN A DIME 4HE DISEASE WAS RIVER BLINDNESS
KNOWN SCIENTIlCALLY AS h/NCHOCERCIASISv )LL
SPARE YOU THE PRONUNCIATION AND CALL IT hRIVER
BLINDNESSv FROM HERE ON IN 3PREAD BY AN IN
FECTED BLACKmYS BITE IT RESULTS IN A PARASITIC
WORM INFESTING THE BODY 4HE INTENSE ITCHING
SKIN DISlGUREMENT AND PERMANENT BLINDNESS
THAT WOULD OCCUR AFFECTED MILLIONS OF PEOPLE
%FFECTIVE IMAGERY
Review Copy
'OOD USE OF
PARALLELISM HERE
/VERVIEW OF THEME
)S THIS AN ADVERTISE
MENT FOR -ERCK
h4ELL THEM WHAT YOURE
GOING TO TELL THEMv
INTRODUCTION
#LEAR STATEMENT OF THE
KEY POINT
7ASNT IT CALLED hRIVER
BLINDNESSv ALREADY
2EINFORCEMENT OF
IMAGERY
Copyright 2006 Gravitas Publishing
4ALK THE 4ALK
-ERCK THOUGH HAD STUMBLED UPON RESEARCH
THAT COULD CURE THIS TERRIBLE DISEASE 4HE PROB
LEM WAS THAT NOBODY WAS WILLING TO PAY FOR IT
4HERE WAS LITTLE COMMITMENT FROM GOVERN
MENTS AND THE END USERS CERTAINLY WERENT
IN ANY POSITION TO AFFORD IT 4O MAKE MATTERS
WORSE THERE WAS NO DISTRIBUTION SYSTEM AS
THE PEOPLE AFmICTED BY RIVER BLINDNESS LIVED
PRIMARILY IN ISOLATED RURAL AREAS THROUGHOUT
MANY !FRICAN COUNTRIES 3HOULD -ERCK SPEND
MILLIONS OF DOLLARS TO DEVELOP ITS DRUG -ECTI
ZAN )F SO SHOULD IT GIVE IT AWAY FOR FREE !ND
IF IT GIVES IT AWAY FOR FREE SHOULD IT TAKE CARE
OF DISTRIBUTING THE DRUG !ND IF IT DID ALL OF
THESE THINGS WOULD IT SET A DANGEROUS PREC
EDENT FOR FUTURE DRUG DEVELOPMENT -ERCK
FACED ALL OF THESE DAUNTING CHALLENGES AND IT
WAS A @GO OR @NO GO DECISION 4HERE WAS NO
HALFWAY SOLUTION 4HEY WOULD EITHER GO FULL
STEAM AHEAD OR ABANDON THE PROJECT
3O HOW DID -ERCK RESOLVE THIS DILEMMA
3IMPLY PUT IT DECIDED THAT IT WOULD DO AWAY
WITH PROlTS AND SINK MILLIONS OF DOLLARS INTO
SOLVING THIS PROBLEM EVEN THOUGH IT KNEW THE
COMPANY WOULD NEVER RECOVER MORE THAN A
FRACTION OF ITS INVESTMENT )N -ERCK AN
NOUNCED THAT IT WOULD GIVE AWAY -ECTIZAN FOR
FREE TO ALL THOSE WHO WERE AFmICTED BY RIVER
BLINDNESS -ERCKS CAMPAIGN PARTICULARLY THE
-ERCK -ECTIZAN $ONATION 0ROGRAM EVENTUALLY
ENGAGED MANY OTHER GROUPS 4HESE INCLUDED
PHARMACEUTICAL COMPANIES GOVERNMENTS
NON PROlT ORGANIZATIONS AND THE 7ORLD "ANK
)N THE 7ORLD "ANK APPROVED A SPECIAL
PROGRAM TO RAISE MILLION TOWARD TREATING
RIVER BLINDNESS IN DEVELOPING COUNTRIES -IL
LIONS OF DOSES LATER THE LIVES OF SO MANY HAD
BEEN CHANGED FOR THE BETTER 7HAT STARTED AS AN
UNCERTAIN VENTURE BY ONE COMPANY TURNED INTO
Review Copy
3TATEMENT OF THE
OVERALL CHALLENGE
'OOD USE OF QUES
TIONS TO DESCRIBE THE
DILEMMA
4HREE QUESTIONS IS
OKAY FOUR PUSHES IT
2EPETITION OF THE SAME
POINT THREE TIMES
PERHAPS TOO MANY
'OOD LINK BACK TO lRST
POINT OF THE SPEECH
! CLEAR DESCRIPTION OF
WHAT ACTUALLY ENDED
UP HAPPENING
(OW MANY
DOSES EXACTLY
Copyright 2006 Gravitas Publishing
,ITERALLY 3PEAKING 3PEECHES WITH #OMMENTARY
A GLOBAL OPERATION ENGAGING PARTNERS AND AF
FECTED COMMUNITIES ALIKE
4HE CASE OF -ERCKS SUCCESS RAISES INTER
ESTING ISSUES FOR THE FUTURE OF DRUG DEVELOP
MENT AND DISTRIBUTION TO THOSE WHO CANT
AFFORD TO PAY FOR MEDICINE 4ODAY THIS ISSUE
COMES UP REPEATEDLY IN THE MISSION TO TREAT
()6!)$3 THROUGHOUT THE DEVELOPING WORLD
BECAUSE THE DRUGS ARE TOO EXPENSIVE FOR MOST
PEOPLE TO AFFORD )TS MY VIEW THAT THE MODEL
DEVELOPED BY -ERCK IS A USEFUL ONE FOR OTHER
HEALTH PROGRAMS 4HE KEY IS THAT THE BUR
DEN NOT BE PLACED SQUARELY ON THE SHOULDERS
OF ONE COMPANY -ERCK TOOK THE RISK THAT IT
WOULDNT HAVE SIGNIlCANT SUPPORT BUT THE
SUPPORT EVENTUALLY CAME /THER DRUG COM
PANIES NEED TO BE ASSURED THAT THEYLL HAVE
WILLING PARTNERS TO SHOULDER PART OF THE RE
SPONSIBILITY SHOULD THEY WANT TO ENGAGE IN
SUCH A HUMANITARIAN EFFORT ) CERTAINLY HOPE
THAT THIS PROBLEM CAN BE SOLVED 3URELY -EC
TIZAN DID SET A PRECEDENT "UT ) WOULD ARGUE
THAT IT WAS A GOOD PRECEDENT TO SET
4ODAY )VE SHARED WITH YOU -ERCKS DI
LEMMA WHAT IT DID TO RESOLVE THIS DILEMMA IN
FAVOR OF HUMAN HEALTH AND WHAT THIS MEANS
FOR FUTURE MEDICAL ENDEAVORS IN DEVELOPING
COUNTRIES )N A GROUP OF PEOPLE DECIDED
THAT UNBEARABLE ITCHING SKIN DISlGUREMENT
AND PERMANENT BLINDNESS DIDNT HAVE TO BE A
REALITY 4HE WORLD DIDNT HAVE TO ACCEPT THAT
NOTHING COULD BE DONE ABOUT IT 3OMETHING
WAS DONE ABOUT IT AND IT SENT A RAY OF HOPE TO
MILLIONS OF PEOPLE AROUND THE WORLD
Review Copy
.O DETAIL OF hAFFECTED
COMMUNITIESv LINK
h)NTERESTING v 5SE A
DIFFERENT WORD
7HY ITS RELEVANT
TODAY
7HO SPECIlCALLY
SHOULD CARRY THE BUR
DEN 'OVERNMENTS
/THER COMPANIES
'OOD OPINION
STATEMENT
.ICE LEAD INTO THE
CONCLUSION
/NCE AGAIN REINFORCE
MENT OF OPENING
IMAGERY
)SNT THE MAIN POINT
WHAT IT MEANS FOR THE
FUTURE
Copyright 2006 Gravitas Publishing
4ALK THE 4ALK
'311)28%6=321)6'/%2(1)'8->%274))',
!LTHOUGH THE SPEAKER SPENT TWO POINTS DESCRIBING WHAT HAPPENED IN
THE PAST THE PURPOSE WAS CLEARLY TO SHOW THAT WHAT -ERCK DID SHOULD
BE A MODEL FOR PRESENT AND FUTURE SITUATIONS )T WAS BOTH A SPEECH TO
INFORM AND A SPEECH TO PERSUADE WITH THE INFORMATIVE PARTS LAYING
THE FOUNDATION FOR THE PERSUASIVE REMARKS
7HAT DID THE SPEECH DO WELL
s 5SE OF IMAGERY )T WAS IMPORTANT FOR THE AUDIENCE TO PICTURE THE EF
FECTS OF RIVER BLINDNESS 4HE OPENING PHRASE h5NBEARABLE ITCHING 3KIN
DISlGUREMENT 0ERMANENT BLINDNESS v WAS ONE INSTANCE WHERE IMAG
ERY WAS USED EFFECTIVELY
s )NSIGHT INTO THE PRIMARY ACTOR 4HE SPEAKER WAS EFFECTIVE AT EXPLAIN
ING -ERCKS DILEMMA DISCUSSING ITS CONmICTING OBJECTIVES AND SPECIlC
CHALLENGES CONCERNING -ECTIZAN 4HIS ALLOWED AN AUDIENCE MEMBER TO
THINK h7HAT WOULD ) DO IF ) HAD TO MAKE THAT DECISION v
s 0ROVIDING RELEVANCE TO THE ISSUE 7ITHOUT DESCRIBING THE FUTURE IMPLICA
TIONS OF -ERCKS ENDEAVOR MANY AUDIENCE MEMBERS WOULD HAVE BEEN
LEFT ASKING h3O WHAT )TS ALL lNE AND WELL TO KNOW ABOUT THIS DILEMMA
BUT WHY DOES IT MATTER v 4HE DISCUSSION OF RELATED SITUATIONS PROVIDED
PRESENT
DAY CONTEXT TO THE SPEECH
s 2ELEVANT FACTUAL INFORMATION 4HE SPEAKER GAVE THE AUDIENCE MEMBERS
KEY FACTS ABOUT THE DISEASE THE DILEMMA AND THE SOLUTION TO HELP
THEM UNDERSTAND THE SITUATION )F MORE FACTS HAD BEEN STATED IT WOULD
HAVE BEEN HARDER FOR THE LISTENERS TO GRASP THE MOST IMPORTANT ONES
7HAT COULD HAVE IMPROVED
s ,ESS PROMOTION OF -ERCK 4HERES NO QUESTION THAT THE SPEAKER INTENDED
TO PAINT -ERCK IN A POSITIVE LIGHT FOR ITS ROLE IN THIS SITUATION !T TIMES
THOUGH THE TONE SEEMED OVERLY GUSHING IN ITS PRAISE OF -ERCK ALMOST
MAKING IT SEEM LIKE THE SPEAKER WAS TRYING TO IMPRESS SOMEONE WHO
WORKED AT THE COMPANY
Review Copy
Copyright 2006 Gravitas Publishing
,ITERALLY 3PEAKING 3PEECHES WITH #OMMENTARY
s $IFFERENT FOCUS IN THE CONCLUSION )F A KEY OBJECTIVE OF THE SPEECH WAS TO
EXPLAIN TO THE LISTENERS HOW -ERCKS MODEL SHOULD APPLY TO PRESENT
AND FUTURE DISEASE OUTBREAKS THE CONCLUSION SHOULDNT HAVE FOCUSED
SO MUCH ON WHAT HAPPENED IN THE PAST 3AYING FOR EXAMPLE h,ETS
EXTEND THIS RAY OF HOPE TO MILLIONS MORE v COULD HAVE BEEN ONE LINE OF
A MORE EFFECTIVE CLOSING
s -ORE DISCUSSION OF THE PRESENT
DAY SOLUTION 'RANTED IT WOULDNT BE WISE
TO OVERBURDEN THE AUDIENCE WITH TOO MUCH FACTUAL INFORMATION 4HAT
BEING SAID IT WOULD HAVE BEEN HELPFUL TO CHARACTERIZE IN MORE DEPTH
WHAT A MODEL FOR SOLVING CURRENT SITUATIONS WOULD LOOK LIKE
Review Copy
Copyright 2006 Gravitas Publishing
4ALK THE 4ALK
#HAPTER +EYS TO 3UCCESS
D.OTICE THE IMPORTANCE OF HAVING A CLEAR OBJECTIVE 9OU COULD
BE FORGIVEN FOR WONDERING WHAT THE KEY GOAL WAS IN THE h3PACE
4OURISMv SPEECH AS THE SPEECH SEEMED TO LACK FOCUS 4HE h-ERCK
AND -ECTIZANv SPEECH DID A MORE EFFECTIVE JOB OF MOVING TOWARD
A RELEVANT IMPORTANT AND PRACTICAL MESSAGE
D0AY ATTENTION TO THE TYPE OF LANGUAGE 4HE h3PACE 4OURISMv
SPEECH USED VIVID COLORFUL LANGUAGE IN ORDER TO MAKE AN EMO
TIONAL CONNECTION 4HE h-ERCK AND -ECTIZANv SPEECH COMBINED
RICHLY DESCRIPTIVE AND FACTUAL LANGUAGE REmECTING BOTH THE
HUMAN DIMENSION OF THE SITUATION AND THE PRACTICAL ASPECT OF
THE DILEMMA RESPECTIVELY
Review Copy
Copyright 2006 Gravitas Publishing
+0:*6=,9+,)(;,!
,3;83;-2%2%6+91)28
4EVX---
Review Copy
Copyright 2006 Gravitas Publishing
Review Copy
Copyright 2006 Gravitas Publishing
*/(7;,9
2YXWERH&SPXW
&YMPHMRK&PSGOWSJ(IFEXI
#OMING 5P
.OW THAT YOUVE SEEN WHAT IT TAKES TO MAKE A GREAT SPEECH ITS TIME TO
DISCOVER HOW TO DEBATE 4HIS CHAPTER WILL TELL YOU ABOUT THE NATURE AND
PROCESS OF A DEBATE 9OULL LEARN HOW TO DElNE RESOLUTIONS PLAY YOUR
ROLE USE A mOW SHEET AND WORK WITH YOUR PARTNER 2OUNDING OUT THE
CHAPTER ARE TIPS TO ENHANCE YOUR PERFORMANCE IN A NUMBER OF AREAS
Review Copy
Copyright 2006 Gravitas Publishing
4ALK THE 4ALK
(-:-2+-283()&%8)
3IMPLY STATED A DEBATE IS A CLASH OF OPPOSING VIEWS THOUGHT TO LIE
SOMEWHERE IN BETWEEN A FORMAL DISCUSSION AND A FORMAL ARGUMENT
-OST DEBATERS WILL TELL YOU THAT ITS FAR CLOS
ER TO AN ARGUMENT !LTHOUGH PANEL DEBATES
+PK@V\2UV^&
MAY INVOLVE A NUMBER OF DIFFERENT PERSPEC
TIVES ALMOST ALL COMPETITIVE DEBATES FOCUS
8LI[SVPH WPSRKIWX
ON A SPECIlC TOPIC 4HIS TOPIC IS KNOWN AS
HIFEXIPEWXIHJSV
A RESOLUTION OR PROPOSITION 4HERE ARE TWO
LSYVWERHQMRYXIW
SIDES IN A COMPETITIVE DEBATE THE !FlRMA
TIVE AND THE .EGATIVE
4HE !FlRMATIVE SIDE ARGUES IN FAVOR OF THE DEBATES RESOLUTION )T
GOES lRST IN THE DEBATE ALLOWING IT TO SET THE TONE FOR THE ROUND 4HE
TEAM SUPPORTING THE RESOLUTION MAY ALSO BE KNOWN AS THE 0ROPOSITION
OR IN PARLIAMENTARY DEBATE AS THE 'OVERNMENT
4HE .EGATIVE SIDE SPEAKS AGAINST THE RESOLUTION PLACING IT IN
DIRECT OPPOSITION TO THE !FlRMATIVE )T MUST RESPOND ACCORDING TO HOW
THE !FlRMATIVE HAS DElNED THE TERMS OF THE RESOLUTION AND SET OUT
ITS CASE )N PARLIAMENTARY DEBATE THE TEAM OPPOSING THE RESOLUTION IS
KNOWN AS THE /PPOSITION
!N ODD NUMBER OF JUDGES MOST COMMONLY THREE DECIDES THE WIN
NING TEAM )N MOST STYLES OF DEBATE THE PANEL MEMBERS VOTE INDE
PENDENTLY FOR THE TEAM THEY FEEL WON THE DEBATE 3OMETIMES THOUGH
THE JUDGES HAVE A DISCUSSION FOLLOWING THE DEBATEA @DEBATE ON THE
DEBATEIN AN EFFORT TO ARRIVE AT A CONSENSUS DECISION
&9-0(-894&962-8(3;2
$EBATE CAN SOMETIMES SEEM DAUNTING AND COMPLEX 7ITH SO MANY
PEOPLE mAUNTING THEIR MASTERY OF BIG WORDS TECHNICAL TERMS WEIGHTY
SOUNDING PHRASES AND INTRICATE ARGUMENTS ITS NO WONDER THAT MANY
STUDENTS lND DEBATE CONFUSING )N REALITY ITS MUCH SIMPLER THAN THAT
'REAT DEBATING REALLY BOILS DOWN TO TWO SIMPLE OBJECTIVES
"UILD A CASE WITH STRONG ARGUMENTS AND SUPPORTING DETAILS $EVELOP
A SERIES OF POINTS THAT ARE COMPELLING ENOUGH TO CONVINCE YOUR JUDGES
AND TOUGH ENOUGH TO WITHSTAND CRITICISM FROM YOUR OPPONENTS 3UP
PORT YOUR POINTS WITH SOUND EXPLANATIONS AND EVIDENCE !RGUMENTS
Review Copy
Copyright 2006 Gravitas Publishing
.UTS AND "OLTS "UILDING "LOCKS OF $EBATE
ARE PLANNED BEFORE THE DEBATE BEGINS EXCEPT FOR THE .EGATIVE TEAM IN
AN IMPROMPTU DEBATE 4HEY ARE THE CORE IDEAS THAT FORM A CASE %ACH
TEAM WILL TYPICALLY MAKE BETWEEN FOUR AND SIX CONSTRUCTIVE POINTS
WHICH ARE ALSO KNOWN AS CONTENTIONS
#OUNTER THE OTHER TEAMS ARGUMENTS WITH REFUTATION 4ELL YOUR
JUDGES IN PLAIN LANGUAGE WHY YOUR OPPONENTS POINTS ARE WRONG $EM
ONSTRATE THAT THE OTHER TEAM HASNT BUILT A CASE STRONG ENOUGH TO PROVE
ITS SIDE OF THE DEBATE 2EFUTATION WHICH IS ALSO CALLED CLASH IS VITAL
TO ANY DEBATE )T INVOLVES THE POINT BY POINT OPPOSITION OF THE OTHER
TEAMS POINTS 7HILE WELL
DEVELOPED CONSTRUCTIVE ARGUMENTS AND EVI
DENCE ARE NECESSARY FOR A SOLID CASE THE DEBATE ROUND IS OFTEN WON OR
LOST IN THE REFUTATION
8,)%66%=3*6)73098-327
$EBATE RESOLUTIONS COME IN A VARIETY OF FORMS 4HE SAME TOPIC MAY BE
STATED IN DIFFERENT WAYS AND THE DISTINCTIONS MAY SEEM TRIVIAL "UT THE
WAY ITS STATED CAN CHANGE THE DYNAMICS OF THE DEBATE "EFORE LOOKING
AT THE TYPES OF RESOLUTIONS LETS LOOK AT THE TWO WAYS TO WRITE THEM
! DEBATE TOPIC MAY BE WRITTEN AS A QUESTION &OR EXAMPLE h3HOULD
THE 'OVERNMENT CONSIDER DRIVING WHILE TALKING ON A CELL PHONE TO BE
IMPAIRED DRIVING v OR h3HOULD ASSISTED SUICIDE BE ALLOWED v )N EACH
CASE THE !FlRMATIVE IS ANSWERING hYESv AND THE .EGATIVE IS ANSWERING
hNOv TO THE QUESTION
! RESOLUTION MAY BE STATED AS A PHRASE )N THIS FORM A DEBATE RESOLU
TION USUALLY BEGINS WITH A STANDARD PHRASE SUCH AS h2ESOLVEDv OR h"E
IT RESOLVED THAT v AND IT CONTINUES WITH A STATEMENT &OR EXAMPLE h"E
IT RESOLVED THAT A NATIONAL IDENTITY CARD SHOULD BE IMPLEMENTEDv OR
h2ESOLVED ENTREPRENEURS AND BANKERS ARE MORE ESSENTIAL TO SOCIETY
THAN ARTISTS AND WRITERSv
4RUE VS &ALSE 0ROPOSITIONS OF &ACT
0ROPOSITIONS OF &ACT ARE DEBATES OVER THE TRUTH OR REALITY OF A STATE
MENT OFTEN OF A HISTORICAL OR TECHNICAL NATURE 3INCE THEY TEND TO BE
FAIRLY ACADEMIC THEY ARENT COMMONLY USED FOR COMPETITIVE DEBATING
.OT ALL 0ROPOSITIONS OF &ACT INVOLVE ANSWERS THAT ARE DElNITELY TRUE OR
Review Copy
Copyright 2006 Gravitas Publishing
4ALK THE 4ALK
DElNITELY FALSE 9OU MAY COME ACROSS A @TRUE VS FALSE RESOLUTION OF
A SPECULATIVE NATURE /F COURSE THIS MAKES IT TOUGH TO DECIDE WHICH
TEAM WON THE DEBATE (ERE ARE A FEW EXAMPLES OF THIS KIND OF TOPIC
s 2ESOLVED 4HE WORLD IS NOT PREPARED FOR A GLOBAL mU PANDEMIC
s 2ESOLVED $EBT PAYMENTS ARE THE PRIMARY CAUSE OF !FRICAN POVERTY
s 2ESOLVED 0RIVATIZING THE WATER SYSTEM WOULD SAVE MONEY
'OOD VS "AD 0ROPOSITIONS OF 6ALUE
0ROPOSITIONS OF 6ALUE ARE DEBATED ON GROUNDS OF MORALITY OR WORTH
4HEY DONT INVOLVE A PLAN FOCUSING INSTEAD ON THE STRENGTHS OF AN IDEA
OR PRINCIPLE 4HE VALUES UP FOR DEBATE MAY CONCERN MORAL SOCIAL ECO
NOMIC POLITICAL OR CULTURAL ISSUES $EBATES ON VALUES RESOLUTIONS ARE
THE MOST SUBJECTIVE BECAUSE THEY INVOLVE AN ARGUMENT ON COMPETING
BELIEFS NOT ON ISSUES OF ABSOLUTE TRUTH OR THE FEASIBILITY OF A PLAN (ERE
ARE SOME EXAMPLES OF 0ROPOSITIONS OF 6ALUE
s "E IT RESOLVED THAT CHILDREN DO NOT HAVE A RIGHT TO PRIVACY
s "E IT RESOLVED THAT INTERNATIONAL SPORT HAS A PLACE IN POLITICS
s "E IT RESOLVED THAT MULTILATERALISM IS PREFERABLE TO UNILATERALISM
s "E IT RESOLVED THAT FOLLOWING ORDERS IS NO EXCUSE FOR WAR CRIMES
#HANGE VS .O #HANGE 0ROPOSITIONS OF 0OLICY
0OLICY RESOLUTIONS INVOLVE A DEBATE OVER WHETHER A SYSTEM NEEDS TO
CHANGE AND IF SO WHETHER THE PLAN PROPOSED IS EFFECTIVE AND WORK
ABLE 4HE !FlRMATIVE TEAM MUST ESTABLISH BOTH OF THESE ELEMENTS TO
PROVE ITS CASE 4HE .EGATIVE TEAM WILL ATTACK THE NEEDS AS INVALID AND
THE PLAN AS UNWORKABLE )N RARE CASES THE .EGATIVE TEAM WILL PROPOSE
A COUNTER PLAN WHEREBY IT AGREES WITH THE NEEDS FOR CHANGE BUT PRO
POSES A SIGNIlCANTLY DIFFERENT AND MORE EFFECTIVE PLAN TO SOLVE THE
PROBLEM (ERE ARE SOME EXAMPLES OF 0ROPOSITIONS OF 0OLICY
s 4HIS (OUSE WOULD DEVELOP A MANDATORY RECYCLING PROGRAM
s 4HIS (OUSE WOULD CREATE AN AGENCY TO CENSOR THE )NTERNET
s 4HIS (OUSE WOULD STRENGTHEN REGULATIONS ON GENETICS
s 4HIS (OUSE WOULD IMPLEMENT A MANDATORY VACCINATION SYSTEM
Review Copy
Copyright 2006 Gravitas Publishing
.UTS AND "OLTS "UILDING "LOCKS OF $EBATE
()*-2-2+8,)()&%8)
4HE lRST RESPONSIBILITY OF THE !FlRMATIVE TEAM IS TO DElNE THE TERMS
OF THE RESOLUTION 4HIS PROCESS SHOULD TAKE NO LONGER THAN TO
SECONDS AND SHOULD PROVIDE A CLEAR FRAMEWORK FOR THE DEBATE -ANY
STUDENTS DElNE EVERY WORD WHICH IS ALMOST ALWAYS UNNECESSARY
&OR EXAMPLE IF THE RESOLUTION IS h"E IT RESOLVED THAT TELEVISION
HAS A NEGATIVE INmUENCE ON TEENAGERS v HERES A POSSIBLE DElNITION
h7E DElNE @TELEVISION AS THE TELEVISION ENTERTAINMENT MEDIA AND WE
DElNE @NEGATIVE INmUENCE AS ENCOURAGING HARMFUL BEHAVIOR IN SOCI
ETYv .OTICE THAT hTEENAGERSv WAS LEFT UNDElNED 4HE TERM IMPLIES A
CERTAIN AGE GROUP AND THE EXACT AGE ISNT CENTRAL TO THE DEBATE
4HE !FlRMATIVE TEAM DOES HAVE A CERTAIN DEGREE OF mEXIBILITY IN
HOW IT DElNES THE RESOLUTION AND THE .EGATIVE TEAM MUST DEBATE ON
THESE GROUNDS )F YOURE THE .EGATIVE TEAM DONT CHALLENGE THE DEl
NITION UNLESS ABSOLUTELY NECESSARY #ONTESTING THE DElNITION LOWERS
THE QUALITY OF THE DEBATE AND THE IMPRESSION YOU MAKE ON THE JUDGES
%VEN SO THE !FlRMATIVES DElNITIONS MUST BE REASONABLE
&OR EXAMPLE IF THE RESOLUTION IS h"E IT
RESOLVED THAT THE 5NITED .ATIONS SHOULD BE
JUDGED A FAILURE v HERES AN EXAMPLE OF A
>H[JO6\[
FAIR DElNITION h4HE !FlRMATIVE DElNES @THE
5NITED .ATIONS AS THE 5. 3ECURITY #OUN
(SR XTVSXIWXEHIRM
CIL AND @JUDGED A FAILURE AS NOT MEETING ITS
XMSRWMQTP]FIGEYWIMX
FOUNDING GOAL OF MAINTAINING INTERNATIONAL
[EWYRI\TIGXIH
PEACE AND SECURITYv .OTICE THAT THE !FlR
MATIVE LEFT OUT OTHER FUNCTIONS OF THE 5NITED
.ATIONS SUCH AS HUMANITARIAN RELIEF 4HIS IS FAIR BECAUSE THE 3ECURITY
#OUNCIL IS A CENTRAL PART OF THE 5NITED .ATIONS AND PROVIDES SUFlCIENT
BASIS FOR DEBATE 4HE .EGATIVE TEAM SHOULDNT BRING UP HUMANITARIAN
AID AS PART OF THE CASE UNLESS IT CAN RELATE ITS ARGUMENTS DIRECTLY TO THE
ISSUE OF INTERNATIONAL PEACE AND SECURITY
! DEBATE COMES DOWN TO WHO ON BALANCE PRESENTED A STRONGER
CASE 3INCE THE DEBATE IS SUBJECTIVE NEITHER OF THE TEAMS CAN PROVE ITS
CASE DElNITIVELY ! DEBATE IS @SHADES OF GREY RATHER THAN @BLACK AND
WHITE )N THE ABOVE EXAMPLE IT WOULD BE IMPOSSIBLE TO SAY THAT THE
5NITED .ATIONS 3ECURITY #OUNCIL IS A COMPLETE SUCCESS OR A COMPLETE
FAILURE 4HE REALITY LIES SOMEWHERE IN BETWEEN AND ITS UP TO THE DEBAT
ERS TO ARGUE WHICH PERSPECTIVE IS MORE CORRECT
Review Copy
Copyright 2006 Gravitas Publishing
4ALK THE 4ALK
*36%869)()&%8)%:3-(869-717
! RESOLUTION IS NOT ALLOWED TO BE DElNED SUCH THAT ITS LITERALLY IMPOS
SIBLE TO DEBATE &OR EXAMPLE IF THE RESOLUTION IS h"E IT RESOLVED THAT
WOMEN ARE BETTER THAN MEN v THE !FlRMATIVE CANT DElNE hBETTERv AS
hTHE ABILITY TO HAVE CHILDRENv )F IT DID THE .EGATIVE WOULDNT HAVE A
FAIR OPPORTUNITY TO PRESENT A CASE ! DElNITION OF THIS NATURE IS CALLED
A TRUISM AND IS GROUNDS FOR THE !FlRMATIVE TO LOSE THE ROUND 9OURE
NOT ALLOWED TO MAKE THE RESOLUTION TRUE BY DElNITION SINCE DOING SO
MAKES THE CONTEST ONE
SIDED
2EASONABLE AND SMART DEBATERS WILL ALWAYS AVOID TRUISMS 5NFOR
TUNATELY EITHER UNINTENTIONALLY OR AS AN ILL
ADVISED TRICK YOUR OPPO
NENT MAY PRESENT ONE (OW DO YOU RESPOND IF THE !FlRMATIVE BRINGS
UP A TRUISM 4HE BEST APPROACH IS TO SPEND NO MORE THAN TO SEC
ONDS EXPLAINING WHY ITS IMPOSSIBLE TO DEBATE WITHIN THE PRESCRIBED
DElNITION !FTER CHALLENGING THE DElNITION lND AN ASPECT OF THE CASE
CLOSELY RELATED TO THE RESOLUTION THAT CAN BE DEBATED
)N THE CASE DISCUSSED ABOVE YOU COULD MAKE THE DEBATE ABOUT
WHETHER WOMEN ARE MORE EFFECTIVE AT RAISING CHILDREN !LTHOUGH
YOU SHOULD TECHNICALLY WIN THE ROUND ON THE UNFAIR DElNITION ALONE
THERES NO USE HAVING AN ENTIRE DEBATE ABOUT DElNITIONS ! @DElNI
TIONAL DEBATE WILL LEAVE A BAD IMPRESSION WITH THE JUDGES AND ALMOST
CERTAINLY LOWER YOUR SPEAKING SCORES AS WELL EVEN IF THEY AGREE WITH
YOUR INTERPRETATION OF THE RESOLUTION
7)88,)7')2) 8-1)40%')7)8'%7)7
5SUALLY A DEBATE TAKES PLACE IN THE PRESENT ON A CIRCUMSTANCE THATS
ACTUALLY HAPPENING )S A PARTICULAR PRACTICE GOOD OR BAD $O WE NEED
TO CHANGE THE PRESENT SYSTEM !LL OF THE IMPORTANT FACTS ARE KNOWN TO
THE DEBATERS AND THEY CAN ALL BE USED TO BUILD CASES (OWEVER SOME
OF MOST EXCITING DEBATES TAKE PLACE ON MATTERS OF HISTORY OR ON REAL OR
lCTIONAL SCENARIOS %NTER THE TIME
PLACE
SET CASE WHERE YOU GET TO SET
THE SCENE OF THE DEBATE
0OINT IN (ISTORY
)N THIS TYPE OF TIME
PLACE
SET DEBATE THE !FlRMATIVE HAS TO SAY WHEN
THE DEBATE IS TAKING PLACE WHAT THE DECISION IS AND WHERE ITS OCCUR
Review Copy
Copyright 2006 Gravitas Publishing
.UTS AND "OLTS "UILDING "LOCKS OF $EBATE
RING /NCE THE !FlRMATIVE HAS DElNED THE TERMS ON THESE DIMENSIONS
NEITHER SIDE CAN BRING IN ANY INFORMATION THAT WOULD NOT HAVE BEEN
KNOWN AT THE SPECIlC TIME AND PLACE 3O EVEN IF EVERYONE KNOWS THE
EVENTUAL RESULT THE DEBATE TAKES PLACE ASSUMING THAT THIS ISNT THE
CASE )TS COMMON TO ASK THE #HAIRPERSON TO ASSUME THE ROLE OF THE
PERSON MAKING THE DECISION (ERE ARE TWO EXAMPLES
s 2ONALD 2EAGAN AT THE "ERLIN 7ALL h-R #HAIRPERSON YOU ARE 2ONALD
2EAGAN 0RESIDENT OF THE 5NITED 3TATES OF !MERICA 4HE DATE IS *UNE
TH 9OURE ABOUT TO DELIVER A SPEECH ON THE 7ESTERN SIDE OF THE
"ERLIN 7ALL 4ELL THE 3OVIET 5NION TO TEAR DOWN THIS WALLv
s -ERCK AND 2IVER "LINDNESS h4HE YEAR IS AND YOURE THE HEAD OF
-ERCK ONE OF THE WORLDS LARGEST PHARMACEUTICAL COMPANIES 9OUVE
DEVELOPED A DRUG CALLED -ECTIZAN WHICH HELPS TREAT AND CURE THE RIVER
BLINDNESS DISEASE THAT HAS IMPACTED HUNDREDS OF THOUSANDS OF PEOPLE
IN MANY COUNTRIES PRIMARILY IN !FRICA 4HEY CANT AFFORD TO PAY FOR THE
DRUG 'IVE IT AWAY FOR FREEv
3CENARIO
'REAT DEBATES CAN TAKE PLACE ON SCENARIOS THAT ACTUALLY HAPPENED
WERE SEEN IN A MOVIE OR TELEVISION SHOW OR ARE COMPLETELY MADE UP
)N THIS TYPE OF CASE THE DEBATE IS ABOUT THE PRINCIPLES INVOLVED IN THE
SCENE )TS ESPECIALLY IMPORTANT THAT THE !FlRMATIVE IS VERY CLEAR IN
PRESENTING ALL OF THE FACTS IN THE CASE BECAUSE ANY CAUSE FOR CONFU
SION WILL MAKE IT TOUGH FOR A GOOD DEBATE TO TAKE PLACE (ERE ARE SOME
EXAMPLES OF SCENARIOS USED AS TIME
PLACE
SET CASES
s (OCKEY 3USPENSION h9OURE THE HEAD OF THE DISCIPLINARY COMMITTEE
FOR THE .ATIONAL (OCKEY ,EAGUE /NE OF THE PLAYERS INJURED A PLAYER
WITH HIS STICK IN RETALIATION FOR AN EARLIER HIT .ORMALLY THIS OFFENCE
WOULD RESULT IN A SUSPENSION FOR AT LEAST THREE GAMES (OWEVER THIS
PLAYER IS KNOWN AS ONE OF THE MOST ETHICAL PLAYERS IN THE LEAGUEA
TRUE ROLE MODEL (E HAS APOLOGIZED AND YOU CONSIDER THIS TO BE AN
ISOLATED INCIDENT -AKE AN EXCEPTION AND DONT SUSPEND HIMv
s #AR !CCIDENT ,AWSUIT h-ADAME #HAIRPERSON YOUR CHILD WAS INJURED
BY A CARELESS DRIVER WHILE SHE WAS RIDING HER BIKE 3HE WILL EVENTUALLY
MAKE A FULL RECOVERY 9OU CAN SUE THE CARELESS DRIVER AND ARE VERY CON
Review Copy
Copyright 2006 Gravitas Publishing
4ALK THE 4ALK
lDENT THAT YOULL BE AWARDED COMPENSATION WHICH YOU BELIEVE YOU
RIGHTLY DESERVE (OWEVER THE CARELESS DRIVER IS A SINGLE MOTHER WITH
TWO SONS AND THE JUDGMENT WOULD FORCE HER TO THE VERGE OF BANK
RUPTCY $ONT SUE HERv
8,)()*-2-8-323*D'6377-2+8,)0-2)
7EVE ALREADY DISCUSSED TRUISMS WHICH
>H[JO6\[
ARE PROHIBITED BECAUSE THEYRE TECHNICALLY
IMPOSSIBLE FOR THE .EGATIVE TEAM TO DEBATE
(SR XXV]XS[MR
"UT WHAT ABOUT DElNITIONS THAT ARE TECH
HIFEXIWF]YWMRK
NICALLY DEBATABLE BUT UNFAIR NONETHELESS
GPIZIVHIRMXMSRW
9OU MAY BE THINKING TO YOURSELF h6IRTU
ALLY EVERYTHING IS DEBATABLE SO HOW CAN
ANY DElNITION OF THE RESOLUTION POSSIBLY BE
UNFAIR v )N THEORY THIS BELIEF IS VALID 3O LONG AS YOU DONT PRESENT A
TRUISM THERE ISNT AN AUTOMATIC BASIS FOR YOU TO LOSE THE ROUND
7HAT ABOUT IN PRACTICE $EBATES ARE JUDGED BY PEOPLE WHO EXPECT
YOU TO BE REASONABLE -ORE SPECIlCALLY THIS MEANS THAT YOU CANT
DElNE THE TOPIC IN SUCH A WAY THAT ANOTHER DEBATER CANT REASONABLY BE
EXPECTED TO ARGUE AGAINST IT !SK YOURSELF THIS QUESTION h)F ) WAS FACING
ANOTHER TEAM WHO DID WHAT ) AM PLANNING TO DO WOULD ) CONSIDER IT TO
BE FAIR v )F YOU ANSWERED hNO v THEN YOUR JUDGES WOULD PROBABLY THINK
ITS UNFAIR AS WELL 4HE NUMEROUS INSTANCES OF UNFAIR DElNITIONS ALL OF
WHICH SHOULD BE AVOIDED ARE DISCUSSED BELOW
-ORALLY REPREHENSIBLE OPPOSITION )TS EXPECTED THAT DEBATERS WILL
HAVE TO DEFEND POSITIONS THAT THEY DONT AGREE WITH OR THAT ARE CON
TROVERSIAL 4HERE IS A LIMIT HOWEVER TO HOW FAR YOU CAN GO 9OU ARENT
ALLOWED TO DElNE A TOPIC IN SUCH A WAY THAT IT CALLS FOR A .EGATIVE CASE
SO MORALLY REPREHENSIBLE THAT VIRTUALLY NOBODY IN SOCIETY WOULD AGREE
WITH THE POSITION &OR EXAMPLE YOU CANT EXPECT THE .EGATIVE TEAM TO
DEFEND RACISM SLAVERY MURDER OR TERRORISM
3PECIlC KNOWLEDGE !CCORDING TO THE GUIDELINES OF MOST DEBATE TOURNA
MENTS YOUR DElNITION MUST BE SUCH THAT AN INFORMED WELL
EDUCATED
PERSON WOULD BE ABLE TO DEBATE IT 3PECIlC KNOWLEDGE CASES ARISE WHEN
YOU DElNE A RESOLUTION SO THAT THE DEBATE TO FOLLOW REQUIRES TECHNICAL
EXPERTISE ON THE SUBJECT &OR EXAMPLE YOU CANT EXPECT THE .EGATIVE
Review Copy
Copyright 2006 Gravitas Publishing
.UTS AND "OLTS "UILDING "LOCKS OF $EBATE
TEAM TO HAVE DETAILED KNOWLEDGE ABOUT MOLECULAR BIOLOGY A LITTLE
KNOWN COURT CASE OR AN ISOLATED HISTORICAL EVENT
(OWEVER YOU CAN BRING UP CASES THAT COULD CONCEIVABLY BE MADE
COMPLICATED SO LONG AS YOU STICK TO PRINCIPLE BASED ARGUMENTS THAT
EVERYONE CAN UNDERSTAND 4AKE A DEBATE ON THE USE OF IN VITRO FER
TILIZATION FOR HUMAN REPRODUCTION )F YOU DElNED THE RESOLUTION AND
INTRODUCED THE CASE IN A WAY THAT ALLOWED FOR A DEBATE ON COMPETING
PRINCIPLES IT WOULD BE ACCEPTABLE )F HOWEVER YOU BROUGHT UP HIGHLY
TECHNICAL AND SCIENTIlC ISSUES IT WOULD BE CONSIDERED UNFAIR )T COULD
BE FAIR IF YOU KNOW THAT YOUR OPPONENTS LEARNED ABOUT IT IN BIOLOGY
CLASS AND THAT YOUR JUDGE IS A SCIENCE EXPERT
6IOLATES THE RESOLUTIONS INTENT 4HE TWO POINTS ABOVE RELATE PRIMARILY
TO IMPROMPTU RESOLUTIONS 4HIS POINT FOCUSES ON DEBATES ON RESOLU
TIONS THAT ARE EXPLICITLY STATED )N THESE TYPES OF DEBATES THE .EGATIVE
SHOULD HAVE A REASONABLE OPPORTUNITY TO PREPARE A CASE EVEN IF IT HAS
TO ADAPT IT TO A REASONABLE BUT UNEXPECTED !FlRMATIVE DElNITION )F
YOURE THE !FlRMATIVE YOU ARENT ALLOWED TO PRESENT A DElNITION THAT
CLEARLY VIOLATES THE INTENT OF THE RESOLUTION
3AY THE TOPIC IS h2ESOLVED THE 53! SHOULD TONE DOWN ITS INTER
NATIONAL RHETORICv )TS WIDELY ACCEPTED THAT THE DEBATE IS ABOUT THE
5NITED 3TATES OF !MERICA )T WOULD BE UNFAIR TO DElNE h53!v AS THE
h5NDERWATER 3CIENTISTS !SSOCIATIONv IF ONE ACTUALLY EXISTS THAT IS .O
REASONABLE PERSON COULD HAVE EXPECTED SUCH A DElNITION SO IT WOULD
REmECT VERY POORLY ON YOUR TEAM
8,)%6',-8)'896)3*%()&%8)
7HILE THERES NO UNIVERSAL STANDARD FOR THE
+PK@V\2UV^&
STRUCTURE OF A DEBATE MOST ROUNDS FOLLOW
A SIMILAR BASIC FRAMEWORK 4HE lRST PART
8LIIEVPMIWXTSPMXMGEP
OF A DEBATE ROUND CONSISTS OF CONSTRUCTIVE
HIFEXIWXSSOTPEGI
SPEECHES $URING THIS PHASE DEBATERS FROM
MR%XLIRW
BOTH TEAMS HAVE AN OPPORTUNITY TO PRESENT
NEW ARGUMENTS TO DEFEND THEIR TEAMS PRE
VIOUS POINTS AGAINST ATTACK AND TO CRITICIZE
THEIR OPPONENTS ARGUMENTS 4HE SECOND PART OF A DEBATE IS THE REBUTTAL
PHASE 4HIS SEGMENT IS EACH TEAMS OPPORTUNITY TO ANALYZE THE DEBATE
AS A WHOLE AND TO MAKE A lNAL PITCH FOR WHY IT HAS WON THE ARGUMENT
/N THE FOLLOWING PAGE IS A SIMPLE STRUCTURE FOR STUDENT DEBATING
Review Copy
Copyright 2006 Gravitas Publishing
4ALK THE 4ALK
ST !FlRMATIVE #ONSTRUCTIVE !#
ST .EGATIVE #ONSTRUCTIVE .#
ND !FlRMATIVE #ONSTRUCTIVE !#
ND .EGATIVE #ONSTRUCTIVE .#
MINUTES
MINUTES
MINUTES
MINUTES
ST .EGATIVE 2EBUTTAL .2
ST !FlRMATIVE 2EBUTTAL !2
MINUTES
MINUTES
/F COURSE THE FORMAT OF DEBATE VARIES
+PK@V\2UV^&
DEPENDING ON WHERE YOURE DEBATING AND
AT WHAT LEVEL !LTHOUGH THE GENERAL SKILLS
&MPP'PMRXSR3TVEL
ARE RELATIVELY SIMILAR YOULL HAVE TO ADAPT
;MRJVI]ERH&VEH4MXX
TO THE SPECIlC CIRCUMSTANCES 4HIS STAN
[IVISRGIHIFEXIVW
DARD FORMAT IS OFTEN CALLED ACADEMIC STYLE
DEBATE !LTHOUGH THE LIMITATIONS OF A SINGLE
BOOK MAKE IT IMPOSSIBLE TO EXPLORE IN DETAIL
THE INTRICACIES OF EACH STYLE HERE ARE A FEW AREAS IN WHICH YOU MAY SEE
A DEPARTURE FROM THE ACADEMIC DEBATE FORMAT OUTLINED PREVIOUSLY
3PEAKERS PER TEAM 5SUALLY THERE ARE TWO DEBATERS REPRESENTING EACH
TEAM "UT IN SOME STYLES EACH SIDE IS REPRESENTED BY A SINGLE DEBATER
WHO PLAYS BOTH CONSTRUCTIVE AND REBUTTAL ROLES /THER TIMES YOULL SEE
THREE DEBATERS PER TEAM WITH ONE MEMBER PER TEAM FOCUSING EXCLU
SIVELY ON THE REBUTTAL SPEECH
1UESTIONS AND ANSWERS 4HE DISCUSSION STYLE OF DEBATE FEATURES A
QUESTION AND ANSWER PERIOD UP TO MINUTES LONG BETWEEN THE END
OF THE CONSTRUCTIVE SECTION AND THE BEGINNING OF THE REBUTTAL SECTION
$EBATERS GO BACK AND FORTH ASKING QUESTIONS TO THE OTHER SIDE AND
ANSWERING QUESTIONS POSED BY THEIR OPPONENTS 4HIS STYLE IS OFTEN
SEEN AT YOUNGER AGE LEVELS
! MORE DIFlCULT TYPE OF QUESTION AND ANSWER FORMAT IS THE CROSS
EXAMINATION STYLE !FTER EACH OF THE FOUR CONSTRUCTIVE SPEECHES A
MEMBER OF THE OPPOSING TEAM HAS THREE TO FOUR MINUTES TO QUESTION
THE SPEAKER HOPING TO DRAW OUT ADMISSIONS OR TO EXPOSE mAWS #ROSS
EXAMINATION DEBATE IS DISCUSSED IN #HAPTER
0ARLIAMENTARY STYLE DEBATE DISCUSSED IN #HAPTER IS YET ANOTHER
FORMAT INVOLVING QUESTIONS AND ANSWERS 4HE DIFFERENCE COMPARED
TO DISCUSSION AND CROSS EXAMINATION STYLES IS THAT THE QUESTIONING
DOESNT TAKE PLACE IN A DElNED PERIOD 2ATHER 0OINTS OF )NFORMATION
Review Copy
Copyright 2006 Gravitas Publishing
.UTS AND "OLTS "UILDING "LOCKS OF $EBATE
ARE QUESTIONS ASKED AS INTERJECTIONS BY A SEATED DEBATER DURING AN
OPPONENTS CONSTRUCTIVE SPEECH
"REAKS 9OU MAY ENCOUNTER A STYLE IN WHICH THERE IS A THREE TO lVE
MINUTE BREAK BEFORE THE REBUTTAL PART OF THE DEBATE 4HIS GIVES EACH
TEAM AN OPPORTUNITY TO DISCUSS AND PLAN ITS REBUTTAL STRATEGY
.UMBER OF REBUTTALS ! SINGLE REBUTTAL SPEECH FOR EACH TEAM IS THE NORM
IN MOST CASES 3OME STYLES THOUGH ALLOW BOTH MEMBERS OF THE TEAM
TO PRESENT A REBUTTAL )N TOTAL THERE WOULD THEN BE FOUR REBUTTALS 3UCH
CIRCUMSTANCES USUALLY INVOLVE SHORTER REBUTTAL SPEECHES 4HE PARTNERS
HAVE TO WORK TOGETHER TO DIVIDE REBUTTAL RESPONSIBILITIES EFFECTIVELY
/RDER OF REBUTTAL 3IMILAR TO HOW THE PROSECUTION USUALLY GOES LAST IN A
COURT TRIAL THE !FlRMATIVE NORMALLY DELIVERS THE lNAL REBUTTAL SPEECH
3OME STYLES SWITCH IT UP ALLOWING THE .EGATIVE TEAM TO HAVE THE LAST
SAY 4HIS CHANGES THE DYNAMICS OF THE REBUTTAL GIVING THE .EGATIVE A
SLIGHT ADVANTAGE OVER THE !FlRMATIVE
4IME PER SPEECH 4HE AMOUNT OF TIME ALLOTTED TO EACH SPEAKER VARIES
SIGNIlCANTLY BETWEEN DIFFERENT DEBATE STYLES AND FORMATS #ONSTRUC
TIVE SPEECHES ARE RARELY LESS THAN lVE MINUTES LONG OR MORE THAN
MINUTES LONG 2EBUTTAL SPEECHES ARE GENERALLY BETWEEN THREE AND lVE
MINUTES IN LENGTH )N TOTAL THE TIME FOR THE WHOLE DEBATE IS USUALLY
BETWEEN AND MINUTES
40%==396630)
%ACH SPEAKER IN THE DEBATE HAS DIFFERENT RESPONSIBILITIES !LTHOUGH
HOW WELL YOU DEBATE WILL HAVE A LARGE IMPACT ON YOUR PERFORMANCE ITS
ALSO IMPORTANT TO BE DEBATING WELL IN THE RIGHT AREAS )TS ESSENTIAL THAT
YOU UNDERSTAND THE ROLE YOU HAVE TO PLAY IN YOUR SPEECH 4HESE ROLES
VARY BETWEEN DEBATE STYLES 5SING THE BASIC DEBATE FORMAT OUTLINED
PREVIOUSLY THE FOLLOWING PAGES DISCUSS EACH SPEAKERS RESPONSIBILI
TIES 4HE DIAGRAM ON THE NEXT PAGE SUMMARIZES THESE FUNCTIONS
ST !FlRMATIVE #ONSTRUCTIVE !#
4HE lRST SPEAKERS ROLE IS THE MOST STRAIGHTFORWARD YET ITS CRITICALLY
IMPORTANT TO THE DEBATE 9OUR SPEECH SETS THE TONE FOR THE ROUND AND
Review Copy
Copyright 2006 Gravitas Publishing
4ALK THE 4ALK
Review Copy
Copyright 2006 Gravitas Publishing
.UTS AND "OLTS "UILDING "LOCKS OF $EBATE
LAYS OUT THE KEY ISSUES 4HERE ARE THREE FUNCTIONS THAT THE lRST !FlR
MATIVE SPEAKER SHOULD PERFORM
$ElNE THE RESOLUTION 3PEND ROUGHLY TO SECONDS MAKING IT
CRYSTAL CLEAR WHAT THE DEBATE IS ABOUT 7ITHOUT lRST PRESENTING A DEl
NITION NONE OF YOUR ARGUMENTS OR ANY OF YOUR OPPONENTS ARGUMENTS
WILL HAVE A WELL
DESCRIBED CONTEXT
)NTRODUCE THE !FlRMATIVES CASE 0RESENTING YOUR CORE THEMES ISNT
A REQUIREMENT BUT ITS HIGHLY RECOMMENDED ,IKE THE DElNITION A
BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF WHAT YOU PLAN TO ACCOMPLISH HELPS SET THE TONE
FOR THE DEBATE -AKE IT CLEAR WHAT YOUR THEMES WILL BE AND WHAT IN A
GENERAL SENSE THE JUDGES CAN EXPECT FROM YOU 3OME DEBATERS OPT TO
STATE WHAT THEIR PARTNERS FOCUS WILL BE 4HIS PRESENTS A CLEARER PICTURE
TO YOUR JUDGES BUT BE CAREFUL NOT TO STEAL YOUR PARTNERS THUNDER
0RESENT CONSTRUCTIVE ARGUMENTS /NCE YOUVE TOLD THE JUDGES WHERE
YOURE GOING WITH YOUR CASE AT LEAST TWO AND NOT MORE THAN FOUR CON
STRUCTIVE ARGUMENTS ARE NECESSARY 4HESE POINTS WILL FORM THE MAJORITY
OF YOUR SPEECH "E SURE TO DEVELOP EACH OF YOUR ARGUMENTS COMPLETELY
7ITHOUT A STRONG SET OF INITIAL ARGUMENTS THE lRST .EGATIVE SPEAKER
WILL BE ABLE TO TEAR DOWN YOUR CASE AND PRESENT A STRONG .EGATIVE CASE
BEFORE YOUVE BEEN ABLE TO CONSTRUCT A SOLID CASE
ST .EGATIVE #ONSTRUCTIVE .#
4HE lRST !FlRMATIVE SPEAKER WILL HAVE SET THE TONE IN A WAY THAT FAVORS
ITS SIDE OF THE RESOLUTION !T THIS POINT THE BALL IS IN THE !FlRMATIVES
COURT 9OUR CHALLENGE IS TO LEVEL THE PLAYING lELD OR HOPEFULLY TO GAIN
THE ADVANTAGE )N lGURATIVE TERMS YOURE TRYING TO TEAR DOWN THEIR
FORTRESS AND BUILD UP YOUR OWN (ERE ARE THE RECOMMENDED RESPONSI
BILITIES OF THE lRST .EGATIVE SPEAKER
)F NECESSARY CONTEST THE !FlRMATIVES DElNITIONS 4HE WORDS hIF
NECESSARYv SHOULD BE TAKEN SERIOUSLY 3HOULD THE lRST !FlRMATIVE
SPEAKER PRESENT GROSSLY UNREASONABLE DElNITIONS YOU CAN ONLY CHAL
LENGE THEM AT THE BEGINNING OF THIS SPEECH !FTER THAT ITS TOO LATE
YOUVE FORFEITED THE RIGHT TO STAKE YOUR CLAIM )F YOU DECIDE TO CONTEST
THEM DO SO QUICKLY AND MOVE ON
Review Copy
Copyright 2006 Gravitas Publishing
4ALK THE 4ALK
)NTRODUCE THE .EGATIVES THEMES #LAIM YOUR GROUND 4ELL YOUR
JUDGES EXACTLY WHERE YOU PLAN TO GO WITH YOUR CASE NAMELY WHAT YOUR
THEMES WILL BE 3IMILAR TO HOW THE !FlRMATIVE HAS DESCRIBED WHAT IT
SEES AS THE MAIN ISSUES YOU SHOULD TRY TO SEIZE THE AGENDA AND EXPLAIN
WHAT YOU BELIEVE ARE THE CORE ISSUES AND WHY !LTHOUGH YOU DONT HAVE
TO PERFORM THIS ROLE DOING SO WILL BE INVALUABLE IN HELPING YOU GO HEAD
TO HEAD WITH THE !FlRMATIVE WHICH HAS THE ADVANTAGE OF SETTING THE
AGENDA FROM THE OUTSET
0RESENT CONSTRUCTIVE ARGUMENTS 4ECHNICALLY YOU USUALLY DONT HAVE
TO MAKE CONSTRUCTIVE ARGUMENTS IF YOURE THE .EGATIVE TEAM 7HILE
YOU COULD STICK TO REFUTATION YOUR CASE WILL BE MUCH STRONGER IF YOU
BUILD A SET OF STRONG CONSTRUCTIVE POINTS $EPENDING ON THE TIME LIMITS
AND HOW MUCH TIME YOU WANT TO SPEND ON REFUTATION YOULL PROBABLY
ONLY BE ABLE TO PRESENT TWO OR AT THE MOST THREE MAIN ARGUMENTS
#LASH WITH THE lRST !FlRMATIVES ARGUMENTS 4HIS ROLE IS ABSOLUTELY
CENTRAL TO YOUR SPEECH 7ITHOUT IT YOULL LEAVE THE IMPRESSION THAT
YOUVE CONCEDED THE !FlRMATIVES KEY ARGUMENTS 3PEND TIME ON POINT
BY POINT REFUTATION OF THE lRST !FlRMATIVE SPEAKERS ARGUMENTS 'ENER
ALLY YOU WANT TO SPEND APPROXIMATELY HALF OF YOUR SPEECH ON CLASH
EITHER BEFORE OR AFTER YOUR CONSTRUCTIVE ARGUMENTS
ND !FlRMATIVE #ONSTRUCTIVE !#
4HE DElNITIONS HAVE BEEN SETTLED THE MAIN THEMES HAVE BEEN LAID
OUT AND THE INITIAL ARGUMENTS HAVE BEEN PRESENTED .OW THE DEBATE
GETS MESSY 4HE SECOND CONSTRUCTIVE SPEECHES ARE WHEN THE GRUELING
PROCESS OF JOCKEYING FOR POSITION TAKES PLACE 4HE lRST SPEAKERS HAVE
HIT THE TEE SHOTS AND NOW ITS YOUR JOB TO PLAY THE FAIRWAYS IN ORDER
TO SETUP A STRONG lNISH (ERE ARE SOME OF THE AREAS THAT THE SECOND
!FlRMATIVE SPEAKER SHOULD COVER
$EVELOP NEW CONSTRUCTIVE ARGUMENTS 4HERES NO WAY THAT YOUR
TEAM CAN PRESENT A THOROUGH AND EFFECTIVE CASE IN YOUR lRST SPEECH
ALONE 9OU SHOULD AIM TO BUILD TWO OR THREE MORE ARGUMENTS FOR YOUR
SIDE WHICH WILL HELP STRENGTHEN YOUR CASE -AKE SURE THAT YOUR ARGU
MENTS ARE DISTINCT FROM YOUR PARTNERS POINTS 4O STAKE OUT YOUR PLACE
IN THE DEBATE CENTER YOUR ARGUMENTS AROUND A DISTINCT THEME
Review Copy
Copyright 2006 Gravitas Publishing
.UTS AND "OLTS "UILDING "LOCKS OF $EBATE
#LASH WITH THE lRST .EGATIVES POINTS .O SECOND !FlRMATIVE SPEECH
IS COMPLETE WITHOUT A COMPREHENSIVE POINT BY POINT CLASH OF THE lRST
.EGATIVE SPEAKERS ARGUMENTS %VEN THOUGH THE BURDEN FALLS ON YOU TO
PROVE YOUR CASE .EGATIVE ARGUMENTS TO THE CONTRARY MUST BE PROVEN
INADEQUATE IRRELEVANT OR INCORRECT
$EFEND THE lRST !FlRMATIVES POINTS !FTER THE lRST .EGATIVE HAS
CLASHED WITH YOUR PARTNERS POINTS THERE ARE TWO WAYS TO BUILD THEM
UP AGAIN 4HE lRST WAY IS TO REINFORCE THEM WITH FURTHER DETAILS AND
EXPLANATION 7HILE THIS CAN BE HELPFUL IT MAY ALSO SUGGEST THAT YOUR
PARTNER WASNT THOROUGH 4HE SECOND AND USUALLY ADVANTAGEOUS METH
OD IS TO @CLASH WITH CLASH EXPLAINING WHY THE lRST .EGATIVE SPEAKERS
REFUTATION WAS WRONG 4HIS APPROACH FOLLOWS THE LOGICAL mOW OF DEBATE
MORE CLOSELY THAN ADDING SUPPORTING MATERIAL
ND .EGATIVE #ONSTRUCTIVE .#
4HE SECOND .EGATIVE SPEECH IS THE lNAL OPPORTUNITY TO BRING NEW
CONSTRUCTIVE MATTER INTO THE DEBATETHE CLOSER OF THE @MEATY PART OF
THE ROUND 5NFORTUNATELY IT CAN SEEM EVEN TOUGHER THAN THE SECOND
!FlRMATIVE SPEECH SINCE THERE ARE SO MANY PREVIOUS ARGUMENTS TO
ANALYZE AND DISCUSS 9OUR MAIN TASK IN THIS SPEECH IS TO SETUP YOUR
TEAM FOR A POWERFUL REBUTTAL (ERE ARE THE KEY ROLES FOR THIS PIVOTAL
POSITION IN THE DEBATE
0RESENT NEW CONSTRUCTIVE POINTS 2EMEMBER THE ONLY SIGNIlCANT
OPPORTUNITY FOR YOUR OPPONENTS TO CLASH WITH YOUR NEW POINTS IS IN
THE REBUTTAL 3INCE THEY WOULD RATHER BE SPENDING THEIR REBUTTAL TIME
SUMMARIZING THE DEBATE A NUMBER OF SOLID ARGUMENTS IN THIS SPEECH
CAN REALLY THROW THEM OFF
#HALLENGE THE SECOND !FlRMATIVES POINTS #LASH WITH THE !FlRMA
TIVES lNAL CONSTRUCTIVE ARGUMENTS SO THAT THE REBUTTAL IS FREE FOR YOU
TO BRING THE DEBATE DOWN TO CORE THEMES
$EFEND YOUR PARTNERS POINTS 5SING SIMILAR TECHNIQUES AS THE SEC
OND !FlRMATIVE SPEAKER REINFORCE THE lRST .EGATIVE SPEAKERS POINTS
%XPLAIN WHY THE SECOND .EGATIVE SPEAKERS REFUTATION DIDNT ACTUALLY
DEFEAT YOUR ARGUMENTS
Review Copy
Copyright 2006 Gravitas Publishing
4ALK THE 4ALK
)F A DEBATE IS SUPPOSED TO BE A CONTINUOUS BACK AND FORTH mOW HAVENT
WE LEFT SOMETHING OUT 7HAT ABOUT CHALLENGING THE SECOND !FlRMA
TIVE SPEAKERS DEFENSE OF THE lRST !FlRMATIVE SPEAKERS POINTS 4HIS
WOULD ESSENTIALLY BE @CLASH OF CLASH OF CLASH AND IF IT SOUNDS CONFUS
ING ITS BECAUSE IT IS 4HATS WHY ITS BEST TO AVOID DOING THIS IN YOUR
SPEECH !DDING A FOURTH OBJECTIVE WOULD LEAVE YOU LITTLE TIME FOR EACH
ONE LIKELY MAKING YOUR ANALYSIS RATHER SHALLOW
ST .EGATIVE 2EBUTTAL .2
4HE REBUTTAL SPEECHES ARE VERY DISTINCT FROM THE CONSTRUCTIVE SPEECH
ES 3O FAR WEVE HAD A BACK AND FORTH mOW OF ARGUMENTS AND REFUTA
TION "Y THIS POINT IN THE DEBATE ALL OF THE MAIN POINTS HAVE BEEN LAID
OUT AND MOST OF THE LINES OF ATTACK HAVE BEEN EXPLORED 4HINK OF THE
.EGATIVE REBUTTAL AS A CLOSING ARGUMENT IN A COURT TRIAL )TS YOUR lNAL
@SALES PITCH FOR WHY THE RESOLUTION SHOULD BE DEFEATED !LTHOUGH THE
FORMAT OF A REBUTTAL SPEECH IS THE MOST mEXIBLE HERE ARE SOME OF THE
.EGATIVE REBUTTAL SPEAKERS RESPONSIBILITIES
0ROVIDE AN OVERALL REFUTATION OF THE !FlRMATIVES CASE .OTICE THE
WORD hOVERALLv 4HAT IS IT SHOULDNT BE A CONTINUATION OF THE POINT BY
POINT CLASH HEARD EARLIER 9OUR GOAL IS TO HIGHLIGHT KEY ASPECTS OF YOUR
REFUTATION EXPLAINING WHY THE !FlRMATIVES GENERAL THEMES ARE INCOR
RECT OR HAVENT BEEN PROVEN
#OMPARE AND CONTRAST KEY THEMES 0ROVIDE YOUR INTERPRETATION
OF THE !FlRMATIVES THEMES AND HOW THEY RELATE TO YOUR THEMES )N
ESSENCE YOURE SAYING h7E TALKED ABOUT THIS AND THEY TALKED ABOUT
THAT (ERES WHY OUR THEMES WERE SUPERIORv %SPECIALLY IN A COMPLEX
AND CONFUSING DEBATE THIS TACTIC CAN CLARIFY THE ROUND FOR YOUR JUDGES
AND MAKE THEIR DECISION EASIER 4HEYRE USUALLY APPRECIATIVEAND
REWARDINGWHEN A REBUTTAL SPEAKER CLARIlES THE ROUND FOR THEM
0RESENT A lNAL SUMMARY OF YOUR CASE 2EMIND THE JUDGES OF YOUR
CASE AND ITS KEY POINTS 9ES YOUVE PRESENTED THE POINTS SUMMARIZED
THEM AT THE END OF EACH SPEECH AND HEARD THEM REFUTED IN YOUR OPPO
NENTS SPEECHES )SNT THAT ENOUGH 0ROBABLY NOT -AKE ABSOLUTELY CER
TAIN THAT YOUR JUDGES KNOW EXACTLY WHAT PILLARS YOUR CASE STANDS ON
PARTICULARLY THE OVERALL CASE THEMES
Review Copy
Copyright 2006 Gravitas Publishing
.UTS AND "OLTS "UILDING "LOCKS OF $EBATE
ST !FlRMATIVE 2EBUTTAL !2
4HE OBJECTIVES OF THE !FlRMATIVES REBUTTAL SPEECH ARE SIMILAR TO THOSE
OF THE .EGATIVES REBUTTAL SPEECH )TS A CLOSING ARGUMENTTHE lNAL
WORD IN THE DEBATE 5SE YOUR @CLOSER POSITION TO YOUR ADVANTAGE BY
SAYING FRANKLY AND CONVINCINGLY WHAT THE DEBATE IS ABOUT AND WHY YOU
WON 4HESE ARE THE KEY ROLES OF THE !FlRMATIVES REBUTTAL
)F NECESSARY REFUTE THE SECOND .EGATIVES NEW POINTS 4HE .EGA
TIVE REBUTTAL SPEAKER FACES A PARADOX ! REBUTTAL IS SUPPOSED TO FOCUS
PRIMARILY ON GENERAL THEMES AND ONLY SECONDARILY ON SPECIlC ARGU
MENTS /N THE OTHER HAND YOU DONT WANT TO LEAVE YOUR OPPONENTS
NEW POINTS UNCONTESTED )F YOU CAN WRAP YOUR CLASH INTO YOUR OVERALL
REFUTATION ITS BEST TO DO SO (OWEVER YOU MAY WANT TO CLASH BRIEmY
WITH THE SECOND .EGATIVE SPEAKERS NEW ARGUMENTS 3HOULD YOU DECIDE
TO TAKE THIS ROUTE FOCUS ON THE KEY ELEMENTS ONLY
2EFUTE THE .EGATIVES CASE AS A WHOLE ,IKE THE .EGATIVES REBUT
TAL YOU NEED TO EXPLAIN CLEARLY AND PERSUASIVELY WHY YOUR OPPONENTS
CASE IS WRONG )F YOUVE CLASHED WITH THE .EGATIVES NEW CONSTRUCTIVE
POINTS IN THE OPENING OF YOUR REBUTTAL MAKE SURE THAT THIS PART OF YOUR
SPEECH IS A CLEAR DEPARTURE FROM POINT BY POINT CLASH
$RAW A CONTRAST BETWEEN THE TWO SIDES )NTERPRET THE THEMES AND
AREAS OF CONTENTION THE WAY YOU SEE THEM )F THE .EGATIVE REBUTTAL
SPEAKER HAS DONE SOMETHING SIMILAR BE SURE TO EXPLAIN WHY YOUR ANAL
YSIS OF THE KEY ISSUES IS MORE CORRECT 4HAT IS MAKE IT CLEAR WHY YOUR
ISSUES SHOULD BE THE DECIDING ISSUES OF THE DEBATE
3UMMARIZE YOUR CASE 9OU MAY BE CONSTRAINED BY TIME AT THIS POINT
SO ITS BEST TO PLAN A SHORT AND TO THE POINT SUMMARY 2EINFORCE THE KEY
REASONS WHY THE JUDGES SHOULD SUPPORT THE RESOLUTION 2EMEMBER THE
BURDEN GENERALLY FALLS ON YOU TO PROVE YOUR CASE SO YOUR CORE ARGU
MENTS MUST STAND STRONG AT THE END OF THE DEBATE
+)8-2838,)+%1) *033674))',)7
7ERE YOU ITCHING TO BE PART OF THAT MEMORABLE lNAL ROUND BUT THE
DECISIONS DIDNT QUITE GO YOUR WAY $ESPAIR NOT FOR YOU HAVE A GOLDEN
OPPORTUNITYAT LEAST AFTER THE OFlCIAL DEBATE IS OVER )N MOST TOURNA
Review Copy
Copyright 2006 Gravitas Publishing
4ALK THE 4ALK
MENTS THERE ARE @SPEECHES FROM THE mOOR AT THE END OF A lNAL ROUND
7HILE THE JUDGES HAVE LEFT THE ROOM TO MAKE THEIR DECISION ITS THE
AUDIENCES TURN TO HAVE THE lNAL SAY
! mOOR SPEECH IS SHORT USUALLY TO SECONDS LONG 9OU CAN
SUPPORT THE 'OVERNMENT SUPPORT THE /PPOSITION OR SPEAK FOR @CROSS
BENCHES 4HE LAST OPTION MEANS THAT YOU DONT WANT TO BACKUP EITHER
SIDE BUT THAT YOU WANT TO PROVIDE COMPLIMENTS CRITICISMS OR COM
MENTARY ON BOTH SIDES OF THE DEBATE 0ERHAPS YOU DONT WANT TO GIVE
EITHER OF THE TEAMS ANY CREDIT SINCE OF COURSE YOU WOULD DONE FAR BETTER
HAD YOU BEEN IN THE ROUND
+3;-8,8,)*03; 7,))8
$EBATES GET VERY LIVELY AND DYNAMIC WITH MULTIPLE ARGUMENTS AND
COUNTER
ARGUMENTS MADE BY EACH SPEAKER *UDGES ARE OFTEN LEFT CON
FUSED WITHOUT A CLEAR PICTURE OF WHERE THE DEBATE IS GOING %QUALLY
IMPORTANT DEBATERS MAY lND IT DIFlCULT TO PLAN THEIR LINE OF ATTACK
WITHOUT AN ORGANIZED @PICTURE TO HELP THEM UNDERSTAND THE DEBATE !
mOW SHEET THAT KEEPS TRACK OF THE BACK AND FORTH mOW OF THE DEBATE IS
ONE OF YOUR MOST IMPORTANT TOOLS IN FORMING YOUR STRATEGY (OW SPE
CIlCALLY WILL A mOW SHEET BE USEFUL TO YOU
0LANNING YOUR CLASH 7RITING DOWN YOUR OPPONENTS POINTS IN A CLEAR
AND ORGANIZED MANNER MAKES IT FAR EASIER AND QUICKER FOR YOU TO lGURE
OUT HOW TO RESPOND 9OULL BE ABLE TO MAKE SURE THAT YOUVE COVERED ALL
OF THE KEY PARTS OF YOUR OPPONENTS CASE
$EFENDING YOUR POINTS .OTING HOW YOUR OPPONENT HAS CLASHED WITH
YOUR ARGUMENTS LETS YOU KNOW WHAT YOU NEED TO COME BACK TO AND
DEFEND %SPECIALLY IF YOUR OPPONENTS CLASH WAS DISORGANIZED A mOW
SHEET MAKES IT CLEAR WHICH OF YOUR POINTS WERE ATTACKED AND WEAKENED
AND WHICH ONES HAVE BEEN LEFT UNDAMAGED
#HECKING FOR CONSISTENCY !NOTHER USE OF THE mOW SHEET IS TO CHECK
THE LOGIC AND CONSISTENCY OF THE ARGUMENTS "Y LAYING OUT YOUR OPPO
NENTS CASE IN AN ORDERED POINT BY POINT WAY YOU CAN DETERMINE MORE
EASILY WHETHER THERE ARE GAPS IN LOGIC OR CONTRADICTIONS BETWEEN THE
POINTS ,IKEWISE YOU CAN MAKE CERTAIN THAT YOUR ARGUMENTS AND COUN
TER
ARGUMENTS DO NOT CONTRADICT EACH OTHER AND THAT THEY mOW IN A
CLEAR AND LOGICAL WAY
Review Copy
Copyright 2006 Gravitas Publishing
.UTS AND "OLTS "UILDING "LOCKS OF $EBATE
0REPARING THE REBUTTAL 0LANNING AN EFFECTIVE REBUTTAL REQUIRES YOU TO
HAVE A CLEAR SENSE OF THE DEBATE AS A WHOLE ! mOW SHEET GIVES YOU A
SNAPSHOTA @ROAD MAP OF SORTSOF HOW THE CONSTRUCTIVE PART OF THE
DEBATE PLAYED OUT 4HIS ALLOWS YOU TO IDENTIFY WHAT YOUR TEAM SHOULD
FOCUS ON IN THE REBUTTAL SPEECH
4AKING NOTES FOR YOUR SPEECH 9OU DONT WANT TO BE TURNING AND READ
ING SCORES OF PAGES WHEN YOU TAKE THE mOOR ! QUICK GLANCE AT YOUR
mOW SHEET TELLS YOU EXACTLY WHERE YOU ARE AND WHERE YOU NEED TO GO
(OPEFULLY YOURE NOW CONVINCED THAT A mOW SHEET WILL BE USEFUL TO YOU
IN MULTIPLE WAYS 3O HOW DO YOU GO ABOUT MAKING ONE
3TEP $IVIDE YOUR PAGE INTO COLUMNS
>H[JO6\[
4HE MOST BASIC SYSTEM INVOLVES DIVIDING
THE PAGE INTO TWO COLUMNS ONE FOR THE !FlR
%ZSMH[VMXMRKHS[R
MATIVE TEAM AND THE OTHER FOR THE .EGATIVE
QMRSVHIXEMPWSR]SYV
TEAM 4HIS HELPS YOU KEEP YOUR PAGE NEAT
S[WLIIX
AND TIDY 5NFORTUNATELY THIS METHOD MAKES
IT TOUGH TO SEE HOW THE ARGUMENTS AND
COUNTER
ARGUMENTS ARE mOWING FROM SPEECH
TO SPEECH 9OU MAY lND IT MORE USEFUL TO DIVIDE YOUR PAGE INTO ONE
COLUMN FOR EACH SPEAKER&IRST !FlRMATIVE &IRST .EGATIVE AND SO ON
)F YOU EMPLOY THIS APPROACH CONSIDER USING A SHEET OF PAPER THATS
LARGER THAN THE STANDARD SIZE
3TEP 7RITE DOWN AND NUMBER EACH POINT !S A MEMBER OF THE
OPPOSING TEAM MAKES POINTS WRITE THEM DOWN IN THE ORDER THEYRE
PRESENTED )TS ABSOLUTELY ESSENTIAL THAT YOU
NUMBER THE POINTS EVEN IF YOUR OPPONENT
:\JJLZZ;PW
DIDNT DO SO /THERWISE YOULL LOSE TRACK AS
THE DEBATE GOES ON 5NDER EACH POINT YOU
7XSVI]SYVS[WLIIXW
COULD HAVE A FEW SUPPORTING DETAILS IF YOU
JSVJYXYVIEREP]WMW
FEEL THEYRE AN IMPORTANT PART OF YOU COUN
TER
ATTACK $ONT FORGET TO WRITE DOWN YOUR
POINTS AS WELL SO THAT YOU CAN KEEP TRACK OF
YOUR OPPONENTS REFUTATION
3TEP $RAW ARROWS IN ORDER TO GAUGE THE mOW !S A DEBATER
REFUTES ONE OF THE OTHER TEAMS ARGUMENTS WHETHER ITS YOUR PARTNER
Review Copy
Copyright 2006 Gravitas Publishing
4ALK THE 4ALK
OR YOUR OPPONENT DRAW AN ARROW FROM EACH POINT TO THE CORRESPOND
ING CLASH 4HIS WILL HELP YOU DETERMINE QUICKLY WHICH POINTS HAVE BEEN
REFUTED AND IF NECESSARY WHETHER YOU NEED TO PROVIDE FURTHER DEFENSE
OF YOUR PREVIOUS ARGUMENTS
;-22-2+;-8,%(=2%1-'(93
9OU MAY BE THINKING h/H GREAT HERE COMES THE SECTION ABOUT MUSHY
GUSHY TEAMWORK STUFFv 7ELL THESE hMUSHY GUSHYv CONCEPTS ARE OFTEN
WHAT MAKE OR BREAK A DEBATE TEAM $EBATE IS A TEAM SPORT 9OUR TEAMS
SUCCESS WONT DEPEND ONLY ON THE INDIVIDUAL STRENGTHS OF BOTH DEBAT
ERS )T WILL ALSO DEPEND IN LARGE PART ON HOW WELL YOU AND YOUR PARTNER
WORK TOGETHER 7HY IS A STRONG TEAM CENTRAL TO SUCCESS IN DEBATE
9OU LOOK UNIlED IN FRONT OF JUDGES !LTHOUGH JUDGES HAVE TO ASSIGN
SPEAKER SCORES TO EACH INDIVIDUAL MUCH OF THEIR EVALUATION IS BASED
ON THEIR OVERALL IMPRESSION OF THE TEAMS PERFORMANCE 4HEY WANT
TO SEE YOU AND YOUR PARTNER OPERATING IN A UNIlED COMPLEMENTARY
WAY 7HAT THEY DONT WANT TO SEE IS TWO PEOPLE BATTLING EACH OTHER FOR
THE SPOTLIGHT !ND THEYLL ALSO BE FAR MORE IMPRESSED IF YOUR DEBATING
STYLES APPEAR COMPATIBLE
9OUR SPEECHES REINFORCE EACH OTHER ! DEBATE ISNT A SET OF INDEPENDENT
SPEECHES 9OUR TEAMS SPEECHES ARE PART OF AN OVERALL CASE APPROACH
4HEY MUST mOW NATURALLY AND COMPLEMENT ONE ANOTHER 7HEN A TEAM
WORKS WELL TOGETHER DEBATERS ARE MORE LIKELY TO DEFEND AND REFER BACK
TO A PARTNERS POINTS
9OU CAN ADAPT ON THE GO MORE EASILY 9OULL NEVER KNOW EXACTLY WHAT
THE OTHER TEAM WILL SAY IN ITS SPEECHES 7HILE YOUR OPPONENT HAS THE
mOOR WHISPERING OR PASSING NOTES CAN HELP BOTH OF YOU lND A STRATEGY
TO DEAL WITH ITS ARGUMENTS )N MANY CASES YOU WONT KNOW HOW TO
CLASH WITH A PARTICULAR ARGUMENT BUT YOUR PARTNER WILL HAVE A TIP TO
PASS ON TO YOU
$EBATE BECOMES MUCH MORE ENJOYABLE "OTH BEFORE AND DURING A
TOURNAMENT YOULL PROBABLY SPEND MANY HOURS WITH YOUR PARTNER
4HERES NOTHING WORSE THAN HAVING A TEAM WHOSE MEMBERS DONT GET
ALONG BUT MERELY TOLERATE EACH OTHER FOR THE SAKE OF DEBATE $EBATE IS
ALSO A SOCIAL ACTIVITY SO THE FRIENDSHIP BETWEEN YOU AND YOUR PARTNER
Review Copy
Copyright 2006 Gravitas Publishing
.UTS AND "OLTS "UILDING "LOCKS OF $EBATE
IS IMPORTANT )F YOURE ENJOYING THE EXPERIENCE IT WILL REmECT POSITIVELY
IN YOUR SPEAKING STYLE 9OULL LIKELY BE LESS TENSE WHEN YOU SPEAK AND
YOULL SEEM MORE LIVELY AND DYNAMIC
1%/-2+%71%687)0)'8-32
.OW THAT YOU KNOW WHY EFFECTIVE TEAMWORK IS IMPORTANT IN DEBATING
THE NEXT STEP IS TO THINK ABOUT HOW TO SELECT A PARTNER 4HIS WILL BE ONE
OF THE MOST IMPORTANT DECISIONS YOU MAKE IN DEBATE 5NFORTUNATELY IT
CAN ALSO GET VERY PERSONAL AND POLITICAL $EBATERS FOR THE MOST PART
ARE NATURALLY COMPETITIVE PEOPLE (ERE ARE SOME TIPS TO KEEP IN MIND
WHEN SELECTING A PARTNER
4RY TO lND SOMEONE WHO IS AT A SIMILAR LEVEL 4HERES NO SENSE IN
HAVING A TEAM WITH ONE VERY SEASONED DEBATER AND ANOTHER WHOS JUST
STARTING OUT 4HE STRONGER DEBATER WILL FEEL
THAT HIS OR HER PARTNER IS DRAGGING THE TEAM
:\JJLZZ;PW
DOWN 4HE LESS EXPERIENCED MEMBER WILL
FEEL LIKE AN UNDERPERFORMER 7HATS WORSE IS
9WITVEGXMGIVSYRHW
THAT THE TEAM WILL APPEAR UNBALANCED IN THE
XSWIIMJEHIFEXI
EYES OF THE JUDGES 0ARTNERSHIPS WORK BEST
TEVXRIVWLMT[MPP[SVO
WHEN BOTH MEMBERS LEARN FROM EACH OTHER
AND PROGRESS TOGETHER
$ONT SELECT A PARTNER PURELY ON PERSONAL FRIENDSHIP 'RANTED
BEING FRIENDS WITH YOUR PARTNER IS IMPORTANT FOR SOME OF THE REASONS
DESCRIBED PREVIOUSLY SUCH AS WORKING WELL TOGETHER "UT A WORD OF CAU
TION A STRONG FRIENDSHIP DOESNT ALWAYS MAKE FOR A SOLID DEBATE TEAM
"E CERTAIN THAT YOU CAN JUSTIFY YOUR SELECTION TO YOURSELF ON DIMEN
SIONS OTHER THAN THE PERSON BEING YOUR BEST FRIEND
!IM FOR COMPLEMENTARY STYLES 4WO DEBATERS WITH VERY SIMILAR
STYLESBOTH VERY AGGRESSIVE OR BOTH VERY PASSIVECAN POSE CHAL
LENGES 4HE JUDGES MAY FORM UNFAVORABLE GENERALIZATIONS SUCH AS
@TOO HOSTILE OR @TOO SHY !T THE SAME TIME YOU DONT WANT TO BE POLAR
OPPOSITES WITH YOUR PARTNER )T PROBABLY ISNT THE GREATEST IDEA TO HAVE
AN EXTREMELY AGGRESSIVE DEBATER PAIRED WITH A VERY SHY DEBATER 4HE
TEAM SIMPLY WONT LOOK COHERENT 4HE TRICK IS TO STRIKE THE RIGHT BAL
ANCE &OR EXAMPLE ONE DEBATER MAY BE SLIGHTLY MORE ANALYTICAL THE
OTHER SLIGHTLY MORE PASSIONATE
Review Copy
Copyright 2006 Gravitas Publishing
4ALK THE 4ALK
#ONSIDER COMMITMENT LEVEL TO DEBATE )TS NOT UNCOMMON FOR DEBAT
ERS TO BE INVOLVED IN MANY EXTRACURRICULAR AND LEADERSHIP ACTIVITIES
-AKE SURE THAT YOUR SCHEDULES MESH BOTH FOR PREPARATION AND TOUR
NAMENTS )F YOURE SOMEONE WHO CONSIDERS DEBATE YOUR TOP PRIORITY
BUT YOUR PARTNER WOULDNT HESITATE TO MISS A TOURNAMENT FOR A DANCE
PRACTICE THINK TWICE ABOUT THE PROSPECT OF DEBATING TOGETHER
;36/-2+83;-2
9OU HAVE A GREAT PARTNER 9OURE READY TO WORK TOGETHER "OTH OF YOU
ARE COMMITTED TO DOING WHATEVER IT TAKES TO IMPROVE AND WIN .OW IS
WHEN THE REAL WORK BEGINS 7HAT ARE SOME OF THE TIPS TO REMEMBER
WHEN DEBATING TOGETHER
7HAT GETS SAID BETWEEN PARTNERS STAYS BETWEEN PARTNERS 4HERES
NOTHING WRONG WITH DISCUSSING A DEBATE ISSUE WITH MANY PEOPLE )N
FACT BRAINSTORMING WITH A LARGER GROUP IS A GREAT IDEA "UT DONT GIVE
AWAY YOUR GAME PLAN )T CAN BE TEMPTING FOR FRIENDS TO DISCUSS THEIR
RESPECTIVE STRATEGIES BEFORE A TOURNAMENT 9OU WOULD BE SURPRISED
AT HOW QUICKLY WORD GETS AROUND -ANY DEBATERS ARE MYSTIlED WHEN
THEY HEAR ONE OF THEIR VERY UNIQUE AND KEY ARGUMENTS USED AGAINST
THEM BY AN OPPOSING TEAM
7ORK INTERDEPENDENTLY ON THE CASE 3OME TEAMS PREFER TO PREPARE A
CASE INDEPENDENTLY 4HEY DECIDE WHOS PLAYING EACH SPEAKER ROLE AND
ASSIGN COMPLETE RESPONSIBILITY FOR THE SPEECH TO THAT INDIVIDUAL 4HIS
MAKES AS MUCH SENSE AS A HOCKEY TEAMS FORWARDS TRAINING TOGETHER
AND ITS DEFENSEMEN TRAINING TOGETHER WITHOUT THE TWO GROUPS EVER
WORKING ALONGSIDE EACH OTHER TO FORM A COMMON STRATEGY 3PEECHES
HAVE TO lT TOGETHER 7HILE lNAL PREPARATION FOR A SPEECH OUTLINE CAN BE
LEFT TO EACH DEBATER ITS BEST TO FORM A CASE JOINTLY "OTH PARTNERS NEED
TO HAVE A SOUND GRASP OF ALL OF THE TEAMS POINTS AND THATS MOST LIKELY
TO HAPPEN IF THE TEAM WORKS ON THE CASE INTERDEPENDENTLY
"OUNCE IDEAS OFF EACH OTHER (AVE ONE PARTNER PROPOSE AN IDEA WHILE
THE OTHER MEMBER ARGUES AGAINST IT 4HIS APPROACH WILL ACCOMPLISH
TWO GOALS &IRSTLY YOULL BE ABLE TO TEST THE STRENGTH OF THE ARGUMENT
AND SEE IF IT CAN WITHSTAND CRITICISM 3ECONDLY IF YOU lND THAT THE
POINT IS STRONG ENOUGH YOULL AT LEAST HAVE ANTICIPATED SOME LIKELY
POINTS OF REFUTATION AGAINST THE ARGUMENT
Review Copy
Copyright 2006 Gravitas Publishing
.UTS AND "OLTS "UILDING "LOCKS OF $EBATE
%VALUATE YOUR PERFORMANCE CONSTRUCTIVELY %FFECTIVE TEAMS LEARN FROM
THEIR MISTAKES AND BUILD ON THEIR STRENGTHS 4ALK TO YOUR PARTNER AFTER
EACH ROUND AND AT THE END OF A TOURNAMENT TO IDENTIFY HOW BOTH OF YOU
CAN IMPROVE IN THE FUTURE
3HARE CREDIT AND BLAME EQUALLY #REDITING A WIN TO THE SUPPOSEDLY
@STRONGER DEBATER OR BLAMING A LOSS ON THE ALLEGEDLY @WEAKER DEBATER
IS A SURE WAY TO DAMAGE THE TEAMS FUTURE PERFORMANCE 9OU COMPETE
AS A TEAM YOU WIN AS A TEAM AND YOU LOSE AS A TEAM 0ERIOD
0)77'390(&)136) 46)4%6-2+83()&%8)
#ONVENTIONAL WISDOM IS THAT THE MORE YOU PREPARE FOR A DEBATE THE
STRONGER YOU PERFORM )SNT IT COMMON SENSE THAT THE TOP DEBATERS ARE
THE ONES WHO SPEND MANY WEEKENDS AND LATE NIGHTS PREPARING SCRIPTS
FOR EVERY SPEECH AND EVERY POSSIBLE ARGUMENT .OT NECESSARILY
/F COURSE THIS DOESNT MEAN THAT YOU DONT HAVE TO WORRY ABOUT
PREPARATION AT ALL 7HAT IT MEANS IS THAT YOU HAVE TO PREPARE THE RIGHT
INFORMATION NOT EVERYTHING THAT MAY COME UP 4HE LEVEL OF PREPARA
TION NECESSARY WILL DEPEND ON HOW EXPERIENCED YOU ARE AND ON YOUR
PERSONAL PREFERENCES "ELOW ARE DISCUSSIONS OF PRE
DEBATE STRATEGIES
FOR PREPARED AND IMPROMPTU DEBATES
0REPARED $EBATES 'ET A 'RIP "UT .OT 4OO 4IGHT
)F YOU KNOW THE RESOLUTION FAR IN ADVANCE OF
THE TOURNAMENT YOU SHOULD BE VERY COM
FORTABLE DEBATING IT BEFOREHAND 4HIS MEANS
UNDERSTANDING THE ISSUE WELL ENOUGH THAT
YOU CAN MOLD AND ADAPT YOUR TEAMS CASE TO
EACH DEBATE "UT IT DOESNT MEAN SPENDING
A DOZEN HOURS WRITING DOWN TEXT FOR EVERY
POSSIBLE CIRCUMSTANCE THAT COULD COME UP
(ERE ARE SOME TIPS TO FOLLOW
>H[JO6\[
(SR XVIEHTSMRXW
JVSQTVITEVIHXI\X
!VOID FULLY PREPARED SPEECHES )F ANYTHING ONLY YOUR lRST !FlRMATIVE
SPEECH SHOULD BE FULLY PREPARED !FTER THAT YOU SHOULDNT HAVE WORD
FOR WORD SPEECHES READY TO GO 7HY NOT )TS A DEBATING TOURNAMENT
NOT A PUBLIC SPEAKING TOURNAMENT )F YOUVE WRITTEN OUT YOUR SPEECH
Review Copy
Copyright 2006 Gravitas Publishing
4ALK THE 4ALK
IT WILL BE OBVIOUS TO YOUR JUDGES THAT YOUVE DONE SO 4HEYLL BE ASKING
THEMSELVES h)S THIS PERSON DEBATING OR JUST READING OUT A PREPARED
SPEECH v -ORE IMPORTANTLY YOU WONT BE FOCUSED ON RESPONDING TO
THE SPECIlCS OF WHATS HAPPENING IN THE DEBATE
7HAT IF YOURE JUST STARTING OUT AND ONLY FEEL COMFORTABLE WITH
PREPARED TEXT &IRSTLY YOU MAY NEED TO STEP OUT OF YOUR COMFORT ZONE
AND EXPERIMENT WITH A LESS RIGID STRUCTURE 3ECONDLY IF YOU ABSOLUTELY
NEED TO HAVE SOMETHING READY KEEP IT TO A MINIMUM LEVEL 0ERHAPS
YOU CAN PREPARE SOME TEXT FOR PART OF YOUR NEW CONSTRUCTIVE ARGU
MENTS "UT WRITE OUT NO MORE THAN THAT
(AVE READY A FEW MORE ARGUMENTS THAN YOU NEED )F YOURE THE .EGA
TIVE TEAM YOULL WANT TO HAVE READY MORE THAN YOUR PRIMARY PRE
FERRED CASE 7HY 4HE !FlRMATIVES DElNITION AND CASE MAY LEAD YOU
IN ANOTHER DIRECTION 4HIS DOESNT MEAN HAVING EVERY POINT PREPARED
IN EXTREME DETAIL "UT WRITE A SENTENCE OR TWO TO DESCRIBE A HANDFUL OF
POINTS OTHER THAN YOUR KEY IDEAS %VEN IF YOURE THE !FlRMATIVE TEAM
YOUR SECOND SPEAKER MAY NEED TO USE DIFFERENT ARGUMENTS IF THE .EGA
TIVE TEAM TAKES AN UNEXPECTED APPROACH TO ITS CASE
4HINK OF SOME POSSIBLE WAYS TO CLASH 4HE KEY WORD HERE IS hTHINKv
4HAT MEANS NOT PREPARING DETAILED SCRIPTED REFUTATION FOR DOZENS OF
POSSIBLE ARGUMENTS 3URELY YOU SHOULD HAVE AN IDEA OF HOW YOU WOULD
GO ABOUT RESPONDING TO NUMEROUS OPPOSING ARGUMENTS !ND ITS PROB
ABLY HELPFUL TO JOT DOWN A FEW NOTES (OWEVER THERE SHOULD BE MUCH
MORE THINKING THAN WRITING TAKING PLACE
)MPROMPTU $EBATES )TS !LL IN THE .AME
4HEYRE CALLED @IMPROMPTU DEBATES FOR A REASON YOUR PLANNING SHOULD
BE HELD TO A MINIMUM 9OULL RECEIVE THE TOPIC ROUGHLY MINUTES IN
ADVANCE !NY PREPARATION SHOULD BE LIMITED TO THE FOLLOWING
!FlRMATIVE CASES -OST IMPROMPTU TOURNAMENTS FEATURE AT LEAST SOME
OPEN
ENDED RESOLUTIONS SEE !PPENDIX ! FOR EXAMPLES WHICH MEANS
YOU CAN DElNE THEM HOWEVER YOU WANT )TS A GOOD IDEA TO COME INTO A
TOURNAMENT WITH AT LEAST HALF A DOZEN CASES READY 9OU DONT NEED TO
BE AS PREPARED AS YOU WOULD FOR A TOURNAMENT IN WHICH THE TOPIC HAS
BEEN ANNOUNCED WELL IN ADVANCE 4HE EXTENT OF PREPARATION SHOULD
BE GENERAL KNOWLEDGE ABOUT THE ISSUE AND A SET OF POINTS TO FORM THE
Review Copy
Copyright 2006 Gravitas Publishing
.UTS AND "OLTS "UILDING "LOCKS OF $EBATE
!FlRMATIVE CASE )F YOU COME INTO THE ROUND TOO PREPARED YOUR JUDGES
WONT BE TOO IMPRESSED BY YOUR LACK OF IMPROMPTU DEBATING
.EGATIVE PROCESSES 3INCE THERE ARE THOU
+PK@V\2UV^&
SANDS OF POSSIBLE DEBATE ISSUES YOU CANT
POSSIBLY PREPARE TO GO UP AGAINST EVEN A FRAC
8LI2IKEXMZIXIEQ
TION OF THEM 9OULL DElNITELY GET TO KNOW
[MRWQSWXMQTVSQTXY
ABOUT MANY ISSUES AS YOU DEBATE MORE OFTEN
HIFEXIVSYRHW
AND STAY ON TOP OF CURRENT AFFAIRS 0REPARING
ARGUMENTS FOR AND AGAINST DIFFERENT POSSIBLE
RESOLUTIONS MAY BE GOOD PRACTICE "UT YOU
SHOULD FOCUS YOUR THINKING ON PROCESSES (OW WILL YOU WORK AS A TEAM
TO REACT QUICKLY TO THE !FlRMATIVES CASE 7HO WILL SPEAK IN EACH POSI
TION 7HAT GENERAL FORMAT COULD YOU USE TO PRESENT YOUR CASE 4HIS
WONT TAKE MUCH TIME AND IT SHOULDNT 'O INTO THE ROUND COMFORTABLE
IN KNOWING HOW YOULL WORK TOGETHER BUT BE READY TO ADAPT YOUR STYLE
TO WHAT THE !FlRMATIVE TEAM PRESENTS
8,)/-7746-2'-40)
h+EEP )T 3WEET AND 3IMPLEv
-ANY DEBATERS BELIEVE THAT COMPLEX ARGUMENTS AND BIG WORDS
WILL HELP THEM WIN 4HEY MAY MAKE YOU LOOK SMART BUT THAT DOESNT
ALWAYS TRANSLATE INTO EFFECTIVE PERSUASION 9OUR CASE IS AS GOOD AS ITS
UNDERSTOOD BY THE JUDGES 9OU DONT SCORE ANY BONUS POINTS FOR COM
PLICATING IT (ERE ARE SOME WAYS TO SIMPLIFY THE DEBATE
5SE @US VS THEM DISTINCTIONS "Y STATING PAIRS OF OPPOSITES YOU CAN
ACTUALLY USE YOUR OPPONENTS CASE TO MAKE YOUR CASE MORE CLEAR h0RE
VENTION VS BANDAGE SOLUTION v hINNOVATION VS OLD WAYS v AND hDECISIVE
ACTION VS COMPLACENCYv ARE EXAMPLES OF SUCH PAIRS 4HIS TOOL HELPS
THE JUDGES UNDERSTAND WHAT EXACTLY YOURE TRYING TO GET ACROSS )T CAN
ALSO PAINT YOUR OPPONENTS CASE IN A NEGATIVE LIGHT )F YOURE ARGUING
AGAINST GIVING PRISONERS THE RIGHT TO VOTE YOU COULD SUMMARIZE AN
ARGUMENT BY SAYING h4HIS POINT AFlRMS THAT CRIMINALS MUST BE TEM
PORARILY REMOVED FROM SOCIETY WHEREAS THE !FlRMATIVE WOULD RATHER
LET CRIMINALS PARTICIPATE ACTIVELY IN SOCIETYS DEMOCRATIC SYSTEMv
)NCLUDE ANALOGIES METAPHORS AND EXAMPLES 3OMETIMES THE MOST
EFFECTIVE WAY TO HELP PEOPLE UNDERSTAND A COMPLEX IDEA IS TO COMPARE
Review Copy
Copyright 2006 Gravitas Publishing
4ALK THE 4ALK
IT TO SOMETHING SIMPLE &OR EXAMPLE h*UST LIKE #HURCHILL WANTED TO
TAKE THE BATTLE TO THE ENEMYS TURF DURING THE 3ECOND 7ORLD 7AR xv
OR h/UR CASE IS AKIN TO lXING THE HOLE IN THE SHIP SO THAT WE DONT HAVE
TO CONTINUE BAILING OUT THE WATERv "UT BE CAREFUL WHEN USING THESE
TOOLS 9OU DONT WANT TO TRIVIALIZE THE DEBATE AND APPEAR TO BE MAKING
SWEEPING GENERALIZATIONS !LSO YOU WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT YOUR JUDG
ES CAN IDENTIFY WITH YOUR COMPARISON "RINGING UP AN ACTRESS WHOSE
NAME YOUR JUDGES HAVE NEVER HEARD BEFORE OR A SCIENTIlC DISCOVERY
THAT ISNT WELL KNOWN MAY BE MORE CONFUSING THAN CLARIFYING
5SE CLEAR DIRECT LANGUAGE )F YOUR QUEST IS TO DEMONSTRATE YOUR MAS
TERY OF THE %NGLISH LANGUAGE AND ALL OF ITS INTRICACIES YOU MAY END UP
LOSING YOUR JUDGES 3UPPOSE YOU WANT TO TALK ABOUT THE hFUNDAMENTAL
FALLACY INHERENT IN THE PHILOSOPHICAL PREMISE OF THE .EGATIVES SEC
OND CONSTRUCTIVE ARGUMENTv 4RY THIS INSTEAD h4HE .EGATIVES SECOND
POINT IS FALSE BECAUSE xv )TS GOOD TO USE INTELLIGENT LANGUAGE BUT DONT
MAKE WHAT YOU SAY NEEDLESSLY AND EXCESSIVELY COMPLICATED
!VOID UNKNOWN ACRONYMS AND @INSIDE LANGUAGE 7E OFTEN THINK
THAT IF WE KNOW A PARTICULAR ACRONYM OR COMMONLY USED JARGON SO WILL
EVERYONE ELSE )F YOURE TALKING ABOUT THE h53 v THE h%5 v OR ANOTHER
WIDELY KNOWN ACRONYM IT WONT BE A PROBLEM "UT DONT ASSUME EVERY
ONE KNOWS THAT h/!3v STANDS FOR h/RGANIZATION OF !MERICAN 3TATESv
OR THAT h42#v STANDS FOR h4RUTH AND 2ECONCILIATION #OMMISSIONv
;%8',8,)'03'/
7OULDNT IT BE NICE IF WE COULD SIMPLY GO ON AND ON UNTIL WEVE lNISHED
WHAT WE HAVE TO SAY 5NFORTUNATELY THIS WOULD MAKE DEBATES DRAG FOR
LONGER THAN THE AUDIENCE WOULD LIKE $EBATERS HAVE TO COMPLY WITH
STRICT TIME CONTROLS 4HERES NOTHING WORSE THAN BEING IN THE MIDDLE OF
YOUR lNAL CONSTRUCTIVE POINT WHEN THE TIMEKEEPER CUTS YOU OFF "UD
GETING YOUR TIME CAREFULLY WILL IMPROVE YOUR PERFORMANCE
!T EACH MINUTE THE TIMEKEEPER WILL SIGNAL TO YOU HOW MUCH TIME
YOU HAVE LEFT 4HERE WILL ALSO BE TIME SIGNALS WHEN YOU HAVE SECONDS
LEFT WHEN YOUR TIME HAS EXPIRED AND WHEN YOUR GRACE PERIODUSUALLY
SECONDSHAS lNISHED !T THE END OF THIS GRACE PERIOD YOU MUST SIT
DOWN .O EXCEPTIONS
(OW DO YOU PACE YOURSELF ACCORDINGLY 4O START YOU MUST KNOW IF
YOURE ON TRACK TO lNISH ON TIME 5SUALLY DEBATERS HAVE A GREAT DEAL
Review Copy
Copyright 2006 Gravitas Publishing
.UTS AND "OLTS "UILDING "LOCKS OF $EBATE
TO SAY SO lNISHING EARLY IS LESS OF A PROBLEM 3AY YOURE THE lRST .EGA
TIVE SPEAKER AND YOU HAVE TO CLASH WITH THREE !FlRMATIVE POINTS AND
PRESENT THREE OF YOUR OWN )F YOU HAVE SEVEN MINUTES TO SPEAK ITS A
GOOD IDEA TO ALLOW APPROXIMATELY SECONDS FOR YOUR INTRODUCTION
SECONDS FOR YOUR CONCLUSION THREE MINUTES FOR CLASH AND THREE
MINUTES TO PRESENT ARGUMENTS 'ENERALLY THIS @MINUTE PER POINT RULE
FOR BOTH REFUTATION AND CONSTRUCTION SERVES AS A USEFUL GUIDE ! SIGNAL
THAT YOU HAVE TWO MINUTES LEFT WHEN YOUVE JUST lNISHED YOUR CLASH
AND ARE STARTING YOUR lRST CONSTRUCTIVE ARGUMENT IS A SIGN THAT YOURE
BEHIND 4HIS WOULD LEAVE YOU ROUGHLY HALF A MINUTE FOR EACH ARGU
MENT WHICH ISNT ENOUGH TIME FOR THOROUGH DEVELOPMENT
7HAT IF YOU CAN TELL YOURE BEHIND &IRSTLY CATCH UP SOONER RATHER
THAN LATER 9OULL lND IT MUCH EASIER TO ADJUST WHEN YOU HAVE MORE
TIME TO WORK WITH "Y THE TIME YOU HAVE ONLY ONE OR TWO MINUTES LEFT
YOUR TASK BECOMES FAR MORE CHALLENGING 3ECONDLY YOU CAN USE ONE OR
MORE OF THE FOLLOWING STRATEGIES TO MAKE SURE YOU lNISH ON TIME
#UT OUT AN ARGUMENT )F YOU HAVE AT LEAST THREE ARGUMENTS AND ONE
OF THEM ISNT PIVOTAL TO YOUR CASE YOU COULD DECIDE TO ELIMINATE IT /F
COURSE THIS LEAVES YOUR CASE WEAKER BUT IT CAN BE MORE EFFECTIVE THAN
MERELY SKIMMING OVER A GREATER NUMBER OF ARGUMENTS
#ONDENSE EACH ARGUMENT !S MENTIONED PREVIOUSLY ITS IMPORTANT NOT
TO SKIM OVER ARGUMENTS JUST TO GET THEM IN (OWEVER IF YOU CAN CUT
OUT NONESSENTIAL EMBELLISHING DETAILS YOU CAN STILL BE FAIRLY THOROUGH
WHILE MAKING SURE THAT YOU COMPLETE EACH POINT
3ACRIlCE SOME REFUTATION 9OU COULD EITHER REFUTE EACH OF YOUR OPPO
NENTS POINTS MORE QUICKLY OR NOT CLASH WITH ONE OR MORE POINTS AT
ALL 4HE lRST TACTIC IS USUALLY SUPERIOR BECAUSE ITS IMPORTANT THAT YOU
CHALLENGE EVERY IMPORTANT POINT MADE BY YOUR OPPONENT )N MOST CAS
ES THOUGH SHRINKING THE REFUTATION SLIGHTLY IS PREFERABLE TO SACRIlCING
CONSTRUCTIVE MATTER THATS CRITICAL TO YOUR CASE
'O LIGHT ON THE CONCLUSION 5NDOUBTEDLY TYING UP YOUR SPEECH AND
PROVIDING REMINDERS TO YOUR JUDGES ARE USEFUL FUNCTIONS OF YOUR CON
CLUSION "UT THEYRE ALSO NOT CRITICAL TO THE CASE ITSELF )F YOU ONLY HAVE
TO CUT OUT A FEW SECONDS FROM YOUR SPEECH KEEP YOUR CONCLUSION TO A
SENTENCE OR TWO SO THAT YOU DONT HAVE TO LEAVE OUT VALUABLE CONSTRUC
TIVE OR REFUTATION MATTER
Review Copy
Copyright 2006 Gravitas Publishing
4ALK THE 4ALK
8,)-286-'%'-)73*)8-59)88)
"EING RESPECTFUL AND POLITE WONT SCORE YOU ANY EXTRA POINTS WITH YOUR
JUDGES 2ATHER ITS A BASIC EXPECTATION /N THE OTHER HAND FAILURE TO
FOLLOW PROPER DEBATE ETIQUETTE CAN LEAVE A BAD IMPRESSION AND COST
YOU DEARLY 4HE RULES OF ETIQUETTE ARE SIMPLE BUT IMPORTANT (ERE ARE
SOME OF THE BASICS
"EFORE THE $EBATE
s !CKNOWLEDGE THE JUDGES WHEN YOU ENTER THE ROOM OR WHEN THEY ENTER
-AKE EYE CONTACT AND SMILE BUT DONT SHAKE HANDS $OING SO SEEMS
TACKY AS IF YOURE TRYING TO IMPRESS THEM
s 7ISH YOUR OPPONENTS hGOOD LUCKv OR SHAKE HANDS !S WITH THE JUDGES ITS A
GOOD IDEA TO ACKNOWLEDGE THE OTHER SIDE IN A RESPECTFUL MANNER %VEN
THOUGH YOURE ABOUT TO GO HEAD TO HEAD WITH THEM YOU WANT TO SHOW
THAT YOURE BEING A GOOD SPORT
s !VOID PRE
DEBATE CHIT
CHAT 7RITE YOUR NAMES YOUR SPEAKER POSITIONS
AND YOUR TEAM CODE ON THE BOARD AND THEN TAKE YOUR SEAT %VEN IF
YOURE FRIENDS WITH THE DEBATERS ON THE TEAM OPPOSITE DONT START MAK
ING CONVERSATION WITH THEM ABOUT THE PREVIOUS ROUND OR LAST NIGHTS
PARTY IN FRONT OF THE JUDGES
$URING THE $EBATE
s $ONT TALK TO YOUR PARTNER TOO LOUDLY )F YOU NEED TO COMMUNICATE DO
SO IN WRITING OR BY WHISPERING VERY QUIETLY 4ALKING AUDIBLY WHILE YOUR
OPPONENT IS SPEAKING APPEARS RUDE AND DISTRACTING
s !VOID RUDE BODY LANGUAGE 9OULL HEAR MANY THINGS THAT YOU DISAGREE
WITH OR THAT YOU CONSIDER TO BE PLAIN WRONG )TS USUALLY BEST TO KEEP
YOUR REACTION TO YOURSELF 3OMETIMES SUBTLE BODY LANGUAGE CAN BE
APPROPRIATE SUCH AS A SLIGHT SHAKE OF THE HEAD OR A PUZZLED LOOK "UT
SIGHING LOUDLY OR THROWING UP YOUR HANDS IN DISAGREEMENT ARE SOME OF
THE REACTIONS THAT APPEAR INAPPROPRIATE
s !DDRESS YOUR OPPONENTS RESPECTFULLY !S MUCH AS POSSIBLE ADDRESS YOUR
OPPONENTS BY TITLE SUCH AS hTHE lRST !FlRMATIVE SPEAKERv OR hTHE ,EAD
Review Copy
Copyright 2006 Gravitas Publishing
.UTS AND "OLTS "UILDING "LOCKS OF $EBATE
ER OF THE /PPOSITIONv 3AYING hTHOSE GUYSv OR hTHE SPEAKER OVER THEREv
SEEMS OVERLY INFORMAL IF NOT IMPOLITE !LSO WHEN YOURE ATTACKING
YOUR OPPONENTS POINTS DONT MAKE IT PERSONAL !VOID PHRASES SUCH AS
h) CANT EMPHASIZE ENOUGH HOW RIDICULOUS *IMS lRST ARGUMENT SOUND
EDv 5SING LANGUAGE LIKE h(ERES WHATS WRONG WITH THE .EGATIVES lRST
POINTv IS THE BEST APPROACH
!FTER THE $EBATE
s !VOID PROFOUND REACTIONS TO THE JUDGES DECISION OR COMMENTS )N MANY
TOURNAMENTS THE WINNING TEAM IS ANNOUNCED IMMEDIATELY AFTER THE
ROUND IS lNISHED 7HETHER THIS IS THE CASE OR EVEN IF THE JUDGES ARE
ONLY PROVIDING CONSTRUCTIVE COMMENTS DONT SHOW ANY BOASTFUL CELE
BRATION OR GRUDGING DISAPPROVAL "E RESPECTFUL BOTH TO YOUR JUDGES AND
TO YOUR OPPONENTS
s 3HAKE HANDS WITH YOUR OPPONENTS AND THE JUDGES )TS POOR TASTE TO DASH
HASTILY OUT OF THE ROOM "E SURE TO THANK THE JUDGES FOR THEIR TIME AND
TO CONGRATULATE YOUR OPPONENTS FOR A GOOD DEBATE
s 3TAY RESPECTFUL IN THE HALLWAYS AND CENTRAL MEETING AREAS *UST BECAUSE A
DEBATE ROUND IS OVER IT ISNT A LICENSE TO CRITICIZE YOUR OPPONENTS OR
JUDGES #OMPETITIVE DEBATING IS USUALLY A TIGHT
KNIT COMMUNITY AND
WORD DOES GET AROUND 7ORSE YET YOU MAY BE OVERHEARD 9OU COULD
END UP WITH THE SAME JUDGES IN THE FUTURE AND YOU COULD FACE YOUR
OPPONENTS ONCE AGAIN 0ERHAPS ONE DAY YOULL EVEN END UP AS PARTNERS
WITH ONE OF THEM
;36/-2+8,)6331
!S DISCUSSED IN #HAPTER YOUR VISUAL IMPRESSION IS A VITAL PART OF HOW
EFFECTIVE YOU ARE AT COMMUNICATING )N DEBATE WHERE YOU STAND AND
HOW YOU USE MOVEMENT WILL HAVE AN IMPACT ON YOUR PERFORMANCE
9OULL OFTEN BE CONSTRAINED BY THE SETUP OF THE ROOM SO ITS IMPORTANT
TO KNOW HOW TO ADAPT TO A VARIETY OF ARRANGEMENTS /N THE FOLLOWING
PAGE YOULL SEE AN EXAMPLE OF HOW A DEBATE ROOM MAY BE SETUP AS
WELL AS THE @POWER POSITIONS FOR STANCE AND MOVEMENT
Review Copy
Copyright 2006 Gravitas Publishing
4ALK THE 4ALK
Review Copy
Copyright 2006 Gravitas Publishing
.UTS AND "OLTS "UILDING "LOCKS OF $EBATE
4AKING A 3TAND
7HERE YOU STANDYOUR PHYSICAL PLACEMENTMAKES A DIFFERENCE TO
YOUR DELIVERY *UDGES @LISTEN NOT ONLY WITH THEIR EARS BUT ALSO WITH
THEIR EYES 7HEN YOU HAVE THE mOOR YOU WANT EVERYONES ATTENTION TO
FOCUS ON YOU (ERE ARE SOME TIPS TO IMPROVE YOUR STAGE PRESENCE
3TEP OUT FROM BEHIND THE TABLE !LTHOUGH SOME DEBATERS PREFER STAND
ING BEHIND THE TABLE THIS APPROACH DOESNT ALLOW YOU TO SHOW COM
MANDING STAGE PRESENCE )N ORDER TO BE MOST EFFECTIVE YOU NEED TO BE
IN FRONT OF THE OTHER DEBATERS SO THAT YOU STAND OUT FROM THE GROUP
#APTURE THE MIDDLE /UR EYES NATURALLY FOCUS ON THE CENTER OF THE
ROOM 3TANDING IN THE MIDDLE ALSO BRINGS YOU CLOSEST TO THE MOST NUM
BER OF JUDGES /F COURSE YOU DONT WANT TO VEER ONTO YOUR OPPONENTS
SIDE SO ITS USUALLY BEST TO PLACE YOURSELF SLIGHTLY OFF CENTER TOWARD
YOUR SIDE OF THE ROOM
.OT TOO CLOSE NOT TOO FAR 3TANDING TOO FAR BACK WEAKENS YOUR STAGE
PRESENCE )T ALMOST MAKES YOU SEEM SHY AND IT BECOMES TOUGHER FOR
YOU TO PROJECT YOUR VOICE TO THE ENTIRE AUDIENCE "UT STANDING TOO CLOSE
TO THE AUDIENCE ISNT THE BEST OF IDEAS EITHER *UDGES LIKE THEIR PERSONAL
SPACE AND PLACING YOURSELF TOO CLOSE TO THEM MAKES YOU SEEM OVERLY
INFRINGING AND FORCEFUL "E SURE TO STRIKE A GOOD BALANCE
$ONT @HIDE BEHIND THE STAND 9OU CAN DElNITELY USE YOUR STAND TO
PLACE YOUR NOTES BUT IT SHOULD NEVER BE USED AS A @CLUTCH FOR YOUR
HANDS )F YOURE CONSTANTLY GRABBING AND lDGETING WITH THE STAND
CHANCES ARE THAT YOULL BECOME STIFF AND APPEAR TO BE TALKING INTO YOUR
STAND MORE THAN TO YOUR AUDIENCE
0RANCING !ROUND THE 0ODIUM
0ODIUMS AND STANDS ARE NECESSARY EVILS 9OU NEED THEM TO PLACE YOUR
NOTES BUT THEY PRESENT A PHYSICAL BARRIER BETWEEN YOU AND THE AUDI
ENCE 4HIS LEAVES MANY DEBATERS WONDERING IF THEY SHOULD EVEN BOTHER
USING ONE 5NFORTUNATELY THE ALTERNATIVES ARE USUALLY LESS DESIRABLE
!VOID PLACING THE PAPERS ON A DESK OR TABLE !LTHOUGH THIS METHOD
MAY SEEM PREFERABLE TO THE OBSTRUCTION OF A PODIUM THE PROBLEM WITH
Review Copy
Copyright 2006 Gravitas Publishing
4ALK THE 4ALK
IT IS THAT YOU HAVE TO LOOK TOO FAR DOWN TO SEE YOUR PAPERS 7HEN YOU
REFER TO YOUR NOTES YOUR POSTURE WILL BE WEAKENED BECAUSE YOULL HAVE
TO LEAN OVER SLIGHTLY AND YOUR EYE CONTACT WILL ALSO SUFFER
4RY NOT TO HAVE CUE CARDS IN YOUR HANDS 4HIS OFTEN USED AND MIS
USED METHOD IS RATHER TEMPTING !FTER ALL IT ELIMINATES THE MOVEMENT
RESTRICTION IMPOSED BY A STAND 5NFORTUNATELY IT CAN BE VERY DISTRACT
ING WHEN A SPEAKER GESTURES WITH CUE CARDS IN HIS OR HER HANDS )F
YOURE WEDDED TO THIS OPTION USE SMALL SIZE CARDS )F NOT YOURE BETTER
OFF KEEPING YOUR HANDS FREE TO GESTURE MORE EXPRESSIVELY
(OW DO YOU GO ABOUT USING A STAND /NE OF THE MOST EFFECTIVE METHODS
IS TO PLACE A DIAGONALLY
SLANTED STAND A FEW FEET TOWARD THE SIDE OF THE
ROOM 4HIS ALLOWS YOU TO STAND IN THE CENTER WITH NOTHING IN FRONT OF
YOU ACTING AS AN OBSTRUCTION 4HE STAND WILL STILL BE VISIBLE TO YOU BUT
IT WILL NOT GET IN THE WAY !LSO THIS METHOD MAKES IT FAR LESS TEMPTING
TO GRAB AND LEAN ON THE STAND
! PODIUM IS GENERALLY IMMOVABLE AS ITS PLACED lRMLY IN THE CEN
TRE OF THE ROOM )N THIS CASE ITS USUALLY BEST TO USE IT -AKE SURE THAT
YOU STAND SLIGHTLY BACK FROM THE PODIUM SO THAT YOU CAN MOVE AND
GESTURE FREELY WITHOUT BEING TEMPTED TO LEAN OVER OR HOLD ONTO IT
(6)77*36()&%8)79'')77
4HIS COMMENT ISNT INTENDED TO TELL YOU HOW TO BE THE MOST FASHION
ABLE PERSON IN THE ROOM 4HERE ARE PLENTY OF MAGAZINES DEVOTED TO
THE SUBJECT 2ATHER ITS MEANT TO GIVE YOU A FEW TIPS ON HOW TO DRESS
APPROPRIATELY FOR A DEBATE TOURNAMENT 9OUR DRESS IS AN IMPORTANT
PART OF THE IMPRESSION YOU GIVE TO YOUR JUDGES $RESSING EITHER TOO
INFORMALLY OR TOO ELABORATELY TAKES AWAY FROM YOUR PERFORMANCE
,ADIES SHOULD BE CAREFUL NOT TO SEEM TOO FANCY 3URE BRIGHT PINK
MAY WORK IF YOURE TRYING TO STAND OUT AT YOUR GRADUATION "UT ITS PROB
ABLY TOO BOLD FOR DEBATE !NY COMBINATION THAT LOOKS NEAT SIMPLE AND
PROFESSIONAL WILL WORK WELL
'ENTS LOOK BEST WITH A SUIT AND TIE ESPECIALLY FOR A CHAMPIONSHIP
TOURNAMENT )F YOU PREFER TO DRESS DOWN A BIT LOSE THE JACKET OR THE TIE
"UT AVOID WEARING KHAKIS JEANS OR ANYTHING THAT WILL MAKE YOU SEEM
TOO INFORMAL -AKE SURE YOU WEAR DRESS SHOES %VEN IF YOU AGREE THAT
DEBATE IS A SPORT RUNNERS WONT DO THE PART
Review Copy
Copyright 2006 Gravitas Publishing
.UTS AND "OLTS "UILDING "LOCKS OF $EBATE
(32 84634=3967)0*94
4HE USE OF VISUAL AIDS IS USUALLY WELCOME IN PUBLIC SPEAKING 3PEAK
ERS USE mIP CHARTS REFER TO THE BOARD TO EXPLAIN THEIR POINTS OR HOLD
OBJECTS IN THEIR HANDS TO HELP ILLUSTRATE AN IDEA
(OWEVER PROPS ARENT WELCOME IN A DEBATE &IRSTLY THEY LOOK TACKY
9OUR ABILITY TO PERSUADE AND EXPLAIN SHOULD REST SOLELY IN THE POWER
OF YOUR VOICE AND PHYSICAL EXPRESSION 3ECONDLY MOST DEBATE STYLES
CONSIDER IT AGAINST THE RULES TO USE PROPS !N ASTUTE JUDGE WILL DEDUCT
POINTS IF YOU USE THEM )N SHORT AVOID PROPS LIKE THE PLAGUE
78%2(94'31)(= ,9136-2()&%8)
4HE USE OF HUMOR IS RIPE WITH REWARDS BUT FRAUGHT WITH PITFALLS 9OULL
EITHER STRIKE A HOME RUN BY MAKING YOUR JUDGES LAUGH OR STRIKE OUT BY
LEAVING EVERYONE WONDERING WHY YOURE TRYING TO BE FUNNY )TS FAIRLY
TOUGH TO LEARN HOW TO BE FUNNY AS IT HAS TO COME NATURALLY FROM WITHIN
YOU (ERE ARE SOME GENERAL TIPS TO KEEP THE JOKE FROM BEING ON YOU
$ONT FORCE HUMOR INTO YOUR SPEECH (UMOR
ISNT NECESSARY 9OU WONT LOSE ANY POINTS IF
YOU ARENT FUNNY 4OO MANY DEBATERS THINK
TO THEMSELVES h)VE NOTICED DEBATERS WHO
ARE FUNNY AND HOW MUCH JUDGES SEEM TO
LIKE THEM 3O PERHAPS ) SHOULD TRY TO DO THE
SAME THINGv )T WONT WORK
>H[JO6\[
-J]SY VIRSXWYVIXLEX
]SYVNSOIMWJYRR]
HSR XWE]MX
+EEP THE JOKES CLEAN -OST JUDGES WONT BE RECEPTIVE TO INAPPROPRI
ATE OR OFFENSIVE HUMOR ! CRUDE REMARK WILL STAND OUT IN YOUR JUDGES
MINDSFOR THE WRONG REASON
-AKE SURE THE HUMOR APPLIES TO THE DEBATE 9OUR HUMOR WILL BE MORE
WARMLY ACCEPTED IF IT ILLUSTRATES AN IDEA THATS PART OF THE ROUND ! WIT
TY ANALOGY FOR INSTANCE CAN BE A VERY USEFUL REFUTATION TOOL )SOLATED
JOKES MEANT PURELY FOR THE SAKE OF BEING FUNNY WONT HELP YOU MUCH
4HE INFORMATION IN THIS CHAPTER PARTICULARLY DElNING THE RESOLUTION
AND PLAYING YOUR ROLE SHOULD SERVE AS A FOUNDATION FOR YOU AS WE MOVE
INTO THE SECTIONS ON MAKING ARGUMENTS AND COUNTER
ARGUMENTS
Review Copy
Copyright 2006 Gravitas Publishing
4ALK THE 4ALK
#HAPTER +EYS TO 3UCCESS
D4HE lRST OBJECTIVE IN A DEBATE IS TO PROVE THAT YOURE RIGHT
9OU ACCOMPLISH THIS GOAL BY DEVELOPING CONSTRUCTIVE ARGUMENTS
7HEN THE OTHER SIDE CLASHES WITH YOUR CONSTRUCTIVE ARGUMENTS
YOUR TASK IS TO DEFEND THEM
4HE SECOND OBJECTIVE IN A DEBATE IS TO PROVE THAT THE OTHER
TEAM IS WRONG 9OU ACCOMPLISH THIS GOAL THROUGH REFUTATION OF
ITS ARGUMENTS 3PECIlCALLY YOUR TASK IS TO CLASH WITH EVERY RELE
VANT POINT MADE BY YOUR OPPONENT AND TO EXPLAIN WHY ITS OVERALL
CASE IS INCORRECT
3TART THE DEBATE ROUND WITH A CLEAR AND FAIR DElNITION $El
NITIONS SHOULD BE USED TO FOCUS THE DEBATE ON A PARTICULAR AREA
OR TO CLARIFY AMBIGUOUS TERMS !VOID UNFAIR DElNITIONS THAT LEAVE
THE .EGATIVE TEAM WITH LIMITED ROOM TO DEBATE !S THE .EGATIVE
SIDE ONLY CONTEST A DElNITION IN THE RAREST OF CASES
0LAY YOUR ROLE IN THE DEBATE )TS IMPORTANT TO KNOW WHEN YOU
SHOULD BE CONSTRUCTING YOUR TEAMS CASE AND WHEN YOU SHOULD
BE REFUTING THE OTHER TEAMS CASE !LSO BE AWARE OF THE WAYS IN
WHICH A REBUTTAL SPEAKER HAS DIFFERENT RESPONSIBILITIES THAN A
CONSTRUCTIVE SPEAKER
5SE A mOW SHEET TO KEEP TRACK OF ARGUMENTS 7RITE DOWN IN
COLUMNS THE ARGUMENTS AND COUNTER
ARGUMENTS MADE BY EACH
SPEAKER 4HEN USE THIS VISUALIZATION OF THE DEBATE TO PLAN YOUR
TEAMS STRATEGY AND TO HELP YOU WHEN ITS YOUR TURN TO SPEAK
D0RACTICE SOUND TEAMWORK SKILLS 4HINK VERY CAREFULLY ABOUT
WHOM YOU WANT AS A PARTNER AS STRONG TEAMWORK AND WELL
MATCHED STYLES ARE IMPORTANT 4REAT DEBATE COMPETITION AS A
TEAM EXERCISE THAT REQUIRES YOU TO WORK WITH YOUR PARTNER
h+EEP IT 3WEET AND 3IMPLEv &OLLOWING THE h+)33v PRINCIPLE
WILL INCREASE YOUR EFFECTIVENESS AS A DEBATER !VOID UNNECESSARY
COMPLEXITY SO THAT ITS EASIER FOR YOUR JUDGES TO GRASP THE POINTS
THAT YOURE TRYING TO COMMUNICATE
Review Copy
Copyright 2006 Gravitas Publishing
.UTS AND "OLTS "UILDING "LOCKS OF $EBATE
0RACTICE GOOD ETIQUETTE 7HETHER BEFORE DURING OR AFTER A
DEBATE ITS ESSENTIAL THAT YOURE RESPECTFUL TO YOUR COMPETITORS
AND TO YOUR JUDGES
3TAND WHERE YOU CAN BE MOST ENGAGING )F THE ROOM SETUP
ALLOWS CAPTURE THE CENTER GIVE YOURSELF ENOUGH ROOM TO MOVE
AROUND AND DONT LET THE STAND BE A BARRIER
Review Copy
Copyright 2006 Gravitas Publishing
Review Copy
Copyright 2006 Gravitas Publishing
*/(7;,9
4VSWERH'SRW
7SPMH4SMRXWERH4S[IVJYP'EWIW
#OMING 5P
4HE HEART OF TOP
NOTCH DEBATE IS A GREAT CASE BY BOTH TEAMS )N THIS
SECTION YOULL LEARN HOW TO ENGINEER STRONG INTELLIGENT ARGUMENTS
CENTERED AROUND COMPELLING THEMES 9OULL ALSO SEE HOW TO PRESENT
YOUR POINTS IN A WAY THAT LEAVES YOUR JUDGES IMPRESSED AND YOUR RIVALS
FACING AN UPHILL BATTLE
Review Copy
Copyright 2006 Gravitas Publishing
4ALK THE 4ALK
&9-0(-2+%'%7)*6318,)+6392(94
4HE FOUNDATION OF A lRST
RATE PERFORMANCE IS A STRONG CASE ! CASE IS A
COLLECTION OF INDIVIDUAL ARGUMENTS THAT PUSH FOR OR AGAINST THE RESOLU
TION 9OUR TEAM IS RESPONSIBLE FOR PRESENTING A CASE THAT ARTICULATES
YOUR SIDE OF THE ISSUE CLEARLY AND EFFECTIVELY 7HAT ARE THE INGREDIENTS
OF A CASE THATS TOUGH ENOUGH TO WITHSTAND ATTACK
#ONSISTENT 4HE ARGUMENTS YOU PRESENT MUST lT WELL WITH ONE ANOTH
ER 4HE NEED FOR CONSISTENCY APPLIES BOTH WITHIN YOUR SPEECH AND
BETWEEN YOU AND YOUR PARTNER 7ITHOUT THIS COHERENCY YOUR CASE WILL
BE EASY TO REFUTE AND HARD TO DEFEND
)F THE ARGUMENTS ARE INDEPENDENTEACH ONE STANDING ALONE HELPS
BUILD YOUR CASETHEY MUST NEVER BE CONTRADICTORY 3AY THAT YOUR PART
NER ARGUES h%CONOMIC GLOBALIZATION IS GOOD BECAUSE OF THE BENElTS
ASSOCIATED WITH GREATER INTERNATIONAL TRADEv 4HEN YOU STAND UP AND
PRESENT THE ARGUMENT h)NFORMATION GLOBALIZATION IS GOOD BECAUSE THE
SPREAD OF KNOWLEDGE ALLOWS COUNTRIES TO PRODUCE MORE LOCALLY MAK
ING THEM LESS DEPENDENT ON FOREIGN IMPORTSv 4HESE TWO INDEPENDENT
ARGUMENTS ARE INCONSISTENT
)F HOWEVER THE ARGUMENTS ARE INTERDEPENDENTTHEYRE LINKED AND
SUPPORT EACH OTHERTHE RELATIONSHIP MUST MAKE SENSE &OR EXAMPLE
IF YOU TALK ABOUT THE hSHORTAGE OF DOCTORS IN DEVELOPING COUNTRIESv AND
PROCEED TO CALL FOR hSENDING MORE MEDICAL EQUIPMENT TO SOLVE THIS
PROBLEM v YOU HAVE A CONSISTENCY PROBLEM 7HAT GOOD IS MORE MEDICAL
EQUIPMENT IF THERE ARENT ENOUGH DOCTORS TO USE THE EQUIPMENT
%XPLAINED )T ISNT ENOUGH SIMPLY TO STATE STRONG FOCUSED POINTS 9OU
HAVE TO EXPLAIN COMPLETELY WHY THEYRE CORRECT 3AY YOURE THE !FlRMA
TIVE TEAM AND YOURE DEBATING ON THE RESOLUTION h"E IT RESOLVED THAT
THE ENTERTAINMENT MEDIA HAS A NEGATIVE INmUENCEv /NE OF YOUR ARGU
MENTS IS h-ANY CHILDREN COMMIT VIOLENT ACTS BECAUSE OF WHAT THEY
SEE ON TELEVISIONv $ONT STOP THERE 7HY IS TELEVISION THE CAUSE (OW
SEVERE IS THE PROBLEM )S THE PROBLEM WIDESPREAD OR ARE WE TALKING
ABOUT A SMALL NUMBER OF SHOWS $O THE HARMFUL SHOWS OVERSHADOW
THE POSITIVE ONES !LWAYS LEAVE YOUR AUDIENCE WITH A COMPLETE SENSE
OF WHAT EACH ARGUMENT MEANS
3UPPORTED )F YOUR EXPLANATION ISNT ENOUGH TO MAKE AN ARGUMENT
CONVINCING YOU MAY NEED TO DRAW ON EVIDENCE TO SUPPORT YOUR CLAIM
Review Copy
Copyright 2006 Gravitas Publishing
0ROS AND #ONS 3OLID 0OINTS AND 0OWERFUL #ASES
3AY THAT IN ARGUING POST SECONDARY EDUCATION SHOULD BE FREE YOU TALK
ABOUT HOW hMANY PEOPLE CANT ACCESS IT BECAUSE THEY DONT HAVE ENOUGH
MONEYv 2EALLY (OW MANY PEOPLE ARE YOU REFERRING TO 7HAT PROOF DO
YOU HAVE THAT MAKING IT FREE FOR EVERYONE IS EVEN NECESSARY WHEN THE
GOVERNMENT COULD SIMPLY INCREASE GRANTS AND LOANS !S DISCUSSED IN
#HAPTER BE SURE TO USE CREDIBLE SOURCES AND STRONG EXAMPLES
/RGANIZED (OW YOU LAY OUT YOUR CASE IS EXTREMELY IMPORTANT $ONT
JUST RANDOMLY STATE ARGUMENT AFTER ARGUMENT 4HINK ABOUT HOW TO
SPLIT THE ARGUMENTS BETWEEN SPEECHES AND HOW TO ORGANIZE THEM WITHIN
A SPEECH ! WELL ORGANIZED CASE IS EASY TO FOLLOW WHICH ALSO MAKES IT
EASIER TO SECURE THE AGREEMENT OF YOUR JUDGES
4HERE ARE MANY DIFFERENT WAYS TO ORGANIZE YOUR POINTS AND THE
METHOD YOU SHOULD SELECT DEPENDS ON THE RESOLUTION 2EFER BACK TO
#HAPTER FOR A DISCUSSION OF THE MORE COMMON STRUCTURES /NE POS
SIBLE WAY IS TO START WITH THE NEED AND THEN TO DESCRIBE THE SOLUTION
&OR EXAMPLE YOU COULD START BY EXPLAINING WHY ENVIRONMENTAL POL
LUTION IS A GROWING PROBLEM AND YOU COULD CONTINUE BY PRESENTING A
NUMBER OF INITIATIVES /R PERHAPS IT MAKES SENSE TO ORGANIZE YOUR CASE
BY THEMES &OR EXAMPLE YOU COULD TALK ABOUT THE SECURITY REASONS FOR
ENGAGING IN A WAR AND YOUR PARTNER COULD TALK ABOUT THE HUMAN RIGHTS
REASONS 7HILE THERES NO @RIGHT WAY TO ORGANIZE A DEBATE CASE THINK
CAREFULLY ABOUT HOW TO MAKE IT LOGICAL AND EASY TO FOLLOW
#OMPLETE -AKE SURE THAT YOU COVER THE KEY ANGLES OF AN ISSUE TO THE
EXTENT THAT THE DElNITION REQUIRES )F YOURE ARGUING THAT THE GOVERN
MENT SHOULD SUBSIDIZE COMMUNITY LEAGUE SPORTS YOU COULD ARGUE THAT
THE PRIMARY REASON IS TO IMPROVE HEALTH AND WELLNESS "UT WHAT ABOUT
THE POSITIVE IMPACT ON THE COMMUNITY 7HILE YOU COULD MAKE A GREAT
CASE ON THE HEALTHY LIFESTYLE ISSUE ALONE YOUR CASE WOULD BE STRONGER
IF YOU COVERED SEVERAL KEY ADVANTAGES (OWEVER A WORD OF CAUTION
DONT COVER EVERY ANGLE AT THE EXPENSE OF DEPTH -AKE SURE THAT YOU
HAVE ENOUGH TIME TO COVER EVERY KEY AREA OF YOUR CASE WITH SUFlCIENT
LOGIC AND SOUND EXPLANATIONS
2ELEVANT 3EEMS COMMON SENSE RIGHT 9OU WOULD BE SURPRISED AT HOW
OFTEN INTELLIGENT PEOPLE MAKE INTELLIGENT ARGUMENTS THAT DONT GET TO
THE HEART OF THE ISSUE 3AY YOURE ARGUING THAT 3UPREME #OURT JUDGES
SHOULD BE ELECTED /NE OF YOUR POINTS COULD BE THAT THE COURT IS DEEPLY
DIVIDED ON SEVERAL KEY ISSUES AND THAT A SHAKEUP OF THE SYSTEM IS IN
Review Copy
Copyright 2006 Gravitas Publishing
4ALK THE 4ALK
ORDER "UT WOULD ELECTING THE JUDGES ACTUALLY CHANGE THAT )S IT EVEN
RELEVANT TO THE COMPETING PRINCIPLES THAT ARE AT THE CORE OF THE DEBATE
-AKE SURE THAT ALL OF YOUR POINTS SUPPORT YOUR CASE DIRECTLY
8,)6-+,8%2+0)7 %2%0=>-2+8,)-779)
7ELL SOON GET INTO THE SPECIlC TYPES OF ARGUMENTS THAT YOU CAN USE TO
SUPPORT YOUR CASE &IRST ITS IMPORTANT TO UNDERSTAND HOW TO GO ABOUT
ANALYZING AN ISSUE 7HILE THERES NO @ONE SIZE lTS ALL FRAMEWORK FOR
THIS ENDEAVOR THERE ARE lVE KEY AREAS TO LOOK AT WHEN LEARNING ABOUT
A TOPIC 0OLITICAL %CONOMIC 3OCIAL #ULTURAL AND -ORAL
0OLITICAL 4HINK ABOUT ISSUES IN TERMS OF HOW THEY PLAY OUT IN THE PUBLIC
ARENA 7HAT ARE THE IMPLICATIONS FOR DIPLOMATIC OR SECURITY RELATIONS
BETWEEN STATES 7HAT DOES THE STATE OF THE NATIONAL POLITICAL DYNAMIC
MEAN FOR SOCIETY
%CONOMIC 4HIS ANGLE OF ANALYSIS DEALS WITH MATERIAL WELL
BEING 3OME
OF THE RELEVANT ISSUES INCLUDE TRADE UNEMPLOYMENT STANDARD OF LIVING
TAXES INVESTMENT AND SUBSIDIES
3OCIAL %XAMINE THE IMPACT OF THE ISSUE ON RELATIONS BETWEEN PEOPLE
IN SOCIETY 3PECIlCALLY WHAT ARE THE MAIN IMPLICATIONS FOR FAMILIES
SCHOOLS WORKPLACES AND COMMUNITIES
#ULTURAL 4HIS AREA OF ANALYSIS RELATES TO A SOCIETYS SENSE OF IDENTITY
AND CHARACTER 3OME OF THE KEY AREAS INCLUDE THE ARTS MEDIA LANGUAG
ES AND MULTICULTURALISM
-ORAL !N ANALYSIS OF THE ISSUES MORAL DIMENSIONS INVOLVES @RIGHT VS
WRONG QUESTIONS &OR EXAMPLE IS IT ETHICAL TO LIE ABOUT A MEDICAL CON
DITION IN ORDER TO PREVENT FEAR /R WOULD IT BE MORALLY ACCEPTABLE FOR A
DOCTOR TO REMOVE A DYING PATIENTS LIFE SUPPORT SYSTEM
%8,)1)837)88,)7')2)
$EBATES WITH SCATTERED DISORDERLY ARGUMENTS LACK A SENSE OF DIREC
TION 'RANTED THE DElNITION SHOULD DO A FAIRLY GOOD JOB OF MAKING THE
SCOPE OF THE DEBATE CLEAR "UT YOU NEED TO GO A STEP FURTHER IN ORDER TO
Review Copy
Copyright 2006 Gravitas Publishing
0ROS AND #ONS 3OLID 0OINTS AND 0OWERFUL #ASES
HAVE A WELL
FOCUSED ROUND 9OUR TEAM NEEDS TO HAVE AN OVERALL THEME
THAT UNIlES THE ENTIRE CASE 3OMETIMES IT MAY MAKE SENSE TO HAVE
TWO THEMES AS LONG AS ITS NECESSARY AND THEY lT WELL TOGETHER
7HAT IS A THEME
! THEME SIMPLY PUT IS AN @UMBRELLA STATE
MENT OF WHAT YOUR CASE IS ABOUTWHAT
YOURE SETTING OUT TO ACCOMPLISH AND WHY IT
MATTERS 'OOD THEMES ARE SHORT AND EASY TO
REMEMBER %VEN IF THE JUDGES FORGET SOME
OF YOUR MORE SPECIlC ARGUMENTS EXPLANA
TIONS AND EVIDENCE THEY SHOULD ALWAYS
REMEMBER YOUR THEME
:\JJLZZ;PW
*SGYW]SYVEVKYQIRXW
EVSYRHGSVIXLIQIW
(OW DO YOU USE IT
5SED EFFECTIVELY A THEME CAN BE A POWERFUL COMMUNICATION TOOL THAT
MAKES YOUR CASE SEEM CONNECTED AND FOCUSED 4HE REAL VALUE COMES
NOT IN STATING THE THEME OVER AND OVER AGAIN BUT IN APPLYING THE THEME
TO DISTINCT PARTS OF YOUR CASE (ERE ARE SOME OF THE TIMES WHEN USING
YOUR THEME MAY BE HELPFUL
.EAR THE BEGINNING OF THE lRST SPEECH $ONT MAKE YOUR THEME A MYS
TERY TO BE DISCOVERED AS THE DEBATE PROGRESSES ! GOOD PLACE TO INTRO
DUCE YOUR THEME AS THE !FlRMATIVE IS RIGHT AFTER YOUVE DElNED THE
TERMS OR IF YOURE THE .EGATIVE AT THE START OF YOUR lRST SPEECH 3TATE
IT CLEARLY AND COMPLETELY AT THIS POINT LETTING EVERYONE KNOW EXACTLY
WHERE YOULL BE GOING WITH YOUR CASE &OR EXAMPLE YOU COULD SAY h4HE
CENTRAL THEME OF THE !FlRMATIVES CASE IS THAT ON BALANCE TELEVISION
ADVERTISEMENTS OBSCURE OUR ABILITY TO MAKE SOUND RATIONAL DECISIONS
ABOUT THE PHARMACEUTICAL PRODUCTS WE BUYv
!T THE END OF A CONSTRUCTIVE POINT #ONCLUDING EACH POINT BY REPEATING
THE MAIN ARGUMENT ISNT VERY INTERESTING !ND RESTATING YOUR THEME
REPEATEDLY WILL BORE THE AUDIENCE AFTER A WHILE 7HAT YOU SHOULD CON
SIDER DOING IS EXPLAINING BRIEmY HOW THE POINT TIES BACK TO AND SUP
PORTS YOUR CENTRAL THEME 4HIS WAY YOUVE REMINDED EVERYONE OF THE
THEME IN THE CONTEXT OF A SPECIlC POINT &OR EXAMPLE YOU COULD ARGUE
h4HIS SECOND POINT ABOUT THE TOOLS THAT COMPANIES USE TO APPEAL TO
Review Copy
Copyright 2006 Gravitas Publishing
4ALK THE 4ALK
OUR INSTINCTS SHOWS HOW ADVERTISING MAKES IT HARDER FOR US TO MAKE
SENSIBLE MEDICAL DECISIONSv
!T THE END OF A CONSTRUCTIVE SPEECH 4YING YOUR SPEECH TOGETHER BY
ADDRESSING HOW YOUVE PROVEN YOUR THEME CAN BE AN EFFECTIVE STRAT
EGY "UT MAKE SURE YOU DO SO CONCISELY ESPECIALLY IF YOUVE USED YOUR
THEME AT THE END OF EACH CONSTRUCTIVE POINT &OR EXAMPLE YOU COULD
CONCLUDE YOUR SPEECH BY SAYING h-Y lRST ARGUMENT ABOUT HUMAN
PSYCHOLOGY AND MY SECOND ARGUMENT ABOUT ADVERTISING TECHNIQUES
COLLECTIVELY PROVE THAT TELEVISION ADVERTISING OF DRUGS HAS A NEGATIVE
INmUENCE ON CONSUMER BUYING HABITSv
!S A CENTRAL FOCUS OF THE REBUTTAL 3INCE THE REBUTTAL IS SUPPOSED TO
FOCUS ON THE COMPETING THEMES OF THE DEBATE IT ONLY MAKES SENSE TO
SAY HOW YOUVE ARGUED YOUR THEME EFFECTIVELY AND HOW THAT MAKES
YOUR CASE SUPERIOR TO YOUR OPPONENTS CASE 9OU COULD EXPLAIN FOR
INSTANCE h4ODAY WEVE DEMONSTRATED THAT OUR THEME NAMELY THAT
ADVERTISING GETS IN THE WAY OF MAKING SOUND RATIONAL DRUG PURCHAS
ING DECISIONS HAS PREVAILED OVER OUR OPPONENTS THEME OF INFORMING
CONSUMERS ON AVAILABLE TREATMENT OPTIONSv
)2+-2))6-2+,-+,4)6*361%2')43-287
)F A THEME IS THE FOUNDATION AND FRAME OF A
>H[JO6\[
DEBATE ARGUMENTS ARE THE BRICKS AND MOR
TAR 4HE STRENGTH OF YOUR TEAMS ARGUMENTS
%ZSMHEVKYQIRXWXLEX
WILL MAKE OR BREAK YOUR CASE 7ITHOUT
EVI[MHIP]EGGITXIHSV
STRONG ARGUMENTS YOU CANT SUPPORT YOUR
YRGSRXIWXEFPI
THEME EFFECTIVELY )F YOUR CONTENTIONS ARE
WEAK ITS TOUGH TO EXPLAIN THE LOGIC BEHIND
THEM AND THE EVIDENCE SUPPORTING THEM
4HERE ARE MANY ANGLES THAT YOU CAN TAKE WHEN DEVELOPING ARGUMENTS
$ISCUSSED IN THIS SECTION ARE SOME OF THE AREAS TO CONSIDER GROUPED
INTO FOUR CATEGORIES *USTIlCATION 3YSTEMS 0ERCEPTION AND "EHAVIOR
!RGUMENTS ON *USTIlCATION
,EGITIMACY !N ARGUMENT CAN BE BASED ON WHETHER ONE PRACTICE LEGITI
MIZES ANOTHER PRACTICE 5SUALLY A PARALLEL CAN BE DRAWN BETWEEN DIF
FERENT CIRCUMSTANCES )N A DEBATE ON THE WHETHER PARENTS HAVE A RIGHT
Review Copy
Copyright 2006 Gravitas Publishing
0ROS AND #ONS 3OLID 0OINTS AND 0OWERFUL #ASES
TO SPANK THEIR CHILDREN YOU COULD ARGUE h!LLOWING SPANKING PROVIDES
A SENSE OF LEGITIMACY TO OTHER FORMS OF VIOLENCE THAT COULD ALSO BE USED
TO DISCIPLINE YOUNG CHILDRENv
-ORALITY )SSUES OF MORALITY CONSIDER WHETHER A PRACTICE IS @RIGHT OR
@WRONG FROM A VALUES PERSPECTIVE 3INCE SUCH JUDGMENTS ARE PERSONAL
IN NATURE MAKING AN ARGUMENT ON MORAL GROUNDS CAN BE CHALLENGING
"UT APPEALING SUCCESSFULLY TO A COMMON BELIEF AND EXPLAINING WHY ITS
A WORTHWHILE VALUE MAY STRENGTHEN YOUR CASE /N THE ISSUE OF FOREIGN
AID YOU COULD ARGUE h)NCREASING OUR MONETARY COMMITMENT TO INTER
NATIONAL DEVELOPMENT IS THE RIGHT THING TO DO BECAUSE IT ADVANCES OUR
SOCIETYS CONCEPT OF UNIVERSAL HUMAN DIGNITYv
#ONSISTENCY )F A PRACTICE RELATED TO THE ISSUE HAS BEEN lRMLY ESTAB
LISHED YOU CAN ARGUE THAT THAT YOUR VIEW IS A JUSTIlED EXTENSION OF THIS
CIRCUMSTANCE 3AY YOURE ARGUING THAT !MERICAN CITIZENS BORN ABROAD
SHOULD BE ALLOWED TO RUN FOR 0RESIDENT 9OU COULD ARGUE h/UR DEMO
CRATIC SYSTEM TRUSTS FOREIGN BORN !MERICANS WITH IMPORTANT HIGH
RESPONSIBILITY POSITIONS SUCH AS 'OVERNOR OF #ALIFORNIA AND SENSITIVE
NATIONAL SECURITY ROLES SUCH AS 3ECRETARY OF 3TATE !LLOWING THEM TO
RUN FOR 0RESIDENT WOULD BE CONSISTENT WITH THESE PRINCIPLESv
2EMEDIES )F AN INJUSTICE HAS OCCURRED IN THE PAST YOU CAN ARGUE THAT
THE VICTIMS ARE JUSTIlED IN DEMANDING COMPENSATION OR ANOTHER REM
EDY &OR EXAMPLE YOU COULD SAY h2ESERVING A SET NUMBER OF PLACES IN
MEDICAL SCHOOLS FOR STUDENTS OF ABORIGINAL ANCESTRY IS JUSTIlED BECAUSE
ABORIGINAL PEOPLES WERE DENIED A FAIR OPPORTUNITY IN THE PASTv
2IGHTS 9OU CAN JUSTIFY A PRINCIPLE ON THE GROUNDS THAT ITS A FUNDAMEN
TAL RIGHT OR FREEDOM 4HE CRUX OF SUCH AN ARGUMENT IS THAT THE RIGHT AT
STAKE IS TOO IMPORTANT TO BE TAKEN AWAY SIMPLY BECAUSE OF A PARTICULAR
CIRCUMSTANCE )TS HELPFUL TO EXPLAIN WHY LIMITING THE FREEDOM IS HARM
FUL )N A DEBATE ON RESTRICTING HATE SPEECH YOU COULD SAY h4HE RIGHT
TO SPEAK FREELY IS UNDENIABLE EVEN IF ITS USED IN A WAY THATS MORALLY
OBJECTIONABLE 7E SHOULDNT BE TRYING TO DRAW AN ARBITRARY @LINE IN THE
SAND WHEN IT COMES TO THIS CORNERSTONE PRINCIPLE OF A FREE SOCIETYv
.ORMS 9OUR POINT CAN APPEAL TO ONES SENSE OF WHATS CONSIDERED
NORMAL OR COMMONPLACE "UT DONT FORGET THAT A NORM TO ONE PERSON
MAY NOT BE A NORM TO ANOTHER /NLY USE THIS TOOL IF VIRTUALLY EVERY
Review Copy
Copyright 2006 Gravitas Publishing
4ALK THE 4ALK
ONE IN SOCIETY ACCEPTS THE NORM THAT YOURE THINKING OF EVOKING &OR
EXAMPLE YOU COULD CLAIM h4HIS PRACTICE INFRINGES ON THE PARENT
CHILD
BOND WHICH IS THE MOST FUNDAMENTAL RELATIONSHIP IN OUR SOCIETYv
(ISTORICAL #ITING HISTORICAL REASONS CAN HELP YOU JUSTIFY EITHER UPHOLD
ING OR REJECTING A CURRENT PRACTICE 5SING HISTORY AS AN ARGUMENT TO
MAINTAIN A CURRENT PRACTICE CAN BE RISKY AS IT BEGS THE REACTION h4HAT
WAS IN THE PAST 4HIS DEBATE IS ABOUT WHATS JUSTIlED IN THE PRESENTv
-ORE OFTEN A TEAM WILL ARGUE THAT A HISTORICAL REASON IS NO LONGER
SUFlCIENT JUSTIlCATION &OR EXAMPLE YOU COULD ARGUE h-ANY OF THE
HISTORICAL REASONS FOR PROTECTING A CITIZENS UNRESTRICTED RIGHT TO BEAR
ARMS DONT EXIST TODAY 7E NOW HAVE WELL
ESTABLISHED POLICE FORCES TO
PROTECT EVERYONE IN SOCIETY SO ITS NO LONGER APPROPRIATE FOR CITIZENS TO
TAKE THE LAW INTO THEIR OWN HANDSv
0RECEDENT 9OU CAN ARGUE THAT A CERTAIN PRACTICE SETS A PRECEDENT FOR
FUTURE ACTIONS !LTHOUGH SOMETIMES THERE IS A POSITIVE PRECEDENT A
DANGEROUS @SLIPPERY SLOPE PRECEDENT IS THE TYPE MOST OFTEN CITED IN
DEBATES &OR EXAMPLE ONE COULD ARGUE h#ENSORING SCHOOL LIBRARY BOOKS
SETS A DANGEROUS PRECEDENT FOR ACADEMIC AND LITERARY FREEDOM 4HE
LOGIC USED TO JUSTIFY CENSORING LIBRARY BOOKS CAN ALSO BE USED TO JUS
TIFY CENSORING NEWSPAPERS TEXTBOOKS AND OTHER INFORMATION SOURCES
READILY AVAILABLE WITHIN THE WALLS OF A SCHOOLv
!RGUMENTS ON 3YSTEMS
%NFORCEABILITY )TS ALL lNE AND WELL THAT A SYSTEM IS BRILLIANT IN THEO
RY "UT IF IT CANT BE ENFORCED FAIRLY AND EFFECTIVELY YOU CAN MAKE AN
ARGUMENT RELATING TO THIS PROBLEM 3AY THE DEBATE IS ON WHETHER THERE
SHOULD BE A LAW AGAINST PARENTS SMOKING AT HOME IN THE PRESENCE OF
THEIR CHILDREN 9OU COULD ARGUE h4HE SHEER DIFlCULTY OF ENFORCING SUCH
A LAW MAKES IT UNWORKABLE AND WEAKv
%FFECTIVENESS %VEN IF A SYSTEM HAS WORTHY GOALS IT MAY NOT BE EFFECTIVE
AT MEETING ITS GOALS 9OU CAN ARGUE FOR OR AGAINST A SYSTEM BASED ON
HOW WELL IT CARRIES OUT ITS STATED MANDATE 3AY YOURE MAKING THE CASE
FOR TRADE SANCTIONS AGAINST A DICTATORSHIP THATS ABUSING THE HUMAN
RIGHTS OF ITS CITIZENS /NE OF YOUR ARGUMENTS COULD BE h$IPLOMATIC
SANCTIONS AND 5NITED .ATIONS RESOLUTIONS HAVE PROVEN INEFFECTIVE
SO WE NEED TO TAKE A HARDER LINEv /N THE OTHER HAND YOUR OPPONENT
Review Copy
Copyright 2006 Gravitas Publishing
0ROS AND #ONS 3OLID 0OINTS AND 0OWERFUL #ASES
COULD ARGUE h)MPOSING TRADE SANCTIONS WOULDNT BE AN EFFECTIVE SOLU
TION BECAUSE IT WOULDNT WEAKEN THE GRIP OF THE COUNTRYS LEADERSHIP
ON THE MILITARY AND POLICE FORCESv
&EASIBILITY ! PROPOSAL IS WORTHY OF PRAISE ONLY TO THE EXTENT THAT ITS
PRACTICAL TO IMPLEMENT 9OU CAN MAKE AN ARGUMENT SUPPORTING OR
OPPOSING A SYSTEM ON THE BASIS OF ITS FEASIBILITY )F YOURE DEBATING THE
ISSUE OF )NTERNET REGULATION YOU COULD SAY h4HE PROBLEM WITH TRYING
TO FORM A GLOBAL )NTERNET @WATCHDOG IS THAT ITS EXCESSIVE COSTS AND
BUREAUCRATIC HURDLES WOULD OVERSHADOW ANY POTENTIAL BENElTSv
!BUSES %VEN IF A SYSTEM HAS WORTHY GOALS AND IS EASY TO OPERATE YOU
CAN ARGUE AGAINST IT ON THE GROUNDS THAT ITS PRONE TO ABUSES 4AKE A
DEBATE ON THE RIGHT OF PRISONERS TO COMMUNICATE PRIVATELY WITH THE
OUTSIDE WORLD ! POSSIBLE ARGUMENT IS h'RANTING THIS RIGHT LEAVES THE
DOOR OPEN TO ABUSES SUCH AS PRISONERS CONDUCTING CRIMINAL ACTIVITIES
THROUGH UNFETTERED COMMUNICATION WITH THEIR ASSOCIATESv
2ESULTS /NE OF THE MOST COMMON WAYS TO JUDGE A SYSTEM IS TO EVALU
ATE ITS OUTCOMES EITHER POSITIVE OR NEGATIVE 4HESE BENElTS OR HARMS
CAN RELATE TO ONE OR MORE OF A VARIETY OF GROUPS SUCH AS FAMILIES COM
MUNITIES COMPANIES COUNTRIES OR THE WORLD &OR EXAMPLE YOU COULD
ARGUE h!S A RESULT OF INSUFlCIENT ENVIRONMENTAL REGULATIONS ON FACTO
RIES THE UNACCEPTABLY HIGH LEVEL OF URBAN SMOG POLLUTION IS NEGATIVELY
IMPACTING HUMAN HEALTHv
!RGUMENTS ON 0ERCEPTION
)MAGE 9OU CAN MAKE AN ARGUMENT RELATING TO THE REPUTATION OF A PER
SON OR GROUP 4O STRENGTHEN THIS TYPE OF POINT EXPLAIN WHY HAVING A
GOOD IMAGE ACTUALLY MATTERS )N A DEBATE ON SCHOOL DISCIPLINE POLICY
ONE COULD ARGUE h! ZERO
TOLERANCE POLICY WOULD IMPROVE THE REPUTA
TION OF THE CITYS PUBLIC SCHOOLS IN THE EYES OF PARENTS 4HIS WOULD LEAD
TO GREATER TRUST AND A MORE COOPERATIVE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN PARENTS
AND SCHOOL ADMINISTRATORSv
3IGNALS !N ARGUMENT CAN BE BASED ON THE SIGNAL THAT AN ACTIVITY OR
CIRCUMSTANCE SENDS TO OTHER PEOPLE )TS HELPFUL TO TAKE THIS TYPE OF
POINT A STEP FURTHER EXPLAINING HOW THE SIGNAL HAS EITHER A POSITIVE OR A
NEGATIVE IMPACT ON SOCIETY !N EXAMPLE OF THIS TECHNIQUE IS h!LLOWING
Review Copy
Copyright 2006 Gravitas Publishing
4ALK THE 4ALK
PRISONERS TO VOTE IN NATIONAL ELECTIONS SENDS THE MESSAGE THAT THEYRE
A FULL PART OF OUR DEMOCRATIC SYSTEM WHICH WOULD LEAD MANY PEOPLE
TO QUESTION THE INTEGRITY OF THE ELECTORAL SYSTEMv
!TTITUDES ! POLICY OR SITUATION CAN IMPACT HOW PEOPLE THINK ABOUT AN
ISSUE AND WHAT PEOPLE THINK CAN IMPACT WHAT THEY DO 3AY THE DEBATE
IS ON THE MERITS OF GRADUATED MULTI
STAGE DRIVER LICENSING /NE SIDE
COULD ARGUE h!DDING STEPS TO THE PROCESS WOULD HELP DISPEL THE CARE
FREE ATTITUDE THAT MANY TEENAGERS HAVE TOWARD DRIVING )T WOULD CAUSE
MORE YOUNG PEOPLE TO RECOGNIZE THAT DRIVING IS A DANGEROUS ACTIVITY
REQUIRING RESPONSIBLE BEHAVIORv
#ULTURE !N ARGUMENT ON CULTURE IS SIMILAR TO ONE ON ATTITUDES EXCEPT
THAT IT DEALS WITH THE OVERALL MOOD RATHER THAN WHAT A SEGMENT OF THE
POPULATION THINKS ABOUT AN ISSUE &OR EXAMPLE YOU COULD SAY h-ODERN
MAGAZINES PAINT A HARMFUL STEREOTYPE OF THE @PERFECT BODY IMAGE 4HIS
CREATES AN UNFAVORABLE CULTURE IN WHICH TEENAGERS ARE JUDGED BY THEIR
PEERS ACCORDING TO THIS STANDARDv
!RGUMENTS ON "EHAVIOR
)NmUENCE 9OU CAN ARGUE THAT A CIRCUMSTANCE HAS A POSITIVE OR NEGA
TIVE IMPACT ON HUMAN ACTIONS 4HE GOAL HERE IS TO ESTABLISH A CAUSE
AND EFFECT LINK /NE COULD ARGUE h4HE TELEVISION ENTERTAINMENT MEDIA
HAS A NEGATIVE INmUENCE ON CHILDREN BECAUSE MUCH OF ITS PROGRAM
MING ENCOURAGES VIOLENCE IN SCHOOLYARDS AND NEIGHBORHOODSv
)NTENT ! POINT CAN BE BASED ON THE INTENT OF A PERSON OR GROUP AS IT
BEHAVES IN A CERTAIN WAY 4HIS INTENT MAY EITHER BE POSITIVE OR NEGA
TIVE )TS IMPORTANT TO EXPLAIN THE LINK BETWEEN INTENT AND RESULT &OR
EXAMPLE YOU COULD MAKE THE POINT h4OBACCO MANUFACTURERS INTENDED
TO TARGET A YOUNG AUDIENCE SO THAT THEY COULD ESTABLISH AN EARLY BASE
OF LOYAL CONSUMERS 4HIS ENDED UP INCREASING THE PERCENT OF TEENAGERS
WHO SMOKED CIGARETTESv
2OLE 0OINTS BASED ON ROLE CONSIDER WHO IS CARRYING OUT AN ACTION
9OU CAN ARGUE THAT THE PERSON OR GROUP PLAYING THE ROLE SHOULD OR
SHOULDNT BE DOING SO )F LOOKING AT AN INDIVIDUALS ROLE ONE COULD
MAKE THE POINT h)TS THE ROLE OF PARENTS NOT TEACHERS TO ENCOURAGE
STUDENTS TO EAT HEALTHY FOODSv )F ANALYZING A ROLE FROM A NON
PERSONAL
Review Copy
Copyright 2006 Gravitas Publishing
0ROS AND #ONS 3OLID 0OINTS AND 0OWERFUL #ASES
STANDPOINT YOU COULD ARGUE h!CTING AS A @GLOBAL POLICE FORCE AND STOP
PING HUMANITARIAN CRISES IS A NECESSARY ROLE FOR THE 5NITED 3TATES OF
!MERICA WHICH IS THE WORLDS ONLY SUPERPOWERv
;)%/%2(;3&&0=%6+91)287
%ACH ARGUMENT SHOULD BE A CLEAR DIRECT REASON FOR THE JUDGES TO AGREE
WITH YOUR SIDE 5NFORTUNATELY MANY DEBATERS USE INAPPROPRIATE TOOLS
TO BUILD A CASE MERITING A DISCUSSION OF THE MOST COMMON PITFALLS
#LAIMING THAT PUBLIC OPINION IS ON YOUR SIDE ! DEBATE ISNT ABOUT
WHETHER A VIEW IS POPULAR OR UNPOPULAR )TS ABOUT WHETHER A VIEW IS
RIGHT OR WRONG /F COURSE A MAJORITY OF THE PUBLIC WILL AGREE WITH ONE
SIDE OR THE OTHER )F POPULARITY COULD BE USED TO MAKE A POINT DEBATES
WOULD BE DECIDED BEFORE THEY EVEN STARTED &OR EXAMPLE DONT SAY h)N
A NATIONAL POLL OF THE PUBLIC AGREED WITH OUR PERSPECTIVEv OR h4HE
RE
ELECTION OF THE PRESENT GOVERNMENT SHOWS THAT MOST PEOPLE AGREED
WITH THE WARv 3UCH STATEMENTS DO NOTHING TO ADVANCE YOUR CASE
5SING EVIDENCE AS AN ARGUMENT 7HILE EVIDENCE SHOULD BE USED TO
SUPPORT ARGUMENTS IT SHOULDNT BE USED TO FORM ARGUMENTS %XAMPLES
AND STATISTICS PROVIDE BACKUP FOR KEY POINTS BUT THEY ARENT CONTEN
TIOUS POINTS THEMSELVES )F WHAT YOURE SAYING IS A FACT THEN IT ISNT
DEBATABLE !ND IF IT ISNT DEBATABLE THEN IT ISNT AN ARGUMENT 3TATING
h4HE !FlRMATIVES lRST ARGUMENT IS THAT THERE WERE MURDERS IN
THE CITY LAST YEAR WHICH IS UP FROM THE YEAR BEFOREv IS A PIECE OF
EVIDENCE NOT AN ARGUMENT
%VOKING A FAMOUS PERSONS VIEWS #ERTAINLY THE VIEWS OF A STATESMAN
OR A CELEBRITY MAY BE ACCEPTABLE IF THEY ADD REASONED SUBSTANTIVE SUP
PORT TO AN ARGUMENT 5NFORTUNATELY THIS TECHNIQUE IS OFTEN MISUSED
&OR EXAMPLE SOME DEBATERS WILL MAKE A STATEMENT LIKE h4HE .EGA
TIVES CASE IS CORRECT BECAUSE IN OUR PERSPECTIVE WAS ENDORSED
BY xv 3O WHAT &OR THE SAME REASON THAT PUBLIC OPINION SHOULDNT
BE EMPLOYED ENDORSEMENTS DONT HAVE A PLACE EITHER 2EMEMBER A
DEBATE IS ABOUT HOW YOU ARGUE FOR OR AGAINST THE RESOLUTION NOT WHAT
SOMEONE ELSE HAPPENS TO THINK ABOUT THE ISSUE
"ASING A POINT ON LEGALITY 3OME DEBATERS WILL USE LAWS PARTICULARLY
CONSTITUTIONS TO ARGUE THE VALIDITY OF THE PRINCIPLE BEHIND AN ARGU
Review Copy
Copyright 2006 Gravitas Publishing
4ALK THE 4ALK
MENT (OWEVER RULES AND REGULATIONS ARENT SUBSTITUTES FOR REASONED
ARGUMENTS %XCEPT IF CLEARLY STATED IN THE RESOLUTION A DEBATE ISNT
ABOUT THE LEGALITY OF A PARTICULAR PRACTICE %VEN IF A PRACTICE IS ILLEGAL
THE DEBATE COULD FOCUS ON WHETHER IT SHOULD BE ILLEGAL )TS POSSIBLE TO
MAKE PRINCIPLED ARGUMENTS FOR BOTH SIDES OF A LAW &OR EXAMPLE YOU
SHOULDNT SAY h4HE .EGATIVES SECOND ARGUMENT IS THAT 3ECTION A OF
THE NATIONAL CONSTITUTION IMPLIES THAT MEDIA CENSORSHIP IS WRONGv
3UPPORTING A PRACTICE BECAUSE ITS A CHOICE *UST BECAUSE A PRACTICE
IS AN OPTION IT DOESNT MAKE IT MORE RIGHT OR MORE WRONG 3AY YOURE
DEBATING THAT GOVERNMENTS SHOULD ALLOW PUBLIC
PRIVATE PARTNERSHIPS
FOR NATIONAL PARKS MANAGEMENT )T WOULD BE POOR FORM TO ARGUE h4HE
GOVERNMENT GETS TO CHOOSE ON A CASE BY CASE BASIS WHETHER A PARTNER
SHIP IS A GOOD IDEA )F ITS GOOD THERE WILL BE A PARTNERSHIP )F IT ISNT
THERE WONT BE A PARTNERSHIP 3INCE ITS A CHOICE OUR OPPONENTS HARMS
CANT POSSIBLY EXISTv 9OU SHOULD HAVE ARGUED THAT ON BALANCE THESE
PARTNERSHIPS ARE A GOOD IDEA NOT THAT THEY MAY BE A GOOD IDEA
"UILDING A CHAIN OF ARGUMENTS $EVELOPING POINTS AS A SERIES OF PRO
GRESSIVE REASONS EACH ARGUMENT BUILDING ON THE PREVIOUS ARGUMENT
IS A TEMPTING TACTIC )T ALLOWS YOU TO SHOW THE LOGICAL DEVELOPMENT OF
YOUR PERSPECTIVE 5NFORTUNATELY ITS OFTEN VERY RISKY )F YOU CONSTRUCT
A CHAIN OF ARGUMENTS AND YOUR OPPONENT IS ABLE TO BREAK A SINGLE
LINK IN THE CHAIN YOUR ENTIRE CASE MAY FALL APART $ONT FEEL THAT YOU
SHOULDNT EVER USE DEPENDENT ARGUMENTS BUT THINK CAREFULLY ABOUT
THIS RISK BEFORE YOU DO SO
43-287%6)&6%2(7%2(&6%2(7,%:)0%&)07
(OW DOES A COMPANY TAKE A PRODUCT WITH
:\JJLZZ;PW
MANY FEATURES AND BENElTS AND PRESENT IT
IN A WAY THATS EASY TO FOR CONSUMERS TO
;LIR]SYDFVERH ]SYV
GRASP )T CREATES A BRAND AND THEN IT LABELS
TSMRXWQEOIXLIPEFIPW
THE PRODUCT SO THAT IT INSTANTLY CATCHES YOUR
IEW]XSVIQIQFIV
EYE $EBATING POINTS SHOULD BE TREATED IN A
SIMILAR WAY 9OU MAY HAVE SPENT SEVERAL
MINUTES TALKING ABOUT THE REASONS SUPPORT
AND IMPLICATIONS CONCERNING A POINT (OW IS A JUDGE TO RECALL EXACTLY
WHAT ARGUMENT IT WAS OR WHAT IT MEANT 3IMPLE LABEL IT
Review Copy
Copyright 2006 Gravitas Publishing
0ROS AND #ONS 3OLID 0OINTS AND 0OWERFUL #ASES
3UPPOSE THAT YOUR SECOND CONSTRUCTIVE POINT EXPLAINS HOW CREATING
A NEW EDUCATION AGENCY WOULD LEAD TO MAJOR STAFlNG PROBLEMS WAST
ED RESOURCES AND COUNTLESS DELAYS 4HIS IS YOUR hMESSY BUREAUCRACYv
POINT /R SAY YOUR ARGUMENT IS THAT TELEVISION SHOWS AND MAGAZINES
HAVE CREATED UNHEALTHY AND SOCIALLY HARMFUL VIEWS OF HOW A YOUNG GIRL
SHOULD LOOK LEADING MANY TEENAGERS TO HAVE POOR EATING HABITS AND
LOW SELF
ESTEEM 4HIS IS YOUR hIMAGE STEREOTYPEv POINT .OT ONLY DOES
THIS STRATEGY MAKE IT EASIER FOR OTHERS TO DIGEST AND REMEMBER WHAT
YOUVE SAID IT ALSO MAKES IT EASIER FOR YOU TO REFER BACK TO YOUR POINTS
LATER ON IN THE DEBATE
8,)430-'=463')77
)F YOURE THE !FlRMATIVE TEAM IN A POLICY DEBATE YOU HAVE TO ESTAB
LISH WHY THERE NEEDS TO BE CHANGE AND WHAT YOU PLAN TO DO ABOUT IT )F
YOURE THE .EGATIVE TEAM YOUR CASE WILL USUALLY INCLUDE ARGUMENTS IN
FAVOR OF THE CURRENT SYSTEM
)N PRACTICE A PLAN IS A THOROUGH SET OF PROCEDURES AND RATIONALES
THAT TAKES MANY HOURS OR HUNDREDS OF PAGES TO EXPLAIN 5NFORTUNATELY
YOURE CONSIDERABLY LIMITED IN A DEBATE 9OUR CHALLENGE IS TO PRESENT A
PLAN CONCISELY WHILE COMMUNICATING THE KEY ASPECTS EFFECTIVELY (ERE
ARE SOME STRATEGIES FOR BUILDING STRONG PLANS
3TICK TO A FEW STEPS *UST AS ITS TOUGH FOR JUDGES TO DIGEST MORE THAN
A FEW ARGUMENTS ITS EQUALLY DIFlCULT TO COMPREHEND A PLAN WITH TOO
MANY STEPS 5SUALLY HAVING THREE PARTS IN YOUR PLAN IS A GOOD RULE OF
THUMB PERHAPS ONE MORE OR ONE LESS IF THE SITUATION WARRANTS )F YOUR
PLAN HAS lVE OR SIX POINTS YOURE LIKELY TO CONFUSE THE JUDGES 3TATING
ONLY ONE STEP MAKES YOUR PLAN SEEM INCOMPLETE
3TRIKE A GOOD BALANCE BETWEEN GENERAL AND SPECIlC 'RANTED THIS IS
TRICKY 9OU DONT WANT TO SPEAK IN SUCH GENERALITIES THAT NOBODY KNOWS
WHAT EXACTLY YOU WANT TO DO !T THE SAME TIME ITS NOT NECESSARY TO GET
INTO SMALL DETAILS 3AY YOURE CALLING FOR GRADUATED MULTI
STAGE DRIVER
LICENSING (ERES A COMPARISON TO ILLUSTRATE THE CONCEPT OF BALANCE
s 4OO GENERAL h7E WOULD HAVE TESTS FOR EACH STAGE OF LICENSINGv
s 4OO SPECIlC h!T 3TAGE WE WOULD IMPLEMENT A QUESTION MULTIPLE
CHOICE KNOWLEDGE TEST AND A MINUTE ROAD TEST FOCUSING ON lVE KEY
Review Copy
Copyright 2006 Gravitas Publishing
4ALK THE 4ALK
AREAS OF DRIVING PROlCIENCY )N ADDITION THE FOLLOWING SIX CONDITIONS
WOULD BE PLACED ON 3TAGE DRIVERS UNDER THE AGE OF xv
s 'OOD BALANCE h!T 3TAGE THERE WOULD BE A WRITTEN KNOWLEDGE TEST
AND A PRACTICAL ROAD TEST !T 3TAGE THERE WOULD ONLY BE A ROAD TEST
BUT IT WOULD BE MORE CHALLENGING AND MORE COMPREHENSIVE THAN THE
PREVIOUS ROAD TESTv
&IT THE PLAN WITH THE NEEDS FOR CHANGE 9OUR
:\JJLZZ;PW
PLAN SHOULD BE AN EXTENSION OF YOUR NEEDS
FOR CHANGE SOLVING DIRECTLY AND EFFECTIVELY
/IIT]SYVTPERWMQTPI
THE PROBLEMS THAT YOU BROUGHT UP -ANY
ERHIEW]XSJSPPS[
DEBATERS PRESENT PLANS THAT ARE VERY SOLID
IN THEIR OWN RIGHT BUT WITH ADVANTAGES AND
RATIONALES THAT ARE SIGNIlCANTLY DIFFERENT
THAN THE NEEDS FOR CHANGE DISCUSSED PREVI
OUSLY 7HEN YOU STATE YOUR PLAN ITS HELPFUL TO EXPLAIN EXACTLY HOW
YOUR PROPOSAL SOLVES THE PROBLEMS IN THE PRESENT SYSTEM
5SE LANGUAGE THATS EASY TO COMPREHEND 0RESENTING A PLAN SHOULDNT
BE AKIN TO PLAYING THE ROLE OF A LAWYER 9OU SHOULD AVOID USING COMPLEX
LEGALISTIC LANGUAGE THAT SOUNDS LIKE FORMAL LEGISLATION -AKE SURE THAT
YOUR JUDGES WILL BE ABLE TO UNDERSTAND YOUR PLAN EASILY AND QUICKLY
$ONT SPEND TOO MUCH TIME ON IT !LTHOUGH A PLAN IS AN IMPORTANT
PART OF POLICY DEBATE IT SHOULD RARELY BECOME THE CENTRAL FOCUS /VERLY
TECHNICAL DEBATES CENTERING ON IMPLEMENTATION ISSUES GET VERY DRY
4HE PRIMARY FOCUS SHOULD BE ON WHY THE SYSTEM NEEDS TO CHANGE AND
THE PLAN SHOULD LARGELY CLARIFY HOW IN A BROAD SENSE YOU WOULD GO
ABOUT CARRYING OUT THE CHANGES IN AN EFFECTIVE AND EFlCIENT WAY
'6-8)6-%830%=(3;28,)=%6(78-'/7
)N MOST INSTANCES THE DElNITION DOES A REASONABLY GOOD JOB OF CLEAR
ING UP WHAT THE DEBATE IS ABOUT "Y DElNING THE TERMS HOW IT CHOOSES
THE !FlRMATIVE TEAM IS EXPLAINING WHAT IT HAS TO PROVE AND TELLING THE
.EGATIVE TEAM THAT IT HAS TO SHOW THE OPPOSITE
(OWEVER A TEAM CAN SETUP CRITERIA TO EXAMINE MORE SPECIlCALLY
WHAT EACH SIDE NEEDS TO PROVE IN ORDER TO WIN 4HERE ARE TWO MAIN
GOALS THAT A TEAM MAY WANT TO ACHIEVE BY USING CRITERIA
Review Copy
Copyright 2006 Gravitas Publishing
0ROS AND #ONS 3OLID 0OINTS AND 0OWERFUL #ASES
'OAL 4O PROVIDE A @LITMUS TEST FOR THE JUDGES )N MANY VALUES
DEBATES TWO TEAMS MAY ARGUE VERY PERSUASIVELY WHY A RESOLUTION IS
TRUE OR FALSE BUT BOTH HAVE ENTIRELY DIFFERENT INTERPRETATIONS OF WHAT
NEEDS TO BE PROVEN /NE OR BOTH TEAMS MAY lND IT HELPFUL TO LAY OUT THE
CRITERIA BY WHICH THE JUDGES SHOULD DECIDE WHO WON
3UPPOSE THAT THE DEBATE IS ON THE RESOLUTION h2ESOLVED THE 5NITED
.ATIONS IS A FAILUREv 4HE !FlRMATIVE DElNES THE TOPIC AS hTHE 3ECURITY
#OUNCIL FAILING TO DELIVER INTERNATIONAL PEACE AND SECURITYv (OW DO WE
KNOW WHATS CONSIDERED A hFAILUREv 7HAT DO WE MEAN BY hPEACE AND
SECURITY v 4HE !FlRMATIVE COULD SET TWO CRITERIA SOLVING CRISES IT COULD
HAVE SOLVED AND DISCOURAGING WARS AND CIVIL CONmICTS
'OAL !S A HIGH
RISK STRATEGY TO STAKE OUT THE CORE ISSUES )DEALLY
THE DEBATE WILL CENTER AROUND YOUR PREFERRED ISSUES -OST TEAMS WILL
SAY FROM THE OUTSET WHAT THEY THINK THE DEBATE IS ABOUT AND THEYLL
PLEAD THEIR CASE AGAIN IN THE REBUTTAL SPEECH ,AYING OUT CRITERIA IS THE
MOST EXPLICIT WAY TO MARK YOUR TERRITORY (OWEVER IT ALSO PAINTS A BIG
TARGET ON YOUR BACK )F THE OTHER TEAM CAN SHOW THE JUDGES THAT YOU
HAVENT MET ALL OF THE CRITERIA THAT YOU CREATED ITS FAR LESS LIKELY THAT
YOULL WIN THE DEBATE
3AY YOURE THE !FlRMATIVE TEAM FOR THE RESOLUTION h"E IT RESOLVED
THAT THE LAW SOCIETY SHOULD SELECT FEDERAL JUDGESv 9OU COULD CLAIM THAT
THERE ARE TWO CRITERIA FOR DECIDING THE ISSUE THE PROCESS MUST BE OBJEC
TIVE AND THE SELECTION MUST BE BASED SOLELY ON LEGAL MERIT #LEARLY YOU
FEEL THAT YOUR TEAM HAS THE UPPER HAND ON BOTH ACCOUNTS (OWEVER
IF THE .EGATIVE TEAM CAN RAISE ENOUGH DOUBT ABOUT THE LAW SOCIETYS
OBJECTIVITY THE JUDGES MAY DECIDE THAT YOU LOST THE DEBATE EVEN IF YOUR
OVERALL CASE WAS STRONG
9OUR DECISION ON WHETHER TO USE CRITERIA SHOULD BE BASED ON HOW CON
lDENT YOU ARE THAT YOU CAN MEET THEM 4HERES NOTHING WORSE THAN
PROPOSING A SET OF CRITERIA ONLY TO SEE YOUR OPPONENT USE YOUR OWN
WORDS AGAINST YOU (ERE ARE SOME STRATEGIES TO FOLLOW IF YOU DECIDE TO
GO WITH THIS CASE STRATEGY
0RESENT THEM AT THE BEGINNING OF YOUR lRST SPEECH )TS ONLY FAIR THAT
YOUR OPPONENT KNOWS YOUR VERSION OF THE CRITERIA AT THE OUTSET 4HIS
ALLOWS ITS SPEAKERS TO CLASH WITH YOUR CASE ACCORDINGLY OR TO ARGUE FOR
A DIFFERENT SET OF CRITERIA
Review Copy
Copyright 2006 Gravitas Publishing
4ALK THE 4ALK
$ONT CONFUSE CRITERIA WITH ARGUMENTS ! SET OF CRITERIA IS A TOOL WITH
WHICH TO EVALUATE YOUR ARGUMENTS BUT THEY ARENT ACTUALLY ARGUMENTS
THEMSELVES 5SING THE JUDGE SELECTION EXAMPLE DISCUSSED PREVIOUSLY
IT WOULD BE WEAK TO SAY h/UR lRST POINT IS THAT THE LAW SOCIETY IS MORE
OBJECTIVE WHICH ADDRESSES OUR lRST CRITERIONv 4HERES NO DISTINCTION
HERE BETWEEN THE CRITERION AND THE ARGUMENT /N THE OTHER HAND YOU
COULD SAY h4HE !FlRMATIVES lRST ARGUMENT IS THAT THE LAW SOCIETY
WOULD NOT RECEIVE ANY DIRECT BENElT AS A RESULT OF ITS CHOICES WHICH
MEETS OUR CRITERIA OF OBJECTIVITY AND MERITv
5SE ONLY A FEW CRITERIA 3TATING TWO CRITERIA IS TYPICAL AND THREE CRI
TERIA SHOULD BE THE MAXIMUM 4HE MORE CRITERIA YOU USE THE MORE
ANGLES OF ATTACK YOU GIVE TO YOUR OPPONENTS AND THE MORE YOU HAVE TO
PROVE )F YOU USE GREATER THAN THREE YOULL BE COMPLICATING THE DEBATE
AND MAKING IT DIFlCULT FOR YOU TO SHOW HOW YOUR POINTS COLLECTIVELY
MEET ALL OF THE CRITERIA )MAGINE ASKING YOUR JUDGES TO UNDERSTAND HOW
lVE CONSTRUCTIVE POINTS EACH MEET FOUR CRITERIA 9OU WOULD CONFUSE
EVEN THE MOST EXPERIENCED JUDGE
,INK YOUR ARGUMENTS BACK TO THE CRITERIA -ANY TEAMS WILL BOLDLY
STATE A SET OF CRITERIA AND THEN WILL NEVER REFER BACK TO THEM DURING
THE REMAINDER OF THE DEBATE 4HE CRITERIA WILL BECOME LESS AND LESS REL
EVANT AS THE DEBATE CONTINUES 7ORSE YET THE JUDGES COULD REMEMBER
THE CRITERIA THEY PROBABLY WROTE THEM DOWN BUT BE LEFT WONDERING
IF YOU ACTUALLY MET THEM !S YOU DELIVER ARGUMENTS AND PRESENT YOUR
REBUTTAL ITS IMPORTANT YOU SHOW THAT WHAT YOURE SAYING IS DIRECTLY
MEETING THE CRITERIA YOU PUT FORTH INITIALLY
0ROVE EACH CONDITION IN EACH SPEECH )TS USUALLY NOT A GOOD IDEA TO
DIVIDE YOUR CASE BASED ON CRITERIA &OR INSTANCE YOU SHOULDNT HAVE
THE lRST SPEAKER ADDRESS THE lRST MEASURE AND THE SECOND SPEAKER
PROVE THE SECOND ONE 4HE CRITERIA ARE MARKERS BY WHICH YOUR ENTIRE
CASE WILL BE JUDGED 4HEREFORE BOTH SPEAKERS SHOULD REFER TO THE FULL
SET OF CRITERIA IN THEIR RESPECTIVE SPEECHES
'3928)6-2+;-8,%'3928)640%2
)N A POLICY DEBATE IT SEEMS COMMON SENSE THAT THE .EGATIVE SHOULD
REFUTE EVERY POINT BROUGHT FORTH BY THE !FlRMATIVE .AMELY IT SHOULD
CLASH WITH THE PROFESSED NEEDS FOR CHANGING THE SYSTEM AND THE !FlR
Review Copy
Copyright 2006 Gravitas Publishing
0ROS AND #ONS 3OLID 0OINTS AND 0OWERFUL #ASES
MATIVES PLAN FOR CARRYING OUT THE CHANGES 3OME TEAMS THOUGH PREFER
TO USE ONE OF THE MOST RISKY TACTICS AVAILABLE THE COUNTER PLAN
7HAT EXACTLY IS A COUNTER PLAN )TS CASE STRATEGY IN WHICH THE
.EGATIVE TEAM AGREES WITH THE !FlRMATIVES NEEDS FOR CHANGE BUT
ARGUES FOR A DIFFERENT PLAN TO ACT ON THE DElCIENCIES IN THE PRESENT
SYSTEM 4HE DEBATE FOCUSES NOT ON THE PRINCIPLED ARGUMENTS FOR OR
AGAINST CHANGE )T FOCUSES INSTEAD ON WHICH TEAM HAS A MORE EFFECTIVE
PLAN TO DEAL WITH THE SITUATION
.OT ALL JUDGES LIKE COUNTER PLANS 2ATHER THAN CREATING DEBATES
ON COMPETING PRINCIPLES COUNTER PLAN CASES OFTEN BECOME TECHNI
CAL SPECULATIVE CASES ON WHICH PROPOSAL WOULD BE MORE SUITABLE
&OR THIS REASON COUNTER PLANS ARE THE MOST MISUSED TYPE OF .EGATIVE
CASE STRATEGY )F YOURE THINKING OF USING A COUNTER PLAN THERE ARE TWO
REQUIREMENTS THAT IT MUST MEET
2EQUIREMENT 4HE COUNTER PLAN MUST BE SIGNIlCANTLY DIFFERENT
FROM THE !FlRMATIVES PLAN ! DEBATE IS SUPPOSED TO BE BETWEEN TWO
OPPOSITES )F YOUVE ALREADY CONCEDED THAT THE !FlRMATIVES NEEDS FOR
CHANGE ARE CORRECT THE GAP BETWEEN THE TWO TEAMS HAS BEEN NARROWED
CONSIDERABLY ! COUNTER PLAN THAT MERELY ENHANCES OR PRESENTS MINOR
DIFFERENCES TO THE !FlRMATIVES PROPOSAL IS INAPPROPRIATE )T MUST BE
FUNDAMENTALLY DISTINCT FROM THE !FlRMATIVES PLAN SO THAT THERES A
CLEAR GULF BETWEEN THE TWO SIDES
&OR EXAMPLE LETS TAKE A CASE ON WHETHER THE 5NITED .ATIONS
SHOULD IMPOSE SANCTIONS ON A COUNTRY THATS ABUSING HUMAN RIGHTS
4HE !FlRMATIVE TEAM DISCUSSES THE SEVERITY OF THE CRIMES COMMITTED
AND RECOMMENDS A SERIES OF ECONOMIC SANCTIONS (ERES A POOR COUN
TER PLAN STRATEGY h7E AGREE THAT THE 5NITED .ATIONS MUST DEAL WITH
THESE HUMAN RIGHTS ABUSES BUT WE BELIEVE THAT POLITICAL SANCTIONS IN
ADDITION TO ECONOMIC SANCTIONS WOULD BE A MORE EFFECTIVE PLANv 4HIS
COUNTER PLAN ISNT ALL THAT DISTINCT FROM THE !FlRMATIVES CASE
! MORE EFFECTIVE .EGATIVE STRATEGY COULD BE THE FOLLOWING h7E WILL
SHOW YOU WHY ECONOMIC SANCTIONS ARE INSUFlCIENT 7E WILL INSTEAD
PROPOSE THE THREAT OF MILITARY FORCE IF THE ABUSES ARE NOT STOPPED
IMMEDIATELYv )S THIS RISKY #ERTAINLY "UT IT WOULD BE VALID COUNTER
PLAN BECAUSE YOU NOW HAVE A CONTENTIOUS DEBATE BETWEEN ECONOMIC
AND MILITARY SOLUTIONS
2EQUIREMENT )T MUST BE SIGNIlCANTLY MORE PRACTICAL OR EFFECTIVE
3OUNDS OBVIOUS RIGHT 5NFORTUNATELY MANY .EGATIVE TEAMS PRESENT
Review Copy
Copyright 2006 Gravitas Publishing
4ALK THE 4ALK
A COUNTER PLAN THAT MAY BE VERY DIFFERENT FROM THE !FlRMATIVES PLAN
BUT THAT REACHES A RELATIVELY SIMILAR OUTCOME )TS NOT ENOUGH TO SAY
THAT YOUR PLAN hWILL GET US SLIGHTLY CLOSER TO THE DESIRED RESULTSv OR hIS
LESS RISKY AND LESS PRONE TO ABUSES THAN THE !FlRMATIVES PLANv 9OU
MUST BE ABLE TO PROVE THAT YOUR PLAN IS THE ONLY ONE THAT WILL WORK
EFFECTIVELY AND THAT THE !FlRMATIVES PLAN WILL FAIL OUTRIGHT
! COUNTER PLAN HAS MAJOR IMPLICATIONS FOR THE .EGATIVES RESPONSIBILITY
IN THE DEBATE )N A TYPICAL DEBATE THE BURDEN OF PROOF LIES LARGELY WITH
THE !FlRMATIVE 4HE !FlRMATIVE MUST PROVE THAT ITS NEEDS FOR CHANGE
ARE VALID AND THAT ITS PLAN IS EFFECTIVE WHEREAS THE .EGATIVE CAN TECH
NICALLY WIN IF IT RAISES SUFlCIENT DOUBTS CONCERNING THE !FlRMATIVES
CASE )F A COUNTER PLAN IS EMPLOYED BOTH TEAMS ARE ON AN EVEN FOOTING
WHEN IT COMES TO BURDEN 4HE .EGATIVE IS NOW REQUIRED TO PROVE THE
EFFECTIVENESS OF ITS PROPOSALS )N FACT EVEN THOUGH BOTH TEAMS CARRY
THIS BURDEN MOST JUDGES WILL EXPECT MORE FROM THE .EGATIVE BECAUSE
IT CHOSE TO TAKE THE UNORTHODOX STRATEGY OF PRESENTING A COUNTER PLAN
4HE DECISION TO USE A COUNTER PLAN SHOULD BE CONSIDERED VERY CARE
FULLY )TS HIGHLY RECOMMENDED THAT ONLY EXPERIENCED DEBATERS TRY THIS
APPROACH 4HERE ARE SIMPLY TOO MANY PITFALLS FOR A BEGINNER TO VENTURE
INTO THIS UNCHARTED TERRITORY
)F YOU FEEL THAT YOURE READY TO TAKE UP THE COUNTER PLAN MAKE SURE
THAT THE SITUATION IS RIPE FOR THIS RISKY STRATEGY 4HE BEST INSTANCE TO
USE A COUNTER PLAN IS WHEN THE !FlRMATIVES NEEDS FOR CHANGE ARE SO
STRONG THAT YOU WOULD BE AT A DISADVANTAGE TRYING TO DEBATE THEM "Y
CONCEDING THAT THE STATED NEEDS ARE COMMON SENSE YOURE ESSENTIALLY
TELLING YOUR JUDGES THAT THE !FlRMATIVE HASNT PRESENTED ANYTHING BOLD
OR INSIGHTFUL IN ITS lRST SPEECH
! COUNTER PLAN CAN BE EFFECTIVE AT THROWING OFF YOUR OPPONENT
4HE SECOND !FlRMATIVE SPEAKER USUALLY HAS TO DISCARD MOST OF HIS OR
HER SPEECH AND COME UP WITH A NEW ONE ON THE mY 5SED EFFECTIVELY
A COUNTER PLAN CAN ADD A DIMENSION OF SURPRISE AND SOPHISTICATION TO
THE DEBATE 5SED POORLY IT CAN LEAVE THE JUDGES SHAKING THEIR HEADS AT
YOUR FAILURE TO HIT THE CORE ISSUES OF THE ROUND
,%:-2+%+33( '%7) &6)%/94
9OUVE DEVELOPED FOUR TO SIX POWERFUL WELL DEVELOPED ARGUMENTS
.OW THE CHALLENGE IS TO DIVIDE THE POINTS BETWEEN THE TWO CONSTRUC
TIVE SPEECHES 4HE WAY THAT YOU @SPLIT YOUR ARGUMENTS IS AN IMPORTANT
Review Copy
Copyright 2006 Gravitas Publishing
0ROS AND #ONS 3OLID 0OINTS AND 0OWERFUL #ASES
DECISION FROM AN ORGANIZATIONAL AND A STRATEGIC PERSPECTIVE ! SOUND
DIVISION ENHANCES THE STRUCTURE AND COHERENCY OF YOUR CASE )T ALSO
HAS IMPLICATIONS FOR HOW THE DEBATE UNFOLDS
(ASTY AND (AZARDOUS 3PLITS
,ETS START WITH WHAT NOT TO DO WHEN DIVIDING YOUR POINTS BETWEEN
SPEECHES THEYVE BEEN DONE FAR TOO OFTEN TO IGNORE
&IRST SPEAKER OUTLINES SECOND SPEAKER EXPANDS 7OULDNT IT BE EASIER
SIMPLY TO LET THE lRST DEBATER PRESENT THE ENTIRE CASE SO THAT THE JUDGES
HAVE A CLEAR PICTURE RIGHT FROM THE BEGINNING 3URE IF YOU WANT TO LET
THE OTHER TEAM STAB AWAY AT POORLY SUPPORTED ARGUMENTS 7HILE ITS A
GOOD IDEA FOR THE SECOND SPEAKER TO DEFEND AGAINST REFUTATION OF YOUR
TEAMS FULLY DEVELOPED POINTS ITS A TALL ORDER TO DEPEND ON YOUR PART
NER TO DEFEND OR EXPAND ON AN POORLY SUPPORTED POINT THATS ALREADY
BEEN TORN APART
!RGUMENTS ARE DIVIDED RANDOMLY 9OUR STRATEGY SHOULD BE DELIBER
ATE AND THOUGHTFUL ! RANDOM SPLIT BETWEEN PARTNERS LEAVES YOUR CASE
LOOKING SCATTERED )T MAKES AS MUCH SENSE AS A SPORTS TEAM RANDOMLY
DECIDING WHO SHOULD PLAY EACH POSITION
%ACH PERSON DELIVERS HIS OR HER FAVORITE POINTS )TS CERTAINLY TEMPT
ING TO LET EACH TEAM MEMBER DELIVER THE POINTS THAT HE OR SHE LIKES
THE MOST ,OGICALLY YOU MAY BE MORE EFFECTIVE IF YOURE PASSIONATE
ABOUT THE POINTS 7HILE IT MAY HELP YOU MAKE EXCELLENT ARGUMENTS IT
WILL PROBABLY ALSO LEAD TO A POOR CASE ,IKE A RANDOM SPLIT IF THERES NO
LOGICAL BASIS FOR THE TYPE OF DIVISION SELECTED THE RISK IS THAT YOUR CASE
WILL APPEAR DISORGANIZED
4HE @MEAT IS LEFT TO THE SECOND SPEAKER %VEN THOUGH BOTH TEAM MEM
BERS SHOULD WORK TOGETHER TO BUILD A CASE EACH SPEECH SHOULD INDEPEN
DENTLY SUPPORT YOUR SIDE OF THE RESOLUTION 3AY YOURE ARGUING THAT THE
/LYMPICS ARE TOO COMMERCIALIZED 4HE lRST SPEAKER TALKS ABOUT THE
EXTENT TO WHICH THEY ARE COMMERCIALIZED AND THE SECOND SPEAKER SAYS
WHY THIS LEVEL OF COMMERCIALIZATION IS BADTHE HEART OF THE CASE 4HIS
IS CALLED A @HUNG CASE BECAUSE THE lRST SPEAKER HAS NOT SAID ANYTHING
EXPLAINING WHY THE /LYMPICS ARE hTOO COMMERCIALIZEDv
Review Copy
Copyright 2006 Gravitas Publishing
4ALK THE 4ALK
4HE "EST "REAKUPS
.OW THAT YOU KNOW HOW NOT TO SPLIT YOUR CASE WHAT IS THE BEST SPLIT
STRATEGY 5SUALLY IT INVOLVES DIVIDING YOUR CASE INTO THEMES OR CAT
EGORIES OF YOUR CENTRAL THEME 3INCE EVERY CASE IS DIFFERENT EACH ONE
REQUIRES A UNIQUE TAILORED APPROACH (ERE ARE A FEW GOOD OPTIONS
.ATIONAL AND INTERNATIONAL -ANY CASES HAVE IMPLICATIONS BOTH AT
HOME AND ABROAD SUCH AS INTERNATIONAL ECONOMIC MILITARY AND LEGAL
ISSUES 3AY YOURE DEBATING WHETHER YOUR COUNTRY SHOULD SIGN A PAR
TICULAR ENVIRONMENTAL TREATY /NE SPEAKER COULD FOCUS ON THE IMPACT
WITHIN YOUR NATIONS BORDERS AND THE OTHER SPEAKER COULD EMPHASIZE
THE INTERNATIONAL BENElTS OR WHY SIGNING THE AGREEMENT lTS WITH YOUR
NATIONS PLACE IN THE WORLD
3HORT
TERM AND LONG
TERM )F THE DEBATE IS ON A VALUES TOPIC YOU COULD
SPLIT YOUR POINTS BETWEEN THE IMMEDIATE AND FUTURE HARMS OF THE CIR
CUMSTANCE &OR EXAMPLE THE lRST SPEAKER COULD DISCUSS HOW SPANKING
A CHILD CAUSES SHORT
TERM HARM AND THE SECOND SPEAKER COULD DESCRIBE
THE LONG
TERM IMPACT ON A CHILDS DEVELOPMENT
)F THE DEBATE IS ON A POLICY TOPIC IT MAY MAKE SENSE TO SPLIT THE
ARGUMENTS BASED ON SHORT
TERM AND LONG
TERM OUTCOMES )F YOURE
DEBATING WHETHER A PARTICULAR COUNTRY SHOULD BE ATTACKED THE SHORT
TERM THEME COULD BE THE @PEACE AND SECURITY IMPACT AND THE LONG
TERM THEME COULD BE THE @DEMOCRACY AND HUMAN RIGHTS IMPACT
3OCIETY AND INDIVIDUAL 4HIS TYPE OF SPLIT IS PARTICULARLY USEFUL WHEN A
SITUATION OR POLICY IMPACTS BOTH AN INDIVIDUALS LIFE AND THE WAY SOCI
ETY OPERATES )F THE DEBATE IS ABOUT BANNING THE USE OF CELL PHONES
WHILE DRIVING ONE SPEAKER COULD DISCUSS THE POSITIVE IMPACT ON AN
INDIVIDUALS ABILITY TO DRIVE CAREFULLY AND THE OTHER SPEAKER COULD
FOCUS ON HOW EVERYONE WOULD BE SAFER AS A RESULT
%CONOMIC AND SOCIAL 7HILE THE @SOCIETY AND INDIVIDUAL SPLIT IS BASED
ON WHO IS AFFECTED THIS SPLIT TECHNIQUE FOCUSES LARGELY ON WHAT ASPECT
OF SOCIETY IS IMPACTED 4HIS SAME CONCEPT WORKS FOR MILITARY AND POLIT
ICAL CULTURAL AND ECONOMIC AND A VARIETY OF SUCH COMBINATIONS ,ETS
TAKE A CASE IN FAVOR OF GOVERNMENT SUBSIDIES FOR THE ARTS 4HE lRST
SPEAKER COULD FOCUS ON SOCIAL BENElTS SUCH AS INCREASING COMMUNITY
ENJOYMENT OF MUSEUMS AND THEATRES 4HE SECOND SPEAKER COULD FOCUS
Review Copy
Copyright 2006 Gravitas Publishing
0ROS AND #ONS 3OLID 0OINTS AND 0OWERFUL #ASES
ON ECONOMIC BENElTS SUCH AS KEEPING STRUGGLING INDUSTRIES ALIVE AND
SAVING THOUSANDS OF VITAL JOBS
!S MENTIONED PREVIOUSLY DONT RELY SOLELY ON THESE COMMON SPLITS
4HEYRE NOTED PRIMARILY TO SPARK SOME IDEAS 4HE BEST SPLITS ARE CASE
SPECIlC 4HESE ARE A FEW EXAMPLES OF MORE NARROW SPLITS THAT APPLY TO
PARTICULAR DEBATE CASES
s 6IOLENCE ON TELEVISION YOUNG CHILDREN AND SCHOOL ENVIRONMENT
s -ANDATORY MINIMUM SENTENCES CRIMINALS AND VICTIMS
s -EDIA CONCENTRATION EDITORIAL SLANT AND INFORMATION DIVERSITY
s 4ELEVISED TRIALS RIGHT TO KNOW AND ABILITY TO SCRUTINIZE
s 2EQUIRED VACCINATIONS PUBLIC HEALTH AND PERSONAL HEALTH
/NCE YOUVE DECIDED ON THE SPLIT WHICH ONE COMES lRST 7HILE THERES
NO DElNITIVE RULE THINK ABOUT WHICH THEME FORMS THE FOUNDATION OF
YOUR CASE )F THE MAIN THRUST OF YOUR CASE IS THE IMPACT ON INDIVIDUALS
AND THE IMPACT ON SOCIETY IS AN EXTENSION OF THE INmUENCE ON PEOPLE
YOU SHOULD PROBABLY PUT THE @INDIVIDUAL THEME lRST )TS TEMPTING TO
LEAVE YOUR KEY POINTS TO THE END ALLOWING LESS TIME FOR YOUR OPPONENT
TO REFUTE THEM (OWEVER THERE ARE THREE REASONS WHY PRESENTING THEM
EARLIER IS USUALLY THE BEST OPTION
3ET THE TONE FOR THE DEBATE "Y PRESENTING YOUR MOST IMPORTANT ARGU
MENTS lRST YOURE SIGNALING TO THE JUDGES THAT THEY ARE THE CORE DECID
ING ISSUES OF THE DEBATE
-AINTAIN ATTENTION THROUGHOUT 7HEN YOU PRESENT AN ARGUMENT EARLY
ITS MORE LIKELY TO BE REFUTED AND DEFENDED SEVERAL TIMES 4HIS CREATES A
LOGICAL EXTENSION INTO THE REBUTTAL WHEN YOU CAN SHOW HOW YOUR CORE
ARGUMENTS HAVE WON THE ROUND
"E SEEN AS HITTING THE KEY ISSUES /N ANY TOPIC MOST JUDGES WILL HAVE
AT LEAST SOME EXPECTATION OF WHAT THE MOST IMPORTANT ISSUES ARE 9OU
DONT WANT IT TO SEEM THAT YOUVE MISSED THE CRUX OF THE DEBATE
36()60=36+%2->%8-32
4HOUGHTFUL ORGANIZATION IS ESSENTIAL TO THE SUCCESS OF YOUR CASE 7ITH
OUT A STRONG STRUCTURE YOUR CASE IS SIMPLY AN ASSORTMENT OF POINTS
Review Copy
Copyright 2006 Gravitas Publishing
4ALK THE 4ALK
THAT LACKS A CLEAR SENSE OF DIRECTION 9OULL BE MORE EFFECTIVE IF YOU
PRESENT THE POINTS WITH A CAREFULLY DESIGNED ARRANGEMENT
7ITHIN EACH POINT THE h#LAIM #OMMENT #ITE #ONCLUDEv RULE DIS
CUSSED IN #HAPTER IS A GOOD RULE OF THUMB TO FOLLOW )T ALLOWS YOU TO
ADDRESS IN ORDER THE FOUR ELEMENTS THAT A JUDGE WANTS TO HEAR A BRIEF
STATEMENT OF WHAT THE ARGUMENT IS AN EXPLANATION OF WHY ITS CORRECT
SOME EVIDENCE TO BACKUP THE EXPLANATION AND A CLOSING THAT REINFORCES
THE IMPACT OF THE ARGUMENT
!S FOR THE OVERALL SPEECH ITS HELPFUL TO FOLLOW THE RULE ALSO
EXPLAINED IN #HAPTER h4ELL THEM WHAT YOURE GOING TO TELL THEM THEN
TELL THEM THEN TELL THEM WHAT YOU TOLD THEMv 4HE hTELL THEMv PART IS
SIMPLY YOUR ARGUMENTS AND THE hTELL THEM WHAT YOU TOLD THEMv PART
IS A BRIEF WRAP UP OF YOUR ARGUMENTS AND A TIE BACK TO YOUR THEME AT
THE END OF YOUR SPEECH 7HEN YOU hTELL THEM WHAT YOURE GOING TO TELL
THEM v MAKE SURE THAT YOURE NOT TOO GENERAL 4HE MORE CLEARLY YOU
STATE WHERE YOU PLAN TO GO WITH YOUR SPEECH THE MORE YOUR JUDGES WILL
UNDERSTAND AND LOOK FORWARD TO WHAT YOU HAVE TO SAY 4HEN AGAIN YOU
DONT WANT TO GIVE AWAY YOUR ENTIRE CASE BEFORE YOUVE DELVED FULLY
INTO THE ARGUMENTS (ERES A COMPARISON
s 4OO GENERAL h&IRST )M GOING TO REFUTE WHAT THE lRST !FlRMATIVE
SPEAKER SAID 3ECOND )M GOING TO PRESENT THE .EGATIVES CASEv 9OU
HAVENT TOLD THE JUDGES ANYTHING TANGIBLE 2ATHER YOUVE TOLD THEM IN
THE MOST GENERAL SENSE HOW YOULL BE ORGANIZING YOUR SPEECH
s 4OO SPECIlC h&IRST )M GOING TO REFUTE THE !FlRMATIVES CASE BY CITING
A REPORT WHICH INVALIDATES ITS lRST POINT THEN )M GOING TO EXPLAIN
THE FAULTY CAUSE AND EFFECT RELATIONSHIP IN THE EXAMPLE USED TO SUPPORT
ITS SECOND POINT xv 9OULL GET TO ALL OF THESE DETAILS WHEN YOU ACTUALLY
REFUTE THE POINTS 4HIS IS FAR TOO SPECIlC FOR THE JUDGES TO DIGEST AT THE
OPENING OF YOUR SPEECH 9OUR GOAL SHOULD BE TO PROVIDE AN OVERVIEW OF
WHAT YOURE GOING TO SAY
s 'OOD BALANCE h&IRST )M GOING TO REFUTE THE !FlRMATIVES CASE BY
EXPLAINING HOW ITS PROPOSAL TO ELECT JUDGES WOULD WEAKEN THE IMPAR
TIALITY OF THE LEGAL SYSTEM 3ECOND )M GOING TO INTRODUCE THE .EGATIVES
CASE BY TELLING YOU WHY APPOINTED JUDGES ARE LESS BEHOLDEN TO ANY
POLITICAL OR INTEREST GROUPv 4HIS LEVEL OF DETAIL PAINTS A CLEAR PICTURE OF
WHERE YOURE GOING WITHOUT COMPLETELY REVEALING THE SPECIlCS
Review Copy
Copyright 2006 Gravitas Publishing
0ROS AND #ONS 3OLID 0OINTS AND 0OWERFUL #ASES
',%2+-2+328,)*0=
)TS EVERY DEBATERS WORST NIGHTMARE 4HE TOPIC HAS BEEN ANNOUNCED
MONTHS BEFORE THE TOURNAMENT 9OUVE PREPARED EXTENSIVELY FOR BOTH
SIDES OF THE DEBATE 4HEN UNEXPECTEDLY AS THE DEBATE BEGINS THE lRST
!FlRMATIVE SPEAKER PRESENTS A PERFECTLY REASONABLE DElNITION THAT
MAKES YOUR CASE IRRELEVANT
7HAT SHOULD YOU DO -ANY DEBATERS WILL DECIDE TO ARGUE AGAINST
THE DElNITION 4HEY DO SO NOT BECAUSE ITS UNFAIR BUT SO THAT THEY CAN
lT THEIR LONG
PREPARED CASE INTO THE ROUND 4HERES A SENSEA FALSE
SENSETHAT AS LONG AS THEY PRESENT EXCEPTIONAL ARGUMENTS THEY CAN
GET AWAY WITH THEIR OWN DElNITION OF THE RESOLUTION !S DISCUSSED IN
#HAPTER THIS TACTIC SHOULD BE AVOIDED AT ALL COSTS )F THE !FlRMATIVES
DElNITION IS REASONABLE YOU HAVE TO FOLLOW IT
/THER DEBATERS WILL JUST IGNORE THE DElNITION ALTOGETHER AND CON
TINUE WITH THEIR CASE ANYWAYS 4HIS ONLY MARGINALIZES THE .EGATIVE
TEAM AS THE JUDGES WILL BE PERPLEXED THAT ITS DEBATING A SIGNIlCANTLY
DIFFERENT ISSUE 4HERE WILL ESSENTIALLY BE TWO SEPARATE DEBATES GOING
ON AND AN ASTUTE JUDGE WILL ASSIGN BLAME TO THE .EGATIVE TEAM FOR TRY
ING TO BYPASS THE DElNITION
4HE BEST TEAMS WILL SWALLOW THEIR PRIDE
:\JJLZZ;PW
AND FORGET THEIR LONG NIGHTS OF PREPARATION
4HEYLL TAKE COMFORT IN REALIZING THAT THEIR
-J]SYVGEWIHSIWR X
PREPARATION WAS A GREAT LEARNING EXPERI
X\MXSVRM\MX
ENCE AND THAT IT MADE THEM FAMILIAR WITH
THE ISSUE !ND THEN THEYLL ABANDON MUCH
OR ALL OF THEIR CASE 9ES THE MOST EFFECTIVE
TEAMS WILL ABANDON THEIR CASE ONLY MINUTES
BEFORE THEIR lRST SPEAKER IS DUE TO PRESENT !DAPTING YOUR CASE ON THE
mY IS A GUSTY CHALLENGING MOVE BUT DOING IT WELL CAN PAY OFF 3URE
YOUR ARGUMENTS WONT BE AS POLISHED BUT ITS SUPERIOR TO MAKING POL
ISHED ARGUMENTS THAT DONT MATTER TO THE ROUND
)F YOUVE MADE THE DECISION TO CHANGE YOUR CASE ON THE mY YOU
HAVE TO ACT QUICKLY AND DECISIVELY 7ITHIN THE SPAN OF A FEW MINUTES
YOU NEED NOT ONLY TO LISTEN CAREFULLY TO YOUR OPPONENTS SPEECH BUT
ALSO TO COME UP WITH NEW CONSTRUCTIVE ARGUMENTS (OW CAN YOU ADAPT
CONlDENTLY AND EFFECTIVELY
$ONT PANIC -ANY DEBATERS SPEND VALUABLE TIME FRETTING ABOUT THE
SEEMINGLY DAUNTING TASK THAT LIES AHEAD 4HEY SAY TO THEIR PARTNER
Review Copy
Copyright 2006 Gravitas Publishing
4ALK THE 4ALK
h/H MY WHAT ON EARTH ARE WE GOING TO DO ABOUT THIS v 9OU SHOULD BE
THINKING h7E CAN DO THIS NOW LETS lGURE OUT HOWv
3TART WITH REFUTATION $ONT STOP LISTENING TO WHATS BEING SAID +EEP
ON USING YOUR mOW SHEET AND THINKING ABOUT HOW YOULL REFUTE THE
!FlRMATIVES POINTS )F YOU BLANK OUT COMPLETELY AND CANT THINK OF
CONSTRUCTIVE POINTS AT LEAST YOU CAN CLASH WITH YOUR OPPONENTS POINTS
FOR THE MAJORITY OR ALL OF YOUR SPEAKING TIME
4URN REFUTATION INTO CONSTRUCTION )F YOU CANT THINK OF ORIGINAL ARGU
MENTS TRY BASING THEM ON YOUR REFUTATION 7HEN YOURE CLASHING WITH
A POINT YOURE TAKING A STAND SAYING THAT A PRINCIPLE IS WRONG ,OGICALLY
THEN YOU BELIEVE THAT SOMETHING ELSELIKELY THE OPPOSITE PERSPEC
TIVEIS RIGHT !ND ARGUING FOR WHAT YOU THINK IS RIGHT IS THE STARTING
POINT FOR CONSTRUCTIVE MATTER 5SE THIS THOUGHT PROCESS IF YOU lND
YOURSELF STUCK AT THE LAST MINUTE
$IVIDE RESPONSIBILITIES 4HE SECOND .EGATIVE SPEAKER DOESNT HAVE TO
WORRY ABOUT CLASH RIGHT AWAY SO HE OR SHE CAN FOCUS ON COMING UP
WITH CONSTRUCTIVE ARGUMENTS 4HIS ALLOWS THE lRST .EGATIVE SPEAKER
TO LISTEN CAREFULLY TO THE lRST !FlRMATIVE SPEAKER AND TO PLAN EFFECTIVE
REFUTATION ,ATE IN THE lRST !FlRMATIVE SPEECH THE SECOND .EGATIVE
SPEAKER CAN @PASS ON THE PROPOSED ARGUMENTS TO HIS OR HER PARTNER
7;38=396'%7)
/NCE YOUVE DEVELOPED A CASE ITS A GOOD
:\JJLZZ;PW
IDEA TO TAKE A STEP BACK AND THINK ABOUT
HOW YOU CAN IMPROVE IT 7HEN YOU WERE
7XVIRKXLIR]SYVGEWI
BUILDING THE CASE YOUR PERSPECTIVE WAS
F]EWOMRKEJVMIRH
THAT OF A CONSTRUCTOR !FTER YOUVE DONE SO
XSGVMXMGM^IMX
ANALYZE YOUR CASE WITH AN EYE OF A RENOVATOR
9OUR TASK IS TO TAKE WHATS ALREADY PREPARED
AND TO ENHANCE IT 4HE MOST EFFECTIVE WAY
TO STRENGTHEN YOUR CASE AND TO PLUG ANY GAPING HOLES IS TO DO A h37/4v
ANALYSIS 3TRENGTHS 7EAKNESSES /PPORTUNITIES AND 4HREATS
s 3TRENGTHS 7HAT ARGUMENTS HAVE YOU DEVELOPED WELL %VALUATE YOUR
POINTS AND THINK ABOUT WHICH ONES ARE THE MOST CONVINCING EFFECTIVE
LY EXPLAINED AND APPROPRIATELY SUPPORTED 4HESE ARE YOUR STRENGTHS
Review Copy
Copyright 2006 Gravitas Publishing
0ROS AND #ONS 3OLID 0OINTS AND 0OWERFUL #ASES
THE PILLARS OF YOUR CASE 9OU SHOULD EMPHASIZE THEM IN YOUR SPEECHES
AND ENSURE THAT THEY BECOME THE DECIDING ISSUES OF THE ROUND
s 7EAKNESSES $O YOU HAVE ANY ARGUMENTS THAT ARENT PARTICULARLY
CONVINCING OR THAT HAVE INSUFlCIENT EXPLANATION AND SUPPORT )F SO
ONE POSSIBLE RESPONSE IS TO GET RID OF THE POINTS ENTIRELY ESPECIALLY IF
THE ARGUMENT ITSELF IS WEAK )F THE ARGUMENT HAPPENS TO BE STRONG BUT
THE DETAIL SURROUNDING IT IS WEAK SPEND SOME TIME EXPANDING ON THE
POINT AND CLARIFYING ITS RATIONALES
s /PPORTUNITIES 7HAT HAVENT YOU SAID THAT COULD BE EFFECTIVE 4HINK
ABOUT THE CASE FROM DIFFERENT ANGLES "RAINSTORM MORE IDEAS )F YOUVE
MISSED AN OPPORTUNITY THAT WOULD BOOST YOUR CASE MAKE THE NECES
SARY ADDITIONS OR MODIlCATIONS
s 4HREATS !RE THERE ARGUMENTS THAT HAVE OBVIOUS AND POTENTIALLY DAM
AGING COUNTER
ARGUMENTS /F COURSE NO CONSTRUCTIVE POINT IS BEYOND
CRITICISM "UT IF IN THE PROCESS OF CRITIQUING YOUR POINTS YOU lND YOUR
SELF STRUGGLING TO DEFEND THEM AGAINST POSSIBLE COUNTER
ARGUMENTS
YOU NEED TO TAKE ACTION 4HINK ABOUT WHAT YOU WOULD SAY IN RESPONSE
TO REFUTATION AND DONT HESITATE TO DISCARD AN ARGUMENT COMPLETELY IF
YOU CANT lND A SOLID DEFENSE
D'%7) 789(= ;%6 '6-1)7 86-&92%07 :7 8698,
%2(6)'32'-0-%8-32'311-77-327
)N THIS SECTION WERE GOING TO TAKE A LOOK AT BOTH AN !FlRMATIVE CASE
AND A .EGATIVE CASE ON THE RESOLUTION h"E IT RESOLVED THAT 4RUTH AND
2ECONCILIATION #OMMISSIONS SHOULD BE FAVORED OVER 7AR #RIMES 4RI
BUNALSv ! 7AR #RIMES 4RIBUNAL AIMS TO BRING THE PERPETRATORS OF WAR
CRIMES TO JUSTICE FOLLOWING A CIVIL OR INTERNATIONAL CONmICT %XAMPLES
INCLUDE THE )NTERNATIONAL #RIMINAL #OURT )## AND THE )NTERNATIONAL
#RIMINAL 4RIBUNAL FOR 2WANDA )#42 ! 4RUTH AND 2ECONCILIATION #OM
MISSION STRIVES TO HELP SOCIETY HEAL WITHOUT EXACTING PUNISHMENT ON
THE OFFENDERS %XAMPLES INCLUDE THE 3OUTH !FRICA COMMISSION
AND THE %AST 4IMOR COMMISSION
,ETS START BY TAKING A LOOK AT HOW THE !FlRMATIVE COULD BUILD A
CASE 4O START THE CASE DEVELOPMENT PROCESS ITS A GOOD IDEA TO IDENTIFY
THE CORE THEMES 4HE lRST THEME COULD BE THE PRACTICAL EFFECTIVENESS OF
Review Copy
Copyright 2006 Gravitas Publishing
4ALK THE 4ALK
A 4RUTH AND 2ECONCILIATION #OMMISSION IN UNCOVERING THE TRUTH 4HE
SECOND THEME COULD BE THE POSITIVE IMPACT ON PEOPLE INCLUDING INDI
VIDUALS AND FAMILIES AFFECTED DIRECTLY BY THE CONmICT AND SOCIETY AS A
WHOLE 4HESE PILLARS ALSO SERVE AS AN APPROPRIATE WAY TO SPLIT ARGU
MENTS BETWEEN THE TWO SPEAKERS (ERES A POSSIBLE STRUCTURE AND
SERIES OF ARGUMENTS INCLUDING LABELS FOR THE !FlRMATIVES CASE
!FlRMATIVE 3PEAKER
4HEME h0RACTICAL %FFECTIVENESSv
5NCOVERING FACTS 4RUTH AND 2ECONCILIATION #OMMISSIONS ARE MORE
EFFECTIVE AT DEVELOPING A FACTUAL ACCOUNT OF THE TRUTH BECAUSE VICTIMS
AND PERPETRATORS ALIKE HAVE INCENTIVES AND OPPORTUNITIES TO TELL THEIR
STORIES )N 7AR #RIMES 4RIBUNALS DEFENDANTS OFTEN SEEK TO HIDE INFOR
MATION AND TO DISTORT THE TRUTH
'REATER FEASIBILITY 4RUTH AND 2ECONCILIATION #OMMISSIONS ARE MORE
FEASIBLE TO IMPLEMENT THAN 7AR #RIMES 4RIBUNALS .ATIONS RAVISHED BY
WAR USUALLY DONT HAVE A STRONG INDEPENDENT JUDICIARY AND LEGAL SYS
TEM FOR THE PURPOSE OF PROSECUTING WARTIME OFFENDERS
5SEFUL RECOMMENDATIONS 4HE COMMISSIONS ARE EFFECTIVE AT PRODUCING
USEFUL RECOMMENDATIONS TO ENSURE THAT SUCH SITUATIONS DONT OCCUR IN
THE FUTURE 7AR #RIMES 4RIBUNALS ARE CONCERNED PRIMARILY WITH PUNISH
MENT NOT WITH EDUCATION AND IMPROVEMENT
!FlRMATIVE 3PEAKER
4HEME h)MPACT ON 0EOPLEv
%MOTIONAL HEALING 2EVEALING THE TRUTH IS ESSENTIAL TO THE PSYCHOLOGI
CAL HEALING PROCESS 0EOPLE NEED TO KNOW WHAT HAPPENED AND WHO WAS
RESPONSIBLE SO THAT THEY CAN REACH A FEELING OF CLOSURE 7AR #RIMES
4RIBUNALS CAN BE ADVERSARIAL TO THE POINT OF SPARKING ANGER
3OCIAL UNITY 4RUTH AND 2ECONCILIATION #OMMISSIONS AIM TO UNIFY
SOCIETY WHEREAS 7AR #RIMES 4RIBUNALS MAY BE SEEN AS INSTRUMENTS OF
REVENGE 4HIS UNITY ALSO AIDS IN THE ESTABLISHMENT OF A NEW DEMOCRATIC
GOVERNMENT WITH THE LEGITIMACY AND CREDIBILITY NECESSARY TO REPRESENT
EVERYONE IN SOCIETY
Review Copy
Copyright 2006 Gravitas Publishing
0ROS AND #ONS 3OLID 0OINTS AND 0OWERFUL #ASES
.OW THAT WEVE MAPPED OUT A POSSIBLE !FlRMATIVE CASE LETS TURN OUR
ATTENTION TO THE .EGATIVE SIDE ,IKE THE !FlRMATIVE ITS BEST TO START
WITH THE CORE THEMES OF THE CASE 4HE lRST THEME COULD FOCUS ON THE
IMMEDIATE BENElTS OF A 7AR #RIMES 4RIBUNAL 4HE SECOND THEME COULD
EMPHASIZE THE OVERALL IMPACT "ELOW ARE SOME OF THE ARGUMENTS THAT
COULD BE BROUGHT FORTH AS PART OF THE .EGATIVES CASE
.EGATIVE 3PEAKER
4HEME h)MMEDIATE )MPACTv
$ISBAND AGGRESSORS 7AR #RIMES 4RIBUNALS SERVE TO DISBAND AND DIMIN
ISH THE POWER OF THE MILITANT GROUPS THAT COMMITTED THE VIOLENT ACTS
4HIS MAKES IT FAR MORE DIFlCULT FOR THEM TO RESUME OR CONTINUE THEIR
WARTIME ATROCITIES
3ENSE OF RESOLUTION 6ICTIMS OF WARTIME ATROCITIES WILL ONLY FEEL A SENSE
OF RESOLUTION WHEN THOSE RESPONSIBLE FOR THE WAR CRIMES ARE FOUND
GUILTY AND PUNISHED )TS IMPORTANT FOR VICTIMS TO KNOW THAT BLAME HAS
BEEN ASSIGNED TO SPECIlC INDIVIDUALS
.EGATIVE 3PEAKER
4HEME h/VERALL -ESSAGEv
$ETERS FUTURE ABUSES 7AR #RIMES 4RIBUNALS SEND AN OVERALL MESSAGE
TO POTENTIAL FUTURE OFFENDERS THAT SUCH ACTS WILL NOT BE TOLERATED 7ITH
OUT SUCH TRIBUNALS THERE WONT BE SUFlCIENT DISINCENTIVE AGAINST THESE
TYPES OF CRIMINAL ACTIONS
)NTERNATIONAL STANDARDS 7AR #RIMES 4RIBUNALS ARE A MOVE TOWARD
INTERNATIONALLY RECOGNIZED STANDARDS OF HUMAN RIGHTS SUCH AS THE
)NTERNATIONAL #RIMINAL #OURT 4HEREFORE THEY SEND AN OVERALL SIGNAL
THAT THOSE WHO COMMIT WARTIME ATROCITIES WILL BE PUNISHED IRRESPEC
TIVE OF NATIONAL BOUNDARIES OR DIFFERING LEGAL STANDARDS
-ORAL OBLIGATION )N GENERAL THERE IS A MORAL OBLIGATION TO PUNISH WAR
CRIMINALS IN ACCORDANCE WITH BASIC PRINCIPLES OF HUMANITY !LLOWING
AMNESTY VIOLATES FUNDAMENTAL HUMAN VALUES ESSENTIALLY CONDONING
OR IGNORING SUCH CRIMES
Review Copy
Copyright 2006 Gravitas Publishing
4ALK THE 4ALK
9OU PROBABLY NOTICED THAT THERES A PARTIAL MATCH BETWEEN THE THEMES
OF EACH TEAMS lRST SPEAKER 4HEY FOCUSED LARGELY ON THE PRACTICAL
IMPACT AND EFFECTIVENESS OF THE RESPECTIVE SYSTEMS (OWEVER THE
SECOND SPEAKERS HAD FAIRLY DIFFERENT THEMES WHICH IS QUITE NORMAL
%ACH TEAM IS TRYING TO FOCUS ITS ARGUMENTS AND THE SPLIT OF THESE POINTS
BETWEEN PARTNERS IN A WAY THAT IT FEELS SERVES ITS INTERESTS
4HIS CHAPTER DISCUSSED HOW TO DEVELOP STRONG CONVINCING ARGUMENTS
AROUND CLEAR AND LOGICAL THEMES REGARDLESS OF THE TYPE OF RESOLUTION
YOURE DEBATING )T ALSO MENTIONED IMPORTANT TIPS TO REMEMBER WHEN
YOURE DIVIDING POINTS BETWEEN PARTNERS )F YOU FOLLOW THESE GUIDE
LINES YOUR DEBATE CASES WILL BE SIGNIlCANTLY STRONGER
Review Copy
Copyright 2006 Gravitas Publishing
0ROS AND #ONS 3OLID 0OINTS AND 0OWERFUL #ASES
#HAPTER +EYS TO 3UCCESS
D"UILD YOUR CASE AROUND STRONG THEMES ! CASE SHOULDNT
SEEM LIKE A SCATTERING OF POINTS EVEN IF THE POINTS ARE INDEPEN
DENTLY STRONG 9OUR ARGUMENTS SHOULD CENTER AROUND ONE OR MORE
THEMES WHICH ARE THE CORE IDEAS OF YOUR CASE
D-AKE STRONG DISTINCT POINTS ! CONVINCING ARGUMENT STARTS
WITH A BOLD STATEMENT FOCUSING ON A SINGLE ISSUE 4HINK ABOUT
THE DIFFERENT TYPES OF ARGUMENTS YOU CAN MAKE SUCH AS POINTS
RELATING TO JUSTIlCATION SYSTEMS PERCEPTION OR BEHAVIOR
,ABEL YOUR ARGUMENTS /NCE YOUVE PRESENTED THE ARGUMENT
EVERYONE ELSE HAS TO BE ABLE TO REMEMBER IT ,ABELING OR @BRAND
ING EACH OF YOUR ARGUMENTS IS A GREAT WAY TO MAKE YOUR POINTS
STAND OUT AND BE REMEMBERED AND IT ALLOWS YOU TO REFER BACK TO
THEM MORE EASILY
$IVIDE POINTS BETWEEN SPEECHES IN A SENSIBLE WAY /NCE
YOUVE IDENTIlED YOUR TEAMS ARGUMENTS THERE SHOULD BE SIG
NIlCANT THOUGHT PUT INTO HOW TO ORGANIZE THEM #ONSIDER THE
CORE THEMES OF YOUR CASE AND SPLIT THE POINTS BETWEEN THE TWO
SPEAKERS ACCORDINGLY
)F NECESSARY CHANGE ON THE mY )F YOURE THE .EGATIVE TEAM
AND YOU GET HIT WITH AN UNEXPECTED DElNITION OR CASE COME UP
WITH NEW ARGUMENTS DURING THE lRST !FlRMATIVE SPEECH $ONT
TRY TO lT AN IRRELEVANT OR WEAK CASE INTO THE DEBATE JUST BECAUSE
YOUVE PREPARED IT ALREADY
D%VALUATE YOUR CASE CAREFULLY $O A h37/4v ANALYSIS LOOKING
AT THE 3TRENGTHS 7EAKNESSES /PPORTUNITIES AND 4HREATS 5SE
THE ANALYSIS TO THINK ABOUT HOW YOU CAN STRENGTHEN YOUR CASE
Review Copy
Copyright 2006 Gravitas Publishing
Review Copy
Copyright 2006 Gravitas Publishing
*/(7;,9
'PEWL[MXL-QTEGX
1EWXIVMRKXLI%VXSJXLI%XXEGO
#OMING 5P
/NCE YOUVE BUILT A SOLID CASE THE NEXT STEP IS lGURING OUT HOW TO
CHALLENGE YOUR OPPONENTS CASE )N THIS CHAPTER YOULL LEARN ABOUT THE
MULTIPLE WAYS TO CLASH WITH THE OTHER TEAMS POINTS DURING CONSTRUC
TIVE SPEECHES AND HOW TO COMPLETE AN OVERALL ATTACK IN THE REBUTTAL
Review Copy
Copyright 2006 Gravitas Publishing
4ALK THE 4ALK
8%/-2+8,)0)%4 8,)',%00)2+)3*6)*98%8-32
7ITHOUT CLASH BETWEEN THE TWO TEAMS A DEBATE WOULD SIMPLY BE A
COLLECTION OF SPEECHES #OMPETITORS WOULD BE ABLE TO PLAN AND PRAC
TICE THE ENTIRE DEBATE BEFOREHAND AND THERE WOULDNT BE ANY BACK AND
FORTH mOW OF ARGUMENTS 4HE FOCUS WOULD BE ON MAKING A GREAT SPEECH
RATHER THAN CONTRIBUTING TO A GREAT DEBATE 2EMEMBER THOUGH THAT
DEBATE ISNT ONLY ABOUT PROVING THAT YOURE RIGHT )TS ALSO ABOUT PROV
ING THAT THE OTHER TEAM IS WRONG
#LASH OR REFUTATION IS THE PROCESS OF COUNTERING POINT BY POINT THE
ARGUMENTS BROUGHT FORTH BY THE OTHER TEAM 9OUR PURPOSE IS TO BE CRIT
ICAL AND TO RAISE DOUBTS IN THE MINDS OF THE JUDGES %FFECTIVE CLASH WILL
FORCE YOUR OPPONENT TO GO ON THE DEFENSIVE AND TO REBUILD ITS CASE
-ANY DEBATERS ESPECIALLY BEGINNERS lND REFUTATION PARTICULARLY
DIFlCULT 7HY 1UITE SIMPLY ITS THE PART OF A DEBATE THAT YOU CANT
PLAN IN ADVANCE "UT WHAT IF YOU MAKE MISTAKES )SNT IT MORE EFFEC
TIVE TO USE PREPARED PRACTICED TEXT AND TO DELIVER IT mAWLESSLY 4HE
REALITY IS ACTUALLY THE OPPOSITE 9OULL BE IN A SUPERIOR POSITION IF YOU
DEVOTE SIGNIlCANT EFFORT TO CLASH EVEN IF YOUR CLASH HAS MISTAKES AND
WEAKNESSES 3INCE YOURE UNABLE TO PLAN YOUR REFUTATION YOURE NOT
EXPECTED TO BE AS mUENT AS WHEN YOU PRESENT YOUR OWN TEAMS CASE
%VEN THOUGH YOU CANT PLAN YOUR CLASH PRECISELY YOU CAN MAKE
YOURSELF FAMILIAR WITH THE GENERAL TOOLS OF REFUTATION 4HAT IS YOU CAN
LEARN ABOUT THE VARIETY OF ANGLES FROM WHICH TO CLASH WITH AN OPPO
NENTS CASE 4HIS WILL PREPARE YOU TO SPOT SUCH OPPORTUNITIES QUICKLY
WHEN THEY COME UP IN A ROUND 9OU CAN ALSO ANTICIPATE SOME OF THE
IDEAS THAT THE OTHER TEAM MAY BRING UP AND CONSIDER HOW YOU WOULD
GO ABOUT CHALLENGING THEM
836)*98)36238836)*98)#
"EFORE DIVING INTO HOW TO REFUTE ITS IMPOR
TANT TO KNOW WHAT TO REFUTE 4HE SHORT EXPLA
NATION IS THAT YOU SHOULD REFUTE ANY PART OF
YOUR OPPONENTS CASE THATS IMPORTANT IN
PROVING ITS SIDE OF THE RESOLUTION 7HILE THIS
ADVICE MAY SEEM SELF
EVIDENT MUCH OF ANY
TEAMS CASE IS EXTRA INFORMATION THAT @PADS
THE MOST IMPORTANT ELEMENTS 9OU WONT BE
Review Copy
:\JJLZZ;PW
'PEWL[MXLIZIV]
VIPIZERXTSMRXQEHI
F]]SYVSTTSRIRX
Copyright 2006 Gravitas Publishing
#LASH WITH )MPACT -ASTERING THE !RT OF THE !TTACK
ABLE TO REFUTE EVERYTHING SO KNOWING WHATS ESSENTIAL AND WHAT ISNT
CAN MAKE YOUR CLASH SIGNIlCANTLY STRONGER
5SUALLY YOU SHOULD STICK TO THE CORE OF EACH OF YOUR OPPONENTS
POINTSTHE SINGLE SENTENCE THAT OUTLINES THE ARGUMENTAND THE LOGI
CAL ANALYSIS AND EXPLANATION THAT FOLLOWS )TS IMPORTANT TO DO THIS
FOR EVERY ARGUMENT AS YOU DONT WANT TO LEAVE ANY IMPORTANT POINTS
UNTOUCHED (OWEVER THERE ARE SOME AREAS THAT YOU SHOULD GENERALLY
AIM TO AVOID IN YOUR CLASH
0ROCESS AND TECHNIQUE 2EFUTATION SHOULD FOCUS EXCLUSIVELY ON SUB
STANTIVE MATTER &OR INSTANCE IF A SPEAKER GOES OVER TIME DONT TAKE UP
ANY OF YOUR TIME TELLING THE JUDGES ABOUT IT 9OU MAY ALSO COME ACROSS
DEBATERS WHO PRESENT POORLY STRUCTURED SPEECHES BUT YOU SHOULDNT
TRY TO CONVINCE THE JUDGES OF THIS WEAKNESS &INALLY YOU SHOULD AVOID
COMMENTS ON HOW EFFECTIVELY THE OTHER TEAM DEBATED SUCH AS SAYING
h4HE lRST .EGATIVE SPEAKER SHOWED POOR SKILL IN EXPLAINING HER SECOND
POINTv )TS UP TO THE JUDGES TO DECIDE HOW WELL EACH PERSON DEBATED
#ASE THEME 3URELY THE PURPOSE OF YOUR SPEECH IS TO SHOW WHY YOUR
OPPONENTS THEME IS INCORRECT "UT YOU SHOULDNT TRY TO DO SO BY DEBAT
ING THAT THE THEME ITSELF IS WRONG AS ITS TOO BROAD TO BE REFUTED DIRECTLY
! THEME IS A GROUPING AND SUMMARY OF A SERIES OF ARGUMENTS EACH OF
WHICH ADDRESSES A SPECIlC ISSUE 9OUR GOAL IN REFUTATION IS TO WEAKEN
THE THEME BY TARGETING THE INDIVIDUAL ARGUMENTS )T MAY ALSO BE USEFUL
TO EXPLAIN HOW YOUR CRITIQUE OF A PARTICULAR POINT HAS DAMAGED YOUR
OPPONENTS CASE THEME
3OURCES AND STATISTICS !DDRESSING THE USEFULNESS OF YOUR OPPONENTS
EVIDENCE OR POINTING OUT A FACTUAL INACCURACY CAN ADD SOME VALUE
TO YOUR CLASH 4HAT BEING SAID A COMMON MISTAKE IS TRYING TO ARGUE
AGAINST SOURCES AND STATISTICS DIRECTLY RATHER THAN THE POINTS THEM
SELVES h/UR SOURCE IS BETTER THAN YOUR SOURCEv OR h7E HAVE BETTER STA
TISTICSv TYPES OF COUNTER
ARGUMENTS DO LITTLE TO REFUTE THE ARGUMENTS
THAT FORM THE BASIS OF THE OTHER TEAMS CASE %VIDENCE ILLUSTRATES AN
ARGUMENT BUT DOESNT MAKE OR BREAK AN ARGUMENT
8,)833073*8)66-*-''0%7,
4HERE ARE COUNTLESS ANGLES FROM WHICH TO CLASH WITH YOUR OPPONENTS
CASE 4HIS SECTION PRESENTS A FEW OF THE MORE COMMON ONES WHICH
Review Copy
Copyright 2006 Gravitas Publishing
4ALK THE 4ALK
WILL GIVE YOU A GENERAL IDEA OF HOW TO APPROACH THE ATTACK 9OU CAN
CERTAINLY DELVE INTO THE MANY BOOKS AND ARTICLES DEVOTED TO MORE
TECHNICAL REFUTATION CONCEPTS 3UCH CONCEPTS GO BY NAMES LIKE hPOST
HOC FALLACYv AND hNON SEQUITURv )F YOU DONT HAVE ANY CLUE WHAT THESE
PHRASES MEAN DONT WORRY -OST DEBATERS DONT 7HILE IT MAY BE USE
FUL TO KNOW ABOUT THEM AS YOU BECOME AN ADVANCED DEBATER YOU CAN
GET QUITE FAR BY UNDERSTANDING THE TOOLS DISCUSSED IN THIS SECTION
)SSUE #HALLENGES
3AID CORRECTLY A CHALLENGE WILL DOUBLE AS
:\JJLZZ;PW
CLASH BY IMPLYING WHATS WRONG WITH THE
ARGUMENT )T TAKES LESS TIME TO ISSUE A CHAL
;LIRMWWYMRKE
LENGE THAT TO COUNTER A POINT DIRECTLY "Y
GLEPPIRKII\TPEMR
SPENDING A FEW SECONDS TELLING THE OTHER
[L]MX WMQTSVXERX
TEAM WHAT SPECIlCALLY IT HAS TO PROVE YOURE
FORCING IT TO SPEND VALUABLE TIME RESPOND
ING TO THE CHALLENGE )TS EFlCIENT FOR YOU
AND INEFlCIENT FOR YOUR OPPONENT
7HEN MAKING A CHALLENGE BE CONlDENT AND DECISIVE IN HOW YOU
PRESENT IT &OR EXAMPLE START WITH h4HE !FlRMATIVE MUST PROVE xv OR
h! FUNDAMENTAL ASSUMPTION THAT THE /PPOSITION HAS TO EXPLAIN IS xv
)N DOING SO YOULL SIMULTANEOUSLY SIGNAL TO YOUR JUDGES THAT A PARTICU
LAR ISSUE MUST BE ADDRESSED AND TO YOUR OPPONENTS THAT THEY HAVE TO
DEAL WITH IT 4HESE ARE SOME EXAMPLES OF HOW TO ISSUE A CHALLENGE
s -EDIA INmUENCE h4HERES A FUNDAMENTAL QUESTION THAT THE !FlRMA
TIVE MUST ANSWER IN ORDER TO JUSTIFY ITS CASE THAT THE NEWS MEDIA HAS
A NEGATIVE INmUENCE ON SOCIETY (OW ELSE WOULD WE RECEIVE VITAL INFOR
MATION ABOUT EMERGENCIES SUCH AS HURRICANES AND EARTHQUAKES v
s %NVIRONMENTAL STANDARDS h4HE @BLACK HOLE IN THE !FlRMATIVES
PLAN MUST BE ADDRESSED IN THE SECOND SPEAKERS SPEECH (OW WILL THE
GOVERNMENT CONVINCE PEOPLE TO PRACTICE THE PROPOSED ENVIRONMENTAL
STANDARDS IF THERES NO REASONABLE WAY TO MONITOR VIOLATIONS v
!TTACK !SSUMPTIONS
-OST ARGUMENTS REST ON ONE OR MORE ASSUMPTIONS /FTEN THESE ASSUMP
TIONS APPEAR NORMAL SO ITS UNLIKELY A TEAM WILL SPEND SIGNIlCANT TIME
Review Copy
Copyright 2006 Gravitas Publishing
#LASH WITH )MPACT -ASTERING THE !RT OF THE !TTACK
JUSTIFYING THEM /NE WAY OF CLASHING IS TO
ATTACK THESE ASSUMPTIONS WEAKENING THE
FOUNDATION FOR THE POINT )TS ALSO IMPORTANT
THAT YOU EXPLAIN WHY THE ASSUMPTION IN
QUESTION IS CENTRAL TO THE REST OF THE TEAMS
CASE (ERE ARE TWO EXAMPLES OF TARGETING A
TEAMS ASSUMPTIONS
:\JJLZZ;PW
)\TPEMRLS[EJEPWI
EWWYQTXMSRHEQEKIW
XLIIRXMVIGEWI
s )$ CARDS h4HE !FlRMATIVES SUGGESTION THAT WE SHOULD ASK EVERYONE
FOR )$ TO PROVE THEYRE OVER AGE ASSUMES THAT THE )$ PRESENTED IS
GENUINE )TS EASY FOR YOUNG PEOPLE TO GET A FAKE )$ WHICH DAMAGES THE
VIABILITY OF ITS PLANv
s 0OST
SECONDARY FUNDING h4HE .EGATIVES ARGUMENT THAT WE NEED
TO PAY FOR MORE OF STUDENTS POST
SECONDARY EDUCATION ASSUMES THAT
SOME STUDENT DEBT IS NECESSARILY A BAD THING )T ACTUALLY FORCES STU
DENTS TO BUDGET AND SPEND CAREFULLY AND IT MAKES THEM WORK HARD
AFTER GRADUATION TO ESTABLISH A SOLID lNANCIAL BASEv
"REAK ,INKS
)MAGINE A FRIEND SAID TO YOU h)NEXPENSIVE AIR TRAVEL MEANS MORE TIME
SPENT OUTSIDE CITIES WHICH MEANS LESS SMOG AFFECTING CITIES WHICH
MEANS LOWER HEALTH CARE COSTS WHICH MEANS LOWER TAXES WHICH MEANS
A STRONGER ECONOMY WHICH MEANS LESS PROPERTY CRIME 3O IF THE GOV
ERNMENT WAS SERIOUS ABOUT MAKING US FEEL SAFER IT WOULD SUBSIDIZE
AIRLINE TICKETSv 9OU CAN PROBABLY THINK OF A HANDFUL OF PLACES WHERE
YOUR FRIEND MADE WEAK LINKS TO ARRIVE AT THIS RIDICULOUS CONCLUSION
'RANTED YOU PROBABLY WONT SEE A CHAIN THIS FRAGILE IN A DEBATE
"UT YOU MAY SEE A TEAM PRESENT A SERIES OF TWO OR THREE ARGUMENTS
THAT ARE CLOSELY RELATED OR THAT DEPEND ON EACH OTHER 3OMETIMES THIS
STRATEGY CREATES A CAUSE AND EFFECT LINK /NE POINT IS THE REASON AND
ANOTHER POINT IS THE IMPLICATION 9OU CAN CLASH WITH LINKED ARGUMENTS
TOGETHER BY ATTACKING THE STATED OR IMPLIED CONNECTION BETWEEN POINTS
CLAIMING THAT ITS WEAK OR THAT IT DOESNT EXIST (ERE ARE TWO EXAMPLES
OF CLASHING WITH ARGUMENTS BY BREAKING LINKS
s 3TUDENT PERFORMANCE h/UR OPPONENTS SECOND POINT CLAIMED THAT
LOWER PERFORMANCE IN OUR DISTRICTS SCHOOLS IS A RESULT OF THE lRST POINT
NAMELY STUDENTS SPENDING TOO MUCH TIME ON VIDEO GAMES AND )NTER
Review Copy
Copyright 2006 Gravitas Publishing
4ALK THE 4ALK
NET CHAT )N REALITY A VARIETY OF FACTORS IMPACT STUDENT PERFORMANCE
SUCH AS ECONOMIC TRENDS POLITICAL DECISIONS AND SCHOOL MANAGEMENT
-ORE TIME SPENT ON THESE NON
ACADEMIC DISTRACTIONS MAY ACTUALLY BE
A SYMPTOM OF THESE OTHER INmUENCESv
s )NCOME TAXES h4HE !FlRMATIVE STARTED BY ARGUING THAT ELIMINATING
PATENTS FOR MEDICINES WOULD ALLOW MORE lRMS TO MANUFACTURE DRUGS
)N ITS SECOND POINT IT FALSELY IMPLIED THAT THIS WOULD INCREASE DRUG
DISCOVERY )F WE REDUCE THE PROlT MOTIVE BY DISALLOWING PATENTS THEN
IN FACT FEWER lRMS WOULD TAKE PART IN DRUG DISCOVERYv
)NDICATE )RRELEVANCE
)T MAY NOT BE NECESSARY TO SPEND SIGNIlCANT TIME SAYING WHY A POINT
IS WRONG IF YOU CAN SHOW WHY IT DOESNT MATTER EVEN IF ITS RIGHT )N
SOME CASES AN ARGUMENT MAY HIT AT AN ISSUE THATS WELL OUTSIDE THE
SCOPE OF THE DElNITION AND AT OTHER TIMES IT MAY BE INSIGNIlCANT TO
YOUR OPPONENTS CASE THEME 9OUR GOAL IS TO @TAKE THE POINT OUT OF THE
ROUND BY MAKING IT SEEM LIKE YOUR OPPONENT WAS WASTING ITS TIME BY
EVEN BRINGING UP THE ARGUMENT (ERE ARE SOME EXAMPLES
s 3TANDARDIZED TESTS h4HE .EGATIVES THIRD CONSTRUCTIVE POINT ARGUED
THAT TOO MUCH TESTING IN GENERAL ADVERSELY IMPACTS YOUNG STUDENTS
4HE POINT IS IRRELEVANT AS THE ISSUE HERE IS WHETHER THE STANDARDIZATION
OF THE TESTS ACROSS SCHOOLS IS HARMFUL &OR MOST STUDENTS THE ABSENCE
OF A STANDARDIZED TEST WOULD SIMPLY MEAN HAVING TO WRITE A SCHOOL
DEVELOPED EXAM IN ITS PLACEv
s -EDIA FUNDING h)N MAKING ITS CASE THAT OUR PUBLICLY
FUNDED BROAD
CASTER SHOULD BE PRIVATIZED THE !FlRMATIVES SECOND ARGUMENT WAS
THAT MAXIMUM CHOICE IS IN THE PUBLIC INTEREST 4HIS IS AN IRRELEVANT
POINT BECAUSE PRIVATIZATION WOULD ONLY CHANGE THE STRUCTURE AND
NATURE OF THIS ONE ORGANIZATION NOT THE NUMBER OF BROADCASTERSv
5NFORTUNATELY MANY DEBATERS MISUSE THIS TOOL OF REFUTATION )N EACH
OF THE CASES BELOW THE GUISE OF CLAIMING IRRELEVANCE IS BEING USED IN
ORDER TO AVOID HITTING THE ISSUE DIRECTLY
h)TS SIMPLY UNRELATEDv 3UPPORTING AN ARGUMENT WITH INFORMATION
FROM ANOTHER TIME PERIOD OR ANOTHER PLACE IS A COMMON AND POTEN
Review Copy
Copyright 2006 Gravitas Publishing
#LASH WITH )MPACT -ASTERING THE !RT OF THE !TTACK
TIALLY USEFUL TACTIC /F COURSE IT MAY VERY WELL BE THE CASE THAT THE
ANALOGY IS A POOR ONE 5NFORTUNATELY RATHER THAN CLAIMING IRRELEVANCE
ONLY FOR WEAK COMPARISONS SOME DEBATERS WILL TRY TO EXCLUDE A POINT
SIMPLY BECAUSE ITS FROM A SITUATION OUTSIDE THE CORE DEBATE 3UPPOSE
THE !FlRMATIVE SAYS h4HE SUCCESS OF THE 3WEDISH MODEL OF PUBLIC
HEALTH CARE SHOWS WHY WE SHOULD ADOPT IT IN THIS COUNTRYv /NE COULD
THINK OF MANY REASONS WHY THIS ANALOGY DOESNT REALLY PROVE THE POINT
OF THE DEBATE ! WEAK RESPONSE THOUGH WOULD BE TO SAY h7ELL THATS
JUST 3WEDEN AND WERE NOT TALKING ABOUT 3WEDENv
h)TS JUST AN EXCEPTIONv 3IMPLY SAYING THAT AN ARGUMENT OR EXAMPLE
IS hAN EXCEPTION TO THE USUAL CIRCUMSTANCEv OR THAT hITS REALLY JUST AN
ISOLATED POINTv DOESNT GET TO THE HEART OF WHY IT ISNT RELEVANT TO THE
ROUND 3AY THAT ON A DEBATE ABOUT THE ENTERTAINMENT MEDIAS INmU
ENCE THE !FlRMATIVE ARGUES THAT hFOUL LANGUAGE ON MANY TELEVISION
SHOWS LEADS TO MORE SWEARING AT SCHOOLv 4HE .EGATIVE CANT JUST SAY
THAT hTHE !FlRMATIVES POINT IS AN EXCEPTION BECAUSE NOT ALL CHILDRENS
SHOWS ARE LIKE THATv 4HE !FlRMATIVE ISNT TRYING TO PROVE THAT ALL ENTER
TAINMENT MEDIA HAS A NEGATIVE INmUENCE BUT ONLY THAT ON BALANCE A
NEGATIVE INmUENCE EXISTS
#ATCH #ONTRADICTIONS
3INCE A SOUND CASE IS CONSISTENT DEMONSTRATING INCONSISTENCIES EITHER
WITHIN A SPEECH OR BETWEEN PARTNERS CAN DO SERIOUS DAMAGE TO YOUR
OPPONENTS ARGUMENTS 9OULL USUALLY NOTICE A CONTRADICTION FAIRLY
QUICKLY AND THE INCONSISTENCY WILL BE APPARENT TO EVERYONE CONCERNED
3O WHILE ITS A GOOD IDEA TO POINT IT OUT DONT TAKE UP TOO MUCH TIME
DWELLING ON IT 9OU CAN ACTUALLY FORCE THE OTHER TEAM TO TAKE UP SOME
OF ITS TIME IN THE NEXT SPEECH BY ASKING THAT IT EXPLAIN WHAT ITS @REAL
POSITION IS "ELOW ARE TWO EXAMPLES OF CATCHING CONTRADICTIONS
s 3CHOOL LOCKER SEARCHES h4HE !FlRMATIVES lRST SPEAKER SAID THAT
SEARCHES BY SCHOOL OFlCIALS OR POLICE OFlCERS ARE JUSTIlED BECAUSE
SCHOOL LOCKERS ARE SCHOOL PROPERTY BUT THE SECOND SPEAKER SAID THAT
SEARCHES ARE A REASONABLE INTRUSION INTO AN AREA THAT SHE CLEARLY STATED
WAS A STUDENTS PRIVATE PROPERTY 7HICH ONE IS IT PUBLIC OR PRIVATE v
s (EALTH CARE PRIVATIZATION h-Y OPPONENTS lRST POINT WAS THAT A PUB
LICLY
FUNDED SYSTEM ALLOWS EQUAL TIMELY ACCESS TO EVERY MEMBER OF
Review Copy
Copyright 2006 Gravitas Publishing
4ALK THE 4ALK
SOCIETY 4HEN IN HER SECOND POINT SHE ARGUED THAT ONLY IN A SYSTEM
THATS PUBLICLY
FUNDED COULD PATIENTS RECEIVE QUICKER TREATMENT OR BE
ASKED TO WAIT ON MEDICAL GROUNDS ALONE )F THIS IS THE CASE THEN ITS
CLEARLY NOT @EQUAL AND @TIMELY FOR EVERYONE BUT JUST FOR THOSE PEOPLE
THE AUTHORITIES DECIDE SHOULD GO lRSTv
#OUNTER #ORRELATIONS
4HE FACT THAT TWO CIRCUMSTANCES HAPPENED TOGETHER OR IN SEQUENCE
DOESNT NECESSARILY MEAN THAT ONE CAUSED THE OTHER $EBATERS SOME
TIMES USE CORRELATION CLAIMS TO SUGGEST INCORRECTLY THE IMPACT OF A
PARTICULAR ACTION OR CIRCUMSTANCE )F CLASHING ON THE GROUNDS THAT ONE
ITEM DIDNT CREATE THE RESULT MENTIONED IT MAY BE HELPFUL TO STATE WHAT
OTHER FACTORS MAY HAVE CAUSED THE OUTCOME (ERE ARE SOME EXAMPLES
OF CHALLENGES TO CORRELATIONS
s &REE TRADE h4HE lRST .EGATIVE SPEAKER CLAIMED THAT THE SLOWDOWN
IN ECONOMIC GROWTH IS EVIDENCE THAT FREE TRADE AGREEMENTS HAVE BEEN
HARMFUL TO OUR COUNTRY 4HIS STATEMENT IS CLEARLY UNFOUNDED AS WE
DONT KNOW THAT FREE TRADE HAS CAUSED THESE TOUGH TIMES 'OVERNMENT
POLICIES OIL PRICES CURRENCY VOLATILITY AND A VARIETY OF OTHER FACTORS
ALSO SHAPE ECONOMIC PERFORMANCE )N FACT THE DOWNTURN COULD HAVE
BEEN WORSE IF NOT FOR THE EXPANSION OF TRADE AGREEMENTSv
s 3CHOOL DROPOUT RATE h7E WANT TO CHALLENGE THE !FlRMATIVES ARGU
MENT THAT DECREASED FUNDING FOR PUBLIC SCHOOLS MOVED LOCK
STEP WITH
INCREASED HIGH SCHOOL DROPOUT RATES 4HE REALITY IS THAT THERE ARE MANY
SOCIAL AND ECONOMIC FACTORS AT PLAY HERE 4HE HARDSHIP FACED BY LOW
INCOME FAMILIES MAY ACTUALLY BE WHATS ENCOURAGING STUDENTS TO lND
FULL
TIME EMPLOYMENT EARLY )TS NOT NECESSARILY A FUNDING PROBLEMv
-AKE #AREFUL #ONCESSIONS
3OMETIMES A POINT IS VERY CLEARLY TRUE AND IT MAKES LITTLE SENSE TO
REFUTE IT 'ENERALLY THE FACT THAT ITS WIDELY SEEN AS CORRECT MAKES IT
A FAIRLY UNSOPHISTICATED POINT "E CAREFUL THOUGH WITH HOW YOU USE
CONCESSIONS /NLY USE THEM WHEN YOURE ABSOLUTELY SURE THAT THE POINT
DOESNT STRENGTHEN YOUR OPPONENTS CASE 4HEY SHOULD NEVER BE USED
BECAUSE YOU DONT HAVE TIME TO EXPLAIN YOUR COUNTER
ARGUMENT MORE
FULLY OR WANT TO FOCUS ON OTHER ISSUES )F YOU CONCEDE A POINT THAT MAY
Review Copy
Copyright 2006 Gravitas Publishing
#LASH WITH )MPACT -ASTERING THE !RT OF THE !TTACK
NOT SEEM VITAL AT THE TIME YOUR OPPONENT COULD TRY TO MAKE IT MORE
IMPORTANT AS THE DEBATE GOES ON 9OULL HAVE SHUT YOURSELF OUT ON ANY
POINT THAT YOUVE ALREADY CONCEDED "ELOW IS ANALYSIS OF TWO INSTANCES
OF MAKING CONCESSIONS ONE EFFECTIVE AND ONE INEFFECTIVE
s 3CHOOL UNIFORMS 3AY A TEAM ARGUES THAT UNIFORMS hELIMINATE CHOICE
REGARDING HOW STUDENTS EXPRESS THEMSELVES THROUGH FASHIONv 7ELL
OF COURSE A STANDARD UNIFORM ELIMINATES CHOICE "UT IS THAT REALLY THE
ESSENCE OF A DEBATE ON WHETHER THE OVERALL OUTCOME IS GOOD OR BAD
#ONCEDE THE POINT AND INDICATE THAT YOU WANT TO MOVE ON TO MORE
IMPORTANT AND CONTENTIOUS ISSUES $ONT TRY TO EXPLAIN THE INTRICACIES
OF HOW hTHERE ARE DIFFERENT TYPES OF UNIFORMSv OR THAT hTHE WAY SOME
ONE @WEARS THE CLOTHES IS ITSELF A FORM OF EXPRESSIONv
s 0OLITICAL TERM LIMITS 3AY YOUR OPPONENT CONTENDS THAT TERM LIMITS
WOULD GUARANTEE hMORE CONSTANT CHANGE IN OUR POLITICAL LEADERSHIP
AND IN OUR LEGISLATIVE SYSTEMv 9OU CONCEDE h/F COURSE THERE WOULD BE
MORE CHANGE IF YOU IMPOSE TERM LIMITS SO LETS MOVE ON TO THE POINTS
THAT ARE ACTUALLY IN DISPUTEv 4HIS MAY ALLOW YOUR OPPONENT TO MAKE A
THEME OF FOSTERING hFRESH INNOVATE POLICIESv A CENTRAL PART OF ITS CASE
9OUR TEAM MAY HAVE BEEN BETTER OFF ARGUING WHY ROTATING THE PEOPLE IN
CHARGE DOESNT NECESSARILY RESULT IN DIFFERENT DECISIONS OR THAT CHANGE
ISNT ALWAYS DESIRABLE
&ACE THE &ACTS
9OUVE READ PREVIOUSLY THAT ITS NORMALLY NOT EFFECTIVE TO CLASH WITH
THE EVIDENCE ITSELF 7HAT CAN BE EFFECTIVE IS CLASHING AGAINST THE USE
OF THE EVIDENCE ! COMMON WAY TO ATTACK EVIDENCE IS ARGUING THAT IT
DOESNT PROVE THE CLAIM ! TEAM MAY HAVE OVERSTRETCHED AN ISOLATED
EXAMPLE TO REPRESENT A WIDER TREND OR CITED A STATISTIC WITH A WEAK
CONNECTION TO THE CLAIM IT WAS MEANT TO SUPPORT 4HE FOLLOWING EXAM
PLES ILLUSTRATE THIS TYPE OF REFUTATION
s !RTS FUNDING h4HE lRST .EGATIVE SPEAKER CITED THE BANKRUPTCY AND
CLOSING OF ONE THEATRE AS PROOF THAT GOVERNMENT SUBSIDIES ARE NEEDED
TO KEEP SUCH INSTITUTIONS AmOAT 4HIS CERTAINLY DOESNT SHOW A BROADER
PROBLEM )T COULD ACTUALLY HAVE BEEN EITHER MISMANAGEMENT OR UNAP
PEALING PLAYS THAT FORCED THIS FAILUREv
Review Copy
Copyright 2006 Gravitas Publishing
4ALK THE 4ALK
s 0RIVATE SCHOOLS h#ITING THEIR HIGHER PLACEMENT IN SCHOOL RANKINGS
WAS A WEAK WAY FOR THE !FlRMATIVE TEAM TO SHOW WHY PRIVATE SCHOOLS
DESERVE PUBLIC FUNDING 4HE lRST SPEAKER WAS TRYING TO MAKE A POINT
RELATING TO WORTHY PRINCIPLES BY BRINGING UP A POORLY CONNECTED EXAMPLE
CONCERNING PRACTICAL RESULTSv
!TTACH AN 5GLY ,ABEL
9OUR OPPONENT HAS OBVIOUSLY TRIED TO MAKE EACH POINT SEEM AS BRIL
LIANT AS POSSIBLE AND YOUR TASK IS TO SUGGEST THE OPPOSITE )F YOUR RIVAL
LABELED A POINT IN ONE WAY TO HELP THE JUDGES REMEMBER IT WHY NOT
CALL IT BY ANOTHER NAME SO THAT THEY SEE IT HOW YOU WANT THEM TO SEE
IT ,ABELING A POINT UNFAVORABLY IS EFFECTIVE AND ACCEPTABLE BUT DOING
SO OFFENSIVELY MAKES YOU LOOK UNREASONABLE &OR EXAMPLE YOU COULD
LABEL PART OF THE OTHER TEAMS CASE AS THE
hGOVERNMENT KNOWS BESTv POINT IF YOURE
:\JJLZZ;PW
TRYING TO CRITICIZE HOW DEEPLY THE BUREAU
CRACY WOULD BE INVOLVED IN A FAMILY DECISION
&IGSRGMWI[LIR
(OWEVER CALLING IT THE hWE THINK THAT ORDI
PEFIPMRKERSTTSRIRX W
NARY PEOPLE ARE UNINTELLIGENT UNINFORMED
EVKYQIRX
AND INCAPABLEv POINT IS PROBABLY PUSHING IT
TOO FAR (ERE ARE SOME COMPLETE EXAMPLES
OF LABELING AN OPPONENTS POINT UNFAVORABLY
AS A USEFUL REFUTATION TOOL
s 'ENETIC ENGINEERING h!FTER THE lRST !FlRMATIVE SPEAKER TALKED ABOUT
HIS RATIONALE FOR LIMITS ON GENETICALLY
MODIlED FARM SEED SHE WENT ON
TO DESCRIBE AN ELABORATE PROCESS OF CONSULTATION AFTER CONSULTATION WITH
STAKEHOLDERS TO DECIDE WHAT THE REGULATIONS SHOULD ACTUALLY BE 4HIS
WAS ESSENTIALLY THE @STRIKE A COMMITTEE POINT 2ATHER THAN EXPLAINING
THE !FlRMATIVES PLAN SHE SIMPLY SAID @,ETS STRIKE A COMMITTEE AND
THE PROBLEM WILL TAKE CARE OF ITSELFv
s 'LOBAL POVERTY h4HE SECOND !FlRMATIVE SPEAKERS lRST POINT WAS THAT
WE SHOULD IMMEDIATELY FORGIVE THE DEBTS OWED BY EVERY POOR NATION
4HIS POINT COULD ACTUALLY BE CALLED THE @WRITE A BLANK CHECK POINT .O
CONDITIONS TO ENSURE GOVERNMENT REFORM NO GUARANTEE THAT THE MONEY
SAVED WILL BE SPENT WELL AND NO PROCESS TO DETERMINE HOW MUCH DEBT
RELIEF IS A FAIR AMOUNT IN EACH CIRCUMSTANCEv
Review Copy
Copyright 2006 Gravitas Publishing
#LASH WITH )MPACT -ASTERING THE !RT OF THE !TTACK
36+%2->-2+)%',43-283*8,)&%880)
6ERY OFTEN DEBATERS WILL BE HIGHLY ORGANIZED WHEN MAKING THEIR OWN
POINTS BUT QUITE DISORGANIZED WHEN CLASHING WITH THEIR OPPONENTS
POINTS )T IS AFTER ALL MORE CHALLENGING TO STRUCTURE AN UNPREPARED REF
UTATION OF A POINT THAN TO STRUCTURE A POINT YOUVE PREPARED IN ADVANCE
7HILE THERE ARE A NUMBER OF WAYS TO ORGANIZE A COUNTER
ARGUMENT
HERES ONE COMMON METHOD THAT HAS PROVEN PARTICULARLY EFFECTIVE
7HAT THEY ARGUED 3TART BY MAKING IT CLEAR EXACTLY WHAT POINT YOURE
REFUTING )T MAY SEEM OBVIOUS TO YOU BUT ITS PROBABLY NOT AS OBVIOUS
TO EVERYONE ELSE 4HIS STEP WHILE VITAL CAN BE COMPLETED IN A BRIEF
SENTENCE 3AYING h4HE .EGATIVES SECOND POINT WAS xv OR h) WOULD
NOW LIKE TO CLASH WITH THE 'OVERNMENTS THIRD ARGUMENT WHICH WAS
THAT xv ARE EXAMPLES OF HOW YOU CAN BEGIN THIS PART
7HY THEYRE WRONG 4HIS PART IS THE @MEAT
OF THE CLASH SO IT SHOULD TAKE UP THE MOST
TIME 9OUR GOAL IS TO EXPLAIN COMPLETELY
AND EFFECTIVELY WHY YOUR OPPONENTS POINT
IS INCORRECT 3OME OF THE WAYS YOU CAN START
THIS ELEMENT INCLUDE h4HIS POINT IS INCOR
RECT BECAUSE xv OR h4HE PROBLEM WITH THIS
ARGUMENT LIES IN ITS ASSUMPTION THAT xv
>H[JO6\[
(SR XNYWXWE]MX W
[VSRK[MXLSYXI\TPEMR
MRK[L]MX W[VSRK
7HY IT MATTERS /NCE YOUVE SHOWN WHY THE OTHER TEAMS POINT IS
FALSE YOU SHOULD PUT YOUR CLASH INTO CONTEXTTHE @SO WHAT OF YOUR
REFUTATION ! GREAT WAY TO ACCOMPLISH THIS OBJECTIVE IS TO TIE THE CLASH
BACK TO YOUR OPPONENTS CASE THEME 4HIS WAY YOURE MAKING IT CLEAR
NOT ONLY THAT YOUVE DEFEATED A SINGLE POINT BUT THAT YOUVE WEAKENED
A KEY PILLAR OF YOUR OPPONENTS CASE &OR EXAMPLE YOU COULD SAY h4HE
mAWS IN THIS ARGUMENT GO TO THE HEART OF THE !FlRMATIVES THEME OF
DIVERSITY BECAUSE THEY REVEAL THAT xv
4HIS TYPE OF STRUCTURE MAKES IT EASY FOR YOUR JUDGES TO @CHECK OFF THAT
YOUVE CLASHED WITH EACH OF YOUR OPPONENTS POINTS )T ALSO GIVES YOU
A ROUGH TEMPLATE TO FOLLOW SO THAT AS YOU LISTEN TO YOUR OPPONENTS
SPEECH YOU CAN SIMPLY @lLL IN THE THREE PARTS OF YOUR CLASH FOR EACH
POINT %VEN IF YOU DONT GET A CHANCE TO WRITE DOWN NOTES FOR EVERY
REFUTATION POINT HAVING THE WORDS hWHAT THEY ARGUED WHY THEYRE
Review Copy
Copyright 2006 Gravitas Publishing
4ALK THE 4ALK
WRONG AND WHY IT MATTERSv ON YOUR PAGE SERVES AS A VALUABLE REMIND
ER OF WHAT YOU NEED TO COVER
)2+-2))6-2+8,)3:)6%00%88%'/
)N ADDITION TO HAVING A STRONG STRUCTURE FOR EACH POINT OF YOUR CLASH
ITS ALSO ESSENTIAL THAT YOUR OVERALL REFUTATION IS ORGANIZED SENSIBLY
4HIS PROVIDES A SENSE OF COMPLETENESS TO THE REFUTATION AND IMPROVES
THE mOW OF YOUR SPEECH 4HERE ARE SEVERAL KEY QUESTIONS THAT YOU NEED
TO CONSIDER WHEN DESIGNING YOUR REFUTATION STRATEGY
7HERE DOES THE REFUTATION lT INTO THE SPEECH
,IKE YOUR CONSTRUCTIVE POINTS YOUR CLASH SHOULD STAY TOGETHER AS A SEC
TION OF YOUR SPEECH 3OME DEBATERS PREFER TO START WITH CLASH WHILE
OTHERS PREFER TO BUILD CONSTRUCTIVE MATTER lRST "OTH WAYS ARE APPRO
PRIATE AND WHICH ONE YOU SELECT COMES DOWN TO PERSONAL PREFERENCE
%ACH METHOD HAS UNIQUE BENElTS
s #LASHING BEFORE CONSTRUCTING 4HE KEY BENElT OF STARTING WITH REFUTATION
IS THAT YOUR OPPONENTS POINTS ARE FRESH IN YOUR MIND AND IN THE MINDS
OF YOUR JUDGES !NOTHER ADVANTAGE IS THAT IT LEAVES YOUR OPPONENTS
CASE SIGNIlCANTLY WEAKENED BEFORE YOU CONSTRUCT YOUR CASE 9OURE
ESSENTIALLY TELLING THE JUDGES h7EVE ALREADY SHOWN YOU WHY THE OTHER
TEAMS CASE HAS FAILED TO MEET ITS BURDEN BUT HERE ARE SOME CONSTRUC
TIVE ARGUMENTS TO PROVE DElNITIVELY WHY WERE CORRECTv
s #LASHING AFTER CONSTRUCTING -ANY DEBATERS ARE MORE COMFORTABLE START
ING WITH WHAT THEYVE ALREADY PREPARED 4HIS METHOD GIVES YOU CONl
DENCE EARLY ON IN YOUR SPEECH /NCE YOU HAVE MOMENTUM ITS EASIER TO
TRANSITION INTO YOUR REFUTATION !LSO STARTING WITH CONSTRUCTIVE MATTER
IMMEDIATELY SHIFTS THE DEBATE BACK INTO YOUR COURT SEIZING THE AGENDA
FROM YOUR OPPONENT RIGHT AT THE OUTSET )N ADDITION IF YOURE SHORT ON
TIME AND NEED TO MAKE ADJUSTMENTS ITS EASIER TO BE SELECTIVE IN YOUR
REFUTATION THAN IN YOUR CONSTRUCTIVE MATTER
)N WHAT ORDER SHOULD YOU CLASH
4HE EASIEST MOST COMMON SENSE WAY TO ORDER YOUR CLASH IS TO GO IN THE
SAME ORDER AS YOUR OPPONENT PRESENTED THE ARGUMENTS 4HIS METHOD
Review Copy
Copyright 2006 Gravitas Publishing
#LASH WITH )MPACT -ASTERING THE !RT OF THE !TTACK
IS LESS COMPLICATED FOR YOU AS YOU CAN SIMPLY GO DOWN YOUR mOW SHEET
AND lRE BACK AT THE ARGUMENTS IN THE ORDER THAT THEYRE LISTED 4HIS IS
ALSO EASY FOR YOUR JUDGES TO FOLLOW BECAUSE THEYLL HAVE REMEMBERED
OR RECORDED THEM IN THE SAME SEQUENCE
(OWEVER THERE ARE SELECT CIRCUMSTANCES WHEN IT MIGHT MAKE SENSE
TO TAKE A DIFFERENT ROUTE &IRSTLY IF A PARTICULAR POINT IS CRITICAL TO YOUR
OPPONENTS CASE AND DAMAGING IT WOULD SIGNIlCANTLY UNDERMINE ITS
CORE THEME YOU COULD CONSIDER STARTING WITH THAT ARGUMENT 3AYING
FOR EXAMPLE h) WANT TO BEGIN WITH MY OPPONENTS SECOND CONSTRUCTIVE
POINT )TS THE FOUNDATION OF THE !FlRMATIVES CASE BECAUSE xv MAKES
IT CLEAR WHY YOURE TAKING THIS ROUTE .OTICE THE WORD hBECAUSEv 9OU
SHOULD ALWAYS SAY WHY THE POINT IS VITAL TO THE DEBATE 3ECONDLY IF
YOURE CONCERNED THAT YOU MAY RUN OUT TIME ITS PREFERABLE TO HAVE
COVERED AT LEAST THE KEY POINTS
(OW DO YOU ALLOCATE TIME TO EACH POINT
7HILE ITS IMPORTANT TO CLASH WITH EVERY POINT ITS NOT NECESSARY TO
SPEND AN EQUAL AMOUNT OF TIME ON EACH ONE )F THERES A SIMPLE EASY
TO STATE REASON WHY YOU FEEL THAT A POINT IS WRONG GET IT ACROSS IN A FEW
SENTENCES AND MOVE ON ,EAVE A GREATER AMOUNT OF TIME FOR ARGUMENTS
THAT ARE MORE CRITICAL OR THAT REQUIRE MORE DETAILED REFUTATION
)F YOUVE ALREADY PRESENTED ADDITIONAL CONSTRUCTIVE POINTS YOU
COULD DECIDE TO SHORTEN A REFUTATION POINT BY STATING HOW YOUVE
ALREADY COVERED THE CRUX OF YOUR OPPONENTS ARGUMENT THROUGH YOUR
OWN POINT &OR EXAMPLE IF ONE OF YOUR NEW POINTS IS THAT hFORGIVING THE
DEBTS OWED BY POOR COUNTRIES WILL SPEED UP GOVERNMENT REFORM v YOU
COULD REFER BACK TO THIS POINT WHEN REFUTING YOUR OPPONENTS ARGUMENT
THAT hDEBT RELIEF EXCUSES AND DOES NOTHING TO REDUCE CORRUPTIONv
7HAT IF YOUR OPPONENTS SPEECH WAS DISORGANIZED
7EVE DISCUSSED HOW TO ORGANIZE REFUTATION ON THE ASSUMPTION THAT
YOUR OPPONENTS POINTS WERE WELL
ORGANIZED 5NFORTUNATELY NOT EVERY
ONES SPEECH WILL HAVE A CLEAR STRUCTURE 3OMETIMES YOU WONT BE ABLE
TO TELL WHEN ONE POINT ENDS AND ANOTHER BEGINS )F SO CHANCES ARE THAT
YOUR JUDGES ARE HAVING THE SAME PROBLEM 4HIS TYPE OF SITUATION MAKES
IT MORE CHALLENGING TO ORGANIZE YOUR CLASH EFFECTIVELY
!LTHOUGH YOU COULD SIMPLY CONDUCT YOUR REFUTATION IN AN EQUAL
LY SCATTERED WAY YOU WOULD ONLY BE DRAGGING YOURSELF DOWN IN THE
Review Copy
Copyright 2006 Gravitas Publishing
4ALK THE 4ALK
PROCESS (OW DO YOU DEAL WITH A DISORGANIZED SPEECH /RGANIZE IT
YOURSELF !S ODD AS THIS TECHNIQUE MAY SOUND IT WILL MAKE YOU MORE
ORGANIZED AND WILL MAKE IT EASIER FOR THE JUDGES TO FOLLOW THE ROUND
9OU ARENT REALLY ASSISTING YOUR OPPONENT
AS YOU WOULD GET CREDIT FOR IMPROVING THE
:\JJLZZ;PW
QUALITY OF THE DEBATE 4HE WAY TO ACCOM
PLISH THIS TASK IS TO READ THROUGH YOUR NOTES
-J]SYVSTTSRIRX W
lND LOGICAL BREAKS AND NUMBER THE POINTS
WTIIGLMWHMWSVKERM^IH
YOURSELF &OR EXAMPLE YOU COULD SAY h4HE
SVKERM^IMX]SYVWIPJ
lRST AREA THAT OUR OPPONENT FOCUSED ON WAS
x THEN THE SECOND ISSUE SHE MOVED TO WAS
x lNALLY SHE DISCUSSED A THIRD POINT xv
'0%7,-2796%2') 8,)D723;&%00 7=78)1
5SUALLY A SINGLE ARGUMENT IS MET WITH A SINGLE POINT OF REFUTATION 4HIS
TACTIC IS TYPICALLY CLEAR
CUT AS IT CREATES A WELL
MATCHED @POINT AND
COUNTER
POINT STRUCTURE TO YOUR REFUTATION )T ALLOWS YOU TO BE THOR
OUGH BECAUSE YOU CAN ZERO
IN ON A PARTICULAR PROBLEM AND EXPLAIN
YOUR POINT OF CONTENTION FULLY
5NFORTUNATELY YOUR WHOLE CLASH AGAINST THE ARGUMENT IN QUESTION
RELIES ON THIS ONE LINE OF ATTACK )F A JUDGE DOESNT BUY INTO YOUR CLAIM
THE POINT WILL STAND (OW DO YOU @INSURE YOURSELF AGAINST THIS POS
SIBILITY 9OU COULD USE MULTIPLE ANGLES OF ATTACK IN SEQUENCE CREATING
A @SNOWBALL THAT GATHERS STRENGTH AS IT MOVES THROUGH AN ARGUMENT
9OURE CREATING MORE REASONS TO REJECT THE POINT EVEN IF THE JUDGES
DONT AGREE FULLY WITH EVERY ONE OF THEM
,ETS TAKE A DEBATE OVER ENVIRONMENTAL LAWS 4HE !FlRMATIVE
MAKES A PASSIONATE PLEA TO CURB GLOBAL WARMING USING A COMBINATION
OF REGULATION AND ENFORCEMENT AIMING TO CURB CARBON DIOXIDE EMIS
SIONS 4O ILLUSTRATE HOW THE .EGATIVE COULD USE CUMULATIVE @SNOWBALL
REFUTATION HERES AN EXAGGERATED EXAMPLE
s h&IRSTLY DESPITE WHATS OFTEN STATED IN THE MEDIA THERES NO DElNITIVE
PROOF THAT THERE EVEN IS A LONG
TERM GLOBAL WARMING TREND 3CIENTISTS
AROUND THE WORLD ARE DIVIDED ON THIS QUESTIONTHERES NO CLEAR CON
SENSUS &OR EXAMPLE WE KNOW THAT xv
s h3ECONDLY EVEN IF YOU BELIEVE THAT GLOBAL WARMING EXISTS IT CANT BE
lRMLY ESTABLISHED THAT CARBON DIOXIDE IS THE PRIMARY CAUSE 3OLAR ACTIV
Review Copy
Copyright 2006 Gravitas Publishing
#LASH WITH )MPACT -ASTERING THE !RT OF THE !TTACK
ITYTHE SUN BURNING HOTTER IN SOME YEARS THAN IN OTHERSIS ANOTHER
POSSIBLE CAUSE SUPPORTED BY RESEARCH FROM xv
s h4HIRDLY EVEN IF CARBON DIOXIDE IS A PROBLEM MANY SCIENTISTS BELIEVE
THAT LESS THAN OF IT IS CAUSED BY HUMAN ACTIVITY 4HE REST IS NATURALLY
OCCURRING WHICH MEANS THAT xv
s h&OURTHLY EVEN IF WE ASSUME THAT HUMAN ACTIVITY IS A LEADING CAUSE OF
CARBON DIOXIDE IN THE ATMOSPHERE ARE THE POTENTIAL CONSEQUENCES SO
SEVERE THAT DRASTIC ACTION IS NEEDED $ESPITE THE DOOMSDAY SCENARIOS
PRESENTED BY THE !FlRMATIVE THERES GOOD REASON TO BELIEVE THAT xv
s h&INALLY EVEN IF SIGNIlCANT CONSEQUENCES WILL RESULT THE !FlRMATIVES
PROPOSALS ARENT THE BEST WAYS TO DEAL WITH THEM BECAUSE THE COSTS
CLEARLY OUTWEIGH THE BENElTS !S WITH HISTORICAL CLIMATE CHANGES
HUMANKIND MAY ACTUALLY NEED TO ADAPT TO THE SITUATION BY xv
8,)'0-2',)6 40%=83;-2-28,)6)&988%0
/VER THE FOUR CONSTRUCTIVE SPEECHES MANY ARGUMENTS AND COUNTER
ARGUMENTS HAVE BEEN HURLED BACK AND FORTH )N A TYPICAL DEBATE THIS
COULD ADD UP TO ARGUMENTS BETWEEN THE TWO TEAMS PLUS REFUTATION
OF THESE POINTS 4HATS A WHOPPING PARCELS OF INFORMATION THAT THE
JUDGES HAVE TO PROCESS
#AN YOU BLAME THE JUDGES IF THEYRE
:\JJLZZ;PW
HAVING TROUBLE DECIDING WHOS UP AND
WHOS DOWN &OR THIS REASON CLOSE DEBATES
6IJIVFEGOXS
ARE WON AND LOST IN THE REBUTTAL )TS YOUR
TVIZMSYWWTIIGLIW
LAST CHANCE TO MAKE AN IMPRESSION ON THE
MRXLIVIFYXXEP
JUDGES WHICH IS WHY YOUR REBUTTAL STRATEGY
IS CRITICAL TO HOW YOUR SIDE IS EVALUATED ,IKE
CLOSING ARGUMENTS IN A COURT TRIAL THE REBUT
TAL MAKES IT CLEAR FOR EVERYONE CONCERNED WHAT HAS HAPPENED IN THE
DEBATE AND WHY YOUR SIDE HAS PREVAILED ,ETS BEGIN BY REVISITING THE
THREE KEY ROLES DISCUSSED IN #HAPTER
s 2EFUTE THE OTHER TEAMS CASE AS A WHOLE
s #OMPARE AND CONTRAST THE COMPETING THEMES
s 3UMMARIZE YOUR TEAMS CASE
Review Copy
Copyright 2006 Gravitas Publishing
4ALK THE 4ALK
7HILE YOU COULD ORDER YOUR REBUTTAL BASED ON THESE THREE SECTIONS FEEL
FREE TO EXPERIMENT WITH WHAT WORKS BEST FOR YOU 4HE ORGANIZATION
OF A REBUTTAL SPEECH IS LESS RIGID THAN THAT OF A CONSTRUCTIVE SPEECH
9OU MAY DECIDE TO FOCUS ON CONTRASTING THE TWO PERSPECTIVES INCOR
PORATING OVERALL REFUTATION AND OVERALL SUMMARY INTO THIS COMPARISON
!LTERNATIVELY YOU MAY WANT TO START BY ANALYZING AND EVALUATING THE
DEBATE CHRONOLOGICALLY AND HIGHLIGHTING THE KEY POINTS MADE BY BOTH
SIDES )T ALL DEPENDS ON YOUR PERSONAL STYLE AND ON WHAT YOURE TRYING
TO ACCOMPLISH WITH YOUR REBUTTAL
)TS CRITICAL THAT YOU UNDERSTAND THE
>H[JO6\[
DIFFERENCE BETWEEN CLASH IN A CONSTRUCTIVE
SPEECH AND REFUTATION IN A REBUTTAL SPEECH
%ZSMHTSMRXF]TSMRX
)N lRST PART OF THE DEBATE YOU SHOULD HAVE
GPEWLMRXLIVIFYXXEP
CLASHED WITH EVERY IMPORTANT POINT MADE
BY YOUR RIVAL TRYING TO WEAKEN ITS CASE ONE
PIECE AT A TIME )N A REBUTTAL SPEECH YOUR
GOAL IS TO REFUTE THE OTHER TEAMS OVERALL
CASE ! REBUTTAL SPEAKER SHOULDNT PUT MUCH EMPHASIS ON DETAILED
ANALYSIS OF EVIDENCE OR ON TAKING APART INDIVIDUAL ARGUMENTS
4HE ONLY POSSIBLE EXCEPTION TO THESE GUIDELINES IS IF THE SECOND
.EGATIVE SPEAKER HAS PRESENTED NEW POINTS AND THE REBUTTAL SPEECH
IS YOUR TEAMS lRST CHANCE TO RESPOND )F YOU DECIDE TO CLASH WITH
THESE ARGUMENTS INDIVIDUALLY RATHER THAN ROLLING THEM INTO THE OVERALL
ATTACK KEEP THE CLASH BRIEF AND PUT IT AT THE BEGINNING OF YOUR REBUTTAL
,EAVE THE BULK OF YOUR REBUTTAL FOR OVERALL REFUTATION AND SUMMARY
4HE TOP REBUTTALS ACCOMPLISH ONE TASK
EXTREMELY WELL FRAMING THE DEBATE 4HIS
:\JJLZZ;PW
MEANS PUTTING FORTH YOUR VERSION OF WHAT
THE DEBATE IS ACTUALLY ABOUTWHAT THE
9WIXLIVIFYXXEPXS
JUDGES SHOULD CONSIDER WHEN MAKING A
JVEQIXLIHIGMWMSR
DECISION 4HERE ARE THREE STEPS INVOLVED IN
GVMXIVME
FRAMING THE DEBATE WHICH CAN ALSO BE USED
AS A STRUCTURE FOR YOUR REBUTTAL
3TEP 4ELL THE JUDGES WHAT THE KEY ISSUES ARE 4ELL THEM BLUNTLY
AND CONCISELYDONT SKATE AROUND THEM IN A ROUNDABOUT WAY 9OURE
BEST OFF LISTING AND NUMBERING YOUR VERSION OF THE DECIDING ISSUES FOR
YOUR JUDGES 4HIS HELPS THEM REMEMBER YOUR INTERPRETATION OF THE KEY
ISSUES AND ENCOURAGES THEM TO WRITE THEM DOWN !S WITH ARGUMENTS
IN A CONSTRUCTIVE SPEECH YOURE WELL
ADVISED NOT TO IDENTIFY MORE THAN
Review Copy
Copyright 2006 Gravitas Publishing
#LASH WITH )MPACT -ASTERING THE !RT OF THE !TTACK
TWO OR THREE ISSUES !NY MORE WILL BE TOO MUCH FOR YOU TO TALK ABOUT
AND FOR YOUR JUDGES TO DIGEST IN SUCH A SHORT SPEECH
3TEP %XPLAIN WHY THEYRE THE KEY ISSUES ! JUDGE CAN BE FORGIV
EN FOR THINKING h/N WHAT BASIS HAVE YOU SELECTED THOSE ISSUES AS THE
DECIDING ISSUES v )F YOURE GOING TO CONDENSE THE DEBATE DOWN TO CORE
THEMES OR ZERO
IN ON SELECTED ARGUMENTS ITS YOUR RESPONSIBILITY TO
JUSTIFY YOUR DECISION 4ELL THE JUDGES WHY THE ENTIRE DEBATE RESTS ON THE
PILLARS YOUVE IDENTIlED
3TEP !RGUE HOW YOUVE COME OUT AHEAD ON THESE ISSUES /F
COURSE IT ONLY MAKES SENSE TO CHOOSE ISSUES THAT YOU FEEL FALL CLEARLY
ON YOUR SIDE OF THE RESOLUTION $RIVE HOME THESE ADVANTAGES IN YOUR
REBUTTAL %XPLAIN HOW YOUVE PREVAILED ON THESE DIMENSIONS AND WHY
THAT MEANS YOUVE WON THE DEBATE
)F YOURE DELIVERING THE .EGATIVE REBUTTAL ONE EFFECTIVE WAY TO FRAME
THE DEBATE AROUND YOUR KEY ISSUES IS TO TELL THE !FlRMATIVE WHAT EXACT
LY IT MUST DO IN ITS REBUTTAL 4HIS TACTIC CAN THROW OFF YOUR OPPONENTS
REBUTTAL AS WELL AS ENCOURAGE YOUR JUDGES TO PAY ATTENTION TO HOW
WELL YOUR RIVAL RESPONDS TO YOUR CHALLENGES "UT ONLY INCLUDE THOSE
ISSUES THAT YOURE VERY CONlDENT FALL CLEARLY ON YOUR SIDE OF THE DEBATE
4HERES NOTHING WORSE THAN LAYING OUT WHAT YOU FEEL SHOULD BE THE KEY
DECISION CRITERIA ONLY TO HAVE THE !FlRMATIVE TEAM PROVE ITSELF RIGHT
ON EACH OF THE POINTS
&OR EXAMPLE YOU COULD SAY h3O WHAT ARE THE TWO CORE ISSUES OF
THIS DEBATE 7HAT MUST THE lRST !FlRMATIVE SPEAKER PROVE TO YOU IN
HER REBUTTAL &IRSTLY SHE MUST SHOW YOU WHY A TAX DEDICATED TO ROADS
WONT END UP IN THE GOVERNMENTS GENERAL COFFERS AND IN OTHER DEPART
MENTS 7EVE REVEALED HOW EASY IT IS FOR THIS TO HAPPEN 3ECONDLY SHE
MUST SHOW YOU THAT xv
(OW SHOULD YOU RESPOND IF YOURE THE !FlRMATIVE REBUTTAL SPEAKER
AND THIS TACTIC IS USED AGAINST YOU 4HERE ARE TWO OPTIONS TACKLE THE
ISSUES DIRECTLY OR IGNORE THEM ALTOGETHER 4HE lRST OPTION IS RISKY
BECAUSE YOURE ALLOWING THE .EGATIVE TO CONTROL YOUR SPEECH )F YOURE
VERY CONlDENT THAT YOU CAN EXPLAIN WHY YOU WON ON THE CRITERIA PRE
SENTED BY ALL MEANS GO AHEAD AND DO SO "UT IF YOU FALL SHORT YOURE
BOUND TO LOSE THE DEBATE 4HE SECOND OPTION ALLOWS YOU TO CARRY OUT
THE REBUTTAL AS YOU SEE lT )F YOURE GOING TO IGNORE THE .EGATIVES CRI
TERIA YOU HAVE TO EXPLAIN CLEARLY WHY THEYRE NOT THE KEY ISSUES OF THE
Review Copy
Copyright 2006 Gravitas Publishing
4ALK THE 4ALK
DEBATE ,OGICALLY IT THEN FALLS ON YOU TO PROVIDE A DIFFERENT VERSION OF
THE KEY ISSUES AND TO JUSTIFY WHY YOUR INTERPRETATION IS RIGHT
4HIS CHAPTER IS PERHAPS ONE OF THE MOST IMPORTANT IN THE BOOK BECAUSE
IT TOLD YOU ABOUT A KEY ASPECT OF A VIBRANT DEBATE THE POINT BY POINT
AND OVERALL REFUTATION OF THE OTHER TEAMS ARGUMENTS )F YOU WANT TO
EXCEL AT DEBATE ITS ESSENTIAL THAT YOU UNDERSTAND THE DIFFERENT WAYS
TO MAKE COUNTER
ARGUMENTS AND HOW TO DELIVER A REBUTTAL SPEECH
Review Copy
Copyright 2006 Gravitas Publishing
#LASH WITH )MPACT -ASTERING THE !RT OF THE !TTACK
#HAPTER +EYS TO 3UCCESS
D#LASH WITH EVERY ARGUMENT ,EAVING A POINT UNCHALLENGED
SUGGESTS THAT YOU AGREE WITH IT AND MAKES YOUR OPPONENTS CASE
STRONGER 2EFUTATION MAY BE A CHALLENGING @ON THE SPOT SKILL BUT
ITS ESSENTIAL TO THE DEBATE
D4HINK ABOUT THE DIFFERENT WAYS TO REFUTE A POINT !NALYZE
WHETHER THE ARGUMENT IS LOGICAL AND RESTS ON SOUND ASSUMP
TIONS ,OOK FOR CONTRADICTORY IRRELEVANT OR POORLY LINKED POINTS
D3IMPLIFY YOUR REFUTATION WITH LABELS ,ABEL EACH OF YOUR
OPPONENTS POINTS IN A WAY THAT COMMUNICATES WHAT YOU THINK IS
WRONG WITH THEM 4HIS TACTIC MAKES IS EASIER TO DISCUSS THE CORE
THEMES RATHER THAN HAVING TO DESCRIBE EACH POINT IN DETAIL
D"E ORGANIZED WHEN YOU CLASH &OR EACH POINT SAY WHAT YOURE
REFUTING REFUTE IT AND EXPLAIN WHY IT MATTERS 5SING YOUR mOW
SHEET AS AN AID WORK METHODICALLY USUALLY IN ORDER THROUGH
YOUR OPPONENTS POINTS 0LACE GREATER EMPHASIS ON THE MOST
IMPORTANT ARGUMENTS
)N THE REBUTTAL FOCUS ON @BIG PICTURE IDEAS &RAME THE DEBATE
IN A WAY THAT FAVORS YOUR SIDE OF THE RESOLUTION 4ELL THE JUDGES
WHAT THE KEY ISSUES ARE WHY THEYRE THE KEY ISSUES AND HOW
YOUVE WON ON THESE ISSUES 2ATHER THAN ENGAGING IN POINT BY
POINT CLASH FOCUS ON THE DEBATES KEY THEMES
Review Copy
Copyright 2006 Gravitas Publishing
Review Copy
Copyright 2006 Gravitas Publishing
*/(7;,9
3R8LEX4SMRX
2EZMKEXMRK4EVPMEQIRXEV](IFEXI
#OMING 5P
)N THIS SECTION YOULL LEARN ABOUT THE PROCEDURES AND TECHNIQUES OF
PARLIAMENTARY DEBATE 9OULL DISCOVER HOW TO USE QUESTIONS OR 0OINTS
OF )NFORMATION TO DAMAGE AN OPPONENTS CASE AND HOW TO REACT WHEN
QUESTIONS ARE lRED AT YOU
Review Copy
Copyright 2006 Gravitas Publishing
4ALK THE 4ALK
8,)4%60-%1)28%6=86%(-8-32
0ARLIAMENTARY DEBATE HAS A LONG HISTORY IN
+PK@V\2UV^&
LEGISLATURES AROUND THE WORLD 4HE 5NITED
3TATES #ONGRESS THE "RITISH (OUSE OF #OM
1SHIVRTEVPMEQIR
MONS AND THE 'ERMAN "UNDESTAG ARE ALL
XEV]HIFEXIWXEVXIHMR
EXAMPLES OF NATIONAL LEGISLATURES )N THESE
)RKPERH
CHAMBERS THE GREAT DEBATES OF SOCIETY TAKE
PLACE %LECTED REPRESENTATIVES FROM VARIOUS
REGIONS GATHER TO DEBATE LAWS ON ECONOMIC
SOCIAL AND FOREIGN AFFAIRS 4HE DEBATES TEND TO BE LIVELY AND VIGOROUS
EVEN BECOMING PUBLIC SPECTACLES AT THEIR MOST HEATED MOMENTS
-ANY OF THE FEATURES SEEN IN NATIONAL PARLIAMENTS HAVE WORKED
THEIR WAY INTO STUDENT PARLIAMENTARY DEBATING SUCH AS THE TITLES OF
THE PARTICIPANTS AND OTHER FORMALITIES 4HE STUDENT VERSION SHRINKS
THE NUMBER OF DEBATERS FROM SEVERAL HUNDRED TO FOUR IN MOST STYLES
!S WITH REAL PARLIAMENTS THERE IS A 'OVERNMENT AND AN /PPOSITION
4HE KEY FEATURE OF THIS STYLE IS YOUR ABILITY TO ASK QUESTIONS KNOWN
AS 0OINTS OF )NFORMATION WHILE YOUR OPPONENT IS SPEAKING 9OU CAN ALSO
HECKLE WHEN SOMEONE ELSE HAS THE mOOR MAKING FOR SOME HUMOROUS
AND SPONTANEOUS MOMENTS )TS LESS RAUCOUS THOUGH THAN THE BAR
RAGE OF SIMULTANEOUS HECKLES COMMONLY SEEN IN ACTUAL LEGISLATURES
/THER THAN THESE ELEMENTS THE SKILLS DISCUSSED IN PREVIOUS CHAPTERS
APPLY TO PARLIAMENTARY STYLE AS WELL
0)%62-2+8,)0-2+3
/NE OF THE lRST FEATURES YOULL NOTICE ABOUT PARLIAMENTARY DEBATE IS
THE DIFFERENCE IN LANGUAGE COMPARED TO OTHER FORMS OF DEBATE ,IKE
FUNCTIONING LEGISLATURES PARLIAMENTARY STYLE HAS ITS OWN LINGO -AKING
MISTAKES RELATING TO APPROPRIATE LANGUAGE WONT WEAKEN YOUR CASE
"UT ITS IMPORTANT TO USE THE RIGHT TERMS BECAUSE DOING SO SHOWS THAT
YOURE FAMILIAR WITH HOW THE STYLE WORKS (ERE ARE SOME OF THE BASIC
PARLIAMENTARY DEBATE TERMS THAT YOU SHOULD GET TO KNOW
4HE 3PEAKER IS TO PARLIAMENTARY DEBATE WHAT THE #HAIRPERSON IS TO
OTHER STYLES OF COMPETITION 4HE PROPER WAY TO REFER TO THIS PERSON IS
h-R 3PEAKERv OR h-ADAME 3PEAKERv !S IN REAL LEGISLATURES THE 3PEAK
ER HAS THE lNAL AUTHORITY OVER RULES AND PROCEDURES %VERYTHING YOU
Review Copy
Copyright 2006 Gravitas Publishing
/N 4HAT 0OINT .AVIGATING 0ARLIAMENTARY $EBATE
SAY mOWS THROUGH THE 3PEAKER &OR EXAMPLE h-ADAME 3PEAKER TODAY
WE WILL SHOW YOU WHY GAMBLING SHOULD BE BANNEDv
4HE 'OVERNMENT IS ESSENTIALLY THE !FlRMATIVE TEAMTHE SIDE THAT
SUPPORTS THE MOTION 2ATHER THAN A lRST !FlRMATIVE SPEAKER AND A SEC
OND !FlRMATIVE SPEAKER THERE IS A 0RIME -INISTER 0- AND A -INISTER
OF THE #ROWN -# RESPECTIVELY 4HESE POSITIONS DONT IMPLY RANK OR
AUTHORITY WITHIN A TEAM 4HEYRE USED SIMPLY TO IDENTIFY ROLES
4HE /PPOSITION SOMETIMES CALLED (ER -AJESTYS ,OYAL /PPOSITION IS
LIKE THE .EGATIVE TEAM IN THAT IT ARGUES AGAINST THE MOTION 5NLIKE
THE TITLES lRST SPEAKER AND SECOND SPEAKER USED IN OTHER STYLES THE
TEAM MEMBERS ARE CALLED THE -EMBER OF THE /PPOSITION -/ AND THE
,EADER OF THE /PPOSITION ,/
4HE "ILL IS ANOTHER TERM FOR THE RESOLUTION )N ADDITION TO RESOLUTIONS
AND MOTIONS PARLIAMENTS ALSO PASS "ILLS ! "ILL USUALLY REFERS TO A POL
ICY (OWEVER THE TERM USED TO DESCRIBE THE TOPIC WILL VARY WITH DIFFER
ENT VERSIONS OF PARLIAMENTARY STYLE
4HE (OUSE IS THE CHAMBER IN WHICH THE DEBATE TAKES PLACE 9OULL HEAR
PHRASES LIKE h4HIS (OUSE IS NOW ADJOURNEDv OR h7EVE MADE THREE
POINTS BEFORE THIS (OUSE TODAYv
4HE (ONORABLE -EMBERS ARE THE DEBATERS ARGUING FOR OR AGAINST THE
ISSUE 4HIS PHRASE IS COMMONLY USED AS A RESPECTFUL WAY TO ADDRESS
THE OPPOSING TEAMS DEBATERS )F ADDRESSING EVERYONE IN THE ROOM ITS
A MORE lTTING ALTERNATIVE TO THE LESS FORMAL hLADIES AND GENTLEMENv
4O PROVIDE YOU WITH A CLEAR UNDERSTANDING OF WHAT PARLIAMENTARY LAN
GUAGE SEEMS LIKE HERES AN EXAMPLE OF A PASSAGE FROM ACADEMIC STYLE
DEBATE @TRANSLATED INTO THE PARLIAMENTARY LEXICON
s !CADEMIC STYLE DEBATE h-R #HAIRPERSON THE .EGATIVE TOLD THIS ROUND
OF DEBATE THAT THE RESOLUTION MUST FALL BECAUSE OF WHAT IT CLAIMS IS AN
INCONSISTENCY IN THE lRST !FlRMATIVE SPEAKERS ARGUMENTSv
s 0ARLIAMENTARY STYLE DEBATE h-R 3PEAKER THE /PPOSITION TOLD THIS (OUSE
TO VOTE AGAINST THIS "ILL BECAUSE OF WHAT THE (ONORABLE -EMBER CLAIMS
IS AN INCONSISTENCY IN THE 0RIME -INISTERS ARGUMENTSv
Review Copy
Copyright 2006 Gravitas Publishing
4ALK THE 4ALK
4%60-%1)28%6=7,%4)%2(7869'896)
,IKE THE STYLE OF DEBATE DISCUSSED IN PREVIOUS CHAPTERS THERES NO
COMMON SHAPE AND STRUCTURE FOR PARLIAMENTARY DEBATE $EPENDING
ON WHERE YOU ARE WHAT LEVEL YOURE AT AND WHAT TOURNAMENT YOURE
DEBATING IN THE TIMES AND ROLES WILL VARY (ERES A BASIC STRUCTURE THAT
APPLIES IN A GENERAL SENSE TO MOST PARLIAMENTARY STYLES OF DEBATE
0RIME -INISTER 0-
-EMBER OF THE /PPOSITION -/
-INISTER OF THE #ROWN -#
,EADER OF THE /PPOSITION ,/
0RIME -INISTER 0-
MINUTES
MINUTES
MINUTES
MINUTES
MINUTES
!LTHOUGH EVERYONE HAS THE SAME AMOUNT OF SPEAKING TIME YOULL
NOTICE THAT THE 0RIME -INISTERS TIME IS SPLIT 4HE lRST SPEECH IS A CON
STRUCTIVE SPEECH AND THE SECOND SPEECH IS A REBUTTAL SPEECH !LSO THE
lRST lVE MINUTES OF THE ,EADER OF THE /PPOSITIONS SPEECH IS THE CON
STRUCTIVE PORTION AND THE LAST THREE MINUTES IS THE REBUTTAL PORTION
4HERES NO CLEAR BREAK THOUGH BETWEEN THESE TWO PARTS 4HE ROLES OF
EACH SPEAKER ARE GENERALLY COMPARABLE TO THE !FlRMATIVE AND .EGA
TIVE ROLES OUTLINED IN #HAPTER
0RIME -INISTER
s $ElNE THE TERMS OF THE RESOLUTION
s 0RESENT THE 'OVERNMENTS CASE INCLUDING SPECIlC ARGUMENTS
-EMBER OF THE /PPOSITION
s #LASH WITH THE 0RIME -INISTERS ARGUMENTS
s 0RESENT THE /PPOSITIONS CASE INCLUDING SPECIlC ARGUMENTS
-INISTER OF THE #ROWN
s #LASH WITH THE -EMBER OF THE /PPOSITIONS ARGUMENTS
s #ONTINUE THE 'OVERNMENTS CASE WITH NEW ARGUMENTS
s $EFEND THE 0RIME -INISTERS ARGUMENTS IF NECESSARY
,EADER OF THE /PPOSITION
s #LASH WITH THE -INISTER OF THE #ROWNS ARGUMENTS
s #ONTINUE THE /PPOSITIONS CASE WITH NEW ARGUMENTS
s $EFEND THE -EMBER OF THE /PPOSITIONS ARGUMENTS IF NECESSARY
Review Copy
Copyright 2006 Gravitas Publishing
/N 4HAT 0OINT .AVIGATING 0ARLIAMENTARY $EBATE
s 2EFUTE THE 'OVERNMENTS CASE AS A WHOLE
s 3UMMARIZE THE /PPOSITIONS CASE AS A WHOLE
0RIME -INISTER
s #LASH WITH THE ,EADER OF THE /PPOSITIONS ARGUMENTS IF NECESSARY
s 2EFUTE THE /PPOSITIONS CASE AS A WHOLE
s 3UMMARIZE THE 'OVERNMENTS CASE AS WHOLE
;,%8 78,)43-283*%43-28#
3IMPLY PUT 0OINTS OF )NFORMATION ARE YOUR OPPORTUNITY TO ASK TOUGH
QUESTION TO YOUR OPPONENT DURING HIS OR HER CONSTRUCTIVE SPEECH
THEYRE NOT ALLOWED IN REBUTTALS 0OINTS OF )NFORMATION TAKE YOUR COM
PETITORS OFF THEIR GAME PLAN FORCING THEM TO RESPOND TO YOUR CHALLENGE
4O ASK A QUESTION STAND UP DURING YOUR RIVALS SPEECH AND SAY h0OINT OF
)NFORMATIONv OR h/N THAT POINTv 9OUR OPPONENT MAY EITHER ALLOW YOU
TO ASK YOUR QUESTION OR SIGNAL YOU TO SIT DOWN !SK QUESTIONS WITH ONE
OR MORE OF THE FOLLOWING GOALS IN MIND
$ISPUTE THE MEMBERS ARGUMENT 4HIS PURPOSE IS THE MOST COMMON
USE OF A 0OINT OF )NFORMATION )F YOU BELIEVE THAT YOUR OPPONENTS POINT
IS EITHER mAWED OR ILLOGICAL ASK A QUESTION THAT FORCES THE ISSUE &OR
EXAMPLE h)F A JUDGE IS SUPPOSED TO INTERPRET THE LAW WITHOUT REGARD
TO WHATS POPULAR WOULDNT ELECTING JUDGES ESSENTIALLY FORCE THEM TO
CATER TO THE WHIMS OF PUBLIC OPINION v %VEN IF THE DEBATER lNDS A WAY
TO DEFEND THE POINT AT MINIMUM YOUVE PLANTED SEEDS OF DOUBT INTO
THE MINDS OF YOUR JUDGES
#ONTEST THE EVIDENCE PRESENTED ! WORD OF CAUTION DONT WASTE YOUR
0OINT OF )NFORMATION ON AN EVIDENCE DISPUTE UNLESS IT WILL INmICT SERIOUS
DAMAGE TO YOUR OPPONENTS CASE )F USED CAREFULLY DISPUTING EVIDENCE
CAN WEAKEN A KEY FOUNDATION OF THE OTHER TEAMS CASE OR HURT ITS CRED
IBILITY ON THE ISSUE &OR EXAMPLE h(OW CAN YOU USE THE ECONOMIC
DATA TO ARGUE THAT UNEMPLOYMENT IS A SERIOUS PROBLEM WHEN THE
REPORT FROM THE SAME SOURCE INDICATED THAT THE RATE HAD DROPPED
TO v 9OU WOULD CERTAINLY HAVE THEM ON THE ROPES WITH THAT ONE
3UGGEST THE POINTS IRRELEVANCE ! GREAT WAY TO OPPOSE A POINT WITH
OUT COUNTERING IT DIRECTLY IS TO CHALLENGE HOW CLOSELY IT lTS WITH THE
ISSUE AT HAND )F ASKED AT THE END OF AN ARGUMENT YOUR QUESTION CAN
Review Copy
Copyright 2006 Gravitas Publishing
4ALK THE 4ALK
THROW OFF YOUR OPPONENT &OR EXAMPLE h/KAY SO YOUVE TOLD US HOW
AN !MERICAN DRUG COMPANY CAN DISTRIBUTE THIS MEDICINE IN !FRICA BUT
HOW IS THAT EVEN RELEVANT IF YOUVE SPECIlED THAT THE CASE IS ABOUT
FUNDING ARRANGEMENTS BETWEEN GOVERNMENTS v 7ELL THERE GOES THE PAST
MINUTE OF YOUR OPPONENTS SPEECH
)NTRODUCE AN UPCOMING ARGUMENT )TS ALWAYS NICE IF YOU CAN COM
BINE A QUESTION ON AN ARGUMENT THAT THE MEMBER HAS JUST MADE WITH
A HINT OF WHATS TO COME IN YOUR SPEECH $OING SO ALERTS THE JUDGES
TO WHAT YOURE GOING TO SAY SHIFTING THE FOCUS OF THE DEBATE CLOSER TO
YOUR TEAM &OR EXAMPLE h)F WE WERE TO FOLLOW YOUR PLAN AND END THE
SPACE SHUTTLE PROGRAM WOULDNT WE ALSO BE CUTTING OFF THE SCIENTIlC
AND MEDICAL EXPERIMENTS THAT HAVE PROVEN SO VALUABLE IN THE RECENT
YEARS v )F DELIVERED DURING THE 0RIME -INISTERS SPEECH THIS POINT
WOULD GET YOU INTO THE DEBATE EARLY
0ROVIDE A REMINDER OF A PAST ARGUMENT )TS EASY FOR YOUR POINTS TO BE
FORGOTTEN ESPECIALLY IF THEYRE INTRODUCED EARLY IN THE DEBATE "RINGING
UP ONE OF YOUR PREVIOUS POINTS IN A QUESTION ON YOUR OPPONENTS ARGU
MENT REINFORCES YOUR CASE &OR EXAMPLE h"UT WEVE ALREADY SHOWN
THAT STANDARDIZED EXAMS ENCOURAGE SCHOOLS TO IMPROVE THEIR PERFOR
MANCE COMPARED TO OTHERS SCHOOLS )F AS YOU NOW SUGGEST WE SIMPLY
STOP MAKING THE RESULTS PUBLIC WOULDNT IT DEFEAT THIS VERY VALUABLE
MOTIVATIONAL PURPOSE v 4HIS QUESTION COUNTERS YOUR OPPONENTS NEW
ARGUMENT WHILE REINTRODUCING A PAST ARGUMENT
#LARIFY A CONFUSING DElNITION /NLY ASK FOR AN EXPLANATION IF WHAT
YOUR OPPONENT SAID IS BOTH UNCLEAR TO EVERYONE AND IS CRITICAL TO THE
DEBATE /THERWISE SAVE YOUR OPPORTUNITY FOR A MORE SIGNIlCANT QUES
TION )F HOWEVER YOU USE THIS TYPE OF 0OINT OF )NFORMATION WISELY IT
CAN WIN YOU POINTS BY CLARIFYING THE DEBATE FOR YOUR TEAM AND FOR THE
JUDGES &OR EXAMPLE h*UST TO BE CLEAR WHEN YOU TALK ABOUT BANNING
@THE VIOLENT SPORT OF BOXING ARE YOU REFERRING ONLY TO PROFESSIONAL COM
PETITION OR ALSO TO /LYMPIC COMPETITION WHICH INVOLVES HELMETS AND
SOFTER GLOVES v 4HIS WAY EVERYONE WILL BE DEBATING THE SAME ISSUE
0OINT OUT A CONTRADICTION #ATCHING AN INCONSISTENCY ON THE SPOT CAN
BE A GREAT WAY TO DISCREDIT AN ARGUMENT 4HIS IS TRUE BOTH FOR CON
SISTENCY WITHIN A SPEECH AND BETWEEN PARTNERS &OR EXAMPLE h/KAY
SO YOURE SAYING THAT THE GOVERNMENT SHOULD FUND THEATRES BECAUSE
Review Copy
Copyright 2006 Gravitas Publishing
/N 4HAT 0OINT .AVIGATING 0ARLIAMENTARY $EBATE
THEYRE SO POPULAR BUT YOUR PARTNER SAID THAT THE CASE FOR SUBSIDIES
IS THAT MOST THEATRES DONT SELL ENOUGH TICKETS TO STAY AmOAT ON THEIR
OWN 7HICH ONE IS IT v 0LACING A @WEDGE BETWEEN PARTNERS CAN STEAL
YOUR OPPONENTS THUNDER IN THE MIDDLE OF ITS SPEECHES
6-7)%88,)6-+,88-1)
9OUVE GOT A QUESTION THAT YOURE ITCHING
:\JJLZZ;PW
TO ASK 7HEN DO YOU JUMP OFF YOUR CHAIR
TO ASK IT 4HERE ARE TWO FACTORS YOU SHOULD
8LMROGEVIJYPP]EFSYX
CONSIDER &IRSTLY WHEN IT WILL HAVE THE MOST
XLIXMQMRKSJ]SYV
IMPACT AND SECONDLY WHEN THE SPEAKER
UYIWXMSRW
IS MOST LIKELY TO ACCEPT IT 4IMING IS MORE
IMPORTANT THAN MOST DEBATERS WILL APPRECI
ATE ! WELL
TIMED QUESTION HELPS YOU SEIZE
THE AGENDA AND TAKE CONTROL THE DEBATE /N THE OTHER HAND POOR TIMING
MAKES YOUR QUESTION SEEM OUT OF PLACEA DISTRACTION TO THE DEBATE
4HE FOLLOWING ARE GOOD PLACES TO ASK A 0OINT OF )NFORMATION
!FTER A KEY PART OF A CONSTRUCTIVE POINT %ACH MAIN ARGUMENT USUALLY
CONSISTS OF A NUMBER OF EXPLANATIONS THAT HELP FORM THE POINT 2IS
ING AFTER ONE OF THESE EXPLANATIONS MAY BE TO YOUR ADVANTAGE SINCE A
TOUGH QUESTION CAN THROW OFF THE mOW OF THE ARGUMENT )F THE SPEAKER
REJECTS YOUR POINT YOU MAY HAVE AN OPPORTUNITY TO PERSIST AT LEAST ONE
MORE TIME BEFORE HE OR SHE MOVES TO AN ENTIRELY NEW ARGUMENT
!T THE END OF A COMPLETE ARGUMENT 2ISING AT THE END OF AN ARGUMENT
ALLOWS YOU TO DAMAGE THE ENTIRE POINT AT ONCE )T GIVES YOU TIME TO
TAKE IN ALL OF EXPLANATIONS AND EVIDENCE USED TO SUPPORT THE ARGUMENT
,ISTEN VERY CAREFULLY FOR WHAT APPEARS TO BE THE SPEAKERS CONCLUDING
SENTENCE TO THE POINT IN QUESTION 4HE SPEAKER IS MOST LIKELY TO ACCEPT
YOUR 0OINT OF )NFORMATION WHEN THE ARGUMENT IS COMPLETE SINCE HE OR
SHE WILL FEEL CONlDENT THAT THE ARGUMENT HAS BEEN JUSTIlED FULLY
)N RESPONSE TO DAMAGING REFUTATION ,ETS FACE IT SOMETIMES YOUR
OPPONENT WILL MAKE A GREAT COUNTER
ARGUMENT TO WHAT YOU THOUGHT
WAS A BULLET
PROOF POINT 2ATHER THAN ACCEPTING IT LYING DOWN SHOW
THAT YOURE CONlDENT BY RISING ON A 0OINT OF )NFORMATION 4HIS WILL GIVE
YOU AN OPPORTUNITY TO CHALLENGE REFUTATION THAT WOULD OTHERWISE INmICT
SERIOUS DAMAGE TO YOUR CASE %VEN IF YOUR QUESTION ISNT ACCEPTED AT
Review Copy
Copyright 2006 Gravitas Publishing
4ALK THE 4ALK
LEAST YOULL BE MAKING IT CLEAR TO YOUR JUDGES THAT YOU HAVE SOMETHING
TO SAY ABOUT YOUR OPPONENTS REFUTATION
;,)28378%=498
5NFORTUNATELY EVEN SEASONED DEBATERS ARE TEMPTED TO ASK QUESTIONS
WHEN THE TIMING ISNT RIGHT 4HE QUESTION MAY BE BRILLIANT BUT THE
EFFECT IS SERIOUSLY WEAKENED BECAUSE OF POOR TIMING )TS IMPORTANT TO
UNDERSTAND WHY ASKING QUESTIONS AT OTHER TIMES ISNT A GOOD IDEA
$URING THE INTRODUCTION )N MOST PARLIAMENTARY DEBATES THE lRST MIN
UTE OF A SPEECH IS @PROTECTED TIME 4HIS MEANS THAT ITS AGAINST THE
RULES TO RISE ON A 0OINT OF )NFORMATION %VEN IF ITS ALLOWED YOU ACCOM
PLISH LITTLE BY RISING ON A 0OINT OF )NFORMATION WHEN YOUR OPPONENT HAS
JUST INTRODUCED THE CASE THEME (OW CAN YOU CHALLENGE A CASE THAT
HASNT YET BEEN DEVELOPED
$URING THE CONCLUSION 3INCE A 0OINT OF )NFORMATION IS MEANT AS A TAR
GETED CHALLENGE OF A PARTICULAR ARGUMENT ASKING A QUESTION WHEN THE
DEBATER IS TALKING ABOUT BROADER THEMES IS POOR TIMING .OTE THAT THE
LAST MINUTE OF SOMEONES SPEECH LIKE THE lRST MINUTE IS PROTECTED
TIME IN MOST PARLIAMENTARY DEBATES
)MMEDIATELY AFTER AN ARGUMENT IS INTRODUCED )TS BEST TO WAIT UNTIL
YOUR OPPONENT HAS DEVELOPED AT LEAST PART OF AN ARGUMENT BEFORE YOU
JUMP ALL OVER IT 4HE ANSWER WILL PROBABLY BE SOME VARIATION OF h7ELL
THANK YOU FOR THE QUESTION ) WAS JUST ABOUT TO GET INTO THATv
)N THE MIDDLE OF A SENTENCE )T MAY BE TEMPTING TO THROW OFF THE MEM
BER IN THE MIDDLE OF A STATEMENT BUT DOING SO MAKES IT SEEM THAT
YOURE INTENTIONALLY INTERRUPTING YOUR OPPONENT !LSO YOU COULD MISS
AN IMPORTANT PART OF THE ARGUMENT IF YOU RISE PREMATURELY
7HEN THE DEBATE HAS MOVED ON 3URE YOU MAY HAVE A BURNING QUES
TION TO ASK CONCERNING YOUR OPPONENTS PREVIOUS POINT "UT ONCE THE
DEBATE HAS MOVED TO THE NEXT ARGUMENT ITS TOO LATE 9OUR QUESTION
WILL SEEM OUT OF PLACE
)F YOUVE BEEN REJECTED SEVERAL TIMES 4HERES NOTHING WRONG WITH
PERSISTING A COUPLE OF TIMES WHEN YOU HAVE SOMETHING IMPORTANT TO
Review Copy
Copyright 2006 Gravitas Publishing
/N 4HAT 0OINT .AVIGATING 0ARLIAMENTARY $EBATE
ASK "UT IF YOURE TOLD TO SIT DOWN REPEATEDLY OVER A SHORT PERIOD OF
TIME THE MEMBER IS MAKING IT VERY CLEAR THAT YOUR POINT WILL NOT BE
ACCEPTED #ONTINUING TO RISE WILL MAKE IT SEEM LIKE YOURE NEEDLESSLY
INTERRUPTING YOUR OPPONENTS SPEECH
78%2(-2+948378%2(398
7HEN YOU STAND UP HOPING TO ASK A 0OINT
OF )NFORMATION THE FOCUS OF THE DEBATE
MOMENTARILY TURNS TO YOU )TS IMPORTANT
THAT YOU HAVE A GOOD @STAGE PRESENCE WHEN
YOU DO SO "ELOW ARE SOME TIPS THAT WILL
HELP YOU MAKE A STRONG IMPRESSION WHEN
YOU RISE TO ASK A QUESTION
:\JJLZZ;PW
1EOIWYVIXLEXFSXL
]SYERH]SYVTEVXRIV
EWOUYIWXMSRW
3TATE YOUR REQUEST IN A SIMPLE WAY 3OME DEBATERS PREFER TO FORE
SHADOW QUESTIONS WHICH PHRASES LIKE h/N DEMOCRACYv OR h/N RATIONAL
ITYv 7HILE APPROPRIATE IF USED OCCASIONALLY IT CERTAINLY ISNT NECESSARY
4HE BEST WAYS TO REQUEST AN OPPORTUNITY TO ASK A QUESTION ARE SAYING
h0OINT OF )NFORMATIONv OR h/N THAT POINTv 4RYING TO MAKE A FULL ARGU
MENT IS PUSHING IT TOO FAR &OR EXAMPLE SAYING h/N THE NEED TO PUNISH
PEOPLE WHO POSE NO HARM TO SOCIETYv MAKES IT LOOK LIKE YOURE TRYING TO
DELIVER PART OF YOUR SPEECH DURING YOUR OPPONENTS SPEECH
3TAND UP QUICKLY AND CONlDENTLY )F YOURE GOING TO RISE ON A 0OINT OF
)NFORMATION BE DECISIVE ABOUT IT 2ISING SLOWLY OR IN A HESITANT WAY
CONVEYS UNCERTAINTY TO YOUR JUDGES
!DDRESS THE MEMBER BY NAME 7ERE NATURALLY MORE RECEPTIVE TO OTH
ER PEOPLE WHEN WERE CALLED BY OUR NAMES 3AYING h/N THAT POINT 'REGv
OR h0OINT OF )NFORMATION -S *ONESv CAN BE A SUBTLE WAY TO INCREASE THE
CHANCES OF YOUR 0OINT OF )NFORMATION BEING ACCEPTED
3TAND UP ONE PERSON AT A TIME 4HERES NO USE IN STANDING UP WITH
YOUR PARTNER AS ITS NEEDLESSLY DISTRACTING )T MAY EVEN LOOK LIKE YOURE
TRYING TO COMPETE WITH YOUR PARTNER FOR ATTENTION
Review Copy
Copyright 2006 Gravitas Publishing
4ALK THE 4ALK
*-)0(-2+8,)&%66%+)3*59)78-327
7HILE YOU MAY PREFER TO SPEAK WITHOUT INTERRUPTION ITS INEVITABLE THAT
YOUR OPPONENTS WILL RISE TO ASK 0OINTS OF )NFORMATION !LTHOUGH ITS
IMPORTANT TO SHOW THAT YOURE CAPABLE OF DEFENDING YOUR ARGUMENTS
YOU DONT WANT TO LET THE QUESTIONS GET YOU OFF TRACK EITHER (ERE ARE
SOME TIPS TO HELP YOU MANAGE 0OINTS OF )NFORMATION
!CCEPT TWO 0OINTS OF )NFORMATION )F YOU
ACCEPT ONE QUESTION YOURE AT LEAST SHOW
ING A WILLINGNESS TO FACE CRITICISM "UT ESPE
CIALLY DURING AN EIGHT MINUTE CONSTRUCTIVE
SPEECH IT COULD STILL SEEM LIKE YOURE TRY
ING TO MINIMIZE CHALLENGES !CCEPTING TWO
POINTS IS THE NORM !LLOWING MORE THAN TWO
QUESTIONS GIVES YOUR OPPONENTS TOO MUCH
CONTROL OVER YOUR SPEECH
>H[JO6\[
(SR XPIX4SMRXWSJ
-RJSVQEXMSRGSRXVSP
]SYVWTIIGL
!LLOW REASONABLE TIME FOR THE QUESTION )F YOUVE ACCEPTED A POINT
ITS USUALLY INAPPROPRIATE TO CUT OFF YOUR OPPONENT BEFORE THE QUESTION
HAS BEEN ASKED FULLY 4HE EXCEPTION IS IF THE QUESTIONER IS RAMBLING
EXCESSIVELY TAKING UP MORE THAN TO SECONDS OF YOUR VALUABLE
TIME )N THIS SCENARIO BE POLITE BUT lRM IN ORDER TO REGAIN CONTROL OF
YOUR SPEECH &OR EXAMPLE YOU COULD SAY h4HANK YOU ) UNDERSTAND
WHAT YOURE GETTING ATv
!NSWER THE QUESTION COMPLETELY 3OME DEBATERS WILL SHRUG OFF A
QUESTION AS IRRELEVANT OR WEAK WITHOUT ACTUALLY ANSWERING IT 4HIS
MAY SUGGEST THAT YOURE UNWILLING OR UNABLE TO DEFEND YOUR ARGUMENT
!LWAYS PROVIDE A CLEAR AND DECISIVE ANSWER TO A 0OINT OF )NFORMATION
4RANSITION BACK TO YOUR SPEECH QUICKLY )T
SHOULDNT TAKE YOU MORE THAN A COUPLE OF
SENTENCES TO ANSWER A QUESTION 'OING ON
FOR LONGER ALLOWS THE QUESTION TO DICTATE
YOUR SPEECH /NCE YOUVE ANSWERED THE
QUESTION MAKE A SMOOTH TRANSITION TO STAY
ON TRACK &OR EXAMPLE YOU COULD SAY h#OM
ING BACK TO MY SECOND POINT xv OR h)D NOW
LIKE TO MOVE ON TO MY THIRD ARGUMENTv
Review Copy
:\JJLZZ;PW
/IIT]SYVERW[IVW
WLSVXERHQSZISR
Copyright 2006 Gravitas Publishing
/N 4HAT 0OINT .AVIGATING 0ARLIAMENTARY $EBATE
(32 8,)'/0)*368,),)'/3*-8
(ECKLING CAN BE AN INTERESTING SPONTANEOUS AND HUMOROUS PART OF
PARLIAMENTARY DEBATE 5NFORTUNATELY ITS ALSO THE MOST MISUSED !
HECKLE IS A SHORT AND WITTY COMMENT THAT GETS TO THE POINT IN A FEW
WORDS USUALLY lVE OR LESS )TS NOT YOUR OPPORTUNITY TO HEAR YOURSELF
TALK )TS NOT YOUR OPPORTUNITY TO CONTINUE YOUR SPEECH DURING YOUR
OPPONENTS SPEECH 3INCE HECKLING IS MORE OFTEN USED POORLY THAN
WELL PERHAPS ITS APPROPRIATE TO FOCUS ON WEAK WAYS TO HECKLE
3HOUTING hSHAME SHAMEv OR hTHATS WRONGv 9OULL HAVE YOUR CHANCE
TO PLEAD YOUR CASE WHEN YOU SPEAK 4HIS TYPE OF HECKLING IS A RUDE
INTERRUPTION AS TEMPTING AS IT MIGHT SEEM
$EMANDING hPROOFv OR hSOURCEv )TS UP TO THE MEMBER TO PRESENT THE
EVIDENCE HOW HE OR SHE SEES lT 4HE JUDGES WILL DECIDE WHETHER THE
OPPOSING TEAM HAS SUPPORTED ITS ARGUMENTS WELL (ECKLING IN THIS WAY
MAKES YOU SEEM PETTY
!SKING QUESTIONS )F YOUR 0OINT OF )NFORMATION IS REJECTED IT DOESNT
GIVE YOU A LICENSE TO GET IT THROUGH THE @BACK DOOR BY HECKLING ! HECKLE
ISNT MEANT TO START A BACK AND FORTH DIALOGUE
-AKING ARGUMENTS 2EFUTATION SHOULD GO IN YOUR SPEECH NOT YOUR
OPPONENTS SPEECH 4RYING TO ARGUE OVER THE VOICE OF YOUR RIVAL IS INEF
FECTIVE AT BEST AND DISRESPECTFUL AT WORST
(ECKLING REPEATEDLY 5NDOUBTEDLY THE OCCASIONAL GOOD HECKLE CAN
LIGHTEN UP THE DEBATE $OING SO OVER AND OVER AGAIN THOUGH INTERRUPTS
THE mOW OF DEBATE EXCESSIVELY AND MAY CAUSE THE JUDGES TO DEDUCT
POINTS FROM YOUR INDIVIDUAL SCORE
,3;83,%2(0),)'/0-2+
4HERE IS ONE SIMPLE RULE FOR RESPONDING TO HECKLING DONT RESPOND
TO HECKLING .EVER START A @SIDE DEBATE WITH YOUR OPPONENT DURING
YOUR VALUABLE SPEAKING TIME 2ESPONDING TO HECKLING SERVES TO LEGITI
MIZE OR GIVE UNDUE ATTENTION TO YOUR RIVAL 3IMPLY IGNORE IT AND MOVE
Review Copy
Copyright 2006 Gravitas Publishing
4ALK THE 4ALK
ON AS YOU NORMALLY WOULD HAVE %VEN LOOKING AT YOUR OPPONENT WHILE
HE OR SHE IS HECKLING DIVERTS ATTENTION AWAY FROM YOU
690-2+7328,)690)7 43-2873*36()6
0ARLIAMENTARY DEBATE HAS COUNTLESS RULES THAT PARTICIPANTS ARE SUP
POSED TO FOLLOW )N REAL PARLIAMENTS THERE ARE THICK BOOKS DESCRIBING
ALL OF THESE RULES IN DETAIL 9OURE NOT SUPPOSED TO PUT YOUR HANDS IN
YOUR POCKETS YOU COULD BE HIDING A WEAPON NOR ARE YOU ALLOWED TO
HAVE A PEN IN YOUR HAND THAT COULD BE VIEWED AS A WEAPON $EBATERS
ARENT SUPPOSED TO CROSS ONTO THE OTHER TEAMS SIDE OF THE mOOR AND
STANDING IN A PLACE THAT OBSTRUCTS THE 3PEAKERS VIEW OF ANY OF THE
PARLIAMENTARIANS IS A BIG TABOO !ND THE LIST GOES ON
)F YOU WANT TO ACCUSE YOUR OPPONENT OF A RULE VIOLATION YOU WOULD
RISE AND SAY h-R 3PEAKER ) RISE ON A 0OINT OF /RDERv OR MORE SIMPLY
h0OINT OF /RDERv !T THIS JUNCTURE THE PERSON WHO HAS THE mOOR MUST
SIT DOWN WHILE THE 3PEAKER DECIDES h0OINT WELL TAKENv IF IN AGREEMENT
OR h0OINT NOT WELL TAKENv IF IN DISAGREEMENT
3HOULD YOU FOLLOW ALL OF THE TIME
HONORED RULES OF PARLIAMENTARY
PROCEDURE 9ES "UT SHOULD YOU DEMAND ENFORCEMENT IF ANOTHER DEBAT
ER DOESNT 0ROBABLY NOT 9OU MAY THINK THAT
DOING SO MAKES YOU SEEM SOPHISTICATED AND
>H[JO6\[
INTELLIGENT "UT AT THE SAME YOULL BE INTER
RUPTING THE mOW OF DEBATE FOR FRIVOLOUS REA
(SR XVEMWIJVMZSPSYW
SONS -OST JUDGES WONT BE IMPRESSED /NLY
4SMRXWSJ3VHIVSV
RAISE A 0OINT OF /RDER FOR THE MOST SERIOUS OF
4IVWSREP4VMZMPIKI
VIOLATIONS 4HIS WILL PROBABLY NEVER HAPPEN
BUT ITS HELPFUL TO KNOW ABOUT THIS FEATURE OF
PARLIAMENTARY DEBATE IN CASE IT COMES UP
233**)27) 43-2873*4)6732%046-:-0)+)
)N ADDITION TO FOLLOWING PARLIAMENTARY RULES DEBATERS ARE EXPECTED TO
SPEAK HONESTLY AND RESPECTFULLY /NE REASON TO RAISE A 0OINT OF 0ERSONAL
0RIVILEGE IS IF A MEMBER OF THE OPPOSING TEAM MAKES A PERSONALLY OFFEN
SIVE REMARK !NOTHER CAUSE IS IF YOUR OPPONENT SERIOUSLY MISQUOTES
YOU 4HE PROCESS IS SIMILAR TO A 0OINT OF /RDER 9OU SAY h-R 3PEAKER )
RISE ON A 0OINT OF 0ERSONAL 0RIVILEGEv AND THE 3PEAKER RULES h0OINT WELL
TAKENv OR h0OINT NOT WELL TAKENv
Review Copy
Copyright 2006 Gravitas Publishing
/N 4HAT 0OINT .AVIGATING 0ARLIAMENTARY $EBATE
7HILE ITS USEFUL TO BE AWARE OF THIS FEATURE YOU SHOULD RARELY IF
EVER HAVE TO USE IT 3URELY IF YOURE ABOUT TO BREAK INTO TEARS BECAUSE
YOUR OPPONENT MADE A VULGAR REMARK YOU COULD DECIDE TO RAISE AN
OBJECTION ! BLATANT MISQUOTATION THAT COULD SERIOUSLY HARM YOUR CASE
MIGHT BE ANOTHER EXCEPTION (OPEFULLY NONE OF THESE INSTANCES WILL
COME UP )N ANY CASE IT WILL PROBABLY BE QUITE CLEAR TO THE JUDGES IF
SOMEONE IS BEING RUDE OR IS MISREPRESENTING YOUR CASE ,ET YOUR OPPO
NENTS BEHAVIOR SPEAK FOR ITSELF
"Y FOLLOWING THE BASIC GUIDELINES PRESENTED IN THIS CHAPTER YOULL BE
WELL ON YOUR WAY TO NAVIGATING A PARLIAMENTARY DEBATE 4HIS STYLE CAN
BE LIVELY AND INTERESTING AND HOW YOU USE THESE TECHNIQUES WILL PLAY
A SIGNIlCANT ROLE IN HOW WELL YOU DO
Review Copy
Copyright 2006 Gravitas Publishing
4ALK THE 4ALK
#HAPTER +EYS TO 3UCCESS
!SK CHALLENGING WELL TIMED 0OINTS OF )NFORMATION ! STRONG
QUESTION ON AN ARGUMENT MADE IMMEDIATELY BEFOREHAND IS A
GREAT WAY TO COUNTER YOUR OPPONENTS CASE 9OULL ALSO FORCE YOUR
OPPONENT TO GO ON THE DEFENSIVE
D!NSWER 0OINTS OF )NFORMATION DIRECTLY AND MOVE ON $ONT
LET A QUESTION GET YOU OFF TRACK "E CONCISE IN YOUR RESPONSE AND
TRANSITION BACK TO YOUR SPEECH QUICKLY )TS ESSENTIAL THAT YOU
MAINTAIN CONTROL OVER YOUR SPEECH
+EEP HECKLES SHORT WITTY AND TO THE POINT (ECKLES ARENT
MEANT FOR YOU TO MAKE ARGUMENTS OR TO ASK QUESTIONS 4HEYRE
USUALLY HUMOROUS SPUR OF THE MOMENT JIBES )F YOU ARENT SURE
YOU CAN DO IT WELL REMEMBER THAT HECKLING ISNT A REQUIREMENT
&OLLOW THE CONVENTIONS OF PARLIAMENTARY DEBATE )N PARTICU
LAR MAKE SURE TO ADDRESS THE 3PEAKER AND YOUR OPPONENTS COR
RECTLY 9OU SHOULD ALSO FOLLOW SPECIlC RULES SUCH AS NOT HOLDING
A PEN IN YOUR HAND ITS POOR FORM IN ANY STYLE (OWEVER DONT
RISE ON A 0OINT OF /RDER FOR THIS TYPE OF PETTY RULE VIOLATION
Review Copy
Copyright 2006 Gravitas Publishing
*/(7;,9
=IWSV2S
'SQQERHMRKXLI'VSWW)\EQMREXMSR
#OMING 5P
)N A CROSS
EXAMINATION DEBATE A PERIOD OF QUESTIONING BY A MEMBER
OF THE OPPOSING TEAM FOLLOWS EACH CONSTRUCTIVE SPEECH 4HIS CHAPTER
WILL SHOW YOU HOW TO ASK A SERIES OF TOUGH QUESTIONS WHEN YOURE THE
CROSS
EXAMINER )T WILL ALSO SHOW YOU HOW TO STAND YOUR GROUND WHEN
YOURE THE ONE UNDER lRE
Review Copy
Copyright 2006 Gravitas Publishing
4ALK THE 4ALK
7%::=328,)7438
! CROSS
EXAMINATION IS A LIVELY @HEAT OF THE MOMENT OPPORTUNITY FOR
YOU TO SHOW YOUR COMMAND OF THE DEBATE !FTER EACH OF THE lRST FOUR
SPEECHES A MEMBER OF THE OTHER TEAM HAS A FEW MINUTES TO CROSS
EXAMINE THE SPEAKER 0UT ANOTHER WAY ITS YOUR OPPORTUNITY TO PEPPER
YOUR OPPONENT WITH A BARRAGE OF QUESTIONS INTENDED TO WEAKEN HIS
OR HER ARGUMENTS )F YOURE THE ONE BEING CROSS
EXAMINED ITS YOUR
CHANCE TO SHOW THAT YOURE CONlDENT IN YOUR ARGUMENTS AND THAT YOU
CAN WITHSTAND SUSTAINED CRITICISM
!T THE END OF A CONSTRUCTIVE SPEECH THE SPEAKER WILL MAKE A
STATEMENT LIKE h) NOW STAND OPEN FOR CROSS
EXAMINATIONv 4HE CROSS
EXAMINER THEN RISES AND BEGINS THE QUESTIONING $IFFERENT VERSIONS OF
CROSS
EXAMINATION DEBATE HAVE SLIGHTLY DIFFERENT STRUCTURES (ERES A
TYPICAL EXAMPLE OF A SPEAKER AND CROSS
EXAMINER CONlGURATION
ST !FlRMATIVE #ONSTRUCTIVE !#
#ROSS
EXAMINATION BY ND .EGATIVE
MINUTES
MINUTES
ST .EGATIVE #ONSTRUCTIVE .#
#ROSS
EXAMINATION BY ST !FlRMATIVE
MINUTES
MINUTES
ND !FlRMATIVE #ONSTRUCTIVE !#
#ROSS
EXAMINATION BY ST .EGATIVE
MINUTES
MINUTES
ND .EGATIVE #ONSTRUCTIVE .#
#ROSS
EXAMINATION BY ND !FlRMATIVE
MINUTES
MINUTES
ST .EGATIVE 2EBUTTAL .2
ST !FlRMATIVE 2EBUTTAL !2
MINUTES
MINUTES
',-44-2+%;%= '6377)<%1-2)6+3%07
)F YOURE THE ONE ASKING THE QUESTIONS YOU SHOULD GO INTO THE CROSS
EXAMINATION WITH SPECIlC OBJECTIVES IN MIND )TS YOUR GOLDEN OPPOR
TUNITY TO CHIP AWAY AT YOUR OPPONENTS CASE "UT IF YOU DONT KNOW
WHAT YOURE TRYING TO ACCOMPLISH YOULL BE STUCK lRING OFF UNFOCUSED
UNRELATED QUESTIONS THAT DONT SIGNIlCANTLY DAMAGE YOUR OPPONENTS
CASE 7HAT ARE SOME OF THE GOALS YOU SHOULD BE TRYING TO ACCOMPLISH
Review Copy
Copyright 2006 Gravitas Publishing
9ES OR .O #OMMANDING THE #ROSS %XAMINATION
%XPOSE %RRORS )F YOUR OPPONENT HAS MADE STATEMENTS THAT ARE EITHER
CONTRADICTORY OR INACCURATE THE CROSS
EXAMINATION PERIOD IS A GREAT
PLACE TO POINT THEM OUT )T CAN BE EVEN MORE EFFECTIVE THAN DOING SO
IN YOUR OWN SPEECH BECAUSE THE JUDGES WILL SEE YOUR OPPONENT STRUG
GLING TO DEFEND THE ERRORS
!TTAIN !DMISSIONS &ORCING YOUR OPPONENT TO ADMIT A FACT OR POINT
THAT YOU BELIEVE IS IMPORTANT TO THE ISSUE AT HAND CAN LEAVE YOU A STEP
AHEAD AT THE END OF THE CROSS
EXAMINATION PERIOD 4HE SPEAKER WILL
APPEAR TO BE RETREATING AS YOU DRAW OUT ADMISSIONS THAT ARE HELPFUL TO
YOUR SIDE OF THE DEBATE
!TTACK !RGUMENTS !S WITH REFUTATION A CROSS
EXAMINATION IS AN
OPPORTUNITY TO CHALLENGE THE LOGIC BEHIND THE OTHER TEAMS POINTS
4HE ADVANTAGE OF A CROSS
EXAMINATION IS THAT YOU CAN CRAFT A LINE OF
QUESTIONING IN A WAY THAT GRADUALLY AND SYSTEMATICALLY WEAKENS YOUR
OPPONENTS ARGUMENT 4HIS LEAVES IT @EXPOSED FOR FURTHER REFUTATION
LATER ON IN THE DEBATE
3ETUP 0OINTS ! CROSS
EXAMINATION ISNT INTENDED FOR YOU TO PRESENT
NEW ARGUMENTS (OWEVER YOU MAY lND IT USEFUL TO ESTABLISH THE FOUN
DATION FOR A FUTURE POINT WITHOUT COMPLETELY GIVING IT AWAY /NE SUCH
USE IS ESTABLISHING THE VALIDITY OF AN ASSUMPTION NECESSARY FOR ONE OF
YOUR UPCOMING ARGUMENTS
#LEAR 5P #ONFUSION )F YOUR OPPONENT HAS PRESENTED DElNITIONS OR
ARGUMENTS THAT ARE CONFUSING SPENDING A SHORT PERIOD OF TIME TO BRING
CLARITY MAY BE VALUABLE 9OULL GET THE CREDIT NOT ONLY FOR SHOWING THAT
YOUR OPPONENT WAS UNCLEAR BUT ALSO FOR MAKING IT EASIER FOR THE JUDGES
TO UNDERSTAND WHATS HAPPENING IN THE DEBATE
839+,%2(8-+,859)78-327
4HE TYPE OF QUESTION YOU ASK HAS A SIGNIlCANT INmUENCE ON THE TYPE
OF ANSWER YOULL RECEIVE EVEN IF THE INTENT IS EXACTLY THE SAME )TS
IMPORTANT THAT YOU TO UNDERSTAND HOW TO PHRASE A QUESTION IN ORDER TO
ACHIEVE YOUR OBJECTIVE 1UESTIONS CAN BE GROUPED INTO THREE CATEGORIES
OPEN
ENDED SEMI
DIRECTED AND LEADING
Review Copy
Copyright 2006 Gravitas Publishing
4ALK THE 4ALK
/PEN
%NDED 1UESTIONS
/PEN
ENDED QUESTIONS INVITE AND ENCOURAGE THE RESPONDER TO PROVIDE
LENGTHY DRAWN OUT ANSWERS 7HEN USED IN A CROSS
EXAMINATION THEY
ALLOW THE SPEAKER TO TAKE UP TIME ELABORATING AND EXPLAINING WHICH
ISNT TO YOUR ADVANTAGE AS A CROSS
EXAMINER 2ATHER THAN ENABLING YOU
TO DRIVE TOWARD A SPECIlC OBJECTIVE THEY ALLOW YOUR OPPONENT TO CON
TROL THE CROSS
EXAMINATION &OR EXAMPLE h(OW SEVERE DO YOU THINK
THE PROBLEM OF SPEEDING IS IN THIS CITY v
3EMI
$IRECTED 1UESTIONS
3EMI
DIRECTED QUESTIONS SUGGEST WHAT THE RESPONSE SHOULD INCLUDE
4HEY SOMETIMES CALL FOR A PARTICULAR FACT TO BE STATED !LTHOUGH MORE
EFFECTIVE THAN OPEN
ENDED QUESTIONS THEY DONT DRIVE AT YOUR POINT
QUICKLY ENOUGH ESPECIALLY IF THE SPEAKER DOESNT KNOW THE ANSWER OR
TRIES TO MANEUVER INTO A RELATED AREA &OR EXAMPLE h!RE YOU AWARE OF
WHAT THE LATEST POLICE REPORT SAID CONCERNING THE NUMBER OF PEOPLE
KILLED IN THIS CITY LAST YEAR BECAUSE OF SPEEDING DRIVERS v 4HIS QUESTION
ONLY ENCOURAGES AN ANSWER SUCH AS h.O PLEASE ENLIGHTEN MEv
,EADING 1UESTIONS
,EADING QUESTIONS IMPLY AN ANSWER TO WHICH YOU WANT THE RESPONDER
TO AGREE 4HEREFORE THEY SERVE TO MAKE AN ARGUMENT WHILE PUSHING
FOR AN ADMISSION 4HESE ARE THE TYPES OF
QUESTIONS YOU WANT TO BE ASKING MOST OFTEN
:\JJLZZ;PW
IN A CROSS
EXAMINATION BECAUSE THEY ALLOW
YOU TO CONTROL THE PROCESS AND DRIVE TOWARD
/IIT]SYVUYIWXMSRW
AN END GOAL &OR EXAMPLE h7OULD YOU NOT
WLSVXWMQTPIERH
AGREE THAT THE DEATHS AND INJU
XSXLITSMRX
RIES CAUSED IN THIS CITY LAST YEAR BY SPEED
ING DRIVERS SHOW VERY CLEARLY THAT THIS IS A
SEVERE PUBLIC SAFETY PROBLEM v
+-:-2+=3966-:%0%+6-00-2+
7EVE SEEN WHY KNOWING YOUR OBJECTIVE HELPS YOU FOCUS YOUR CROSS
EXAMINATION AND WEVE COVERED THE DIFFERENT TYPES OF QUESTIONS )TS
NOW TIME TO DISCUSS HOW SPECIlCALLY TO GO ABOUT REACHING YOUR GOALS
Review Copy
Copyright 2006 Gravitas Publishing
9ES OR .O #OMMANDING THE #ROSS %XAMINATION
4HE KEY TO SUCCESSFUL CROSS EXAMINING IS ASKING DIRECT TARGETED QUES
TIONS IN A SERIES &IRING OFF RANDOM QUESTIONS ON A WIDE VARIETY OF
ISSUES WILL LEAVE YOU WITHOUT ANY KEY TAKEAWAYS AT THE END (ERE ARE
SOME SMART STRATEGIES FOR SUCCESSFUL CROSS EXAMINING
!SK ONE QUESTION AT A TIME -ULTIPART QUESTIONS SHOW A LACK OF mOW
AND FOCUS 9OURE ALSO REQUIRED TO ALLOW THE SPEAKER ENOUGH TIME TO
ANSWER ALL OF YOUR QUESTIONS WHICH MAKES IT HARDER FOR YOU TO REGAIN
CONTROL WHEN YOU WANT TO MOVE ON ! SINGLE QUESTION IS MORE FOCUSED
AS IT HELPS YOU DRILL DOWN A SPECIlC POINT )TS BEST TO FOLLOW UP WITH
ANOTHER QUESTION ONCE YOUVE RECEIVED AN ANSWER
!VOID SARCASM OR MOCKERY 4HERES NOTHING WORSE THAN LOOKING LIKE
YOURE TRYING TO @BEAT UP ON YOUR OPPONENT 3TICK TO INTELLIGENT PUR
POSEFUL QUESTIONS THAT SHOW CONlDENCE AND COMMAND OF THE DEBATE
)F YOU HAVE YOUR OPPONENT ON THE DEFENSIVE SOUNDING ARROGANT ABOUT
IT PAINTS YOU IN A NEGATIVE LIGHT
!SK LEADING hYES OR NOv QUESTIONS 9OUR GOAL IN A CROSS EXAMINATION
IS TO FORCE A QUICK ANTICIPATED RESPONSE FROM THE SPEAKER )DEALLY YOU
WANT YOUR OPPONENT TO SAY hYESv OR hNOv WITHOUT LEAVING MUCH ROOM
FOR A LENGTHY EXPLANATION
0ERMIT A BRIEF QUALIlCATION %VEN IF YOU ASK A hYES OR NOv QUESTION
THE SPEAKER HAS A RIGHT TO QUALIFY HIS OR HER ANSWER )F HOWEVER YOUR
OPPONENT STARTS RAMBLING YOURE WELL WITHIN YOUR RIGHTS TO CUT OFF THE
ANSWER PROMPTLY AND RESPECTFULLY
+EEP YOUR QUESTIONS BRIEF AND TO THE POINT
,ENGTHY INTRODUCTORY EXPLANATIONS MAKE
IT LOOK MORE LIKE A SPEECH AND LESS LIKE A
CROSS EXAMINATION 'RANTED YOURE TRYING
TO ARGUE YOUR PERSPECTIVE IN A CROSS EXAMI
NATION "UT LET YOUR QUESTIONS SUGGEST YOUR
LINE OF ARGUMENTATION RATHER THAN TRYING TO
MAKE ARGUMENTS DIRECTLY
>H[JO6\[
(SR XWXEVXDWTIIGL
QEOMRK MR]SYV
GVSWWI\EQMREXMSR
0LAN A SERIES OF QUESTIONS /N A GIVEN ISSUE PREPARE TO ASK AT LEAST SIX
TO EIGHT QUESTIONS TO GET TO THE POINT OR ADMISSION THAT YOURE SEEK
ING 4HIS TACTIC WILL PROVIDE KEY AREAS OF FOCUS FOR THE CROSS
EXAMINA
Review Copy
Copyright 2006 Gravitas Publishing
4ALK THE 4ALK
TION LEAVING THE JUDGES WITH THE SENSE THAT YOUVE INmICTED DAMAGE TO
SPECIlC ARGUMENTS 3IMPLY SCRATCHING THE SURFACE OF MANY ARGUMENTS
LEAVES EVERYONE WONDERING WHAT IF ANYTHING WAS ACCOMPLISHED
0ERSIST IN RESPONSE TO INDECISIVENESS )F THE SPEAKER TRIES TO AVOID A
QUESTION DELIBERATELY ASK IT AGAIN IN DIFFERENT WORDS AND WITH A lRMER
TONE $ONT LET YOUR OPPONENT GET AWAY WITH BEING INCONCLUSIVE )N
MOST CASE EVASIVENESS SUGGESTS THERES SOMETHING TO HIDE "E DETER
MINED TO GET A DIRECT ANSWER TO YOUR QUESTION
+NOW WHEN TO MOVE ON 7HEN YOU GET TO THE END OF A QUESTIONING
SEQUENCE YOUR OPPONENT WILL BE VERY RELUCTANT TO ADMIT WHAT YOU
WANT IN ORDER TO AVOID MAKING A DAMAGING REMARK /NCE THE CROSS
EXAMINATION IS AT A DEADLOCK MOVE ON TO ANOTHER LINE OF QUESTIONING
OR CONCLUDE 4HERES NOTHING WORSE THAN GOING HOPELESSLY BACK AND
FORTH ON THE SAME QUESTION WHEN BOTH SIDES HAVE CLEARLY STAKED OUT
THEIR RESPECTIVE POSITIONS
-AINTAIN CONTROL OF THE QUESTIONING 3OMETIMES THE SPEAKER WILL TRY
TO TURN AROUND THE CROSS
EXAMINATION BY ASKING QUESTIONS BACK TO YOU
4HIS IS A TRICK AIMED AT SHIFTING THE POWER AWAY FROM YOU $ONT LET IT
HAPPEN )F YOUR OPPONENT STARTS ASKING QUESTIONS REMIND HIM OR HER
THAT ITS YOUR CROSS
EXAMINATION
*%908=83*%28%78-' 7%140)59)78-327
.OW THAT YOU KNOW THE TOOLS OF THE TRADE FOR ASKING POWERFUL CROSS
EXAMINATION QUESTIONS LETS TAKE A LOOK AT A FEW EXAMPLES OF QUES
TIONS TO SEE WHAT MAKES AND BREAKS A CROSS
EXAMINATION .OTICE
HOW EACH QUESTION PROGRESSES FROM A POOR WORDING TO A GOOD WORD
ING +NOWING THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN WEAK AND STRONG QUESTIONS WILL
GREATLY IMPROVE YOUR CROSS
EXAMINATION
)NTERNET #ENSORSHIP /PEN
%NDED TO ,EADING
s 0OOR 1UESTION h7HAT DO YOU THINK ABOUT HOW EASY OR DIFlCULT IT IS TO
VERIFY THE AGE OF EACH PERSON WHO WANTS TO ENTER AN ADULT WEBSITE v
s /KAY 1UESTION h)SNT IT CHALLENGING TO CHECK THE AGE OF SOMEONE EN
TERING AN )NTERNET SITE SINCE THERES NO FACE TO FACE CONTACT v
Review Copy
Copyright 2006 Gravitas Publishing
9ES OR .O #OMMANDING THE #ROSS %XAMINATION
s 'OOD 1UESTION h7OULD YOU NOT AGREE THAT THE UNRESTRICTED NATURE OF
)NTERNET SEARCH MAKES IT ALMOST IMPOSSIBLE TO VERIFY THE AGE OF SOME
ONE ENTERING A SITE v
&OOD ,ABELING 3PEECHMAKING TO "RIEF
s 0OOR 1UESTION h4HERE ARE MANY PEOPLE WHO DONT WANT TO EAT GE
NETICALLY
MODIlED FOODS 7E BELIEVE THEY DESERVE THE RIGHT TO KNOW
IF A PARTICULAR ITEM AT THE GROCERY STORE HAS BEEN GENETICALLY
MODIlED
IN ANY WAY 2EQUIRED LABELING OF GENETICALLY
MODIlED PRODUCTS WOULD
HELP THEM MAKE THE CHOICES THEY DESIRE $ONT YOU AGREE v
s /KAY 1UESTION h#ONSIDERING THAT MANY PEOPLE DONT WANT TO BUY ANY
GENETICALLY
MODIlED FOODS AND THAT LABELING IS THE ONLY WAY TO ALLOW
THEM TO MAKE INFORMED CHOICES DO YOU AGREE THAT MANDATORY LABELING
WOULD PROTECT A CONSUMERS RIGHT TO KNOW WHATS IN A FOOD PRODUCT v
s 'OOD 1UESTION h7OULD YOU ACKNOWLEDGE THAT MANY CONSUMERS PREFER
NOT TO EAT GENETICALLY
MODIlED FOODS v
#OMMERCIALIZATION OF 3PORT -ULTIPART TO 3INGLE
s 0OOR 1UESTION h7OULDNT YOU AGREE THAT CORPORATE SPONSORSHIP INJECTS
MORE MONEY INTO SPORT PROGRAMS WHICH HELPS TRAIN ATHLETES AND LEADS
TO STRONGER PERFORMANCE AT THE /LYMPICS AND OTHER COMPETITIONS v
s /KAY 1UESTION h$O YOU ACKNOWLEDGE THAT SPORTS FACILITIES USE SPON
SORSHIP MONEY TO STAY AmOAT AND TO TRAIN ATHLETES v
s 'OOD 1UESTION h$O YOU AGREE THAT MANY TRAINING FACILITIES RECEIVE A
SIGNIlCANT PORTION OF THEIR REVENUES FROM CORPORATE SPONSORSHIPS v
*OINT 0EACEKEEPING -OCKING TO )NTELLIGENT
s 0OOR 1UESTION h7OULDNT YOU AGREE THAT YOUR GRANDIOSE PLAN TO HAVE
RIVALS WORK TOGETHER IS A BIT LIKE ASKING KIDS TO BE PART OF THE SAME
GROUP PROJECT AFTER THEYVE HAD A BIG lGHT v
s /KAY 1UESTION h$O YOU AGREE THAT ASKING ENEMIES TO BE FRIENDS ALL OF
A SUDDEN IS REALLY A TEAMWORK DISASTER WAITING TO HAPPEN v
Review Copy
Copyright 2006 Gravitas Publishing
4ALK THE 4ALK
s 'OOD 1UESTION h$O YOU AGREE THAT COUNTRIES WORK TOGETHER MORE EF
FECTIVELY IF THEY HAVE A LONG HISTORY OF FRIENDLY RELATIONS v
40%22-2+8,)463')77
,IKE ANY SPEECH A CROSS
EXAMINATION MUST HAVE STRUCTURE IN ORDER TO
BE EFFECTIVE 5SUALLY YOU HAVE THREE TO FOUR MINUTES TO CROSS
EXAMINE
THE SPEAKER 4HIS LENGTH OF TIME ALLOWS YOU TO COVER MORE THAN ONE
ISSUE /NE EFFECTIVE TECHNIQUE IS @SIGNPOSTING YOUR CROSS
EXAMINATION
&OR EXAMPLE YOU COULD SAY h4HE lRST AREA )
WANT TO ASK YOU ABOUT IS THE LEGAL ASPECT OF
:\JJLZZ;PW
PROFESSIONAL BOXINGv /NCE YOUVE COMPLET
ED THIS LINE OF QUESTIONING YOU COULD STATE
4PEREJYPPPMRISJ
h.OW THAT )VE CHALLENGED YOUR POINTS ABOUT
UYIWXMSRMRK[MXL
LEGALITY LETS MOVE ON TO YOUR ASSUMPTIONS
ERIRHKSEP
CONCERNING MORAL HAZARDSv 4HE ADVANTAGE
OF BREAKING DOWN THE CROSS
EXAMINATION IS
THAT THE JUDGES WILL GRASP MORE EASILY THE
DISTINCT THEMES THAT YOUVE COVERED
78%2(-2+=396+6392( 74)%/)6+3%07
/F COURSE THE QUESTIONER HAS AN OPPORTUNITY TO GO ON THE OFFENSIVE
DURING THE CROSS
EXAMINATION PERIOD "UT AS THE SPEAKER BEING CROSS
EXAMINED YOU CAN DO MUCH MORE THAN SIMPLY WEATHER THE STORM
)NSTEAD YOU CAN STRIVE TO COME OUT OF THE CROSS
EXAMINATION APPEAR
ING EVEN STRONGER THAN BEFORE IT !S THE SPEAKER THERE ARE A NUMBER OF
OBJECTIVES YOU MAY WANT TO ACCOMPLISH
0RE
REFUTE REFUTATION 9OUR CROSS
EXAMINER IS TRYING TO EXPOSE mAWS
THAT WILL ASSIST HIM OR HER IN FUTURE CLASH AGAINST YOUR ARGUMENTS )F
YOU CAN DEmECT AND DEBUNK THE ATTACKS DURING THE CROSS
EXAMINA
TION YOURE ESSENTIALLY NEGATING WHAT THE OTHER TEAM PLANS TO USE AS
ITS REFUTATION $ONE EFFECTIVELY THIS TACTIC CAN LEAVE YOUR OPPONENT
SCRAMBLING TO lND ANOTHER ANGLE OF ATTACK
3TImE THE QUESTIONER 9OUR OPPONENT WILL LIKELY HAVE A SERIES OF QUES
TIONS TO ASK YOU ON A GIVEN ISSUE )N MOST CASES HE OR SHE HAS ANTICI
PATED WHAT YOULL SAY ABOUT THE PRELIMINARY QUESTIONS IN ORDER TO
Review Copy
Copyright 2006 Gravitas Publishing
9ES OR .O #OMMANDING THE #ROSS %XAMINATION
SETUP THE MORE DAMAGING ONES )F YOU CAN SIDETRACK THE CROSS
EXAM
INER EARLY ON BY PRESENTING FAIR BUT UNEXPECTED ANSWERS YOU CAN LEAVE
YOUR OPPONENT STRUGGLING TO GET BACK ON TRACK )N ADDITION YOULL FORCE
YOUR RIVAL TO TAKE UP VALUABLE CROSS
EXAMINATION TIME SCURRYING TO GET
TO THE POINT OF CONTENTION
$EFEND YOUR CASE )F YOU CAN STAND TOUGH
AGAINST A STRONG CROSS
EXAMINER YOULL HAVE
GONE A LONG WAY IN SHOWING CONlDENCE IN
YOUR CASE 4HE JUDGES WILL VIEW BOLD AND
INTELLIGENT RESPONSES TO TOUGH QUESTIONS
VERY FAVORABLY 4HEY SHOW THAT YOU CAN FACE
CRITICISM ON THE SPOT WHICH EMPHASIZES THE
STRENGTH OF YOUR ARGUMENTS
:\JJLZZ;PW
%RXMGMTEXIXLI
GVSWWI\EQMRIV W
RI\XUYIWXMSRW
=)7231%=&)73 %27;)6-2+59)78-327
4HE BEST CROSS
EXAMINERS WILL TRY TO FORCE YOU INTO TO SIMPLE hYES OR
NOv ANSWERS 2EMEMBER THAT YOUR CROSS
EXAMINER HAS LIKELY PLANNED
OUT A SERIES OF QUESTIONS AIMED AT EXTRACTING AN ADMISSION FROM YOU
(ERE ARE SOME OF THE KEYS TO ANSWERING QUESTIONS EFFECTIVELY
1UALIFY YOUR ANSWERS 9OUR CROSS
EXAMINER IS HOPING YOULL ANSWER
A SIMPLE hYESv OR hNOv SO THAT HE OR SHE CAN QUICKLY MOVE ON WITH THE
LINE OF QUESTIONING $ONT LET YOUR CROSS
EXAMINER DOMINATE YOU IN
THIS WAY 4HERE ARE USUALLY NUANCES EXCEPTIONS AND DETAILS THAT WILL
STRENGTHEN YOUR ANSWER 0ROVIDING AN EXPLANATION TO YOUR ANSWER WILL
HELP STImE THE CROSS
EXAMINER AND SHOW YOUR CONlDENCE
"E CONCISE 4HE RISK OF QUALIFYING YOUR ANSWERS IS THAT YOULL START TO
RAMBLE 'OING TOO FAR WITH EXPLANATIONS WILL RESULT IN YOU LOSING POINTS
9OU DONT WANT TO BE SEEN AS KILLING TIME BY MAKING SPEECHES INSTEAD
OF PROVIDING ANSWERS $O QUALIFY YOUR ANSWERS BUT GET TO THE POINT
QUICKLY AND LET THE CROSS
EXAMINER MOVE ON
2EFER BACK TO YOUR SPEECH 7HEN RELEVANT TO THE ANSWER SAYING FOR
EXAMPLE h!S ) DISCUSSED IN MY SECOND POINT v OR h7EVE ALREADY
EXPLAINED THAT v REMINDS THE JUDGES OF WHAT YOU SAID PREVIOUSLY )T
ALSO MAKES YOUR ANSWERS STRONGER BY USING THE BACKING OF ARGUMENTS
THAT HAVE ALREADY BEEN WELL
DEVELOPED
Review Copy
Copyright 2006 Gravitas Publishing
4ALK THE 4ALK
$ONT PASS IT ON TO YOUR PARTNER 3AYING FOR EXAMPLE h-Y PARTNER
WILL ADDRESS YOUR QUESTION IN HER UPCOMING SPEECHv MAKES YOU SEEM
UNSURE )N ADDITION YOUVE NOW MADE A PROMISE THAT YOUR PARTNER HAS
TO KEEP THROWING YOUR TEAMS NEXT SPEECH OFF TRACK !LWAYS PROVIDE A
COMPLETE ANSWER YOURSELF
.EVER GIVE IN )T DOESNT MATTER IF YOUR CROSS
EXAMINER HAS YOU ON THE
ROPES WITH A SERIES OF VERY TOUGH QUESTIONS !LWAYS DEFEND YOURSELF
EVEN IF YOUR OPPONENT HAS DONE DAMAGE TO YOUR CASE #ONCEDING A
POINT ONLY WORSENS THE DAMAGE MAKING IT NEXT TO IRREVERSIBLE
,OOK AT THE AUDIENCE AS WELL 4HERES NOTHING WRONG WITH LOOKING
EXCLUSIVELY AT YOUR QUESTIONER )T CERTAINLY MAKES SENSE SINCE HE OR
SHE IS THE ONE WITH WHOM YOURE CONVERSING (OWEVER ALSO MAKING
EYE CONTACT WITH THE AUDIENCE MAKES YOU SEEM MORE ENGAGING AND
CONlDENT IN WHAT YOURE SAYING
$ONT COMMUNICATE WITH YOUR PARTNER 7HISPERING OR GESTURING
BETWEEN YOU AND YOUR PARTNER MAKES IT SEEM LIKE YOU NEED A @CLUTCH
IN ORDER TO ANSWER THE QUESTION )TS ESSENTIAL THAT YOU SEEM INDEPEN
DENTLY CONlDENT IN YOUR SPEECH
!NSWER QUESTIONS DONT ASK THEM 3OME DEBATERS lND IT CLEVER TO
TRY TURNING AROUND THE CROSS
EXAMINATION BY ASKING QUESTIONS TO THE
CROSS
EXAMINER 4HIS TACTIC WILL BE OBVIOUS TO THE JUDGES WHO WILL TYP
ICALLY VIEW IT AS INAPPROPRIATE 3TICK TO YOUR ROLE BY ANSWERING QUES
TIONS ASKED OF YOU BY YOUR OPPONENT
"E DECISIVE )T ISNT GOOD PRACTICE TO BE DELIBERATELY VAGUE AS IT SEEMS
LIKE YOURE TRYING TO EVADE YOUR OPPONENT OR THAT YOU LACK CONlDENCE
-AKE SURE YOUR ANSWERS ARE CLEAR AND DIRECT !NSWERS SUCH AS h7ELL IT
JUST DEPENDSv OR h)TS TOUGH TO SAY REALLYv APPEAR VERY INDECISIVE
%()48%27;)67
7EVE DISCUSSED THE KEYS TO ANSWERING CROSS
EXAMINATION QUESTIONS
.OW LETS TAKE A LOOK AT A FEW EXAMPLES 4HE FOLLOWING SAMPLE ANSWERS
WILL LEAD YOU FROM A POOR RESPONSE THROUGH TO A GOOD RESPONSE
Review Copy
Copyright 2006 Gravitas Publishing
9ES OR .O #OMMANDING THE #ROSS %XAMINATION
5NQUALIlED TO %XPLAINED h$O YOU NOT AGREE THAT ADVERTISING DESIGNED
TO APPEAL TO OUR EMOTIONS MAKES US BUY THINGS WITH LITTLE BENElT v
s 0OOR !NSWER h.O ) DONT AGREEv
s /KAY !NSWER h.O BECAUSE IF IT SATISlES OUR EMOTIONS THEN IT DOES
INDEED HAVE A BENElTv
s 'OOD !NSWER h.OT NECESSARILY 7E DONT GET PERSONAL SATISFACTION
ONLY FROM WHAT WE @NEED 7E ALSO HAVE NONESSENTIAL @WANTS THAT
ADVERTISERS AIM TO SATISFY SUCH AS FEELING GOOD ABOUT WEARING A PAR
TICULAR BRAND OF CLOTHINGv
#ONCESSION TO #ASE $EFENSE h)S IT NOT TRUE THAT STUDENTS WOULD BEN
ElT FROM MORE MUSIC TRAINING v
s 0OOR !NSWER h3URE THEY WOULD OF COURSE GET SOME BENElTv
s /KAY !NSWER h4HEY MAY GET A BENElT BUT THERE WOULD BE SIGNIlCANT
TIME AND MONEY COSTSv
s 'OOD !NSWER h$ESPITE THE ENHANCEMENT INCREASING THE TIME SPENT
ON MUSIC CLASS WOULD TAKE AWAY FROM OTHER COURSES 4HERES LIMITED
TIME AND THE TRADE
OFF AWAY FROM CORE SUBJECTS WOULD BE HARMFULv
)NDECISIVE TO #ONlDENT h$O YOU ACKNOWLEDGE THAT PRISON AMENITIES
AND ACTIVITIES MAKE IT EASIER TO GO FROM BEING A CRIMINAL TO ACTING AS
A RESPONSIBLE MEMBER OF SOCIETY v
s 0OOR !NSWER h7ELL IT DEPENDS %VERYONE IS DIFFERENTv
s /KAY !NSWER h!LTHOUGH THEY PERHAPS MAKE FOR AN EASIER TRANSITION
THEY GO SLIGHTLY AGAINST THE CORE GOALS OF PRISONS NAMELY PUNISHMENT
FOR CRIMES AND DETERRENCE AGAINST FUTURE CRIMESv
s 'OOD !NSWER h1UITE THE CONTRARY 0RISONS ARE MEANT TO PUNISH CRIMI
NALS AND DETER CRIME 0RISON LUXURIES SEND THE OPPOSITE MESSAGEv
Review Copy
Copyright 2006 Gravitas Publishing
4ALK THE 4ALK
1UESTIONING TO !NSWERING h)SNT IT THE CASE THAT CORPORATE EXECU
TIVES ARE ACCOUNTABLE ONLY TO THE PROlT DEMANDS OF SHAREHOLDERS v
s 0OOR !NSWER h"UT DO YOU NOT THINK THAT THEY CONSIDER HOW THE PUB
LIC WILL VIEW THEIR ACTIONS 7OULDNT YOU AGREE THAT THEY ALSO WANT TO
HAVE A GOOD PUBLIC IMAGE v
s /KAY !NSWER h&OR CERTAIN SHAREHOLDERS MAY BE ONE STAKEHOLDER BUT
YOU MUST ADMIT THAT THEY CONSIDER PUBLIC PERCEPTIONS AND THEIR OWN
REPUTATIONS AS WELLv
s 'OOD !NSWER h.O THEY HAVE TO BALANCE DEMANDS FOR SHORT TERM PROF
ITS WITH THEIR GOAL OF CREATING A POSITIVE LONG TERM RELATIONSHIP WITH
THE PUBLIC %XECUTIVES KNOW THAT A STRONG CORPORATE IMAGE WILL HELP
THE COMPANY OVER TIMEv
,%11)6-8,31) 97-2+8,)'6377)<%1-2%8-32
3TANDING ALONE STRONG PERFORMANCE IN A CROSS
EXAMINATION PERIOD
CAN HELP YOUR TEAM CONSIDERABLY "UT CAN YOU STRETCH THE EFFECTS OF A
CROSS
EXAMINATION INTO OTHER PARTS OF THE DEBATE !BSOLUTELY !PPLYING
THE CROSS
EXAMINATION TO THE OVERALL DEBATE HIGHLIGHTS AND REINFORCES
MOMENTS IN THE CROSS
EXAMINATION THAT YOU
FEEL BENElTED YOUR CASE 4HIS TOOL APPLIES
:\JJLZZ;PW
BOTH TO CROSS
EXAMINATIONS THAT INVOLVED
YOU AND THOSE IN WHICH YOUR PARTNER WAS
6IQMRHXLINYHKIWSJ
A PARTICIPANT !DDITIONALLY ALTHOUGH YOULL
XLIGVSWWI\EQMREXMSR
USUALLY lND MORE MATERIAL TO USE FROM
WHEN YOUR TEAM ASKED THE QUESTIONS YOUR
ANSWERS MAY ALSO BE GOOD MATERIAL FOR
FUTURE SPEECHES (ERE ARE SOME WAYS TO USE
THE CROSS
EXAMINATION
(IGHLIGHT A mAW )F YOUR TEAM HAS EXPOSED WEAKNESS IN ONE OF YOUR
OPPONENTS ARGUMENTS REMIND THE JUDGES THAT YOUVE DONE SO 3INCE
YOU DONT HAVE A FULL OPPORTUNITY TO ANALYZE AND CRITICIZE YOUR OPPO
NENTS ANSWERS DURING A CROSS
EXAMINATION AN UNINTERRUPTED SPEECH
PROVIDES YOU WITH A VALUABLE CHANCE TO EXPLAIN EXACTLY HOW THE CROSS
EXAMINATION EXPOSED THE mAWS
Review Copy
Copyright 2006 Gravitas Publishing
9ES OR .O #OMMANDING THE #ROSS %XAMINATION
5SE AN ADMISSION FOR REFUTATION "RINGING UP CONCESSIONS MADE BY
YOUR OPPONENTS DURING CROSS
EXAMINATION PERIODS IS A WAY OF TURNING
THEIR OWN WORDS INTO REFUTATION !N ADMISSION PROVIDED IN AN ANSWER
MAKES YOUR CLASH SIGNIlCANTLY STRONGER SINCE YOU DONT HAVE TO SPEND
VERY MUCH OF YOUR VALUABLE TIME EXPLAINING AND PROVING A POINT THAT
THE OTHER SIDE HAS ALREADY CONCEDED
,AY THE FOUNDATION FOR YOUR ARGUMENT !LTHOUGH ITS LESS COMMON
THAN USING THE CROSS
EXAMINATION FOR REFUTATION YOU CAN USE AN
ADMISSION GAINED DURING A CROSS
EXAMINATION TO SUPPORT THE BASIS OF
A CONSTRUCTIVE POINT 4HIS TOOL CAN BE USED TO DEFEND PREVIOUS POINTS
OR TO LAY THE FOUNDATION FOR NEW POINTS 5SING CROSS
EXAMINATION CON
CESSIONS IN THIS WAY MAKES IT TOUGHER FOR THE OTHER SIDE TO CLASH SINCE
YOUR OPPONENT APPEARS TO BE AT LEAST IN PARTIAL AGREEMENT
2EINFORCE YOUR STRENGTHS !N OPPOSING TEAM WILL TRY FERVENTLY TO WEAK
EN YOUR ARGUMENTS WHILE CROSS
EXAMINING YOU )N MANY CASES YOUR
RIVAL WILL GO IN CIRCLES WITHOUT INmICTING ANY HARM HELPING YOU SHOW
CONlDENCE IN YOUR CASE 2EFERRING BACK TO THE CROSS
EXAMINATION CAN
AID IN REINFORCING THAT YOUR POINTS HAVE PASSED THE TEST OF CRITICISM )TS
A WAY OF SAYING h4HEY TRIED TO DEFEAT IT AND THEY FAILEDv
#ROSS
EXAMINATION DEBATE CAN BE CHALLENGING "UT KNOWING HOW TO ASK
TOUGH QUESTIONS HOW TO ANSWER QUESTIONS EFFECTIVELY AND HOW TO USE
THE CROSS
EXAMINATION IN YOUR SPEECH WILL IMPROVE YOUR PERFORMANCE
AT THIS STYLE OF DEBATE
Review Copy
Copyright 2006 Gravitas Publishing
4ALK THE 4ALK
#HAPTER +EYS TO 3UCCESS
D!SK DIRECT LEADING QUESTIONS TO GET THE ANSWERS YOU WANT
4HIS METHOD ALLOWS YOU TO CONTROL THE CROSS
EXAMINATION /PEN
ENDED QUESTIONS GIVE YOUR COMPETITOR AN OPPORTUNITY TO RAMBLE
TAKING UP YOUR VALUABLE CROSS
EXAMINATION TIME
D(AVE A CLEAR OBJECTIVE FOR YOUR CROSS EXAMINATION !SK A
SERIES OF QUESTIONS DESIGNED TO GET AT A PARTICULAR POINT OR ADMIS
SION 3TART WITH QUESTIONS THAT SETUP THE LINE OF QUESTIONING AND
THEN PROCEED TO QUESTIONS THAT GET TO THE HEART OF THE MATTER
D!NSWER DIRECTLY BUT BE SURE TO QUALIFY YOUR ANSWERS !
SIMPLE hYESv OR hNOv GIVES THE CROSS EXAMINER EXCESSIVE CONTROL
OVER THE QUESTIONING PERIOD 0ROVIDING A BRIEF EXPLANATION WILL
CLARIFY YOUR PERSPECTIVE AND WILL MAKE IT MORE DIFlCULT FOR YOUR
OPPONENT TO GO ON THE ATTACK
D5SE THE CROSS EXAMINATION )F YOUVE FORCED A DAMAGING
ADMISSION OR DEFENDED YOUR CASE EFFECTIVELY REMIND YOUR JUDGES
ABOUT IT DURING THE SPEECH THAT FOLLOWS
Review Copy
Copyright 2006 Gravitas Publishing
*/(7;,9
*SVE]MRXS*SVYQW
7XERHMRK3YXJVSQXLI'VS[H
#OMING 5P
$EBATES DONT ONLY TAKE PLACE BETWEEN TWO TEAMS 4HERE ARE OFTEN
MANY DIFFERENT PERSPECTIVES AT PLAY 4HIS CHAPTER WILL SHOW YOU HOW
TO EMERGE AS A LEADER IN FORUMS 9OULL lND OUT HOW TO SET THE AGENDA
STRIKE A COMPROMISE BUILD A COALITION AND SPEAK IN AN ENGAGING WAY
Review Copy
Copyright 2006 Gravitas Publishing
4ALK THE 4ALK
;,)28;37-()7%6)2 8)239+,
(AVING ONLY AN !FlRMATIVE TEAM AND A .EGATIVE TEAM HAS CERTAIN
ADVANTAGES 4HE ISSUE IS CLEAR ESPECIALLY AFTER THE lRST SPEAKER DElNES
THE TERMS 4HERES AN OBVIOUS FAULT LINE THAT DIVIDES THE OPPOSING
TEAMS 3INCE EACH SIDE KNOWS EXACTLY WHAT IT HAS TO ARGUE THIS FORMAT
CERTAINLY MAKES FOR GOOD PRACTICE AND COMPETITION
"UT DO MOST DEBATES HAVE ONLY TWO PERSPECTIVES )F YOU THINK
ABOUT THE WORLD AROUND YOU YOULL REALIZE THAT THERE ARE USUALLY MANY
VIEWS ON THE SAME SUBJECT %VEN ON THE SAME SUBJECT THERE ARE MANY
DIFFERENT SUB
ISSUES AND EACH STAKEHOLDER WILL CONSIDER DIFFERENT SUB
ISSUES TO BE THE MOST IMPORTANT ONES "ELOW ARE DESCRIPTIONS OF SOME
OF THE INSTANCES WHEN THERE ARE MULTIPLE PERSPECTIVES AT PLAY
3TUDENT #ONGRESS AND -ODEL 0ARLIAMENT
)N DEMOCRATIC SYSTEMS THERE ARE NUMEROUS POLITICAL PARTIES %ACH PAR
TY HAS ELECTED MEMBERS WHO REPRESENT ITS POSITIONS IN A LEGISLATURE
)N SOME INSTANCES SUCH AS THE 5NITED 3TATES #ONGRESS THERE ARE TWO
DOMINANT PARTIES )N OTHER PLACES SUCH AS #ANADA AND MANY %UROPE
AN NATIONS THERE ARE THREE OR MORE GROUPS REPRESENTED IN SIGNIlCANT
NUMBERS ! PARTY DOESNT ONLY REPRESENT A SINGLE NARROWLY DElNED
PERSPECTIVE ON EACH ISSUE 2ATHER ITS MEMBERS REPRESENT A RANGE OF
VIEWS ON WHATS CALLED THE POLITICAL SPECTRUM 4HEY COME TOGETHER AS A
UNIT BECAUSE THEIR VIEWS ARE REASONABLY SIMILAR BUT THERES STILL PLENTY
OF ROOM FOR MANEUVERING
)N A 3TUDENT #ONGRESS OR -ODEL 0ARLIAMENT THE CORE ACTIVITIES
INCLUDE DEVELOPING DEBATING AND VOTING ON "ILLS -ULTIPLE PERSPEC
TIVES GO INTO THE DRAFTING OF A "ILL %VERYONE WILL WANT TO HAVE THEIR
ISSUES AND VIEWS INCLUDED )F THE PARTY PROPOSING THE "ILL DOESNT HAVE
A MAJORITY IN THE LEGISLATURE IT WILL HAVE TO COMPROMISE OR FORM A COALI
TION WITH OTHER MEMBERS #ONSEQUENTLY THE BACKROOM DEAL
MAKING IS
OFTEN AS IMPORTANT AS THE DEBATE ITSELF
-ODEL 5NITED .ATIONS
)N THIS INTERNATIONAL FORUM YOU REPRESENT A COUNTRY ON A COMMITTEE
SUCH AS THE 3ECURITY #OUNCIL OR THE #OMMISSION ON (UMAN 2IGHTS
'ENERALLY THERE ARE ONLY ONE OR TWO MEMBERS ADVOCATING FOR YOUR
COUNTRY ON EACH COMMITTEE 4HEREFORE DECIDING ON YOUR COUNTRYS PER
Review Copy
Copyright 2006 Gravitas Publishing
&ORAY INTO &ORUMS 3TANDING /UT FROM THE #ROWD
SPECTIVE IS MUCH EASIER THAN DECIDING ON A PARTYS PERSPECTIVE IN A
3TUDENT #ONGRESS OR -ODEL 0ARLIAMENT 4HE CHALLENGE LIES IN lNDING
AREAS OF MUTUAL INTEREST AND AGREEMENT BETWEEN COUNTRIES )TS VIR
TUALLY IMPOSSIBLE FOR ONE COUNTRY TO PUSH THROUGH A RIGID VIEW SINCE
OTHER COUNTRIES ARE UNLIKELY TO AGREE 4HIS MAKES NEGOTIATION AND COM
PROMISE CENTRAL TO THE DEBATE
#OMMITTEE -EETINGS
7HETHER ITS A SCHOOL CLUB A STUDENT COUNCIL OR A COMMUNITY GROUP
YOURE PROBABLY PART OF A COMMITTEE 7HEN A COMMITTEE MEETS ITS
MEMBERS HAVE GOALS THAT ARE MORE WIDELY HELD AMONG PARTICIPANTS
THAN IN THE TYPES OF FORUMS MENTIONED PREVIOUSLY 4HERE TENDS NOT TO
BE DISTINCT FACTIONS 2ATHER THE DEBATES ARE MORE CIVIL AND CONSTRUC
TIVE AND THE PURPOSE IS TO DECIDE HOW BEST TO CARRY OUT THE GROUPS
MANDATE 9OU SHOULDNT BE TRYING TO DEFEAT ANYONE ELSE ON THE COM
MITTEE AS THE AIM IS TO lND CONSENSUS AMONG ALL GROUP MEMBERS 3UC
CESS IN THIS TYPE OF FORUM DEBATE INVOLVES LEADERSHIP AND ENGAGEMENT
3HOUTING DOWN ARGUMENTS MADE BY OTHER MEMBERS IS BOUND TO ISOLATE
YOU AND RENDER YOU LESS EFFECTIVE
#LASS $ISCUSSIONS
9OUVE CERTAINLY BEEN PART OF CLASSROOM DEBATES ON THE THEME OF A
NOVEL OR ON AN INTERNATIONAL AFFAIRS ISSUE 0ERHAPS YOUVE EVEN ADVO
CATED HOW TO GO ABOUT SOLVING A MATH PROBLEM OR CONDUCTING A SCIENCE
EXPERIMENT )N THESE DISCUSSIONS YOUR GOALS SHOULD BE TO CONTRIBUTE TO
THE LEARNING OF EVERYONE IN THE CLASS TO INCREASE YOUR OWN UNDERSTAND
ING OF AN ISSUE AND TO PRACTICE YOUR SPEECH
AND DEBATE SKILLS 3INCE YOURE DEBATING
:\JJLZZ;PW
WITH PEOPLE WHO ARE YOUR FRIENDS THE STYLE
OF DEBATE IS MORE CONSTRUCTIVE AND ANALYTI
'SRXVMFYXIEGXMZIP]
CAL THAN CONFRONTATIONAL 4HERE ARE NO @WIN
XSGPEWWHMWGYWWMSRW
NERS AND @LOSERS BUT SELECT PEOPLE WILL BE
SEEN AS LEADERS BY THEIR TEACHER AND BY THEIR
PEERS 9OUR MISSION SHOULD BE TO MAKE SURE
THAT YOURE ONE OF THESE PEOPLE
Review Copy
Copyright 2006 Gravitas Publishing
4ALK THE 4ALK
%86-'/=&%0%2'-2+%'8
)N A DEBATE BETWEEN TWO TEAMS THE GOALS ARE SIMPLE BUILD YOUR ARGU
MENTS AND DEFEAT YOUR OPPONENTS ARGUMENTS /NE TEAM WILL WIN AND
THE OTHER WILL LOSE 4HE ONLY PERSON YOU HAVE TO WORK WITH IS YOUR
PARTNER 3IMPLY PUT ITS AN @US VS THEM BATTLE
! FORUM DEBATE IS MUCH DIFFERENT .OT ONLY ARE YOU TRYING TO PRES
ENT YOUR ARGUMENTS YOURE ALSO AIMING TO WORK WITHIN THE CONTEXT OF
A DYNAMIC DEBATE TO SEE WHERE YOUR POINTS lT IN AND MAKE THE MOST
IMPACT 4HERE ARE MORE THAN TWO DISTINCT PERSPECTIVES MAKING THE
AREAS OF CONTENTION LESS CLEAR
9OU HAVE TO WORK WITH OTHER PEOPLEENGAGE RATHER THAN DEFEATIN
ORDER TO ACHIEVE YOUR OBJECTIVES )N FACT YOUR PEERS WILL HAVE SIGNIl
CANT SWAY IN HOW YOURE JUDGED AS OPPOSED TO A PANEL OF JUDGES WHO
ARE REMOVED FROM THE DEBATE ITSELF
!LL OF THESE FACTORS REQUIRE YOU TO PERFORM A BALANCING ACT 9OU
HAVE TO PUSH YOUR PERSPECTIVE BUT COMPROMISE MAY BE NECESSARY
FOR ANYTHING TO PASS "EING DECISIVE WILL HELP YOU STAND OUT BUT OTHER
PEOPLE WILL WANT TO FEEL THAT YOURE LISTEN
ING TO THEIR VIEWS 9OU SHOULD STRIVE TO SET
:\JJLZZ;PW
THE AGENDA BY PROMOTING THE ISSUES YOU
FEEL ARE MOST IMPORTANT WHILE AT THE SAME
&YMPHVIPEXMSRWFIJSVI
TIME ENSURING THAT YOUR COMMENTS lT WITH
XLIJSVYQIZIRWXEVXW
THE DEBATE )N SHORT PEOPLE ACTUALLY HAVE TO
LIKE YOU AND WANT TO STAND WITH YOU ON THE
TOPICS BEING DEBATED
,31)*-)0(%(:%28%+) 7)88,)%+)2(%
4HE MORE INVOLVED YOU ARE IN DECIDING
:\JJLZZ;PW
WHAT GETS DEBATED THE MORE INmUENTIAL YOU
WILL BE IN THE DEBATE ITSELF 4HERES RARELY
7XVMZIXSMRYIRGI
ENOUGH TIME TO DISCUSS EVERY RELEVANT ISSUE
[LEXKIXWHIFEXIH
IN DETAIL )F THERE ARE SEVERAL IMPORTANT MAT
TERS AN AGENDA HELPS STRUCTURE AND FOCUS
THE DEBATE )N SOME CASES THERE IS A FORMAL
AGENDA SUCH AS A LIST OF "ILLS IN A -ODEL 0AR
LIAMENT OR A LIST OF DISCUSSION ITEMS IN A COMMITTEE MEETING !T OTHER
TIMES THE AGENDA IS MORE INFORMAL 4HE PARTICIPANTS WHO LEAD THE
Review Copy
Copyright 2006 Gravitas Publishing
&ORAY INTO &ORUMS 3TANDING /UT FROM THE #ROWD
DEBATE ESSENTIALLY SET THE TONE FOR EVERYONE BY MAKING IT CLEAR WHAT
THE KEY ISSUES ARE (ERE ARE SOME STRATEGIES THAT WILL HELP YOU PARTICI
PATE IN SETTING THE AGENDA
*UMP ON AN ISSUE QUICKLY )F YOURE ONE OF THE lRST PEOPLE TO SUGGEST
A REASONABLE AGENDA FOR THE DEBATE YOUR ISSUES ARE FAR MORE LIKELY
TO BE ACCEPTED /NCE THE KEY ISSUES HAVE BEEN DECIDED ADDING YOUR
ITEMS TO THE DEBATE MAY BE SEEN AS COMPLICATING AND SIDETRACKING THE
FORUM 4HE MOST EFFECTIVE DEBATERS TRY TO SET THE AGENDA BEFORE THE
FORUM EVEN BEGINS 4HEY TALK INFORMALLY WITH OTHERS BEFOREHAND TO
GAUGE THE MOOD AND TO SUGGEST IDEAS )N A CRISIS COMMITTEE INVOLVING
RAPIDLY UNFOLDING EVENTS SUCH AS A 5NITED .ATIONS 3ECURITY #OUNCIL
SESSION TACKLING A NEW EVENT QUICKLY WILL HELP YOU SET THE TONE OF THE
DISCUSSION TO FOLLOW
%XPLAIN WHY YOUR ISSUES ARE THE IMPORTANT ONES )N A SENSE YOURE
ARGUING WHY YOUR ISSUES NEED TO BE ARGUED 9OU NEED TO MAKE IT CLEAR TO
EVERYONE ELSE WHAT THE FORUM STANDS TO GAIN FROM DEBATING THE ISSUES
THAT YOURE SUGGESTING "ELOW ARE SOME OF THE REASONS WHY AN ISSUE
MIGHT NEED TO BE DEBATED PROMPTLY
s 5RGENCY )F A PROBLEM IS IMMEDIATE OR FORTHCOMING CLAIMING URGEN
CY CAN BE A COMPELLING REASON TO HAVE YOUR ISSUE ON THE AGENDA &OR
EXAMPLE AN IMMINENT CIVIL WAR OR A TIGHT PROJECT DEADLINE COULD BE
CAUSE FOR URGENT DEBATE
s 3CALE "Y EXPLAINING THE MAGNITUDE OF A SITUATION YOU CAN PRESENT A
POWERFUL CASE TO THE FORUM FOR DEBATING THIS ISSUE 4HE ENORMITIES OF
A DRUG TRAFlCKING PROBLEM OR A GROWING HEALTH CRISIS ARE INSTANCES IN
WHICH THE SCALE OF THE SITUATION CAN BE USED TO JUSTIFY DISCUSSION
s $EPENDENCY )N MANY CASES A NUMBER OF IMPORTANT ISSUES ARE DEPEN
DENT ON THE OUTCOME OF ANOTHER DEBATE 3AY THAT A 3TUDENT #OUNCIL IS
DISCUSSING A YEAR
END PARTY $EBATING HOW MUCH SHOULD BE SPENT ON IT
SHOULD COME BEFORE PLANNING OTHER ITEMS
4HINK ABOUT WHAT OTHERS WILL lND IMPORTANT (OW SUCCESSFUL YOU ARE
IN ESTABLISHING THE KEY ISSUES FOR DEBATE DEPENDS ON THE OPINIONS OF
OTHER PARTICIPANTS *UDGING WHAT OTHER PEOPLE BELIEVE IS A VALUABLE TOOL
FOR PROPOSING AN AGENDA /NE METHOD IS CONSIDERING THEIR ROLES AND
Review Copy
Copyright 2006 Gravitas Publishing
4ALK THE 4ALK
HOW THEY RELATE TO IMPORTANT ISSUES )F YOURE IN A -ODEL 0ARLIAMENT
AND THE 'REEN 0ARTY IS HEAVILY REPRESENTED ITS A FAIR BET THAT ENVIRON
MENTAL ISSUES WILL BE OF FOREMOST CONCERN "UT THERES A LESS SPECULA
TIVE METHOD OF GAUGING THE MOOD ASK THEM )T MAY SEEM LIKE COMMON
SENSE BUT ITS RARELY DONE 7HEN YOURE TALKING TO PEOPLE BEFORE THE
FORUM ASK THEM WHAT THEY SEE AS THE KEY ISSUES ,ISTENING IS FAR MORE
EFFECTIVE THAN MIND
READING
'31132+6392( 786-/-2+%'314631-7)
9OU THINK YOURE RIGHT AND YOURE CONVINCED THAT EVERYONE ELSE AROUND
YOU SHOULD TAKE YOUR VIEW 5NFORTUNATELY THEY ALL HAVE THEIR OWN VIEWS
ANDYOU GUESSED ITTHEY THINK THEYRE RIGHT AS WELL 7HAT TO DO
/F COURSE YOU COULD GO ON WITH THE SAME COURSE STUBBORNLY STICKING
TO YOUR ORIGINAL POSITION "UT CONSIDER THAT YOU PROBABLY NEED THE SUP
PORT OF PEOPLE WHO HAVE OTHER VIEWS 'OOD
LUCK TRYING TO GET YOUR FELLOW PARTICIPANTS
:\JJLZZ;PW
TO BACK DOWN AND BOW TO YOUR DEMANDS
5SUALLY YOULL HAVE TO lND COMMON GROUND
9RHIVWXERH[LEX
AND ARRIVE AT A COMPROMISE (ERE ARE SOME
QSXMZEXIWSXLIV
STRATEGIES FOR COMING UP WITH A MUTUALLY
TEVXMGMTERXW
AGREEABLE POSITION
#OME INTO THE NEGOTIATION FROM A POSITION OF STRENGTH !T lRST STAKE
OUT A CLEAR DECISIVE POSITION )TS IMPOSSIBLE TO GET EVEN PART OF WHAT
YOU WANT IF YOU BEGIN WITH A WATERED
DOWN VERSION OF WHAT YOU REALLY
THINK )F YOU START WITH A POSITION THATS ALREADY A COMPROMISE YOULL
PROBABLY HAVE TO CONCEDE EVEN MORE GROUND TO THOSE WHO ARE PUSHING
FOR A DIFFERENT PERSPECTIVE
4HINK ABOUT WHEN YOU USED TO NEGOTIATE WITH YOUR PARENTS FOR
MONEY TO GO OUT /R PERHAPS YOU STILL DO 9OU ASKED FOR THEY
PROPOSED AND SO YOU COMPRISED AT
7HAT IF YOU DECIDED TO START LOW THINKING
>H[JO6\[
YOU WOULD BE REWARDED FOR BEING REASON
ABLE 9OU ASKED FOR THEY PROPOSED
(SR XGSQTVSQMWI
AND SO THEY FELT THAT A COMPROMISE
SVKMZIMRXSSUYMGOP]
WOULD BE FAIR .EXT TIME YOULL REMEMBER
TO START THE NEGOTIATION A BIT HIGHER
Review Copy
Copyright 2006 Gravitas Publishing
&ORAY INTO &ORUMS 3TANDING /UT FROM THE #ROWD
3TICK lRM TO YOUR MOST IMPORTANT DEMANDS +NOW WHAT YOU CONSIDER
A TOP PRIORITY AND WHATS LESS IMPORTANT %VEN IF YOU APPEAR TO TAKE
STRONG POSITIONS ON THE LOWER PRIORITY DEMANDS YOU CAN USE THEM AS
BARGAINING CHIPS TO PROTECT WHAT YOU CONSIDER VITAL ! DEMAND THATS
LESS IMPORTANT TO YOU MAY BE A CONCESSION THAT SOMEONE WITH ANOTHER
PERSPECTIVE VALUES GREATLY
786)2+8,-2291&)67 &9-0(-2+'3%0-8-327
7ORKING ALONE ITS RATHER DIFlCULT TO REACH
YOUR OBJECTIVES IN A FORUM 9OU MAY PREFER
>H[JO6\[
TO @GO IT ALONE AND GET ALL OF THE BRAGGING
RIGHTS IF YOUR PROPOSAL IS ACCEPTED 5NFORTU
(SR XETTIEVXSFI
NATELY TRYING TO BE THE ONLY SHINING STAR WILL
JSVQMRKI\GPYWMZI
RARELY WORK %VEN IF OTHER PEOPLE AGREE WITH
GPMUYIW
YOU THEYRE LESS LIKELY TO VOTE FOR YOUR IDEAS
IF THEY THINK YOURE TRYING TO DOMINATE
! COALITION CAN BE AN EFFECTIVE VEHICLE FOR ADVANCING YOUR INTERESTS
5NLIKE COMPROMISING WHICH EMPHASIZES BRINGING IDEAS TOGETHER COALI
TION
BUILDING PLACES MORE STRESS ON BRINGING PEOPLE TOGETHER TO PROMOTE
A SET OF IDEAS #OALITIONS ARE USUALLY CREATED
BEFORE THE DEBATE WHEREAS COMPROMISES
>H[JO6\[
HAPPEN DURING THE DEBATE )N THIS SENSE A
POLITICAL PARTY IS A TYPE OF COALITION "UILDING
(SR XJSVQGSEPMXMSRW
A COALITION IS TRICKY BUT THE EFFORT USUALLY
TYVIP]SRJVMIRHWLMT
PAYS OFF BY MAKING IT EASIER TO ACHIEVE YOUR
OBJECTIVES (ERE ARE SOME STRATEGIES TO HELP
YOU BUILD COALITIONS
)DENTIFY PEOPLE WITH SIMILAR INTERESTS !LTHOUGH ITS RARE FOR ANY TWO
PARTICIPANTS TO HAVE EXACTLY THE SAME POSITION ON A TOPIC ITS COMMON
FOR NUMEROUS PEOPLE TO HAVE POSITIONS WITH MINOR DIFFERENCES THAT CAN
BE BRIDGED &OR EXAMPLE TAKE A -ODEL 5NITED .ATIONS DEBATE ON FOR
EIGN AID /NE POTENTIAL COALITION IS A GROUP OF WEALTHY DONOR NATIONS
EACH HAVING DIFFERENT PROPOSALS BUT SHARING THE PERSPECTIVE THAT AID
SHOULD BE TIED TO DEMOCRATIC REFORM
-AKE TRADE
OFFS TO SECURE PASSAGE 3OME COALITION SCENARIOS INVOLVE
SACRIlCES AND DEALS 3EPARATE GROUPS AGREE TO BACK EACH OTHER SO THAT
EACH ONE CAN ACCOMPLISH ITS PRIORITIES &OR EXAMPLE THE #ONSERVATIVE
Review Copy
Copyright 2006 Gravitas Publishing
4ALK THE 4ALK
0ARTY IN A -ODEL 0ARLIAMENT COULD AGREE TO THE ,IBERAL 0ARTYS BID FOR
GREATER SPENDING ON HEALTH CARE )N EXCHANGE IT WOULD RECEIVE A GUAR
ANTEE OF THE ,IBERAL 0ARTYS SUPPORT FOR ITS TAX CUT PROPOSALS
3HARE RESPONSIBILITY AND CREDIT WITH OTHER PARTICIPANTS 0LAYING A
LEADERSHIP ROLE DOESNT MEAN HOGGING THE INITIATIVE 4RYING TO DOMI
NATE A COALITION IS A SURE WAY TO SEE IT FALL
APART %VERYONE IS IN THE COALITION BECAUSE
:\JJLZZ;PW
THEY FEEL THERES SOMETHING FOR THEM TO GAIN
)F THEY SEE IT AS A POWER GRAB ON YOUR PART
-HIRXMJ]]SYVTSXIRXMEP
THEY MAY NOT WANT TO WORK WITH YOU 4HE
EPPMIWJVSQXLISYXWIX
BEST LEADERS IN A COALITION WORK TO INVOLVE
EVERYONE 7HEN AN INITIATIVE SUCCEEDS THE
ENTIRE TEAM TAKES CREDIT
)2+%+)):)6=32) 78=0)%2(()0-:)6=
-OST OF THE PRINCIPLES OF STRONG DELIVERY DISCUSSED IN PREVIOUS CHAP
TERS HOLD TRUE IN FORUMS BUT THERE ARE A NUMBER OF TECHNIQUES THAT ARE
PARTICULARLY IMPORTANT IN A GROUP SITUATION (ERE ARE SOME TIPS TO HELP
YOU APPEAL TO A WIDE RANGE OF PEOPLE
&ACE AS MANY PEOPLE AS POSSIBLE &OCUSING PREDOMINANTLY ON THE
#HAIRPERSON THE FRONT OF THE ROOM OR THE KEY PLAYERS IS A NATURAL
INSTINCT 4HIS PRACTICE LEAVES EVERYONE ELSE FEELING @LEFT OUT OF YOUR
SPEECH 4URNING YOUR BODY AND YOUR EYES TOWARD AS WIDE A SPECTRUM
OF YOUR AUDIENCE AS POSSIBLE IS A GREAT WAY TO KEEP ALL OF THE PARTICI
PANTS FEELING ENGAGED
!T A MEETING SITTING AT CERTAIN POSITIONS WILL HELP YOU FACE THE
MAXIMUM NUMBER OF PEOPLE 3ITTING AT CERTAIN POSITIONS 9OURE PROB
ABLY THINKING h)TS A TABLE AND YOU SIT DOWN ANYWHERE )TS THAT SIMPLEv
!CTUALLY IF YOU LOOK CAREFULLY AROUND A TYPICAL MEETING TABLE YOULL lND
THAT CERTAIN PLACES ARE ADVANTAGEOUS 4HESE @POWER POSITIONS MAKE IT
MORE LIKELY THAT OTHERS WILL NOTICE YOU WHEN YOU WANT TO SPEAK !ND
WHEN YOU DO SPEAK FEWER PEOPLE WILL HAVE TO TURN THEIR BODIES IN ORDER
TO FACE YOU DIRECTLY
+EEP YOU PALMS OPEN AND UP 4HE EXCESSIVE USE OF CLOSED
lSTED OR
lNGER
POINTING GESTURES PAINTS AN IMAGE OF YOU SAYING h(ERES WHY
YOURE WRONGv 9OURE ESSENTIALLY PLACING A @BARRIER BETWEEN YOU AND
Review Copy
Copyright 2006 Gravitas Publishing
&ORAY INTO &ORUMS 3TANDING /UT FROM THE #ROWD
EVERYONE ELSE 3PEAKING WITH OPEN PALMS THAT FACE UP OR OUTWARD IS A
WAY OF COMMUNICATING h)M INVITING YOU TO JOIN MY POSITIONv 3OUNDS
SUBTLE AND SUBCONSCIOUS 7ELL IT IS "UT ITS A SMALL TOOL THAT CAN ADD
AN EXTRA TOUCH TO YOUR DELIVERY
3HOW THAT YOURE LISTENING )N A FORUM
:\JJLZZ;PW
YOURE COMMUNICATING EVEN WHEN YOURE
NOT SPEAKING 3INCE THERE ARE SO MANY
7XE]LYQFPIXSKEMR
SPEAKERS WITH DIFFERENT OPINIONS EVERYONE
VIWTIGXERHWYTTSVX
IS STRUGGLING TO STAND OUT AND TO FEEL THAT
THEYRE HAVING AN IMPACT %YE CONTACT WITH
THE SPEAKER AND AN ATTENTIVE POSTURE ARE
TWO WAYS TO SHOW THAT YOURE PAYING ATTEN
TION !DDITIONALLY EVERYONE LIKES TO KNOW THAT THEIR CONTRIBUTIONS ARE
BEING APPRECIATED BY THE OTHER PARTICIPANTS .ODDING IN AGREEMENT
HELPS CONVEY ENGAGEMENT AND INTEREST IN THE SPEAKERS COMMENTS )N
A PARLIAMENTARY FORUM APPLAUDING BY BANGING ON YOUR DESK OR CHANT
ING h(ERE HEREv ARE OTHER WAYS TO SHOW YOUR AGREEMENT
)F YOU REMEMBER THE TIPS AND TRICKS OUTLINED IN THIS CHAPTER YOULL
GIVE YOURSELF A COMPETITIVE ADVANTAGE AS YOU PARTICIPATE IN ANY TYPE OF
COMPETITIVE OR INFORMAL DEBATE FORUM
Review Copy
Copyright 2006 Gravitas Publishing
4ALK THE 4ALK
#HAPTER +EYS TO 3UCCESS
D0ROVIDE A SENSE OF DIRECTION TO THE DISCUSSION 3UGGEST WHAT
NEEDS TO BE DISCUSSED OR WHAT CHALLENGES SHOULD BE ADDRESSED
)F THE FORUM FOCUSES ON YOUR ISSUES ITS MORE LIKELY THAT YOULL
PLAY A LEADERSHIP ROLE IN THE DEBATE
D+EEP YOUR COMMENTS IN THE CONTEXT OF THE FORUM 5NLESS
YOU CAN SHOW WHY A NEW DIRECTION IS NECESSARY STAY FOCUSED
ON THE ISSUE AT HAND $ONT BRING UP POINTS JUST BECAUSE YOUVE
WANTED TO SAY THEM FOR SOME TIME
3EEK COMMON GROUND WITH OTHER PARTICIPANTS !LTHOUGH
STATING YOUR IDEAS CONlDENTLY IS IMPORTANT ITS ESSENTIAL THAT
YOURE ABLE TO BRING TOGETHER A COALITION OF PEOPLE OR TO CREATE
AGREEMENT AROUND KEY IDEAS 0LAY A LEADERSHIP ROLE BY SUGGEST
ING WAYS TO JOIN FORCES
D,ISTEN TO WHAT OTHERS ARE SAYING AND RESPOND ACCORDINGLY
3INCE THE PEOPLE YOURE TRYING TO CONVINCE ARE PART OF THE DEBATE
YOU NEED TO UNDERSTAND ALL OF THE RELEVANT PERSPECTIVES 3TRIVE
TO UNDERSTAND WHATS MOTIVATING OTHER PARTICIPANTS AND ADAPT
YOUR TACTICS AND CONTRIBUTIONS ACCORDINGLY
Review Copy
Copyright 2006 Gravitas Publishing
*/(7;,9
;EVWSJ;SVHW
(IFEXIW[MXL'SQQIRXEV]
#OMING 5P
)N THIS SECTION YOULL SEE THE TIPS AND TRICKS DISCUSSED IN PREVIOUS CHAP
TERS COME TOGETHER AS FULL DEBATES 4HE RESOLUTIONS WILL BE DEBATED VIG
OROUSLY FROM BOTH SIDES OF THE ISSUE SO THAT YOU CAN SEE HOW A DEBATE
UNFOLDS 4HE COMMENTARY AND mOW SHEETS WILL HELP YOU UNDERSTAND
THE TOOLS THAT THE DEBATERS ARE USING (OWEVER YOURE ENCOURAGED TO
MAKE YOUR OWN mOW SHEET AS YOU READ EACH DEBATE
Review Copy
Copyright 2006 Gravitas Publishing
4ALK THE 4ALK
4%60-%1)28%6=78=0)()&%8) 8,-7,397);390(
8,;
03;)68,)1-2-191:38-2+%+)
$EBATE
#OMMENTARY
3PEAKER ) CALL THIS (OUSE TO ORDER 4HE "ILL
BEFORE US TODAY IS 4HIS (OUSE WOULD 4(7
LOWER THE MINIMUM VOTING AGE 2EPRESENTING
THE 'OVERNMENT ARE THE 0RIME -INISTER AND
THE -INISTER OF THE #ROWN AND REPRESENTING
(ER -AJESTYS ,OYAL /PPOSITION ARE THE -EM
BER OF THE /PPOSITION AND THE ,EADER OF THE
/PPOSITION ) NOW CALL UPON THE 0RIME -INIS
TER TO DElNE THE TERMS OF THE "ILL AND PRESENT
THE 'OVERNMENTS CASE
0RIME -INISTER 4HANK YOU -R 3PEAKER (ON
ORABLE MEMBERS OF THE (OUSE WE ARE HERE
TODAY TO DEBATE WHETHER THIS (OUSE SHOULD
LOWER THE MINIMUM VOTING AGE )N ORDER TO
FOCUS THE DEBATE ON NATIONS WITH LONG STAND
ING DEMOCRATIC TRADITIONS WE ARE REFERRING
TO THE NATIONS THAT ARE MEMBERS OF THE
/RGANIZATION FOR %CONOMIC #OOPERATION AND
$EVELOPMENT /%#$ LARGELY .ORTH !MERICA
AND 7ESTERN %UROPE 7E DElNE hLOWER THE
MINIMUM VOTING AGEv AS ALLOWING CITIZENS TO
VOTE IN ELECTIONS FOR PUBLIC OFlCE BEGINNING AT
THE AGE OF COMPARED TO THE CURRENT SYS
TEMS WHICH TYPICALLY HAVE A MINIMUM VOTING
AGE OF YEARS
) WILL FOCUS ON THE ISSUE OF RIGHTSWHY IT
IS THAT CITIZENS AS YOUNG AS AGE DESERVE TO
VOTE -Y PARTNER WILL FOCUS ON THE BENElTS TO
SOCIETY AND TO YOUNG PEOPLE OF LOWERING THE
VOTING AGE TO
4HE lRST POINT OF THE 'OVERNMENTS CASE
IS THAT PEOPLE AS YOUNG AS AGE HAVE ADULT
AND DEMOCRATIC RESPONSIBILITIES WHICH SHOULD
Review Copy
.O NEED FOR A PLAN
BECAUSE THE RESOLU
TION IS A SINGLE SIMPLE
DECISION
3HOULD STATE IN PROPER
RESOLUTION FORMAT
!PPROPRIATE RATIONALE
AND CHOICE FOR
GEOGRAPHIC SCOPE
'OOD TO BE SPECIlC IN
THIS WAY
4ELLS THE JUDGES
EXACTLY WHERE THE CASE
IS GOING
#LEAR STATEMENT OF THE
POINT BEING MADE
Copyright 2006 Gravitas Publishing
7ARS OF 7ORDS $EBATES WITH #OMMENTARY
TRANSLATE INTO THE RIGHT TO VOTE 4HE CONCEPT
OF RIGHTS AND RESPONSIBILITIES ARE RELATED !S
SOMEONES RESPONSIBILITIES TO SOCIETY INCREASE
SO SHOULD THE CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHTS THEY HAVE
TO SHAPE HOW SOCIETY IS RUN &OR EXAMPLE
PEOPLE AS YOUNG AS PAY SALES TAXES ON THEIR
RAPIDLY GROWING SPENDING AND INCOME TAXES
ON PART TIME EMPLOYMENT INCOME 4HEY ARE
HELD CRIMINALLY RESPONSIBLE COMMONLY AS
ADULTS FOR ACTIONS THAT VIOLATE THE LAW 3OCI
ETY EXPECTS THESE INDIVIDUALS TO BEGIN ACTING
LIKE ADULTS WHICH IS WHY PEOPLE AS YOUNG
AS DESERVE THE RIGHT TO INmUENCE POLITICAL
DECISIONS CONCERNING FOR INSTANCE HOW THEIR
TAX DOLLARS ARE SPENT AND A VARIETY OF OTHER
IMPORTANT ISSUES
,EADER OF THE /PPOSITION h/N THAT POINTv 0RIME
-INISTER ACCEPTS THE 0OINT OF )NFORMATION
h7OULD YOU NOT AGREE THAT A BASIC EASY TO
PERFORM OBLIGATION SUCH AS PAYING TAXES OR
BEHAVING LAWFULLY IS FUNDAMENTALLY DIFFERENT
THAN AN IMPORTANT COMPLEX CHOICE LIKE DECID
ING ON WHO SHOULD GOVERN THE COUNTRY v
0RIME -INISTER &IRSTLY PAYING TAXES AND LAWFUL
BEHAVIOR ARE CRITICALLY IMPORTANT TO THE FUNC
TIONING OF SOCIETY 3ECONDLY AS ) WILL DISCUSS
LATER THE PREMISE OF YOUR QUESTIONVOTING IS
TOO DIFlCULT FOR YOUNG PEOPLE TO UNDERSTAND
IS COMPLETELY INCORRECT
.OW THAT WE HAVE ESTABLISHED THE ISSUE OF
DEMOCRATIC RIGHTS WE WILL MOVE ON TO OUR SEC
OND POINT WHICH IS HOW SIGNIlCANTLY POLITICAL
DECISIONS IMPACT YOUNG PEOPLE 4HE CONCEPT
OF A DEMOCRATIC SOCIETY IS THAT THE PEOPLE WHO
ARE IMPACTED BY POLITICAL DECISIONS SHOULD BE
ABLE TO DETERMINE WHO IT IS THAT MAKES THESE
DECISIONS )N THIS SENSE WE HAVE GOVERNMENT
BY CONSENT OF THE PEOPLE &OR EXAMPLE POLITI
Review Copy
'OOD CONNECTION
BETWEEN RIGHTS AND
RESPONSIBILITIES
%XAMPLE HELPS TO
CLARIFY THE POINT
3TARTED WITH A CON
CLUDING LINE BUT THEN
MOVED NEEDLESSLY BACK
INTO SPECIlCS
'OOD TIMING AS ARGU
MENT HAS JUST lNISHED
3TRONG CONTRAST BE
TWEEN CIRCUMSTANCES
3PEAKER FORESHADOWS
WHATS TO COME ALLOW
ING HIM TO MOVE ON
#LEAR EFFECTIVE TRANSI
TION BACK TO THE SPEECH
AND TO THE NEXT POINT
!PPEAL TO A WIDELY
HELD BELIEF
Copyright 2006 Gravitas Publishing
4ALK THE 4ALK
CIANS MAKE DECISIONS THAT IMPACT THE SCHOOL
SYSTEM POLICING OF VIOLENCE BY YOUNG PEOPLE
AND ACCESS AND AFFORDABILITY OF COLLEGE AND
UNIVERSITY -ANY YOUTH ARE ALSO IMPACTED BY
ISSUES SUCH AS POVERTY HEALTH CARE AND SOCIAL
SERVICES )N ORDER FOR POLITICIANS TO HAVE FULL
LEGITIMACY IN MAKING THESE DECISIONS THE
YOUTH WHO ARE IMPACTED BY THESE CHOICES
SHOULD BE PART OF THE VOTING CONSTITUENCY THAT
FORMS OUR GOVERNMENTS
3INCE WE HAVE NOW TALKED ABOUT THE CON
CEPT OF RESPONSIBILITIES AND THE NUMEROUS
POLITICAL DECISIONS THAT IMPACT YOUTH WE WILL
NOW MOVE ON TO THE THIRD AND lNAL AREA OF
RIGHTS NAMELY WHETHER PEOPLE AS YOUNG AS
HAVE THE CAPABILITY TO EXERCISE THIS RIGHT WELL
4HE OFTEN STATED REASON FOR HAVING AGE AS
THE MINIMUM VOTING AGE IS THAT IT IS AT THIS
STAGE IN LIFE THAT PEOPLE HAVE THE CAPABILITY
TO EXERCISE THEIR DEMOCRATIC RIGHTS APPROPRI
ATELY )T IS OF COURSE REASONABLE TO LIMIT RIGHTS
TO PEOPLE SO YOUNG THAT THEY CANNOT EXERCISE
THEM RESPONSIBLY (OWEVER THIS IS NOT THE
CASE FOR STUDENTS WHO ARE YEARS OLD 0EOPLE
AT THIS AGE ARE LEARNING ABOUT SOCIETY AND GOV
ERNMENT AT SCHOOL ARGUABLY GIVING THEM MORE
RECENT KNOWLEDGE ABOUT POLITICAL ISSUES THAN
EVEN MANY ADULTS )N ADDITION THEY HAVE HAD
MANY YEARS TO LEARN ABOUT HOW SOCIETY AND
THE POLITICAL SYSTEM WORK 4HEY ARE BEGINNING
TO THINK ABOUT WHAT THEY WANT TO DO AFTER
GRADUATING FROM SCHOOL SUCH AS EARNING A LIV
ING OR PURSUING COLLEGE OR UNIVERSITY EDUCA
TION 4HAT IS THEY HAVE THE CAPABILITY TO THINK
RATIONALLY AND RESPONSIBLY ABOUT HOW TO EXER
CISE THIS IMPORTANT RIGHT
%XAMPLES PROVIDE
CONTEXT AS TO WHY THE
RIGHTS ARE IMPORTANT
,INKS THE INITIAL CON
CEPT OF IMPACT TO THE
CONCEPT OF LEGITIMACY
3IGNAL THAT THE SPEAK
ER WANTS TO DEBUNK A
COMMON MYTH
7HY NOT GO RIGHT INTO
HOW VOTING AT AGE
IS OKAY
(AVE MOST YOUTH BEEN
PAYING ATTENTION FOR
THESE hMANY YEARS v
)S THERE REALLY A
DElNITE TIME WHEN
YOU HAVE @LEARNED THE
CONCEPTS OF VOTING
-EMBER OF THE /PPOSITION h0OINT OF )NFORMA
TIONv 0RIME -INISTER ACCEPTS h$O YOU NOT
THINK THAT PEOPLE SHOULD lNISH LEARNING ALL
Review Copy
Copyright 2006 Gravitas Publishing
7ARS OF 7ORDS $EBATES WITH #OMMENTARY
OF THESE IMPORTANT MATTERS BEFORE THEY VOTE
AS OPPOSED TO GETTING FAMILIAR WITH POLITICAL
DECISION WHILE THEY ARE ALLOWED TO VOTE v
0RIME -INISTER 4HE RIGHT TO VOTE HAS NEVER
REQUIRED A SOPHISTICATED LEVEL OF POLITICAL
KNOWLEDGE 2ATHER ONE MUST HAVE MERELY
ENOUGH INFORMATION TO MAKE THEIR PREFERRED
CHOICE AND THE 'OVERNMENT BELIEVES THAT
A YEAR OLD STUDENTS SCHOOL ENVIRONMENT
PROVIDES SUFlCIENT KNOWLEDGE FOR A CAREFULLY
CONSIDERED VOTING DECISION
) HAVE TOLD YOU lRSTLY THAT THE RIGHT TO
VOTE IS A LOGICAL EXTENSION OF THE RESPONSIBILI
TIES PLACED ON PEOPLE AS YOUNG AS SECONDLY
THAT POLITICAL DECISIONS HAVE A STRONG IMPACT
ON STUDENTS OF THIS AGE AND lNALLY THAT THEY
HAVE THE CAPABILITY TO EXERCISE THIS RIGHT
APPROPRIATELY 4HEREFORE THE 'OVERNMENT HAS
ESTABLISHED THE THEME OF RIGHTS WHICH IS WHY
THIS (OUSE SHOULD LOWER THE MINIMUM VOTING
AGE TO 4HANK YOU -R 3PEAKER
'OOD DESCRIPTION OF
WHAT THE BROADER CON
CEPT OF VOTING RIGHTS
MEANS AND DOESNT
MEAN
.UMBERING THE POINTS
HELPS THE JUDGES TO
REMEMBER THEM
#LEAR TIE
BACK TO THE
MAIN THEME AND CASE
STATEMENT
3PEAKER ) THANK THE 0RIME -INISTER FOR HIS
REMARKS ) NOW CALL UPON ON THE -EMBER OF
THE /PPOSITION TO DELIVER HER SPEECH
-EMBER OF THE /PPOSITION 4HANK YOU -R
3PEAKER 4ODAY THE 'OVERNMENT HAS PRE
SENTED A CASE BASED ON THE ASSUMPTION THAT
THERE IS A DEMOCRATIC RIGHT TO VOTE AT THE AGE
OF !FTER REFUTING THE THREE ARGUMENTS PRE
SENTED BY THE 0RIME -INISTER ) WILL TALK ABOUT
THE IDEA OF THE ABILITY TO VOTE RESPONSIBLY -Y
PARTNER WILL TALK ABOUT THE CONCEPT OF WHAT
INmUENCES A VOTE AND HOW THIS MAKES LOWER
ING THE VOTING AGE A BAD IDEA
4HE lRST ARGUMENT MADE BY THE 0RIME
-INISTER WAS THAT YOUNG PEOPLE HAVE ADULT
RESPONSIBILITIES WHICH MEANS THEY SHOULD
Review Copy
)MMEDIATELY STAKES
OUT AN APPROACH TO
THE REFUTATION
h"ADv IS TOO ELEMEN
TARY A TERM
4ELLS THE JUDGES
WHATS BEING REFUTED
Copyright 2006 Gravitas Publishing
4ALK THE 4ALK
HAVE THE ADULT RIGHT TO VOTE )N REALITY HOWEV
ER SOCIETY SETS DIFFERENT AGE LIMITS FOR DIFFER
ENT ACTIVITIES AND RESPONSIBILITIES DEPENDING
ON THE CIRCUMSTANCES 4HE REASON WHY PEOPLE
PAY SALES TAXES AND INCOME TAXES AT A YOUNGER
AGE IS THAT THEY HAVE THE ABILITY TO SPEND AND
EARN INCOME BEFORE THEY ARE YEARS OLD /N
THE OTHER HAND THE RIGHT TO PURCHASE ALCOHOL
OR BUY CIGARETTES IS RESTRICTED TO PEOPLE WHO
ARE SEVERAL YEARS OLDER BECAUSE SOCIETY DOES
NOT BELIEVE THAT YOUNG PEOPLE HAVE ENOUGH
KNOWLEDGE OR EXPERIENCE TO MAKE THESE DECI
SIONS RESPONSIBLY 4EENAGERS ARE OFTEN TREATED
AS ADULTS BY THE CRIMINAL SYSTEM BECAUSE BY
THE AGE OF SOCIETY BELIEVES THAT THEY KNOW
THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN RIGHT AND WRONG
(OWEVER ITS WRONG TO EQUATE EACH OF THESE
CIRCUMSTANCES TO THE RIGHT TO VOTE IN HOW
SOCIETY AT LARGE OPERATES 4HE 0RIME -INISTER
HAS TRIED TO DRAW PARALLELS THAT HAVE NO DIRECT
RELATION TO ONE ANOTHER WHICH IS WHY THIS lRST
ARGUMENT IS INVALID
4HEN THE 0RIME -INISTER WENT ON TO TALK
ABOUT THE POLITICAL DECISIONS IMPACTING YOUNG
PEOPLE )F WE EXTEND THIS LOGIC THEN WHY
WOULD WE NOT LOWER THE VOTING AGE TO PEOPLE
MUCH YOUNGER THAN WHO WERE ALSO AFFECTED
BY A WIDE VARIETY OF PUBLIC POLICY ISSUES 4HE
REASON IS THAT UNTIL THE AGE OF WE ENTRUST
PARENTS OR GUARDIANS TO ACT ON BEHALF OF THEIR
CHILDREN 0ARENTS OR GUARDIANS TAKE THE INTER
ESTS OF THEIR FAMILIES INTO CONSIDERATION WHEN
MAKING POLITICAL DECISIONS AND ARE CONSID
ERED TO BE REPRESENTATIVES OF THE ENTIRE FAMILY
UNIT 4HIS SECOND ARGUMENT THEREFORE LACKS
BOTH LOGICAL CONSISTENCY AND NECESSITY
%FFECTIVE EXPLANATIONS
OF THE DISTINCTIONS
BETWEEN THE 0RIME
-INISTERS EXAMPLES
#OULD HAVE BEEN A BIT
MORE CONCISE OR CUT
OUT ONE EXAMPLE
7HY IS IT WRONG
3TRETCHING THE LOGIC IS
A GOOD WAY TO SHOW
THE POINTS mAWS
$O THEY LOOK AT WHAT
THEIR CHILDREN WANT OR
JUST WHAT THEY WANT
FOR THEMSELVES
0RIME -INISTER h/N THAT POINTv -EMBER OF THE
/PPOSITION ACCEPTS h)SNT IT TRUE THAT BY AGE
A STUDENT HAS REACHED SIGNIlCANT INDEPEN
Review Copy
Copyright 2006 Gravitas Publishing
7ARS OF 7ORDS $EBATES WITH #OMMENTARY
DENCE FROM HIS OR HER PARENTS PARTICULARLY
THEIR VIEWS OF SOCIETY AND THE WORLD v
-EMBER OF THE /PPOSITION ,EGALLY WE STILL CON
SIDER A YEAR OLD TO BE UNDER THE CARE OF HIS
OR HER PARENTS OR GUARDIANS 3URELY THEY ARE
DEVELOPING INDEPENDENCE BUT THEY HAVE NOT
YET REACHED THE STAGE OF FULL INDEPENDENCE
REQUIRED IN ORDER FOR THEM TO MAKE A FULLY
INDEPENDENT VOTING CHOICE
4HE 0RIME -INISTERS THIRD POINT WAS THAT
PEOPLE AS YOUNG AS HAVE THE CAPABILITY TO
VOTE RESPONSIBLY (OWEVER EVEN HE HIMSELF
ACKNOWLEDGED THAT YOUNG PEOPLE ARE IN THE
PROCESS OF LEARNING THE REQUIRED KNOWLEDGE
AND ARE ONLY BEGINNING TO THINK IN THE LONG
TERM ABOUT VARIOUS MATTERS CONCERNING THEIR
LIVES 7E CANT EQUATE THIS LEVEL OF KNOWLEDGE
AND EXPERIENCE TO THAT OF AN ADULT
4HIS LEADS ME VERY WELL INTO THE THEME
OF THE CONSTRUCTIVE PART OF MY SPEECH WHICH
IS WHETHER STUDENTS AS YOUNG AS AGE HAVE
THE ABILITY TO EXERCISE THE VOTING RIGHT RESPON
SIBLY !S THE 'OVERNMENT HAS STATED WE CAN
ONLY EXTEND THE RIGHT TO VOTE TO THOSE WHO CAN
EXERCISE THIS IMPORTANT PRACTICE APPROPRIATE
LY AND REASONABLE LIMITS ARE CERTAINLY IN ORDER
IF THEY CANT DO SO
-Y lRST ARGUMENT IS THAT MINORS ARE NOT
YET FAMILIAR WITH THE COMPLEX DECISIONS THAT
ARE INVOLVED IN INDEPENDENT LIVING 4HEY
HAVE NOT YET HAD TO MANAGE A HOUSEHOLD AS
THEY ARE STILL GENERALLY UNDER THE CARE OF THEIR
PARENTS OR GUARDIANS 4HEY DONT TAKE CARE OF
MAINTAINING THE FAMILY RESIDENCE NOR HOW
THE FAMILY SPENDS ITS INCOME !S A RESULT
THEY DONT HAVE THE EXPERIENCE IN INDEPEN
DENT DECISION MAKING NECESSARY TO HAVE THE
RIGHT TO MAKE DECISIONS ON THE WIDE VARIETY OF
ISSUES THAT IMPACT FAMILIES
Review Copy
)NDEPENDENT THOUGHT
BEING A CENTRAL TENET OF
THE RIGHT TO VOTE
"UT IS LEGAL CUSTODY
THE REAL ISSUE HERE
5SING THE 0RIME
-INISTERS OWN WORDS
TO ATTACK THE CASE
#LASH WITH THIS POINT
WAS SHORT BUT TO THE
POINT NONETHELESS
#LEAR SHIFT FROM CLASH
TO CONSTRUCTIVE
.EED TO EXPLAIN WHY
EXPERIENCE LIVING
INDEPENDENTLY MATTERS
TO THE RIGHT TO VOTE
2AMBLING SENTENCE
Copyright 2006 Gravitas Publishing
4ALK THE 4ALK
)N ADDITION TO HAVING INSUFlCIENT EXPERI
ENCE MY SECOND POINT IS THAT THEY HAVE INSUF
lCIENT ENGAGEMENT IN THE POLITICAL PROCESS TO
VOTE WISELY -OST YOUTH ARE MORE INTERESTED
IN MUSIC SPORTS AND SOCIALIZING THAN DEBAT
ING THE PUBLIC POLICY ISSUES THAT IMPACT SOCI
ETY )N FACT EVEN PEOPLE SEVERAL YEARS OVER THE
AGE OF WHO ARE ALLOWED TO VOTE HAVE SHOWN
SUBSTANTIAL DISENGAGEMENT CONSIDERING THAT
VOTER TURNOUT AT THIS AGE LEVEL IS SIGNIlCANTLY
LOWER THAN FOR OLDER ADULTS )T IS ONLY ONCE
PEOPLE ENTER THE @REAL WORLD OF WORK AND POST
SECONDARY EDUCATION THAT THEY BECOME MORE
ENGAGED IN SOCIETAL AND POLITICAL ISSUES RATH
ER THAN PRIMARILY ENTERTAINMENT AND EDUCA
TIONAL MATTERS
-INISTER OF THE #ROWN h0OINT OF )NFORMATIONv
-EMBER OF THE /PPOSITION ACCEPTS h3O ARE
YOU SUGGESTING THAT RETIRED SENIORS WHO ARE
MORE CONCERNED WITH RELAXATION AND VACA
TIONS SHOULD HAVE THEIR RIGHT TO VOTE TAKEN
AWAY BECAUSE THEY ARE NOT IN WHAT YOU CALL
THE @REAL WORLD OF WORK v
-EMBER OF THE /PPOSITION 4HE -INISTER OF THE
#ROWN MAKES A RATHER TRIVIAL COMPARISON THAT
HAS LITTLE IMPACT ON OUR ARGUMENT 3ENIOR CITI
ZENS HAVE ALREADY HAD EXTENSIVE LIFE EXPERI
ENCE AND KNOW WHAT IT MEANS TO EXERCISE A
DEMOCRATIC RIGHT TO VOTE 4HE SAME CANNOT BE
SAID FOR SOMEONE WHOS ONLY YEARS OLD
)N MY SPEECH ) HAVE SHOWN YOU THAT THE
0RIME -INISTER HAS NOT SUFlCIENTLY PROVEN HIS
POINTS ABOUT THE DEMOCRATIC RESPONSIBILITIES
AND RIGHTS THE IMPACT OF POLITICAL DECISIONS
AND THE CAPABILITY TO EXERCISE THE VOTING RIGHT
RESPONSIBLY ) HAVE PRESENTED A CASE BASED ON
THE ABILITY TO VOTE STARTING WITH THE LACK OF
FAMILIARITY WITH INDEPENDENT DECISION
MAK
Review Copy
'OOD TRANSITION FROM
LIFE EXPERIENCE TO
ENGAGEMENT
5SE OF RELATED FACTS AS
BASIS FOR AN ARGUMENT
$RAWS A PARALLEL TO
AN IDEA MOST WOULD
CONSIDER RIDICULOUS
THEREBY IMPLYING A
mAW IN LOGIC
'OOD CONTRAST BETWEEN
SENIORS AND STUDENTS
TO ANSWER THE 0OINT OF
)NFORMATION
%FFECTIVE BECAUSE IT
SAYS SPECIlCALLY WHAT
HAS BEEN REFUTED
Copyright 2006 Gravitas Publishing
7ARS OF 7ORDS $EBATES WITH #OMMENTARY
ING AND CONTINUING WITH HOW PEOPLE AS YOUNG
AS YEARS OLD HAVE INSUFlCIENT ENGAGEMENT
IN THE POLITICAL PROCESS TO MAKE INFORMED VOT
ING CHOICES &OR THESE REASONS WE PROUDLY
OPPOSE THIS "ILL
-AY BE HELPFUL TO
NUMBER THE POINTS
3PEAKER ) THANK THE -EMBER OF THE /PPOSI
TION ) NOW CALL UPON THE -INISTER OF THE #ROWN
TO CONTINUE THE 'OVERNMENTS CASE
-INISTER OF THE #ROWN -R 3PEAKER THE /PPO
SITION HAS CLAIMED THAT STUDENTS UNDER THE
AGE OF DO NOT HAVE THE ABILITY TO MAKE AN
INFORMED DECISION WHICH ) INTEND TO REFUTE IN
MY SPEECH /NCE ) HAVE PROVEN THIS THEME TO
BE INCORRECT ) WILL CONTINUE THE 'OVERNMENTS
CASE BY DISCUSSING THREE ADDITIONAL REASONS
FOR CHANGE CENTERING ON THE IDEA OF BENElTS
TO SOCIETY PARTICULARLY YOUNG PEOPLE
4HE lRST POINT MADE BY THE -EMBER OF
THE /PPOSITION WAS THAT YOUNG PEOPLE ARE
NOT YET FAMILIAR WITH LIVING ON THEIR OWN 4HIS
ARGUMENT CERTAINLY DOESNT DEMONSTRATE THAT
STUDENTS AT LEAST YEARS OLD WOULD BE INCA
PABLE OF MAKING DECISIONS THAT AFFECT HOW
PEOPLE LIVE /NE DOES NOT NECESSARILY HAVE TO
BE DIRECTLY INVOLVED IN MAKING EVERY DECISION
TO BE ABLE TO UNDERSTAND DECISIONS AND THEIR
IMPACT )N FACT SENIOR CITIZENS WHO ARE UNDER
THE CARE OF THEIR CHILDREN OR A NURSING HOME
ARE CERTAINLY NOT FORBIDDEN FROM EXERCISING
THEIR INDEPENDENT JUDGMENT 3IMILARLY WE DO
NOT PREVENT PEOPLE WHO ARE ILL OR HOSPITALIZED
FROM EXERCISING THEIR DEMOCRATIC WILL 4HE
'OVERNMENT ONLY HAS TO SHOW THAT YOUNGER
VOTERS WOULD BE CAPABLE OF UNDERSTANDING THE
CHOICES THAT IMPACT SOCIETY AND THEIR EXPERI
ENCE UP TO THE AGE OF AND THEIR EDUCATION
ON CIVIC MATTERS IS IN OUR VIEW SUFlCIENT TO
BE ABLE TO MAKE AN INFORMED VOTE
Review Copy
'OOD @ROAD MAP FOR
THE SPEECH
$RAWS CLEAR DISTINC
TION BETWEEN MAKING
AND UNDERSTANDING
DECISIONS
%XAMPLE ILLUSTRATES
HOW CUSTODY OR CARE
DOESNT NECESSARILY
IMPEDE JUDGMENT
#LARIlES THE 'OVERN
MENTS RESPONSIBILITY
Copyright 2006 Gravitas Publishing
4ALK THE 4ALK
4HE /PPOSITIONS SECOND POINT WAS THAT
YOUNG PEOPLE ARE INSUFlCIENTLY ENGAGED TO BE
ABLE TO MAKE A WISE CHOICE "UT PERHAPS -R
3PEAKER THE REASON WHY MANY YOUTH ARE NOT
ENGAGED IS THAT THEIR VOICES ARE NOT CONSID
ERED IN THE POLITICAL DYNAMIC /F COURSE MANY
ADULTS ARE NOT ENGAGED IN THE POLITICAL SYSTEM
BUT SOCIETY CERTAINLY WOULD NOT TAKE AWAY
THEIR RIGHT TO VOTE BASED ON A LITMUS TEST OF
THEIR LEVEL OF ENGAGEMENT )N REALITY THERE ARE
PEOPLE AT ALL AGE GROUPS WHO ARE DISINTERESTED
IN THE POLITICAL SYSTEM AND THESE INDIVIDU
ALS ARE UNLIKELY TO VOTE BY THEIR OWN CHOICE
4HEREFORE THE /PPOSITIONS POINT MAKES A
SWEEPING GENERALIZATION THAT DOESNT STAND
UP TO LOGICAL EXAMINATION
.OW THAT ) HAVE CLASHED WITH THE /PPOSI
TIONS CASE ) WOULD LIKE TO BUILD ON THE 0RIME
-INISTERS CASE BY DISCUSSING THE BENElTS OF
ALLOWING YOUNGER PEOPLE TO VOTE -Y lRST POINT
IS THAT ALLOWING PEOPLE TO VOTE ONCE THEY ARE
YEARS OLD WILL FORCE POLITICIANS TO REPRESENT
MORE ACTIVELY THE ISSUES THAT AFFECT THIS AGE
DEMOGRAPHIC 0OLITICIANS ARE MOST RESPONSIVE
TO THE NEEDS OF THEIR CONSTITUENTS WHEN THESE
CONSTITUENTS CAN DETERMINE WHETHER OR NOT
THEY REMAIN IN OFlCE 0ARENTS ONLY CONSIDER
YOUTH ISSUES AS ONE OF MANY ISSUES AND STU
DENTS MAY HAVE VIEWS THAT ARE INDEED DIFFER
ENT THAN THOSE OF THEIR PARENTS "Y LOWERING
THE VOTING AGE POLITICIANS WOULD HAVE TO CON
SIDER FOR EXAMPLE THE VIEWS OF STUDENTS ON
HOW TO IMPROVE THE EDUCATION SYSTEM OR HOW
TO PROMOTE SPORTS AND lTNESS AMONG YOUNG
PEOPLE !S A RESULT AN UNDERREPRESENTED
SEGMENT OF SOCIETY WOULD HAVE THEIR ISSUES
ADVANCED BY ELECTED OFlCIALS
3UGGESTS THE RESULT
IS A SYMPTOM RATHER
THAN PROOF OF AN ARGU
MENT
3HOWS HOW THE /PPO
SITIONS LOGIC COULD IF
EXTENDED LEAD TO AN
UNTHINKABLE PRACTICE
#LEAR STATEMENT OF
WHY THE ARGUMENT
IS INCORRECT
3MART TO GO INTO WHY
THE PRINCIPLE MATTERS
,INKS MOTIVATIONS
TO BEHAVIORS
3PECIlC EXAMPLE OF
HOW THE CHANGE WOULD
HAVE AN IMPACT
-EMBER OF THE /PPOSITION h/N THAT POINT SIRv
-INISTER OF THE #ROWN ACCEPTS h3O THEN IF
Review Copy
Copyright 2006 Gravitas Publishing
7ARS OF 7ORDS $EBATES WITH #OMMENTARY
YEAR OLD VOTERS WANT MORE DAYS OFF FROM
SCHOOL FEWER CLASSES EACH DAY AND LONGER
BREAKS BETWEEN EACH CLASS SHOULD POLITICIANS
CATER TO THIS SO GROSSLY UNDERREPRESENTED SEG
MENT OF OUR SOCIETY v
-INISTER OF THE #ROWN ) THINK THAT THE -EMBER
OF THE /PPOSITION IS TRIVIALIZING AND EXAGGER
ATING HOW THE SYSTEM WORKS 0OLITICIANS HAVE
TO MAKE REASONABLE DECISIONS AFTER LISTENING
CAREFULLY TO ALL STAKEHOLDER GROUPS INCLUDING
STUDENTS TEACHERS PARENTS AND ADMINISTRA
TORS 4HERE IS NO REASON TO BELIEVE THAT THEY
WOULD GIVE IN TO UNREALISTIC DEMANDS
)N ADDITION TO HAVING THEIR ISSUES BETTER
REPRESENTED MY SECOND POINT IS THAT STUDENTS
WILL BECOME MORE POLITICALLY INVOLVED 3INCE
STUDENTS AT THIS AGE ARE LEARNING ABOUT CIVIC
ENGAGEMENT IN THEIR CLASSES THEY WILL HAVE
AN OPPORTUNITY TO PUT WHAT THEY HAVE LEARNED
IN PRACTICE AS VOTERS )F SOMEBODY KNOWS
THAT THEIR VIEWS COUNT AND THAT THEIR CHOICES
CAN HAVE AN IMPACT ON THEIR LIVES THEY ARE
FAR MORE LIKELY TO TAKE AN INTEREST IN AND TO
BECOME INVOLVED IN THE POLITICAL SYSTEM THAT
SHAPES THESE DECISIONS 7E CONTEND THAT
YOUNG PEOPLE WILL SPEND MORE TIME DEBATING
AND DISCUSSING AMONG THEMSELVES AND WITH
IN THEIR FAMILIES THE IMPORTANT ISSUES THAT
AFFECT SOCIETY WHICH IS WHY WE BELIEVE THAT
LOWERING THE VOTING AGE WILL PROMOTE POSITIVE
DEMOCRATIC ENGAGEMENT
&INALLY THE THIRD ARGUMENT UNDER THIS
BENElTS THEME IS THAT ALLOWING PEOPLE TO VOTE
AT A YOUNG AGE WILL CREATE NOT ONLY SHORT TERM
BUT MORE IMPORTANTLY LONG TERM PARTICIPA
TION IN THE DEMOCRATIC PROCESS 7E ALL KNOW
THAT PEOPLE TEND TO FORM HABITS LIKES AND DIS
LIKES RELATIVELY EARLY ON IN LIFE )F YOUNG PEO
PLE BECOME ENGAGED BEFORE THEY EVEN lNISH
Review Copy
5SES THE -INISTER OF
THE #ROWNS OWN LOGIC
AGAINST HER
%XPLAINS HOW MULTIPLE
STAKEHOLDERS ARE A
@CHECK ON ONE HAVING
UNDUE INmUENCE
#ONNECTS WITH A POINT
MADE BY THE 0RIME
-INISTER
0ROVIDES INSIGHT INTO
HUMAN MOTIVATIONS
2EMINDS JUDGES OF THE
THEME BEING DISCUSSED
#OULD POLITICAL PARTIES
MAKE PROMISES THAT
ENTICE THEM INTO LONG
TERM LOYALTY WHEN
THEYRE AT AN IMPRES
SIONABLE AGE
Copyright 2006 Gravitas Publishing
4ALK THE 4ALK
SCHOOL THEY ARE FAR MORE LIKELY TO PARTICIPATE
IN THE ELECTORAL SYSTEM AS VOTERS VOLUNTEERS
AND ACTIVISTS LATER ON IN LIFE /VERALL THIS CRE
ATES A MORE POLITICALLY AWARE SOCIETY IN WHICH
MORE CITIZENS ARE CONTINUALLY INTERESTED IN
THE ISSUES THAT AFFECT THEM AND ARE WILLING TO
HOLD POLITICIANS TO ACCOUNT
) WANT TO COME BACK TO THE -EMBER OF THE
/PPOSITIONS REFUTATION AND DEFEND SOME OF
THE ARGUMENTS THAT THE 0RIME -INISTER MADE
4O THE 0RIME -INISTERS lRST POINT ABOUT
RIGHTS AND RESPONSIBILITIES THE -EMBER OF
THE /PPOSITION ADMITTED THAT STUDENTS AGE
OR OVER ARE EXPECTED TO KNOW RIGHT FROM
WRONG IN TERMS OF CRIMINAL BEHAVIOR SO WHY
WOULD THEY BE ANY LESS CAPABLE OF JUDGING
RIGHT FROM WRONG IN TERMS OF DECISIONS THAT
OTHERS SUCH AS POLITICIANS MAKE 2EGARD
ING THE 0RIME -INISTERS SECOND POINT ABOUT
POLITICAL DECISIONS DIRECTLY IMPACTING YOUNG
PEOPLE THE /PPOSITION STATED THAT PARENTS
SHOULD HAVE EXCLUSIVE RIGHT TO JUDGE WHAT IS
BEST FOR PEOPLE UNDER YEARS OLD (OWEVER
AT YEARS OLD IN INDIVIDUAL EXERCISES A SIG
NIlCANT DEGREE OF INDEPENDENCE IN HIS OR HER
DAILY LIFE AS PARENTAL INmUENCE GETS WEAKER
OVER TIME /N THE 0RIME -INISTERS lNAL POINT
ABOUT THE CAPABILITY TO EXERCISE THE DEMOCRAT
IC RIGHTS APPROPRIATELY THE /PPOSITION ARGUED
THAT PEOPLE ARE ONLY LEARNING ABOUT SEVERAL
IMPORTANT DECISIONS AT AGE (OWEVER SOCI
ETY DOES NOT REQUIRE ADULT VOTERS TO BE FULLY
INFORMED AND INDEED MANY OF THEM ARE ALSO
LEARNING AT THE SAME TIME )N FACT IT IS A GOOD
THING THAT STUDENTS WOULD BE LEARNING ABOUT
POLITICAL DECISIONS AT THE SAME TIME AS HAVING
TO MAKE THE VOTING CHOICE WHICH MAKES THE
DECISION MORE ENGAGED AND MORE INFORMED
)N MY SPEECH ) HAVE TALKED TO YOU ABOUT
THE BENElTS OF POLITICIANS REPRESENTING YOUTH
Review Copy
$ISCUSSING IMPACT
ON SOCIETY AS A WHOLE
STRENGTHENS THE CLAIM
OF BENElTS
$RAWS A PARALLEL
4HIS LINE OF DEFENSE
HAS ALREADY BEEN DIS
CUSSED IN THE DEBATE
)N GENERAL THESE
POINTS OF DEFENSE ARE
QUITE BRIEF AND DONT
ADD SIGNIlCANT VALUE
4HE ONLY REALLY @NEW
CLAIM MADE IN THIS
PARAGRAPH
Copyright 2006 Gravitas Publishing
7ARS OF 7ORDS $EBATES WITH #OMMENTARY
ISSUES STUDENTS BECOMING MORE POLITICALLY
INVOLVED AND CREATING LONG TERM HABITS OF
POLITICAL ENGAGEMENT 4HEN ) SHOWED YOU
WHY THE /PPOSITIONS POINTS REGARDING THE
ABILITY TO MAKE DECISIONS ARE INCORRECT AND
WHY THE /PPOSITIONS REFUTATION OF THE 0RIME
-INISTERS POINTS CONCERNING THE RIGHT TO VOTE
DID NOT WEAKEN THE CASE 4HEREFORE WE STAND
PROUDLY FOR THIS "ILL
.UMBER THE POINTS
TO MAKE IT CLEARER
FOR THE JUDGES
3PEAKER ) THANK THE -INISTER THE #ROWN FOR
HER REMARKS AND ) NOW CALL UPON THE ,EADER
OF THE /PPOSITION TO COMPLETE THE CONSTRUC
TIVE PART OF THE /PPOSITIONS CASE AND TO DELIV
ER THE /PPOSITIONS REBUTTAL
,EADER OF THE /PPOSITION 4HANK YOU -R
3PEAKER ) WANT TO BEGIN MY ADDRESS BY PRE
SENTING THE lNAL TWO POINTS OF THE /PPOSITIONS
CASE AFTER WHICH ) WILL REFUTE THE 'OVERN
MENTS NEW POINTS AND TELL YOU WHY WE HAVE
WON THIS DEBATE /UR NEW CONSTRUCTIVE ARGU
MENTS FOCUS ON THE THEME OF WHAT INmUENCES
A YOUNG PERSONS VOTE AND WHY THESE INmU
ENCES WOULD HAVE A NEGATIVE IMPACT SHOULD
PEOPLE BE ALLOWED TO VOTE AT THE AGE OF
&IRSTLY MEDIA AND POLITICAL PRESSURES THAT
IS EXTERNAL INmUENCES HAVE A GREATER IMPACT
ON A MINOR THAN ON AN ADULT 4HE YOUNGER
WE ARE THE LESS EXPERIENCED WE ARE IN SEEING
THROUGH SOME OF THE RHETORIC THAT IS PRESENTED
TO US BY COMMENTATORS AND POLITICIANS 3TU
DENTS ARE LESS LIKELY TO HAVE SIGNIlCANT EXPE
RIENCE ANALYZING MEDIA STORIES AND DECIDING
WHAT THEY BELIEVE TO BE TRUE AND WHAT IS FALSE
OR EXAGGERATED 4HEREFORE A VOTE BY SOMEONE
UNDER AGE WOULD BE LESS INDEPENDENT GIVEN
THESE EXTERNAL INmUENCES
3ECONDLY -R 3PEAKER THERE ARE ALSO PER
SONAL INmUENCES THAT CAN SIGNIlCANTLY IMPACT
Review Copy
3HOWS HOW THE ,EADER
OF THE /PPOSITION IS
GOING TO ADD VALUE
TO THE CASE
'OOD DISCUSSION OF
HUMAN PSYCHOLOGY
"ACKS UP THEORETICAL
CLAIMS WITH THE
EXPERIENCE FACTOR
Copyright 2006 Gravitas Publishing
4ALK THE 4ALK
THE STUDENTS VOTE 7HEN THEY ARE UNDER THE
AGE OF INDIVIDUALS ARE GUIDED TO A LARGE
EXTENT BY TEACHERS AND PARENTS ! STUDENT CAN
EASILY BE SWAYED BY THE CLASS DISCUSSION OR BY A
TEACHERS NATURAL UNINTENTIONAL BIASES IN FOR
MAL AND INFORMAL INSTRUCTION ON POLITICS AND
GOVERNMENT !DDITIONALLY A PARENT HAS SIG
NIlCANT INmUENCE ON HOW THEIR CHILDREN THINK
ABOUT MANY ISSUES SHAPED IN PART BY THEIR
DISCUSSIONS AT THE DINNER TABLE FOR EXAMPLE
&OR THESE REASONS THE FULL INDEPENDENCE OF
THE VOTING DECISION WOULD BE COMPROMISED BY
THESE SIGNIlCANT PERSONAL INmUENCES
0RIME -INISTER h0OINT OF )NFORMATIONv ,EADER
OF THE /PPOSITION ACCEPTS h3INCE WHEN DO
YEAR OLD STUDENTS SIMPLY PARROT WHATEVER
THEIR PARENTS DO AND THINK )N FACT ARENT THEY
AT AN AGE WHEN THEY ACTIVELY TRY TO BE MORE
INDEPENDENT FROM THEIR PARENTS v
,EADER OF THE /PPOSITION 7HILE THEY ARE CER
TAINLY IN THE PROCESS OF BECOMING MORE INDE
PENDENT THEIR PARENTS HAVE HAD AND CONTINUE
TO HAVE SIGNIlCANT INmUENCE OVER A CHILDS
VIEWS IN LARGE PART BECAUSE OF HOW MUCH
TIME A FAMILY SPENDS TOGETHER
) NOW WANT TO GO INTO THE NEW POINTS
BROUGHT UP BY THE -INISTER OF THE #ROWN (IS
lRST POINT WAS THAT POLITICIANS WILL BE MORE
LIKELY TO REPRESENT YOUTH ISSUES BUT THAT COULD
SIMPLY LEAD TO POLITICIANS MAKING UNREALISTIC
PROMISES TO THIS VOTING GROUP 3INCE MINORS
ARE MUCH LESS INVOLVED IN THE BROADER ISSUES
THAT AFFECT SOCIETY AT LARGE THEN ADULTS THEY
WOULD BE MAKING THEIR DECISIONS ON A MORE
NARROW SET OF INTERESTS
4HE SECOND POINT WAS THAT STUDENTS WILL
BECOME MORE POLITICALLY INVOLVED )T SEEMS
LIKE THE 'OVERNMENT WANTS TO HAVE IT BOTH
Review Copy
"UT ARENT SCHOOLS
MEANT TO TEACH STU
DENTS HOW TO THINK
CRITICALLY
,INKS BACK TO THE
CENTRAL CONCEPT OF A
VOTE NEEDING TO BE
INDEPENDENT
#ITES A COMMONLY
HELD BELIEF PROBABLY
UNDERSTOOD BY MANY
IN THE ROOM
5SES A CAREFUL CONCES
SION TO EXPLAIN DIFFER
ENCE BETWEEN PARTIAL
AND FULL INDEPENDENCE
%XPLAINS WHY THIS IS A
NARROW VOTING BLOCK
Copyright 2006 Gravitas Publishing
7ARS OF 7ORDS $EBATES WITH #OMMENTARY
WAYS SAYING ON THE ONE HAND THAT THEY ARE
INFORMED ENOUGH TO MAKE GOOD DECISIONS
AND SAYING ON THE OTHER HAND THAT THEY NEED
TO BECOME MORE INVOLVED IN ORDER TO MAKE
GOOD DECISIONS !DDRESSING THIS POINT DIRECTLY
HOWEVER A YOUTH WHO IS INTERESTED IN POLITICAL
ISSUES CERTAINLY HAS AN INCENTIVE TO BECOME
INFORMED KNOWING THAT THEY WILL BE ABLE TO
VOTE IN ONLY A FEW YEARS )N FACT MANY YOUNG
PEOPLE GET INVOLVED IN AREAS OTHER THAN VOTING
SUCH AS VOLUNTEERING ON ELECTION CAMPAIGNS
WRITING LETTERS TO THE EDITOR OR TALKING TO THEIR
FAMILY AND FRIENDS ABOUT THEIR VIEWS ON DIF
FERENT ISSUES
3O -R 3PEAKER WHAT HAVE WE HEARD IN
TODAYS DEBATE AND WHAT HAS THIS DEBATE COME
DOWN TO 4HE lRST COMPETING THEME OF THIS
DEBATE WAS THE IDEA OF RIGHTS VERSUS THE ABIL
ITY TO EXERCISE THESE RIGHTS RESPONSIBLY 4HE
'OVERNMENT BASED ITS CASE ON THE LOGIC THAT
JUST BECAUSE PEOPLE UNDER THE AGE OF HAVE
OTHER RIGHTS AND RESPONSIBILITIES THEY SHOULD
NECESSARILY HAVE THE VOTING RIGHT WHEREAS
WE HAVE TALKED ABOUT WHY THE RIGHT TO VOTE
IN ELECTIONS REQUIRES A LEVEL OF KNOWLEDGE AND
EXPERIENCE THAT IS DIFFERENT FROM OTHER AREAS
%LECTIONS ARE ABOUT MUCH MORE THAN INDIVID
UAL BEHAVIOR AS THEY SHAPE OUR ENTIRE ECON
OMY SOCIETY AND CULTURE 4HE 'OVERNMENT
HAS STAKED THEIR CLAIM ON THE IDEA THAT SIMPLY
BEING IN THE PROCESS OF LEARNING SOMETHING IS
SUFlCIENT TO MAKE AN INFORMED CHOICE WHILE
WEVE ARGUED THAT KNOWLEDGE AND EXPERI
ENCE ARE PREREQUISITES TO HAVING THE RIGHT TO
MAKE THIS IMPORTANT CHOICE 4HE 'OVERNMENT
WOULD HAVE YOU BELIEVE THAT VOTING IS JUST
ANOTHER PART OF A TEENAGERS LEARNING EXPERI
ENCE 7E BELIEVE THAT VOTING IS SO IMPORTANT
TO OUR SOCIETY THAT WE CANNOT SIMPLY ALLOW IT
TO BE JUST ANOTHER LEARNING PROCESS
Review Copy
0OINTS OUT AN APPARENT
INCONSISTENCY IN THE
'OVERNMENTS CASE
7OULD MORE PEOPLE
WANT TO PARTICIPATE IN
THESE ACTIVITIES IF THEY
COULD VOTE
3IGNALS A TRANSITION
INTO THE REBUTTAL POR
TION OF THE SPEECH
$RAWS A CONTRAST BE
TWEEN HOW THE THEME
WAS DISCUSSED BY THE
RESPECTIVE SIDES
#ONTINUES TO DRAW
GOOD DISTINCTIONS
BETWEEN APPROACHES
TILTING THEM IN A PRO
/PPOSITION WAY
Copyright 2006 Gravitas Publishing
4ALK THE 4ALK
4HE 'OVERNMENTS CASE REGARDING BENElTS
TO SOCIETY IS BASED ON THE NOTION THAT CREAT
ING ANOTHER NARROW INTEREST GROUP MAKES OUR
DEMOCRATIC SYSTEM WORK BETTER 4HE FUNDA
MENTAL REASON WHY PARENTS STILL GUIDE THEIR
KIDS UNTIL THE AGE OF IS THAT SOCIETY DOES NOT
WANT PEOPLE TO BE GETTING THEIR WAY ON EVERY
ISSUE BEFORE THIS AGE BUT POLITICIANS WOULD
HAVE TO GIVE IN TO THE WILL OF PEOPLE AS YOUNG
AS AGE IF THEY ARE GIVEN THE RIGHT TO VOTE
4HIS MAY NOT SERVE THE INTERESTS OF FAMILIES
AND SOCIETY AS A WHOLE WHICH IS WHAT ADULTS
ARE BETTER ABLE TO JUDGE WHO SHOULD BE IN
POWER 7E TALKED ABOUT HOW INmUENCES FROM
THE MEDIA POLITICIANS PARENTS AND TEACHERS
COULD DISTORT VOTING CHOICES THAT ARE SUPPOSED
TO BE INDEPENDENT !N INDEPENDENT CHOICE
IS THE BASIS OF A TRULY DEMOCRATIC SOCIETY A
CHOICE THAT MUST BE FULLY INFORMED AND BASED
ON SOUND JUDGMENT
-R 3PEAKER WHAT DOES THE 0RIME -INIS
TER HAVE TO DO IN HIS REBUTTAL &IRSTLY HE HAS TO
SHOW YOU HOW SOMEBODY AT THE AGE OF WHO
IS STILL IN SCHOOL AND STILL UNDER THE GUIDANCE OF
HIS OR HER PARENTS SOMEHOW HAS THE INDEPEN
DENT LIFE EXPERIENCE NECESSARY TO JUDGE WIDER
SOCIETAL ISSUES 3ECONDLY HE HAS TO SHOW YOU
HOW PEOPLE AT SUCH A YOUNG AGE ARE POSSIBLY
ABLE TO KNOW AS MUCH ABOUT THE COMPLEX AND
WIDE VARIETY OF POLITICAL ISSUES SUCH AS INTER
NATIONAL TRADE AND TAXATION POLICY AS ADULTS
WHO HAVE MANY MORE YEARS OF KNOWLEDGE AND
EXPERIENCE REGARDING THESE MATTERS 4HIRDLY
HE MUST BE ABLE TO SHOW YOU HOW EXACTLY A
TEENAGERS VOTE COULD BE AS INDEPENDENT AS AN
ADULTS VOTE CONSIDERING THE RANGE OF INmUENC
ES THAT SHAPE A PERSONS MIND AND BEHAVIOR AT
THIS STAGE IN THEIR LIVES 7E ARE CONlDENT THAT
WE HAVE SHOWN YOU WHY THE 'OVERNMENT HAS
NOT SUFlCIENTLY PROVEN ITS CASE ON THESE THREE
Review Copy
3HIFT TO THE NEXT
THEME BUT IT COULD BE
MADE CLEARER THAT THIS
IS THE CASE
"UT THEN WOULDNT
POLITICIANS CONSIDER
THE VIEWS OF EVERYONE
ELSE WHO SUPPOSEDLY
DOESNT WANT MINORS
TO GET THEIR WAY ON
EVERYTHING
4IES THE REFUTATION
BACK TO THIS KEY PRIN
CIPLE OF THE CASE
&RAMES THE DEBATE AND
POSSIBLY THROWS OFF THE
0RIME -INISTER
/PPOSITION USING THIS
CRITERION BECAUSE IT
FEELS IT HAS PREVAILED
ON THE ISSUE
#RITERION IMPLIES WHY
THE 0RIME -INISTER
CANT WIN ON THIS
DIMENSION
)N GENERAL AN ATTEMPT
TO PLACE THE BURDEN
SQUARELY ON THE
'OVERNMENT
Copyright 2006 Gravitas Publishing
7ARS OF 7ORDS $EBATES WITH #OMMENTARY
CORE ISSUES WHICH IS WHY WE OPPOSE THIS "ILL
4HANK YOU -R 3PEAKER
3PEAKER ) THANK THE ,EADER OF (ER -AJESTYS
,OYAL /PPOSITION lRST CONSTRUCTED SPEECH AND
REBUTTAL AND NOW CALL UPON THE 0RIME -INIS
TER TO CONCLUDE TODAYS DEBATE
0RIME -INISTER 4HANK YOU -R 3PEAKER ,ET
ME GET RIGHT TO THE HEART OF WHAT THIS DEBATE
IS REALLY ABOUT #AN A RIGHT AS FUNDAMENTAL
AND BENElCIAL AS THE RIGHT TO VOTE BE ARBI
TRARILY TAKEN AWAY ON THE BASIS THAT SOME
ONE IS NOT COMPLETELY SELF
SUFlCIENT AND HAS
NOT LEARNED ABOUT THE COMPLEXITIES OF EVERY
POLITICAL ISSUE 4HE RIGHT TO VOTE IS NOT BASED
ON THE IDEA THAT SOMEONE HAS TO BE PERFECTLY
INFORMED ABOUT EVERY ISSUE AND RESTRICTING
THIS RIGHT IS ONLY JUSTIlED IF GRANTING IT WOULD
BE HARMFUL OR COMPLETELY UNJUSTIlED
7HAT THE /PPOSITION HAS TOLD US TODAY
IS THAT PERHAPS YOUNG PEOPLE NEED A LITTLE
BIT MORE LIVING EXPERIENCE A LITTLE BIT MORE
ENGAGEMENT AND A LITTLE BIT LESS INmUENCE BY
OTHER PEOPLE /NE COULD ARGUE THAT THESE VERY
SAME DESIRES HOLD TRUE FOR SO MANY PEOPLE IN
THE CURRENT VOTING POPULATION /F COURSE WE
WOULD NOT TAKE AWAY THE CENTRAL RIGHT TO VOTE
BECAUSE AN ADULT HAS NOT FULLY MET ALL OF THE
DESIRABLE CRITERIA OF A COMPLETELY INFORMED
VOTER 4HE HEART OF A DEMOCRATIC SYSTEM IS
THAT THE VOTER IS ALWAYS RIGHT AND THAT NOBODY
ELSE CAN PASS JUDGMENT ON A VOTERS ABILITY TO
MAKE SOUND JUDGMENTS
7E HAVE SHOWN YOU THAT BECAUSE YOUNG
PEOPLE HAVE MANY OF THE SAME RESPONSIBILI
TIES AS ADULTS AND ARE AFFECTED BY THE DECI
SIONS THAT POLITICIANS MAKE GRANTING THEM
THE RIGHT TO VOTE WOULD BE ENTIRELY APPROPRI
ATE 7E HAVE SHOWN YOU THAT YEAR OLDS
Review Copy
0RIME -INISTER IS TRY
ING TO SEIZE BACK THE
AGENDA NOT GOING TO
PLAY INTO THE /PPOSI
TIONS TRAP
'OOD CHOICE TO DESCRIBE
IT AS A SINGLE CENTRAL
ISSUE EVEN IF IT COM
BINES SEVERAL THEMES
$ESCRIBES HOW THE
/PPOSITION MADE WEAK
DISTINCTIONS
-ORE EFFECTIVE TO
REWORK THE PREVIOUS
SENTENCE THAN TO BE
DEFENSIVE LIKE THIS
3AYING hTHE HEARTv
SUGGEST THAT THIS IS A
CENTRAL FACTOR
'OOD USE OF PARALLEL
LANGUAGE WITH h7E
HAVE SHOWN YOUv
Copyright 2006 Gravitas Publishing
4ALK THE 4ALK
HAVE SUFlCIENT KNOWLEDGE THROUGH THEIR EDU
CATION TO BE ABLE TO EXERCISE THIS RIGHT APPRO
PRIATELY !ND WE HAVE SHOWN YOU TODAY THAT
THE BENElTS OF GIVING YOUNGER CITIZENS THIS
FUNDAMENTAL DEMOCRATIC RIGHT WILL ENCOURAGE
ELECTED POLITICIANS TO REPRESENT THEIR ISSUES
WELL AND THAT IT WILL ENCOURAGE YOUNG PEOPLE
TO BECOME MORE ENGAGED IN THE POLITICAL SYS
TEM NOW AND IN THE LONG
TERM 4HEREFORE WE
STAND PROUDLY FOR THIS "ILL
3ENTENCE IS SLIGHTLY TOO
DRAWN OUT
3PEAKER ) THANK ALL OF THE DEBATERS FOR THEIR
REMARKS 4HIS (OUSE IS NOW ADJOURNED
'311)28%6=32:38-2+%+)()&%8)
"OTH TEAMS PRESENTED WELL
ORGANIZED CASES THAT WERE EASY TO FOLLOW
%XAMPLES WERE USED HEAVILY TO SUPPORT CLAIMS (OWEVER IN SOME PLAC
ES BROAD GENERALIZATIONS WERE MADE WITHOUT SUFlCIENT EXPLANATION OR
PROOF 4HE 0OINTS OF )NFORMATION ADDED CHARACTER TO THE DEBATE AS DID
THE DIRECT POINT BY POINT CLASH FROM BOTH SIDES
7HAT DID THE 'OVERNMENT DO WELL
s !NALYSIS OF ROLES AND RESPONSIBILITIES 4HE 0RIME -INISTER IN PARTICULAR
WAS EFFECTIVE IN EXAMINING THE NATURE OF CITIZENS PLACE IN SOCIETY AT
THE AGE OF CITING EXAMPLES SUCH AS CRIMINAL AND lNANCIAL RESPONSI
BILITIES 4HE DISCUSSION OF CAPABILITY TO EXERCISE THIS DEMOCRATIC RIGHT
ADDED WEIGHT TO THE UNDERLYING CLAIM
s $ISCUSSION OF RESULTS AND OUTCOMES !FTER THE 0RIME -INISTER HAD
EXPLAINED WHY LOWERING THE VOTING AGE WAS THE @RIGHT DECISION THE
-INISTER OF THE #ROWN EXPLAINED WHY IT MATTERS 4HIS DISCUSSION OF
IMPACT ADDED DEPTH BY SHOWING THAT THE 'OVERNMENT CASE WAS ABOUT
MORE THAN ONLY THEORETICAL PRINCIPLES
BASED ARGUMENTS )T SHOWED
THAT THERE WAS A PRACTICAL DIMENSION AS WELL
s 3TRUCTURE 3TRUCTURE 3TRUCTURE "OTH SPEAKERS MADE IT ABSOLUTELY CLEAR
WHERE THEY WERE GOING AND WHAT THEY HAD ACCOMPLISHED INCLUDING
INTRODUCTIONS CONCLUSIONS AND TRANSITIONS 4HIS LEVEL OF ORGANIZATION
Review Copy
Copyright 2006 Gravitas Publishing
7ARS OF 7ORDS $EBATES WITH #OMMENTARY
TOOK THE JUDGES ON A WELL
DElNED @PATH AND MADE IT EASY TO GRASP ALL
OF THE IMPORTANT CONCEPTS
s 3EIZING BACK THE AGENDA IN THE REBUTTAL 4HE ,EADER OF THE /PPOSITION
DID AN EFFECTIVE JOB AT TRYING TO FRAME THE DEBATE BUT THE 0RIME -INIS
TER DIDNT GET SIDE
TRACKED )N THE 'OVERNMENTS REBUTTAL THERE WAS A
CLEAR TO THE POINT ARTICULATION OF THE KEY THEMES AND WHY THE 'OVERN
MENT HAD COME OUT AHEAD OF THESE FRONTS
7HAT COULD THE 'OVERNMENT HAVE IMPROVED
s 7HY AGE 7HY NOT OR FOR THAT MATTER 'RANTED THIS IS A DIF
lCULT DISTINCTION TO MAKE AND THE 'OVERNMENT DID ITS BEST WITH IT "UT
FURTHER EXPLANATION OR EVIDENCE AS TO WHY THIS WAS THE @MAGIC NUMBER
WOULD HAVE HELPED
s $EFENSE OF PREVIOUS ARGUMENTS 4HE -INISTER OF THE #ROWNS ATTEMPTED
DEFENSE OF THE 0RIME -INISTERS POINTS SEEMED SCATTERED AT TIMES )N
MANY CASES THE DEFENSE DID NOT ADD ANY SIGNIlCANT VALUE OR DEPTH TO
THE PREVIOUS ARGUMENTS )T WOULD HAVE BEEN ADVANTAGEOUS TO FOCUS ON
ONE AREA WHERE SIGNIlCANT DAMAGE WAS DONE AND TO PRESENT A MORE
THOROUGH DEFENSE
7HAT DID THE /PPOSITION DO WELL
s $ISCUSSION OF EXCEPTIONS AND NUANCES 4HE 'OVERNMENT TRIED TO USE EX
AMPLES OUTSIDE OF THE CORE ISSUE OF THE DEBATE AS SUPPORT FOR LOWERING
THE VOTING AGE WHICH THE /PPOSITION DEALT WITH HEAD
ON "OTH SPEAK
ERS EXPLAINED HOW THESE INSTANCES WERE OFTEN GENERALIZATIONS AND DID
NOT SHOW SPECIlCALLY WHY ALLOWING YEAR OLDS TO VOTE WOULD BE THE
RIGHT DECISION TO MAKE
s %XAMINATION OF CENTRAL TENETS OF DEMOCRACY 4HE /PPOSITION LOOKED AT
HOW THE INDEPENDENCE AND SOLID FOUNDATION FOR A VOTE WAS IMPERATIVE
IN ORDER FOR THE DEMOCRATIC SYSTEM TO HAVE FULL LEGITIMACY $ISTINCTIONS
WERE DRAWN TO SHOW HOW NOT ALL OF THE KEY CRITERIA FOR A SOUND VOTE ARE
FULlLLED FOR A YEAR OLD
s &RAMING THE DEBATE IN THE REBUTTAL 4HE ,EADER OF THE /PPOSITION WAS
VERY CLEAR AND DECISIVE IN ARGUING WHAT THE KEY ISSUES WERE 0ARTICU
Review Copy
Copyright 2006 Gravitas Publishing
4ALK THE 4ALK
LARLY AT THE END TELLING THE 0RIME -INISTER WHAT THE 'OVERNMENTS RE
BUTTAL MUST DO WAS A BOLD BUT CAREFULLY EXECUTED METHOD
7HAT COULD THE /PPOSITION HAVE IMPROVED
s 2ELEVANCE OF CERTAIN DETAILS &OR EXAMPLE TALKING ABOUT LEGAL CUSTODY
AND ITS IMPLICATIONS FOR VOTING DECISIONS OR CITING HOW PEOPLE UNDER
THE AGE OF CAN GET INVOLVED IN OTHER WAYS WERE NOT CENTRAL TO THE
FUNDAMENTAL QUESTION OF THE RIGHT TO VOTE )TS ESSENTIAL THAT EVERY
POINT TIES DIRECTLY INTO THE CASE THEME
s 'ENERALIZATIONS AND ASSUMPTIONS )N PARTICULAR THE ,EADER OF THE /PPO
SITIONS POINT ABOUT PARENTS AND TEACHERS INmUENCING STUDENTS COULD
HAVE INCLUDED MORE CONCRETE AND SPECIlC ANALYSIS !LSO WHEN THE
-EMBER OF THE /PPOSITION TALKED ABOUT THE NEGATIVE IMPACT OF A LACK
OF INDEPENDENT LIVING THERE WASNT SUFlCIENT ANALYSIS TO SHOW WHY
SPECIlCALLY THIS ASSUMPTION WAS CORRECT IN THE CONTEXT OF THE DEBATE
ON LOWERING THE VOTING AGE
Review Copy
Copyright 2006 Gravitas Publishing
7ARS OF 7ORDS $EBATES WITH #OMMENTARY
Review Copy
Copyright 2006 Gravitas Publishing
4ALK THE 4ALK
'6377)<%1-2%8-3278=0)()&%8) &)-86)730:)(
8,%8 &-68
8,)'36436%8)74327367,-43*396
7',3307-7,%61*90
$EBATE
#OMMENTARY
#HAIRPERSON ) CALL THIS DEBATE TO ORDER 4HE
TOPIC OF DEBATE TODAY IS "E IT RESOLVED THAT
")24 THE CORPORATE SPONSORSHIP OF OUR
SCHOOLS IS HARMFUL ) WOULD LIKE TO WELCOME
THE lRST !FlRMATIVE SPEAKER AND THE SECOND
!FlRMATIVE SPEAKER WHO WILL SUPPORT THE
RESOLUTION AND THE lRST .EGATIVE SPEAKER AND
THE SECOND .EGATIVE SPEAKER WHO WILL OP
POSE THE RESOLUTION ) NOW CALL UPON THE lRST
SPEAKER OF THE !FlRMATIVE TEAM TO DElNE THE
TERMS OF THE RESOLUTION AND TO INTRODUCE THE
!FlRMATIVES CASE
&IRST !FlRMATIVE 4HANK YOU -ADAME #HAIR
PERSON 4HE RESOLUTION BEFORE US TODAY IS "E
IT RESOLVED THAT THE CORPORATE SPONSORSHIP OF
OUR SCHOOLS IS HARMFUL 7E WOULD LIKE TO BEGIN
BY DElNING THE TERMS OF THIS RESOLUTION 7E
DElNE hCORPORATE SPONSORSHIPv AS ADVERTIS
ING DIRECT MARKETING EXCLUSIVE AGREEMENTS
INCENTIVE PROGRAMS AND EVENT AND FACIL
ITY NAMING RIGHTS 7E DElNED hOUR SCHOOLSv
AS ALL OF THE PUBLIC SCHOOLS IN THE &REEDONIA
SCHOOL DISTRICT &INALLY WE DElNE hHARMFULv AS
NEGATIVELY IMPACTING THE OPERATION OF SCHOOLS
AND THE EDUCATION OF STUDENTS ) WILL TELL YOU
WHY SCHOOL ADMINISTRATION IS HURT BY CORPO
RATE SPONSORSHIP AND THE SECOND !FlRMATIVE
SPEAKER WILL TELL YOU WHY STUDENTS ARE HARMED
BY THIS PRACTICE
/UR lRST CONTENTION IS THAT CORPORATE
SPONSORSHIP FOCUSES SCHOOL ADMINISTRATORS
Review Copy
#LEARLY A VALUES
@RIGHT OR WRONG TYPE
OF RESOLUTION
"ROAD BUT CLEAR
DElNITION OF CORPORATE
SPONSORSHIP
2EASONABLE LIMITATION
DOES NOT CHANGE THE
PRINCIPLES INVOLVED
! SOUND SPLIT BETWEEN
SCHOOL IMPACT AND
STUDENT IMPACT
Copyright 2006 Gravitas Publishing
7ARS OF 7ORDS $EBATES WITH #OMMENTARY
ON INTERESTS OTHER THAN WHAT SHOULD BE THE
ONLY FOCUS THE BEST INTERESTS OF STUDENTS
7ITH CORPORATE SPONSORSHIP SCHOOL MANAG
ERS MUST CONSIDER WHAT WILL YIELD THE MAXI
MUM REVENUES EVEN IF THAT MEANS STUDENTS
MAY BE UNFAVORABLY AFFECTED BY THE OUTCOME
3O IF A SOFT DRINK COMPANY IS WILLING TO PAY FOR
THE EXCLUSIVE RIGHT TO PUT VENDING MACHINES
IN THE SCHOOL THE SCHOOL PRINCIPAL MAY BE IN
CLINED TO ACCEPT THE OFFER OF FUNDING EVEN IF
IT HARMS STUDENT HEALTH 3CHOOLS ARE INCLUD
ING ACTIVITIES AND EXERCISES ABOUT A PRODUCT
SPONSORED BY THE PRODUCER 4HE hCALCULATE
THE NUMBER OF CHOCOLATE CHIPS IN A BAG OF
COOKIESv MATH ACTIVITY IS REALLY MARKETING FOR
A COMPANY 4HIS PRACTICE COMPROMISES THE
OBJECTIVITY OF THE SCHOOL CURRICULUM AND EN
COURAGES EDUCATORS TO CONSIDER FACTORS OTHER
THAN WHAT MAKES FOR THE BEST LEARNING MATE
RIAL 4HEREFORE THE CONmICT OF INTEREST BETWEEN
STUDENT LEARNING AND CORPORATE INTERESTS IS
UNWELCOME AND HARMFUL
)N ADDITION TO PLACING SCHOOL ADMINISTRA
TORS IN A CONmICT OF INTEREST POSITION CORPORATE
SPONSORSHIP ALSO IMPACTS THE RELATIONSHIP
BETWEEN THE GOVERNMENT AND OUR SCHOOL DIS
TRICT 4HAT IS THE RISE IN CORPORATE SPONSORSHIP
OF SCHOOLS SENDS A SIGNAL TO THE GOVERNMENT
THAT SCHOOLS HAVE ANOTHER SOURCE THAT THEY
CAN TURN TO IN THE EVENT THAT PUBLIC FUNDING IS
INADEQUATE !S A RESULT IT ESSENTIALLY LETS GOV
ERNMENTS @OFF THE HOOK WHEN IT COMES TO PRO
VIDING SUFlCIENT FUNDING FOR OUR SCHOOLS ,AST
YEAR THE $EPARTMENT OF %DUCATION DECLINED
OUR DISTRICTS REQUEST TO INCREASE FUNDING STAT
ING THAT SCHOOLS HAD TO EXPLORE OTHER SOURCES
OF REVENUE 7E CONTEND THAT PUBLIC FUNDING
WHICH DOES NOT COME WITH STRINGS ATTACHED IS
SUPERIOR TO CORPORATE FUNDING WHICH ALLOWS
THEM INmUENCE INSIDE THE SCHOOL
Review Copy
'OOD STATEMENT OF
GUIDING PRINCIPAL FOR
SCHOOLS
(OW DO WE KNOW THEY
hMUSTv CONSIDER MAXI
MUM REVENUES
.EED A TRANSITION
PHRASE SUCH AS h!N
OTHER AREA OF CONCERN
IS THAT xv
)N THE lRST SENTENCE
SAY IN GENERAL HOW IT
HAS AN IMPACT
%XPLAIN HOW IT SENDS
SUCH A SIGNAL TO THE
GOVERNMENT
#OULD IT JUST BE THAT
THEY DIDNT HAVE
ENOUGH MONEY AND
WERE SIMPLY SUGGEST
ING A SOLUTION
7AS THIS THE KEY IDEA
Copyright 2006 Gravitas Publishing
4ALK THE 4ALK
4ODAY ) HAVE TOLD YOU lRSTLY THAT CORPO
RATE SPONSORSHIP ENCOURAGES ADMINISTRATORS
TO CONSIDER CORPORATE INTEREST EVEN AT THE
EXPENSE OF STUDENT INTEREST AND ) HAVE TOLD
YOU SECONDLY THAT IT HAS A NEGATIVE IMPACT
ON GOVERNMENT SUPPORT FOR PUBLIC EDUCATION
4HEREFORE WE STAND PROUDLY IN FAVOR OF THE
RESOLUTION THAT CORPORATE SPONSORSHIP HARMS
OUR PUBLIC EDUCATION SYSTEM ) NOW STAND
OPEN FOR CROSS EXAMINATION
#LEAR STATEMENT OF
WHATS BEEN DISCUSSED
3ECOND .EGATIVE $O YOU AGREE THAT A PRINCIPAL
IS RESPONSIBLE lRST AND FOREMOST FOR ENSURING
THAT STUDENTS LEARN WELL
3HIFTING THE FOCUS
AWAY FROM BUDGET
RESPONSIBILITIES
&IRST !FlRMATIVE 9ES OF COURSE NOTHING ELSE
SHOULD PROVIDE A CONmICTING INTEREST
)MPLIES CORPORATE IN
TERESTS ARE CONmICTING
3ECOND .EGATIVE 7OULD YOU ALSO AGREE THAT
PARENTS AND SCHOOL BOARD OFlCIAL JUDGE A PRIN
CIPALS EFFECTIVENESS BY HOW STRONG OF A LEARN
ING ENVIRONMENT HE OR SHE CREATES
2EINFORCES THE THRUST
OF THE lRST QUESTION
&IRST !FlRMATIVE 9ES BUT A PRINCIPAL ALSO FACES
PRESSURE TO BALANCE A BUDGET AND WILL CER
TAINLY PURSUE WHATEVER MEANS ARE AVAILABLE
TO INCREASE REVENUES
3TRONG QUALIlCATION
EVOKES WHAT WAS SAID
IN SPEECH
3ECOND .EGATIVE )S IT NOT TRUE THAT A PRINCI
PAL HAS A CHOICE TO ACCEPT OR REJECT CORPORATE
SPONSORSHIPS ON A CASE BY CASE BASIS
,EADING INTO KEY CROSS
EXAMINATION GOAL
&IRST !FlRMATIVE 9ES ALTHOUGH THERE IS ALWAYS
lNANCIAL PRESSURE ON A SCHOOL TO ACCEPT COR
PORATE SPONSORSHIPS
3ENSES THE ATTACK
CLEARLY DEFENDS THE
PRESENCE OF A CONmICT
3ECOND .EGATIVE 3O IF THEY ARE RESPONSIBLE
PRIMARILY FOR LEARNING ARE EVALUATED ON THIS
BASIS AND HAVE FULL AUTHORITY TO MAKE SPON
SORSHIP AGREEMENTS WOULD PRINCIPALS EVER
4IES THE FULL LINE OF
QUESTIONING TOGETHER TO
GET AT THE MAIN POINT
Review Copy
Copyright 2006 Gravitas Publishing
7ARS OF 7ORDS $EBATES WITH #OMMENTARY
MAKE AN AGREEMENT THAT HAS AN OVERALL NEGA
TIVE IMPACT ON THE SCHOOL
&IRST !FlRMATIVE 7ELL ITS CLEAR THAT THEY NOW
HAVE TO CONSIDER MULTIPLE INTERESTS AND
SOMETIMES lNANCIAL PRESSURES WILL UNDOUBT
EDLY LEAD TO A NEGATIVE IMPACT ON THE SCHOOL
3TANDING lRM
)S IT hSOMETIMESv OR
hUNDOUBTEDLY v
3ECOND .EGATIVE 4HANK YOU OUR TIME IS UP
#HAIRPERSON 4HANK YOU ) NOW CALL UPON THE
lRST SPEAKER OF THE .EGATIVE TEAM TO INTRO
DUCE ITS CASE AND IF DESIRED TO CONTEST ANY OF
THE !FlRMATIVES DElNITIONS
&IRST .EGATIVE 4HANK YOU -ADAME #HAIRPER
SON ,ADIES AND GENTLEMEN BEFORE ) INTRODUCE
OUR TEAMS CASE ) WOULD LIKE TO TAKE A FEW
MINUTES TO CLASH WITH THE TWO POINTS MADE BY
THE lRST SPEAKER OF THE !FlRMATIVE TEAM
4HE !FlRMATIVE STARTED BY TALKING ABOUT
HOW ADMINISTRATORS WILL BE PLACED IN A CON
mICT OF INTEREST POSITION (OWEVER AS BROUGHT
UP IN THE CROSS
EXAMINATION ADMINISTRATORS
DO NOT HAVE A MANDATE TO ADVANCE CORPORATE
INTERESTS NOR ARE THEY JUDGED IN THIS REGARD
4HEY ARE JUDGED BY HOW WELL STUDENTS IN THEIR
SCHOOL PERFORM AND HOW WELL THEY MANAGE
THE OPERATIONS OF THE SCHOOL ,IKEWISE CUR
RICULUM DEVELOPERS ARE JUDGED BY HOW WELL
EDUCATIONAL MATERIALS HELP STUDENTS LEARN
IMPORTANT CONCEPTS NOT BY HOW WELL THEY PRO
MOTE CORPORATIONS !DMINISTRATORS OF COURSE
TAKE INTO CONSIDERATION THE IMPACT OF A VARI
ETY OF CORPORATE SPONSORSHIPS MAY HAVE ON
STUDENT LEARNING )F THEY COME TO THE SOUND
JUDGMENT THAT THE BENElTS OF CORPORATE SPON
SORSHIP SUCH AS FUNDING FOR IMPORTANT EXTRA
CURRICULAR ACTIVITIES ARE SIGNIlCANT AND THAT
THE CORPORATE ADVERTISING WOULD NOT ACTUALLY
Review Copy
! BIT TOO GENERAL FOR
THE INTRODUCTION BUT
DOES GET RIGHT INTO THE
REFUTATION
2EINFORCES THE QUES
TIONS ASKED IN THE
CROSS
EXAMINATION
#LEARLY OPPOSES THE
!FlRMATIVES INTERPRE
TATIONS OF ADMINISTRA
TOR RESPONSIBILITIES
3ETS UP THE CRITERIA
FOR DECISION
MAKING
BASED ON THE PRINCIPLE
MENTIONED ABOVE
Copyright 2006 Gravitas Publishing
4ALK THE 4ALK
HARM STUDENTS THEY ARE PERFECTLY JUSTIlED IN
MAKING THIS CHOICE
4HEN THE SECOND !FlRMATIVE POINT WAS
THAT THE GOVERNMENT MAY FEEL THAT IT HAS LESS
OF AN OBLIGATION TO FUND PUBLIC EDUCATION !C
TUALLY QUITE THE OPPOSITE IS TRUE 3CHOOLS DO
NOT JUSTIFY CORPORATE SPONSORSHIPS TO PARENTS
BY SAYING HOW IT HELPS PAY FOR BASIC EDUCATION
MATERIALS 2ATHER THEY SHOW HOW CORPORATE
SPONSORSHIPS HELP PAY FOR SOME OF THE EN
HANCEMENTS TO EDUCATION SUCH AS RECREATION
AL ACTIVITIES AND lELD TRIPS 4HE GOVERNMENT
IS ACCOUNTABLE TO THE ELECTORATE TO PROVIDE
WHAT IS NECESSARY FOR QUALITY STUDENT LEARN
ING ESPECIALLY FOR THOSE SCHOOLS THAT MAY NOT
HAVE SUCCEEDED IN ATTRACTING LARGE CORPORATE
SPONSORSHIPS )NDEED AS THE GOVERNMENT
CONTINUES TO INCREASE FUNDING FOR EDUCATION
IT ULTIMATELY COMES OUT OF OTHER VALUABLE PRO
GRAMS OR RESULTS IN HIGHER TAXES ON PARENTS
)NSTEAD CORPORATE SPONSORSHIP SIMPLY MEANS
AN ADDITIONAL REVENUE SOURCE WITHOUT GIVING
UP ANOTHER PROGRAM OR GREATER PART OF FAMILY
INCOME WHICH MAKES THE !FlRMATIVES ARGU
MENT IRRELEVANT AND INCORRECT
.OW THAT ) HAVE SHOWN YOU WHY THE WAY
THE !FlRMATIVE ARGUMENTS ARE INCORRECT )
WANT TO INTRODUCE THE .EGATIVE CASE BY TALK
ING ABOUT THE BENElTS OF CORPORATE SPONSOR
SHIP TO SCHOOLS -Y lRST POINT WHICH ) HAVE
INTRODUCED BRIEmY IN MY CLASH IS THAT CORPO
RATE SPONSORSHIP PROVIDES VALUABLE FUNDING
TO SCHOOLS 2ATHER THAN BEING ENTIRELY DEPEN
DENT ON WHAT THE GOVERNMENT PROVIDES ON
A YEAR TO YEAR BASIS CORPORATE SPONSORSHIP
ALLOWS SCHOOLS TO BE PROACTIVE IN lNDING THE
FUNDING TO MEET THEIR SPECIlC NEEDS &OR EX
AMPLE IF THE SCHOOL WANTS TO HOST A PARTICULAR
EVENT IT CAN SEEK A CORPORATE SPONSORSHIP OF
THE EVENT TO ENSURE THAT IT TAKES PLACE /R IF
Review Copy
"UT WHAT IF THERE ARE
BUDGET PRESSURES
4HEY SAY ITS NOT THE
REASON BUT DOES THAT
MEAN IT ISNT
#OULD BE ARGUED THAT
THESE ARE REALLY A CORE
PART OF THE EDUCATION
3O IF A SCHOOL FALLS
SHORT THE GOVERNMENT
JUST MAKES UP FOR
THE DIFFERENCE 4HEN
WHATS THE INCENTIVE
!ND ISNT THAT HARMFUL
BECAUSE IT AFFECTS OTHER
PROGRAMS AND TAXES
#LEAR STATEMENT OF THE
SPEECHS THEME
3HOULD BE MORE
SPECIlC AS TO WHAT
THE POINT IS hVALUABLE
FUNDINGv IS THE WHOLE
POINT OF THE CASE
h!LLOWS v /R FORCES
'OOD MATCHING OF SITU
ATIONS AND SOLUTION
Copyright 2006 Gravitas Publishing
7ARS OF 7ORDS $EBATES WITH #OMMENTARY
A SCHOOL WANTS TO UNDERTAKE AN EXPANSION
OF ITS LIBRARY IT CAN PARTNER WITH A COMPANY
IN A SHOPPING INCENTIVE PROGRAM TO PROVIDE
THE NECESSARY FUNDING 4HEREFORE CORPORATE
SPONSORSHIP CAN BE AN IMPORTANT SOURCE OF
FUNDING FOR ENHANCEMENTS TO A SCHOOL
3ECONDLY CORPORATE SPONSORSHIP OF
SCHOOLS ALLOWS EDUCATORS TO HAVE SOME IN
mUENCE OVER CORPORATE ACTIVITIES THAT IMPACT
CHILDREN )F CORPORATIONS ARE DEPENDENT ON
SCHOOLS FOR SOME OF THEIR MARKETING EFFORTS
THEY ARE FAR MORE LIKELY TO PAY ATTENTION TO
WHAT EDUCATORS WANT TO SEE IN TERMS OF THEIR
PRACTICES &OR INSTANCE MANY SCHOOLS IN OUR
DISTRICT HAVE BEEN DEMANDING THAT SOFT DRINK
COMPANIES PROVIDE HEALTHIER ALTERNATIVES
SUCH AS JUICE AND WATER IN THEIR VENDING MA
CHINES )N TURN WE HAVE SEEN HEALTHIER ALTER
NATIVES IN MANY OF THE VENDING MACHINES IN
THIS DISTRICTS PUBLIC SCHOOLS )N ONE CASE A
SCHOOL IN OUR DISTRICT PARTNERED WITH AN EN
ERGY COMPANY ON AN ENVIRONMENTAL INITIA
TIVE WHICH SERVED THE DESIRE OF EDUCATORS TO
PROMOTE ENVIRONMENTAL AWARENESS AND GOOD
CORPORATE CITIZENSHIP 5NDOUBTEDLY CORPORATE
SPONSORSHIP CAN PROVIDE A WIN WIN SITUATION
THAT ALLOWS SCHOOLS TO IMPACT POSITIVELY THE
ACTIVITIES OF CORPORATIONS
)N MY SPEECH ) HAVE TOLD YOU WHY COR
PORATE SPONSORSHIP DOES NOT PLACE SCHOOL
ADMINISTRATORS IN AN UNHEALTHY CONmICT OF IN
TEREST AND THAT IT DOES NOT COMPROMISE GOV
ERNMENT FUNDING FOR CORE PROGRAMS ) HAVE
ALSO TOLD YOU IN OUR CONSTRUCTIVE MATTER THAT
SCHOOLS BENElT FROM VALUABLE CORPORATE FUND
ING AND THEIR ABILITY TO IMPACT THE ACTIONS OF
CORPORATIONS &OR THESE REASONS WE STAND
PROUDLY IN OPPOSITION TO THIS RESOLUTION AND )
AM NOW READY TO BE CROSS EXAMINED
Review Copy
/R PERHAPS EDUCA
TORS NOW HAVE TO PAY
EVEN MORE ATTENTION TO
CORPORATIONS
3TRONG EXAMPLE OF
CHALLENGE AND RESULT
&IRST EXAMPLE SCHOOL
SPECIlC APPROPRIATE
MOVE INTO WIDER
BENElTS TO SOCIETY
0ERHAPS SAY hlRSTLYv
AND hSECONDLYv
Copyright 2006 Gravitas Publishing
4ALK THE 4ALK
&IRST !FlRMATIVE )S IT FAIR TO SAY THAT A TEACHERS
MAIN RESPONSIBLY IS LOGICALLY TO TEACH
3EEMS A TOUCH TOO
BASIC BUT LAYS DOWN A
KEY ASSUMPTION
&IRST .EGATIVE 9ES OBVIOUSLY
&IRST !FlRMATIVE !ND IS IT ALSO FAIR TO SAY THAT A
PRINCIPALS MAIN ROLE IS TO RUN THE SCHOOL
&IRST .EGATIVE 9ES BUT ) REALLY DONT SEE WHAT
THE POINT IS HERE
,ET THE CROSS
EXAMINER
SAY WHAT THE POINT IS
&IRST !FlRMATIVE /KAY SO YOU ACKNOWLEDGE
THAT NEITHER TEACHERS NOR PRINCIPALS ARE CON
CERNED TO A SIGNIlCANT EXTENT WITH TRYING TO
CHANGE CORPORATIONS
3TARTING TO MAKE
MORE SENSE WHAT
THE OBJECTIVE IS
&IRST .EGATIVE .O NO )N ADDITION TO THEIR PRI
MARY DUTIES THEY ALSO WANT TO MAKE SURE THE
OVERALL LEARNING ENVIRONMENT IS POSITIVE
%STABLISHES THAT A
THERE IS A RELEVANT SEC
ONDARY DUTY AS WELL
&IRST !FlRMATIVE "UT WOULD YOU NOT AGREE THAT
GIVEN THE CHOICE BETWEEN FUNDING FOR WHAT
THEY FEEL THEY NEED TO DO FOR THEIR STUDENTS
AND SOME DESIRE TO CHANGE CORPORATIONS THEY
WOULD MUCH RATHER TAKE CARE OF WHAT THEY
NEED TO DO
&IRST .EGATIVE 7ELL ) THINK IN REALITY THEY CON
SIDER ALL OF THE FACTORS
&IRST !FlRMATIVE 3O WHEN CONSIDERING ALL OF
THE FACTORS IF PRINCIPALS REALLY WANTED TO GET
MONEY FOR MORE lELD TRIPS THEY MIGHT VERY
WELL LEAVE THEIR DESIRES TO BE SOCIAL ACTIVISTS
FOR OTHER OCCASIONS
&IRST .EGATIVE !LL ) AM SAYING IS THAT WITHIN A
SCHOOL ENVIRONMENT AT LEAST TEACHERS AND AD
MINISTRATORS HAVE A GREATER ABILITY TO GENERATE
A POSITIVE IMPACT ON CORPORATE ACTIVITIES
Review Copy
%XPLAIN FURTHER
%XAMPLE MAKES THE
POINT MORE CONCRETE
$OES ABILITY TRANSLATE
INTO ACTION
Copyright 2006 Gravitas Publishing
7ARS OF 7ORDS $EBATES WITH #OMMENTARY
&IRST !FlRMATIVE /KAY THANK YOU
#LEAR THAT POINT CANT
BE TAKEN ANY FURTHER
#HAIRPERSON ) THANK THE lRST SPEAKER OF THE
.EGATIVE TEAM FOR HER REMARKS AND ) NOW CALL
UPON THE SECOND SPEAKER OF THE !FlRMATIVE
TEAM TO CONTINUE THE DEBATE
3ECOND !FlRMATIVE 4HANK YOU &ELLOW DEBAT
ERS JUDGES AUDIENCE MEMBERS AND CHAIRPER
SON MY PARTNER STARTED THIS DEBATE BY TALKING
ABOUT THE NEGATIVE INmUENCE OF CORPORATE
SPONSORSHIP ON SCHOOL ADMINISTRATION .OW )
WANT TO EXTEND OUR CASE BY TALKING ABOUT THE
DIRECT AND NEGATIVE IMPACT OF CORPORATE SPON
SORSHIP ON STUDENTS
4HE THIRD ARGUMENT OF THE !FlRMATIVE
CASE IS THAT KIDS ARE FAR MORE VULNERABLE TO
THE EFFECTS OF ADVERTISING !T A YOUNG AGE
PEOPLE ARE LESS ABLE TO MAKE INFORMED CRITI
CAL AND RATIONAL DECISIONS ABOUT CORPORATE
CLAIMS +IDS ARE MORE LIKELY TO BELIEVE WHAT A
COMPANY HAS TO SAY ABOUT ITS PRODUCT #ORPO
RATE SPONSORSHIP OF SCHOOLS ALLOWS COMPANIES
EASY ACCESS TO THIS VULNERABLE POPULATION
WELL OUT OF THE PROTECTIVE REACH OF PARENTS &OR
EXAMPLE WHEN A TEXTBOOK CONTAINS EXAMPLES
ABOUT CORPORATIONS THAT WERE SPONSORED BY
CORPORATIONS A STUDENT SEES THIS INFORMATION
AS TRUE )N ADDITION THE FACT THAT THE INFORMA
TION WAS PROVIDED IN AN EDUCATIONAL SETTING
MAKES IT FAR LESS LIKELY THAT THE STUDENT IS GO
ING TO QUESTION ITS VALIDITY !LSO WHEN STU
DENTS SEE TELEVISION ADVERTISEMENTS AS PART OF
A SPONSORED DAILY NEWS PROGRAM THEY OFTEN
VIEW CORPORATE CLAIMS AS CORRECT ESPECIALLY
SINCE ITS PART OF THEIR SCHOOL PROGRAM 7E BE
LIEVE STRONGLY THAT ADVERTISING TO AN IMPRES
SIONABLE STUDENT POPULATION IS HARMFUL
&INALLY OUR FOURTH ARGUMENT IS THAT COR
PORATE SPONSORSHIP DISTRACTS ATTENTION AWAY
Review Copy
3HORTEN THE USE
OF TITLES
(ELPFUL LINK BACK TO
WHAT HAS BEEN ACCOM
PLISHED ALREADY
0ERSONALIZES THE ISSUE
OF DEBATE MORE THAN
lRST SPEECH DID
!N EASY TO UNDERSTAND
DESCRIPTION OF A CHILDS
THINKING
4HE POINT BEING PAR
ENTS AND NOT SCHOOLS
SHOULD BE THE
@GATEKEEPERS
%XPLANATION OF WHY
INFORMATION CAN
BE HARMFUL
7OULD THEY REALLY AC
CEPT IT ANY MORE THAN
AN ADVERTISEMENT THEY
SEE AT HOME
Copyright 2006 Gravitas Publishing
4ALK THE 4ALK
FROM LEARNING )T GOES WITHOUT SAYING THAT
STUDENTS GO TO SCHOOL TO LEARN NOT TO BE HIT
WITH CORPORATE MESSAGES )N FACT A SCHOOL IS
SUPPOSED TO PROVIDE A LEARNING ENVIRONMENT
FOR STUDENTS ENTIRELY DIFFERENT THAN THE COM
MERCIAL WORLD AROUND THEM )F EVERY EXTRACUR
RICULAR EVENT IS SPONSORED BY A COMPANY AND
IF THEY SEE CORPORATIONS TRYING TO SELL THEM
PRODUCTS DAILY WITHIN THE SCHOOL IT ALMOST
MAKES SCHOOLS AN EXTENSION OF THE SHOPPING
MALL AS OPPOSED TO SOLELY A PLACE TO LEARN 7E
ARGUE THAT THIS MAKES CORPORATE SPONSORSHIP
A DISTRACTION FOR STUDENTS WHICH MAKES THEM
FOCUS LESS ON THE LEARNING THAT THEY ARE SUP
POSED TO BE FOCUSING ON EXCLUSIVELY
3O WHAT ABOUT THE ARGUMENTS MADE BY THE
lRST SPEAKER OF THE .EGATIVE TEAM (ER lRST
POINT WAS THAT CORPORATE SPONSORSHIP PRO
VIDES VALUABLE FUNDING FOR PROGRAMS WHICH
IS OBVIOUSLY THE BASIC ELEMENT OF A SPONSOR
SHIP AGREEMENT "UT THE ISSUE HERE IS REALLY
WHAT CORPORATE SPONSORSHIP COSTS THE SCHOOL
IN TERMS OF ITS INDEPENDENCE AND ITS LEARNING
%VERY MINUTE THAT STUDENTS SPEND READING
POSTER ADVERTISEMENTS OR VIEWING TELEVISION
COMMERCIALS TAKES AWAY FROM TIME SPENT ON
LEARNING 3OCIETY PLACES AN ECONOMIC VALUE ON
THIS LEARNING TIME !LSO SHOPPING INCENTIVE
PROGRAMS ENCOURAGE STUDENTS AND PARENTS TO
BUY MORE WHICH ENDS UP COSTING FAMILIES SIG
NIlCANTLY JUST TO PROVIDE A SMALL AMOUNT OF
EXTRA FUNDING TO A SCHOOL PROGRAM 4HE QUES
TION OF THIS DEBATE IS WHETHER SCHOOLS SHOULD
BE GIVING UP PART OF THEIR CORE MANDATE TO
PROVIDE A STRONG LEARNING ENVIRONMENT IN
EXCHANGE FOR A FEW NONESSENTIAL CORPORATE
SPONSORSHIP DOLLARS EACH YEAR
(ER SECOND ARGUMENT WAS THAT SCHOOLS
CAN SOMEHOW INmUENCE CORPORATE ACTIVITIES IF
THERE IS A SPONSORSHIP PARTNERSHIP 4HIS BEGS
Review Copy
&ITS INTO THEME OF
HARMING STUDENTS
3TRONG DISTINCTION
HELPS TO ILLUSTRATE THE
ARGUMENT
3OMEWHAT OF A STRETCH
BUT DOES ILLUSTRATE THE
POINT BEING MADE
#ONCLUDES QUICKLY
NEED TO DEVELOP MORE
#LEAR TRANSITION INTO
REFUTATION
)MPLYING THE POINT
WAS MORE COMMON
SENSE THAN INSIGHT
!TTEMPT TO FRAME THE
POINT OF CONTENTION
3UGGESTS THAT EVERY
MINUTE MUST BE PUT TO
MAXIMUM USE
4HIS ISNT THE POINT
4OO EARLY TO GO INTO THE
GENERAL hQUESTION OF
THIS DEBATEv
!RE THEY ALWAYS
NONESSENTIAL
Copyright 2006 Gravitas Publishing
7ARS OF 7ORDS $EBATES WITH #OMMENTARY
THE QUESTION WHO HAS MORE POWER IN THE RE
LATIONSHIP ! SCHOOL WHICH IS DOING WHATEVER
IT TAKES TO GET MORE FUNDING OR A LARGE POWER
FUL CORPORATION WHICH IS MARKETING TO A WIDE
VARIETY OF STUDENTS BY DANGLING lNANCIAL BEN
ElTS TO SCHOOLS /F COURSE ITS OBVIOUS THAT
CORPORATIONS HAVE FAR MORE INmUENCE ON THE
HABITS AND BEHAVIORS OF STUDENTS IN SCHOOLS
COULD POSSIBLY HAVE ON HOW SELF
INTERESTED
CORPORATIONS RUN !NYWAYS SOCIAL ACTIVISM IS
NOT WHAT TEACHERS ARE OR NECESSARILY SHOULD
BE FOCUSED ON WHICH COUNTERS THE .EGATIVES
ARGUMENT THAT TEACHERS ARE FOCUSED ON PRO
MOTING CORPORATE SOCIAL RESPONSIBILITY
&OR THESE REASONS WE STAND PROUDLY IN FA
VOR OF THIS IMPORTANT RESOLUTION AND ) WOULD
BE PLEASED TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS OR CRITI
CISM IN THE CROSS
EXAMINATION
2HETORICAL QUESTIONS
THAT IMPLY THE ANSWER
&IRST .EGATIVE ,ETS TALK ABOUT THE CONCEPT OF
PROGRAM FUNDING 7OULD IT BE FAIR TO SAY THAT
THE MORE MONEY A SCHOOL HAS THE MORE ABLE
IT IS TO PROVIDE ENHANCING ACTIVITIES SUCH AS
lELD TRIPS AND SPECIAL EVENTS
#LEAR @SIGNPOST OF
THE CROSS
EXAMINERS
PURPOSE
3ECOND !FlRMATIVE 7ELL YES BUT NOT IF IT NEGA
TIVELY IMPACTS THE SCHOOL ENVIRONMENT
,INKS BACK TO THE
@YARDSTICK TO MEASURE
SUITABILITY
"UT PERHAPS SOME
POWER TO INmUENCE IS
SUPERIOR TO HAVING NO
POWER AT ALL
)F TEACHERS WANT TO
HELP CHILDREN AND SOCI
ETY BEYOND ACADEMICS
WHAT EXACTLY IS WRONG
WITH THAT
&IRST .EGATIVE )S IT ALSO FAIR TO SAY THAT EVERY
SCHOOL HAS DIFFERENT NEEDS IN THIS REGARD
3ECOND !FlRMATIVE 9ES
/BVIOUS ANSWER TO
OBVIOUS QUESTION
&IRST .EGATIVE 3O IF A SCHOOL WANTS TO PURSUE
A UNIQUE ACTIVITY WOULD CORPORATE SPONSOR
SHIPS NOT HELP THEM ACHIEVE THIS GOAL
3ECOND !FlRMATIVE 0ERHAPS BUT DONT FORGET
THE SIGNIlCANT HARM IT IMPOSES ON THE SCHOOL
LEARNING ENVIRONMENT
Review Copy
3PEAKER REFUSING TO
PLAY INTO THE CROSS
EXAMINERS HANDS
Copyright 2006 Gravitas Publishing
4ALK THE 4ALK
&IRST .EGATIVE ) SEE 3O YOU ARE ADMITTING THEN
THAT WITHOUT THE SPONSORSHIP THE SCHOOL MAY
NOT BE ABLE TO PURSUE THESE VALUE
ADDED INI
TIATIVES
4RYING AGAIN A SECOND
TIME GOOD TO PERSIST
THIS WAY
3ECOND !FlRMATIVE .O NOT AT ALL 4HERE ARE
OTHER WAYS TO RAISE FUNDS SUCH AS INVOLVING
PARENTS AND STUDENTS OR SEEKING GRANTS FROM
THE GOVERNMENT OR NON PROlT GROUPS
3TANDING lRM
AND ENHANCING THE
PREVIOUS ANSWER
&IRST !FlRMATIVE 4HANK YOU IT SEEMS THAT OUR
TIME HAS EXPIRED
#HAIRPERSON ) THANK THE SECOND SPEAKER OF
THE !FlRMATIVE AND NOW CALL UPON THE SEC
OND SPEAKER OF THE .EGATIVE TO CONCLUDE THE
CONSTRUCTIVE PART OF THE DEBATE
3ECOND .EGATIVE ,ADIES AND GENTLEMEN LET
ME GET RIGHT INTO THE NEW CONSTRUCTIVE ARGU
MENTS BROUGHT UP BY THE SECOND SPEAKER OF
THE !FlRMATIVE TEAM (E STARTED BY TALKING
ABOUT HOW KIDS ARE VULNERABLE TO ADVERTISE
MENTS 5LTIMATELY THOUGH IT IS THE RESPON
SIBILITY OF PARENTS TO TEACH THEIR KIDS ABOUT
MAKING RESPONSIBLE CHOICES !S ) WILL TELL YOU
ABOUT LATER CORPORATIONS WILL lND A WAY TO
REACH KIDS ANYWAY 4HIS DEBATE IS NOT ABOUT
WHETHER CORPORATE ADVERTISING TO STUDENTS
IS GOOD OR BAD )T IS ABOUT WHETHER SCHOOLS
SPECIlCALLY ARE HARMED BY THIS PRACTICE #ER
TAINLY THIS POINT WOULD BE INTERESTING IN THE
CONTEXT OF A WIDER DEBATE ABOUT ADVERTISING
TO CHILDREN BUT IT DOES NOT SHOW YOU THAT
ADVERTISING IN A SCHOOL ENVIRONMENT CREATES
ADDITIONAL HARMS 7E BELIEVE THAT A STUDENT
CERTAINLY KNOWS THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN AN
ADVERTISEMENT AND A LEARNING POINT
Review Copy
1UITE GENERAL BUT PER
HAPS THERES NO TIME TO
WASTE HERE
#LEAR DISTINCTION BUT
ARE PARENTS AROUND TO
HELP DURING THE DAY
%XPLAINS EFFECTIVELY
WHAT THE REAL ISSUE IS
#AN A YOUNG STUDENT
MAKE SUCH AS DISTINC
TION SO EASILY
Copyright 2006 Gravitas Publishing
7ARS OF 7ORDS $EBATES WITH #OMMENTARY
.EXT THE SECOND !FlRMATIVE SPEAKER
CLAIMED THAT CORPORATE SPONSORSHIP DISTRACTS
AWAY FROM LEARNING 4HE REALITY HOWEVER IS
THAT THE VAST MAJORITY OF CORPORATE SPONSOR
SHIP TAKES PLACE OUTSIDE OF A CLASS )T IS TOUGH
TO MAKE THE ARGUMENT THAT A GYMNASIUM
NAMED AFTER A COMPANY A POSTER ON A WALL OR
THE PRODUCTS IN A VENDING MACHINE DISTRACTS
FROM WHAT STUDENTS LEARN IN THEIR COURSES
%VEN THOUGH THE PRIMARY PURPOSE OF A SCHOOL
IS LEARNING DURING BREAKS AT LUNCH AND BE
FORE AND AFTER SCHOOL LEARNING IS CLEARLY NOT
THE FOCUS OF ATTENTION !S FOR CLASSROOM ACTIV
ITIES IS THERE ANYTHING ESSENTIALLY WRONG WITH
THE PRODUCT BEING PROMOTED SO LONG AS THE
STUDENTS ARE LEARNING AN IMPORTANT CONCEPT
AT THE SAME TIME
!T THIS POINT WE WOULD LIKE TO INTRODUCE
THE lNAL TWO POINTS OF THE .EGATIVE CASE
4HESE ARGUMENTS FOCUS ON THE IDEA THAT AD
VERTISING WITHIN A SCHOOL IS A BENElCIAL AD
VANTAGE OVER THE ADVERTISING THAT WOULD TAKE
PLACE OUTSIDE OF THE SCHOOL /UR THIRD POINT IS
THAT IF CORPORATIONS ARE GOING TO SPEND MONEY
ADVERTISING TO KIDS ANYWAYS AT LEAST HAVING
A COMPANY SPONSORING SCHOOL PROVIDES SOME
BENElT TO SOCIETY )N THE PROCESS OF MEETING
ITS COMMERCIAL OBJECTIVES A BUSINESS IS ALSO
IMPROVING THE EDUCATION OF STUDENTS THROUGH
ITS FUNDING !LTERNATIVELY IT WOULD HAVE SIM
PLY SPENT THESE ADVERTISING DOLLARS BY PAYING
FOR EXAMPLE TELEVISION COMPANIES 4HEREFORE
THERE IS MORE VALUE CREATED TO SOCIETY THROUGH
THIS WIN WIN ARRANGEMENT
/UR FOURTH AND lNAL POINT IS THAT ADVER
TISING WITHIN A SCHOOL TAKES PLACE WITHIN A
lLTERED SHELTERED ENVIRONMENT 4HE !FlR
MATIVE HAS TALKED ABOUT HOW ADVERTISING IN
SCHOOLS MAKES IT MORE DIFlCULT FOR PARENTS TO
RAISE THEIR KIDS AS THEY WISH )N REALITY STU
Review Copy
! WELL
STATED POINT
THAT MOST PEOPLE
WOULD AGREE IS TRUE
"UT ISNT THE ENVIRON
MENT STILL IMPORTANT
! RISKY STATEMENT
PROBABLY BEST TO
EXPLAIN FURTHER
#LEAR STATEMENT OF
OVERALL THEME
3PIN
OFF BENElTS OF
THE INEVITABLE
/PPOSES DIRECTLY THE
!FlRMATIVES CONCEPT
OF VALUE
Copyright 2006 Gravitas Publishing
4ALK THE 4ALK
DENTS SEE ADVERTISEMENTS IN MANY PLACES
FROM BILLBOARDS AND POSTERS TO TELEVISION AND
RADIO COMMERCIALS ALMOST COMPLETELY UNlL
TERED BY PARENTS !T LEAST IN A SCHOOL OFlCIALS
HAVE THE ABILITY TO SCREEN OUT ADVERTISEMENTS
AND SPONSORSHIPS THAT THEY BELIEVE ARE INAP
PROPRIATE !DDITIONALLY ITS MORE LIKELY THAT
THERE WILL BE A FAIR CRITIQUE AND EVALUATION
OF ADVERTISEMENTS BY TEACHERS AND STUDENTS
WITHIN THE SCHOOL #LEARLY A SCHOOL PROVIDES A
LESS HARMFUL ENVIRONMENT FOR CORPORATE SPON
SORSHIP THAN IN THE WORLD OUTSIDE OF SCHOOL
4HESE TWO POINTS COMBINED WITH MY
PARTNERS POINTS ABOUT FUNDING FOR PROGRAMS
AND THE INmUENCE THAT SCHOOLS CAN HAVE ON
CORPORATE ACTIVITIES PROVIDE A SOLID CASE IN
FAVOR OF CORPORATE SPONSORSHIP IN SCHOOLS )
HAVE SHOWN YOU THAT THE !FlRMATIVES THIRD
AND FOURTH POINTS ABOUT THE VULNERABILITY OF
KIDS AND THE DISTRACTION TO LEARNING DO NOT
SUPPORT THEIR SIDE OF THIS ROUNDS RESOLUTION
4HEREFORE THIS RESOLUTION MUST FALL AND ) NOW
STAND OPEN FOR CROSS EXAMINATION
3O WHY SHOULD WE
ACCEPT EVEN MORE
ADVERTISING
3ECOND !FlRMATIVE ) WANT TO TALK ABOUT YOUR
IDEA OF A SCHOOL AS SOME TYPE OF lLTERED EN
VIRONMENT )F A COMPANY WAS HELPING PAY FOR
NEW MUSIC EQUIPMENT DO YOU AGREE THAT A
SCHOOL WOULD BE LESS LIKELY TO SCREEN OUT THE
SPONSORS ADVERTISEMENT
3TATEMENT OF PURPOSE
3ECOND .EGATIVE 7ELL AT LEAST THE SCHOOL CAN
MAKE AN INFORMED CHOICE OVER WHO SHOULD
SPONSOR THE PURCHASES AND WHAT THE CORPORA
TION IS ALLOWED TO DO IN EXCHANGE
7HAT DOES hINFORMED
CHOICEv MEAN IN TERMS
OF OUTCOMES
3ECOND !FlRMATIVE "UT THIS SPONSORING COM
PANY COULDNT IT SIMPLY GO TO ANOTHER SCHOOL
IF THIS PARTICULAR SCHOOL DECIDES TO BE PICKY
3UGGESTS HOW THE
COMPANY HAS MORE
POWER THAN THE SCHOOL
Review Copy
)F A COMPANY IS PAYING
MONEY WHAT INTER
EST IS THERE TO SCREEN
7HO WOULD CRITIQUE
THEM AND WHY WOULD
THEY BOTHER
'OOD WRAP
UP OF THE
SPEECH AND THE CASE
LAYS THE GROUND FOR THE
REBUTTAL
3PECIlC EXAMPLE
MAKES THE CONCEPT
MORE TANGIBLE
Copyright 2006 Gravitas Publishing
7ARS OF 7ORDS $EBATES WITH #OMMENTARY
3ECOND .EGATIVE ) SUPPOSE SO YES
1UALIFY THIS ANSWER
3ECOND !FlRMATIVE 3O THEN THE SCHOOL WOULD
BE WITHOUT ANY ADDITIONAL FUNDING SUPPORT
FOR ITS MUSIC PROGRAM
3TATEMENT OF HARMS
3ECOND .EGATIVE .O IT WOULD SIMPLY HAVE TO
LOOK ELSEWHERE FOR A SPONSOR THAT DID NOT
COMPROMISE THE LEARNING ENVIRONMENT
'OOD ANSWER REJECTS
HARMS AND SUPPORTS
AM IMPORTANT PILLAR OF
THE .EGATIVES CASE
3ECOND !FlRMATIVE 9OU ALSO MENTIONED CRI
TIQUING AND EVALUATING SPONSORSHIPS AND AD
VERTISEMENTS 3O IF A COMPANY HAS ITS NAME
PLACED OVER THE SCHOOL GYMNASIUM DO YOU
SEE STUDENTS AND TEACHERS WALKING BY AND
SAYING TO EACH OTHER h,ETS DO AN ANALYSIS OF
THIS COMPANYS INTENT AND PRACTICES v
3ECOND .EGATIVE ) THINK YOURE TRIVIALIZING
THE ISSUE !T LEAST WHEN A COMPANY MAKES A
QUESTIONABLE CLAIM A SCHOOL IS A PLACE WHERE
DEBATE TAKES PLACE #ERTAINLY MORE SO THAN
WHEN SOMEONE IS DRIVING BY A BILLBOARD OR
WATCHING TELEVISION
3ECOND !FlRMATIVE 4HANK YOU OUR CROSS EX
AMINATION TIME HAS lNISHED
)S THIS A NEW ISSUE OR
A CONTINUATION OF THE
EXISTING ONE
4HIS SCENARIO HELPS
TO ILLUSTRATE
)T WOULD BE TOUGH TO
ANSWER THE QUESTION
DIRECTLY IN THIS CASE
#HAIRPERSON ) THANK THE SECOND SPEAKER OF
THE .EGATIVE FOR HER REMARKS 7E NOW MOVE
INTO THE REBUTTAL PHASE ) WOULD LIKE TO REMIND
THE DEBATERS THAT NO NEW CONTENTIONS CAN BE
MADE DURING THIS TIME ) NOW CALL UPON THE
lRST SPEAKER OF THE .EGATIVE TEAM TO DELIVER
THE .EGATIVE REBUTTAL
&IRST .EGATIVE 4ODAYS DEBATE HAS CENTERED
ON TWO COMPETING THEMES 4HE lRST THEME
WAS THE IMPACT OF CORPORATE SPONSORSHIP ON
THE OPERATION OF SCHOOLS 4HE SECOND THEME
Review Copy
'OOD IDEA TO STATE THE
CENTRAL THEMES FROM
THE OUTSET
Copyright 2006 Gravitas Publishing
4ALK THE 4ALK
DISCUSSED MAINLY BY THE SECOND SPEAKER OF
EACH TEAM WAS ABOUT THE IMPACT OF CORPORATE
SPONSORSHIP IN SCHOOLS ON STUDENTS )N MY RE
BUTTAL ) WILL SHOW YOU WHY THE .EGATIVE TEAM
HAS PREVAILED ON BOTH OF THESE CORE THEMES
4HE !FlRMATIVES CASE ON THE SCHOOL OP
ERATION THEME MADE A NUMBER OF UNFOUNDED
ASSUMPTIONS )T ASSUMED THAT CORPORATE
SPONSORSHIP COMPROMISES THE OBJECTIVE OF
ADMINISTRATORS TO CONSIDER THE BEST INTEREST
OF STUDENTS WHEN IN FACT THE MANDATE AND
EVALUATION OF SCHOOLS IS BASED ON THE OVERALL
QUALITY OF STUDENT EDUCATION )T ALSO FALSELY
ASSUMED THAT CORPORATE SPONSORSHIP NECES
SARILY MEANT LESS GOVERNMENT FUNDING WHEN
IN FACT THE ACCOUNTABILITY OF THE GOVERNMENT
TO PROVIDE QUALITY EDUCATION AND BASIC FUND
ING FOR CORE PROGRAMS DEMONSTRATES THE mAWS
IN THIS ARGUMENT 7E SHOWED YOU HOW COR
PORATE SPONSORSHIP ACTUALLY BENElTS SCHOOLS
BOTH IN TERMS OF FUNDING FOR VALUE ADDED
PROGRAMS AND THE ABILITY OF SCHOOLS TO INmU
ENCE CORPORATE ACTIVITIES THAT RELATE TO THEIR
OBJECTIVES 4HE !FlRMATIVE FAILED TO SHOW YOU
WHAT WOULD MAKE UP FOR THESE BENElTS IF NOT
FOR CORPORATE SPONSORSHIP
4HE !FlRMATIVE CASE ON THE STUDENT IM
PACT THEME ALSO RESTED ON SEVERAL UNPROVEN
ASSUMPTIONS )T ASSUMED THAT SCHOOLS CAN
SOMEHOW DECREASE THE VULNERABILITY OF STU
DENTS TO CORPORATE INmUENCE WHEN IN REAL
ITY STUDENTS ARE INmUENCED BY ADVERTISING
ANYWHERE THEY SEE IT AND ULTIMATELY PARENTS
ARE RESPONSIBLE FOR TEACHING THEIR KIDS HOW
TO MAKE GOOD CHOICES )T ASSUMED THAT COR
PORATE SPONSORSHIP DISTRACTS ATTENTION AWAY
FROM LEARNING WHEN IN REALITY IT TYPICALLY
TAKES PLACE OUTSIDE OF THE CLASSROOM OR DOES
NOT TAKE AWAY FROM THE LEARNING EXPERIENCE
7E SHOWED YOU THAT IF CORPORATIONS ARE GO
Review Copy
(ELPS THE JUDGES TO SEE
THE @BIG PICTURE OF THE
DEBATE AND HOW IT lTS
WITH THE STRUCTURE
/UTLINES THE WAY IN
WHICH THE !FlRMA
TIVES CASE IS mAWED
2EFUTES WHILE RAISING A
CONSTRUCTIVE POINT
! SECOND INSTANCE
OF AN ASSUMPTION
STRENGTHENS THE CLAIM
$RAWS A CONTRAST h7E
SHOWED YOUv VS h4HE
!FlRMATIVE FAILEDv
#ONTINUES WITH FALSE
ASSUMPTIONS METHOD
! FAIRLY LONG
WINDED
PASSAGE
7OULD BE HELPFUL TO
CLARIFY OR EXPLAIN THIS
CONCEPT FURTHER
Copyright 2006 Gravitas Publishing
7ARS OF 7ORDS $EBATES WITH #OMMENTARY
ING TO ADVERTISE TO KIDS ANYWAYS DOING SO IN
A SCHOOL HAS A POSITIVE SPIN
OFF FOR EDUCATION
AND TAKES PLACE IN A MORE lLTERED ENVIRON
MENT 4HE !FlRMATIVE ESSENTIALLY FOCUSED ON
CORPORATE ADVERTISING IN GENERAL AS OPPOSED
TO WHY IT WOULD BE ANY WORSE IN SCHOOLS
3INCE WE HAVE CLEARLY DEMONSTRATED
HOW THE .EGATIVE HAS WON THE DEBATE ON THE
SCHOOL OPERATIONS THEME AND THE STUDENT IM
PACT THEME WE REST OUR CASE
#LAIMS WHY THE
!FlRMATIVES AP
PROACH WAS mAWED
"RINGS BACK AND REIN
FORCES THE THEMES ONE
MORE TIME
#HAIRPERSON ) WOULD NOW LIKE TO CALL UPON
THE lRST SPEAKER OF THE !FlRMATIVE TEAM TO
CONCLUDE TODAYS DEBATE
&IRST !FlRMATIVE )N DECIDING WHICH TEAM WON
THE DEBATE WE ARGUE THAT THERE ARE TWO CEN
TRAL QUESTIONS WHAT IS THE PURPOSE OF A SCHOOL
AND DOES CORPORATE SPONSORSHIP lT WITHIN THIS
PURPOSE 4ODAY WE HAVE DEMONSTRATED THAT
CORPORATE SPONSORSHIP AND THE OBJECTIVES OF A
SCHOOL ARE FUNDAMENTALLY INCOMPATIBLE
,ET ME BEGIN BY TALKING ABOUT THE PUR
POSE OF A SCHOOL 7E HAVE TALKED ABOUT HOW
ADMINISTRATORS SHOULD FOCUS SOLELY ON THE
INTERESTS OF STUDENTS 7E HAVE ALSO DISCUSSED
HOW STUDENTS SHOULD BE IN SCHOOL TO FOCUS ON
LEARNING ! SCHOOL IN OUR VIEW IT ESSENTIALLY
DIFFERENT THAN THE WORLD AROUND IT AND THAT IT
IS SUPPOSED TO PRESENT AN ENVIRONMENT SUIT
ABLE FOR STUDENT DEVELOPMENT
.OW LET ME EXPLORE WHETHER CORPORATE
ADVERTISING lTS WITHIN THIS MANDATE 7E HAVE
DEMONSTRATED HOW ADMINISTRATORS HAVE TO
BALANCE STUDENT INTERESTS WITH CORPORATE IN
TERESTS WHEN SPONSORSHIPS ARE TAKING PLACE
4HE .EGATIVE NAVELY AND INCORRECTLY ARGUED
THAT SCHOOLS WILL SUPPOSEDLY INmUENCE COR
PORATIONS AND EFFECTIVELY SCREEN ADVERTISE
MENTS 4HIS HOWEVER IS NEITHER THE GOAL
Review Copy
0HRASING THE ISSUES AS
QUESTIONS ENCOURAGES
THE JUDGES TO SEE THEM
AS THE KEY CRITERIA
3UMMARY OF UNDER
LYING POINTS OF THE
!FlRMATIVES CASE
"UT WHERE IS THE
REFUTATION
%XPLAIN HOW ITS BEEN
DEMONSTRATED
Copyright 2006 Gravitas Publishing
4ALK THE 4ALK
NOR THE CORE CAPABILITY OF A SCHOOL 7E HAVE
SHOWN YOU HOW CORPORATE SPONSORSHIP IN
SCHOOLS EXPLOITS THE VULNERABILITY OF KIDS
AND DISTRACTS THEM AWAY FROM LEARNING 4HE
.EGATIVE WOULD HAVE YOU BELIEVE THAT THIS IS
SOMEHOW BETTER THAN IN THE OUTSIDE WORLD
7E COULD NOT DISAGREE MORE ,EAVE CORPORATE
ADVERTISING WHICH HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH THE
EDUCATION OF CHILDREN TO THE OUTSIDE WORLD
7E HAVE PROVEN ON EVERY DIMENSION OF
THIS DEBATE THAT CORPORATE SPONSORSHIP IS COM
PLETELY OUT OF PLACE WHEN IT COMES TO SCHOOL
OBJECTIVES AND STUDENT LEARNING 4HEREFORE
THE CORPORATE SPONSORSHIP OF SCHOOLS DOES FAR
MORE HARM THAN ANY GOOD 4HANK YOU
#LEAR REJECTION OF THE
.EGATIVES CLAIMS
$RAWS A CONTRAST
#ONCLUDES THE REBUTTAL
FAIRLY QUICKLY MORE
DEPTH WOULD HAVE
BEEN HELPFUL
#HAIRPERSON ) NOW DECLARE THAT THIS DEBATE
HAS CONCLUDED ) INVITE THE DEBATERS TO CROSS
THE mOOR AND TO SHAKE HANDS
'311)28%6=3274327367,-4()&%8)
4HE DEBATE HAS CLEAR
CUT CONTENTIOUS ISSUES AND BOTH TEAMS ARTICU
LATED A NUMBER OF RELEVANT POINTS ON THESE ISSUES )N SOME CASES THE
EXPLANATIONS AND SUPPORT FOR THESE POINTS COULD HAVE GONE FURTHER
4HE CROSS
EXAMINATION PERIODS WERE LIVELY WITH THE QUESTIONERS ASK
ING TOUGH TARGETED QUESTIONS
7HAT DID THE !FlRMATIVE DO WELL
s 0ERSPECTIVES ON THE ROLE OF A SCHOOL 4HE !FlRMATIVE MADE THE PRINCIPLE
OF A SCHOOL BEING EXCLUSIVELY FOR LEARNING A CENTRAL PART OF ITS CASE 4HIS
PRINCIPLE WAS USED EFFECTIVELY TO SUGGEST HOW CORPORATE SPONSORSHIPS
VIOLATE THIS PRINCIPLE
s $ISCUSSION OF IMPACT ON DECISION
MAKERS "OTH SPEAKERS DID A GOOD JOB
OF EXPLAINING HOW CORPORATE SPONSORSHIP PLACES ADMINISTRATORS AND
TEACHERS IN A CONmICT OF INTEREST SITUATION HAVING TO BALANCE STUDENT
LEARNING WITH lNANCIAL MATTERS 4HIS PRACTICAL ANALYSIS ADDED TO THE
PRINCIPLE OF WHAT A SCHOOL SHOULD AND SHOULD NOT BE
Review Copy
Copyright 2006 Gravitas Publishing
7ARS OF 7ORDS $EBATES WITH #OMMENTARY
s !NALYSIS OF A CHILDS VULNERABILITY 4HE EXAMINATION OF HOW A CHILDS
MIND OPERATES WAS IMPORTANT IN BACKING UP THE !FlRMATIVES CLAIM
THAT THE ADVERTISING HAD A NEGATIVE INmUENCE -ANY DEBATERS COULD
HAVE COMPLICATED THIS TYPE OF ANALYSIS WHEREAS THE !FlRMATIVE TEAM
MADE IT EASY TO UNDERSTAND
7HAT COULD THE !FlRMATIVE HAVE IMPROVED
s )MPACT OF LOST REVENUES ON SCHOOLS 3INCE ITS WIDELY ACCEPTED THAT LESS
FUNDING FOR SCHOOLS ISNT DESIRABLE THE !FlRMATIVE TEAM SHOULD HAVE
EXPLAINED FURTHER HOW THE BENElTS OF STOPPING CORPORATE SPONSOR
SHIP CLEARLY OUTWEIGHED THE COSTS 7OULD CERTAIN PROGRAM HAVE TO BE
STOPPED AND IF SO WAS IT WORTHWHILE CONSIDERING THE STATED IMPROVE
MENTS TO THE SCHOOL
s 2EBUTTAL HAD INSUFlCIENT EXPLANATION AND DEPTH 7HILE THE SPEAKER DID
FRAME THE KEY ISSUES EFFECTIVELY THE DISCUSSION THAT FOLLOWED WASNT
THOROUGH ENOUGH TO DEMONSTRATE CLEARLY HOW THE !FlRMATIVE CAME
AHEAD ON THE CRITERIA PRESENTED /N A NUMBER OF POINTS THERE WAS
NO REFUTATION OF THE .EGATIVES POINTS ONLY A BROAD SUMMARY OF THE
!FlRMATIVES ARGUMENTS
7HAT DID THE .EGATIVE DO WELL
s #OMMENTS ON POSITIVE IMPACT OF CORPORATE SPONSORSHIPS 7HILE THE ARGU
MENT THAT ADDITIONAL FUNDING IS HELPFUL MAY SEEM LIKE AN OBVIOUS ONE
THE .EGATIVE TEAM EXPLAINED SPECIlCALLY HOW IT BENElTS THE SCHOOLS
4HE DISCUSSION ON ENHANCEMENTS TO SCHOOLS SUCH AS lELD TRIPS AND
MUSIC PROGRAMS ILLUSTRATED WHAT THEY STAND TO LOSE IF THERE ARE NO
CORPORATE SPONSORSHIPS
s /PPOSITION TO THE HARMS PRESENTED BY THE !FlRMATIVE !LTHOUGH IT WAS
TOUGH TO REFUTE THIS POINT IN EVERY RESPECT THE .EGATIVE DID EXPLAIN
HOW IN MANY CASES CORPORATE SPONSORSHIP DOESNT NECESSARILY HAVE A
NEGATIVE IMPACT &OR EXAMPLE THE NAMING OF A SCHOOL GYMNASIUM WAS
CITED APPROPRIATELY AS A WIN
WIN ARRANGEMENT
s !TTACK OF THE !FlRMATIVES CASE IN THE REBUTTAL 4HE lRST .EGATIVE SPEAK
ERS REBUTTAL WAS HIGHLY STRUCTURED AROUND CORE THEMES AND ON EACH
THEME THERE WAS CLEAR AND DIRECT REFUTATION OF THE !FlRMATIVES ARGU
Review Copy
Copyright 2006 Gravitas Publishing
4ALK THE 4ALK
MENTS AND ASSUMPTIONS 4HE COMPARISONS MADE WITH THE .EGATIVES
CASE ENHANCED THE REFUTATION
7HAT COULD THE .EGATIVE HAVE IMPROVED
s !RGUMENT ON COMPARATIVE ADVANTAGES OF SCHOOL ADVERTISING 4HE SECOND
.EGATIVE SPEAKER WASNT ENTIRELY CONVINCING IN ARGUING THAT SCHOOLS
COULD hlLTERv ADVERTISEMENTS AND THAT THE SUPPOSEDLY hSHELTEREDv EN
VIRONMENT MADE SPONSORSHIPS ACCEPTABLE )T WASNT CLEAR HOW THIS
WOULD HAPPEN OR WHY THE SCHOOL ENVIRONMENT WOULD MAKE THE AD
VERTISING ANY LESS INmUENTIAL ON CHILDREN
s !NSWERS TO CROSS
EXAMINATION QUESTIONS 4HE lRST .EGATIVE SPEAKER
SHOULD HAVE BEEN MORE THOROUGH AND DIRECT IN ANSWERING THE CROSS
EXAMINERS QUESTIONS 3EVERAL OF THE ANSWERS WERE MORE QUIPS AIMED
AT QUICKLY REBUFlNG THE CROSS
EXAMINER RATHER THAN MORE THOROUGH
DEFENSES OF THE .EGATIVES CASE
Review Copy
Copyright 2006 Gravitas Publishing
7ARS OF 7ORDS $EBATES WITH #OMMENTARY
Review Copy
Copyright 2006 Gravitas Publishing
4ALK THE 4ALK
#HAPTER +EYS TO 3UCCESS
.OTICE HOW A SPEAKER IDENTIlES SPECIlCALLY WHICH POINT HE
OR SHE IS REFUTING 4HIS MAKES IT MUCH EASIER FOR THE JUDGES TO
KEEP TRACK OF HOW WELL YOU ARE CLASHING %ITHER IN THEIR MINDS OR
ON PAPER THEY CAN @CHECK OFF EACH POINT AS IT IS OPPOSED
D/BSERVE HOW THE STRONGEST DEBATERS HAD A CLEAR OVERALL
SPEECH STRUCTURE 4HEY TOLD THE AUDIENCE EXACTLY WHERE THEY
WERE GOING THEY FOLLOWED THIS ROAD MAP AND THEY lNISHED BY
REMINDING EVERYONE ABOUT WHAT THEY HAVE SAID 4HIS SERVED TO
REINFORCE THE KEY MESSAGES
4AKE NOTE OF THE IMPORTANCE THAT PERSISTENCE PLAYS IN A
CROSS EXAMINATION 4HE CROSS EXAMINER STUCK TO A PARTICULAR
LINE OF QUESTIONING RATHER THAN BEING SIDE TRACKED BY THE RE
SPONSES "UT THE PERSON ANSWERING THE QUESTIONS WAS SURE TO
EXPLAIN THE ANSWERS TO AVOID SEEMING WEAKENED AND TO PREVENT
THE CROSS EXAMINER FROM EXTRACTING THE DESIRED ANSWERS
2ECOGNIZE HOW THE REBUTTAL SPEAKERS BROUGHT THE DEBATE
DOWN TO ONE OR TWO ISSUES 9OU DIDNT SEE MINOR ARGUMENTS OR
EVIDENCE BROUGHT UP IN THE REBUTTALS &OR THE .EGATIVE OR /P
POSITION IT WAS HELPFUL TO PUT THE OPPONENT ON THE DEFENSIVE BY
STATING CLEARLY WHAT THE MAIN QUESTIONS OR THEMES WERE
Review Copy
Copyright 2006 Gravitas Publishing
*VUJS\ZPVU
8LI;MPPXS;MR[MXL)XLMGWERH6IWTIGX
)TS NO ACCIDENT THAT )VE WRITTEN THIS BOOK LARGELY IN THE THIRD
PERSON
-Y PRIMARY GOAL WASNT TO INFUSE THE TEXT WITH MY PERSONAL OPINIONS
2ATHER MY INTENT WAS TO PRESENT USEFUL INFORMATION COMPILED FROM
MANY SOURCES AND LEARNED FROM MANY PEOPLE
!LLOW ME THEN TO DEPART BRIEmY FROM THIS OBJECTIVITY AND TO USE
THIS SPACE FOR SOME PERSONAL THOUGHTS &IRSTLY ) WANT TO DISCUSS WHAT
IT MEANS TO HAVE THE WILL TO WIN AT THE SPORT OF DEBATE 3ECONDLY ) HOPE
TO GET ACROSS THE VITAL ROLE THAT HONESTY AND RESPECT PLAY IN DEBATE
&INALLY ) WANT TO TALK ABOUT THE VITAL ROLE THAT DEBATE PLAYS IN MAKING
THE WORLD @TICK
8,)59)78*36:-'836=
$EBATE TOURNAMENTS CAN BE VERY COMPETITIVE 4HEY PLACE INTELLIGENT
WELL
SPOKEN PEOPLE WHO BELIEVE PASSIONATELY THAT THEYRE RIGHT IN DIRECT
OPPOSITION TO ONE ANOTHER $ONT VIEW THIS COMPETITION AS A BARRIER
)NSTEAD YOU SHOULD THRIVE ON HEALTHY RIVALRY AND ALLOW IT TO MOTIVATE
YOU TO EXCEL .EVER GET DISCOURAGED IF YOU DONT ALWAYS PLACE AS WELL
AS YOU HAD HOPED .EVER GIVE UP )F YOU BELIEVE IN YOURSELF AND PERSIST
IN ACHIEVING YOUR PERSONAL BEST YOULL IMPROVE YOUR PERFORMANCE AND
REACH THE MEDAL PODIUM
4HIS COMPETITIVE ENVIRONMENT EXTENDS WELL BEYOND TOURNAMENTS
!NY @REAL WORLD DEBATE INVOLVES BY ITS VERY NATURE SOME LEVEL OF RIVAL
RY %VERYONE WANTS TO WIN THE ARGUMENT BOTH TO ACHIEVE THEIR OBJEC
TIVES AND TO FEEL PERSONAL SATISFACTION 5NFORTUNATELY YOULL RARELY GET
EVERYTHING YOU WANT SO BE PREPARED TO WORK WITH OTHERS 4HE WILL
TO WIN MAY INVOLVE SACRIlCING WHATS LEAST IMPORTANT TO YOU BUT VAL
UED BY OTHERS SO THAT YOU CAN ACHIEVE WHATS MOST IMPORTANT TO YOU
AND NONESSENTIAL TO YOUR PEERS )N MANY CASES HAVING THE WILL TO WIN
Review Copy
Copyright 2006 Gravitas Publishing
4ALK THE 4ALK
MEANS HELPING THE TEAM WIN RATHER THAN AIMING FOR A PERSONAL VICTORY
AT THE EXPENSE OF OTHERS PARTICIPANTS
8,))8,-'73*)2+%+)1)28
)TS CRITICALLY IMPORTANT THAT YOU MAINTAIN YOUR ETHICS IN ANY COMPETI
TIVE DEBATE ENVIRONMENT .EVER MAKE UP EVIDENCE OR MISREPRESENT
YOURSELF EVEN IF YOU MAY GET AWAY WITH IT A FEW TIMES .OT ONLY WILL YOU
BE CHEATING YOURSELF BUT YOULL EVENTUALLY GET A REPUTATION FOR PLAYING
AGAINST THE RULES !LTHOUGH YOURE WELCOME TO BE ASSERTIVE MAKE SURE
THAT YOURE COURTEOUS TO YOUR OPPONENTS 2ESPECT THE JUDGES COACHES
PARENTS AND VOLUNTEERS WHO HELP RUN DEBATE WORKSHOPS AND TOURNA
MENTS 4HE EXPERIENCE OF COMPETITION SHOULD BE ENJOYABLE $ONT ALLOW
IT TO BECOME TENSE AND DISRESPECTFUL
3IMILAR PRINCIPLES APPLY WHEN YOU DEBATE IN DAILY SITUATIONS )F
YOURE ETHICAL AND RESPECTFUL YOUR ARGUMENTS WILL HAVE MUCH MORE
IMPACT /THER PEOPLE WILL WANT TO LISTEN TO WHAT YOU HAVE TO SAY 4HE
SKILLS OF DEBATING SHOULD HELP YOU BECOME MORE INmUENTIAL WHEN DECI
SIONS ARE MADE BUT THEY SHOULDNT BE USED TO INSULT OR DIMINISH THE
CONTRIBUTIONS MADE BY OTHER PARTICIPANTS
()&%8)%7%(6-:)63*()'-7-327
)TS MY CONVICTION THAT DEBATE IS A VITAL PART OF THE WORLD AROUND US
) BELIEVE THAT THE BEST IDEAS EMERGE FROM VIGOROUS DEBATE 4HE BEST
IDEAS EMERGE IN THE CLASSROOM WHEN STUDENTS SPEAK FREELY AND CONl
DENTLY ABOUT WHAT THEYRE LEARNING 4HE BEST IDEAS EMERGE IN COMPA
NIES WHEN TEAM MEMBERS DEBATE THE DECISIONS THEY FACE THOROUGHLY
AND INTELLIGENTLY 4HE BEST IDEAS EMERGE IN SOCIETY WHEN THERES LIVELY
DEBATE WITHIN GOVERNMENT IN THE MEDIA AND AMONG THE CITIZENRY
$EBATE CAN AND SHOULD PLAY A CENTRAL ROLE IN HOW YOU CONTRIBUTE
TO SOCIETY -ORE THAN EVER BEFORE @THOUGHT LEADERS HAVE COME TO THE
FOREFRONT OF HOW THE WORLD OPERATES 9OU CAN USE THE POWER OF PERSUA
SION TO CONTRIBUTE TO THE DEMOCRATIC LIFE OF YOUR COUNTRY OR TO CONTRIB
UTE TO THE ADVANCEMENT OF A WORTHY CAUSE )TS UP TO YOU HOW YOU USE
THE SKILLS OF DEBATE BUT KNOW THAT YOU POSSESS THE ABILITY TO USE IT TO
IMPROVE THE WORLD AROUND YOU
Review Copy
Copyright 2006 Gravitas Publishing
#ONCLUSION
%2(23;-8 79483=39
) HOPE THAT THIS BOOK HAS PROVIDED YOU WITH A SOLID BASE OF INFORMA
TION ABOUT THE ART OF SPEECH AND DEBATE .OW ITS UP TO YOU TO PUT
THIS INFORMATION INTO ACTION )T WILL TAKE TIME AND EFFORT AND YOU WILL
GET FRUSTRATED "UT IF YOU HAVE THE WILL TO EXCEL YOU WILL DO SO ) HAVE
BENElTED A GREAT DEAL FROM SPEECH AND DEBATE AND ITS BECOME PART OF
EVERYTHING ) DO ) HOPE THAT 4ALK THE 4ALK WILL PLAY AT LEAST A SMALL ROLE IN
HELPING YOU DO THE SAME
!S YOU EMBARK ON YOUR OWN ROAD TO VICTORY YOURE WELCOME AND
ENCOURAGED TO WRITE TO ME WITH YOUR QUESTIONS OBSERVATIONS CRITI
CISMS SUGGESTIONS OR ANYTHING ELSE THATS ON YOUR MIND 7HETHER
YOURE A COMPETITIVE DEBATER A DEBATE COACH OR EVEN A PARENT WHO
WANTS EITHER TO THANK OR SCOLD ME FOR HELPING TURN YOUR DINNER TABLE
INTO A DEBATE FORUM ) LOOK FORWARD TO READING AND RESPONDING TO
WHAT YOU HAVE TO SAY
!LIM -ERALI
ALIM TALKTHETALKCA
WWWTALKTHETALKCA
Review Copy
Copyright 2006 Gravitas Publishing
Review Copy
Copyright 2006 Gravitas Publishing
Review Copy
Copyright 2006 Gravitas Publishing
Review Copy
Copyright 2006 Gravitas Publishing
(WWLUKP_(
(IFEXI6IWSPYXMSRW
0RELIMINARY PHRASES SUCH AS h4HIS (OUSE WOULDv 4(7 h4HIS (OUSE
BELIEVES THATv 4("4 h"E IT RESOLVED THATv ")24 OR h2ESOLVEDv COME
BEFORE A DEBATE RESOLUTION 4HE lRST TWO ARE SEEN MOSTLY IN PARLIAMEN
TARY STYLE DEBATE h4(7v IMPLYING A POLICY DEBATE AND h4("4v SIGNAL
ING A VALUES DEBATE 4HE LAST TWO ARE FOUND IN ACADEMIC DISCUSSION
AND CROSS
EXAMINATION STYLES
!S YOU READ EACH OF THE RESOLUTIONS THINK ABOUT THE TYPE OF DEBATE
IT SUGGESTS )S IT A VALUES DEBATE INVOLVING COMPETING PRINCIPLES /R
IS IT A POLICY DEBATE INVOLVING A SET OF NEEDS FOR CHANGE AND A PLAN OF
ACTION )N SOME CASES YOULL lND THAT THE RESOLUTION CAN BE SPUN INTO
EITHER A VALUES DEBATE OR A POLICY DEBATE
4HINK ALSO ABOUT THE VARIETY OF ISSUES THAT COULD FALL UNDER EACH
RESOLUTION $EBATING MULTIPLE AREAS IS USUALLY BEYOND THE SCOPE OF ONE
ROUND 9OU MAY lND IT NECESSARY TO NARROW THE RESOLUTION SO THAT A
MORE FOCUSED DEBATE CAN TAKE PLACE 9OURE ALSO ENCOURAGED TO MODIFY
mIP AROUND OR COME UP WITH A SPIN
OFF OF THE RESOLUTION TO CREATE THE
TYPE OF DEBATE YOU WANT
743687
#OMMERCIALIZATION HAS IMPROVED THE /LYMPICS
0ROFESSIONAL BOXING SHOULD BE BANNED
3PORTS TEAMS SHOULD BE HELD RESPONSIBLE FOR MISCHIEF BY THEIR FANS
7OMENS AND MENS SPORTS TEAMS SHOULD RECEIVE EQUAL SUPPORT
)NTERNATIONAL SPORT HAS A PLACE IN INTERNATIONAL POLITICS
0ROFESSIONAL ATHLETES ARE PAID TOO MUCH
3PORTS ENTERTAINMENT SHOULD NOT BE CONSIDERED SPORT
Review Copy
Copyright 2006 Gravitas Publishing
4ALK THE 4ALK
)(9'%8-32
3CHOOL UNIFORMS LIMIT DIVERSITY AND CREATIVITY
3TANDARDIZED TESTS SHOULD BE ELIMINATED
3INGLE
SEX SCHOOLS ARE PREFERABLE TO CO
ED SCHOOLS
3TUDENTS LEARN MORE FROM THEIR PEERS THAN FROM THEIR TEACHERS
0RIVATE SCHOOLS SHOULD RECEIVE GOVERNMENT FUNDING
4HE SCHOOL DISCIPLINE SYSTEM NEEDS REFORMING
9EAR
ROUND SCHOOLING SHOULD BE IMPLEMENTED
3TUDENTS SHOULD HAVE A SAY IN HOW SCHOOLS ARE RUN
4HERE IS TOO MUCH EMPHASIS ON MARKS
0OST
SECONDARY EDUCATION SHOULD BE PUBLICLY
FUNDED
4HE GOVERNMENT SHOULD SUBSIDIZE FOREIGN EDUCATIONAL EXPERIENCES
(OME
SCHOOLING IS AN ACCEPTABLE ALTERNATIVE TO TRADITIONAL SCHOOLS
,EARNING A SECOND LANGUAGE SHOULD BE MANDATORY
0ARENTS SHOULD PLAY A MAJOR ROLE IN THE OPERATION OF SCHOOLS
'90896)
-USEUMS AND THEATRES SHOULD FUND THEMSELVES
(OLLYWOOD HAS NEGATIVELY INmUENCED OUR CULTURE
-INORITY LANGUAGE RIGHTS ARE WORTH PROTECTING
&OREIGN CULTURAL INmUENCES SHOULD BE RESTRICTED
4HE GOVERNMENT SHOULD CENSOR THE ARTS
73'-%0
0ARENTING LESSONS SHOULD BE MANDATORY
,IFE HAS BECOME TOO COMPETITIVE
4HE PEOPLE ARE NOT AS TOLERANT AS THEY THINK THEY ARE
#ELEBRITIES SHOULD ALSO BE ROLE MODELS
4HE ADVERTISING OF ALCOHOL SHOULD BE BANNED
4HE FEMINIST MOVEMENT HAS FAILED
0RIVATE GROUPS SHOULD NOT HAVE THE RIGHT TO DISCRIMINATE
#HILDREN SHOULD NEVER BE SPANKED
Review Copy
Copyright 2006 Gravitas Publishing
!PPENDIX ! $EBATE 2ESOLUTIONS
1)(-%
*OURNALISTS SHOULD NOT USE CONlDENTIAL SOURCES
4HE ENTERTAINMENT MEDIA HAS A NEGATIVE INmUENCE
4HE MORE FREE THE PRESS THE MORE FREE THE PEOPLE
!LL BROADCASTERS SHOULD BE PRIVATE ORGANIZATIONS
4HE MEDIA HAS A SOCIAL RESPONSIBILITY
4HE NUMBER OF TELEVISION ADVERTISING MINUTES SHOULD BE LIMITED
2ESTRICTIONS SHOULD BE PLACED ON VIDEO GAME VIOLENCE
4HE GOVERNMENT SHOULD IMPOSE DOMESTIC CONTENT REQUIREMENTS
8)',2303+=
4HE GOVERNMENT SHOULD REGULATE )NTERNET CONTENT
4HERE SHOULD BE A FEE FOR EACH E
MAIL SENT
)NTERNET @BLOGS ARE LEGITIMATE JOURNALISM
)NTERNET CHAT IS HARMING OUR YOUNG GENERATION
4ECHNOLOGY HAS GONE TOO FAR
#OMPUTER TECHNOLOGY CAN SOLVE OUR PROBLEMS
7'-)2')
3PACE EXPLORATION IS A WASTE OF TIME AND MONEY
3CIENTIlC RESEARCH SHOULD BE AVAILABLE FOR PUBLIC USE
3PACE TOURISM IS A WORTHWHILE OBJECTIVE
'ENETIC ENGINEERING HAS A POSITIVE IMPACT
4HE PATENTING OF PHARMACEUTICALS SHOULD BE ENDED
4HE GOVERNMENT SHOULD NOT FUND COMMERCIAL SCIENCE
()13'6%'=
$ICTATORSHIP IS PREFERABLE TO ANARCHY
! NOBLE DICTATOR IS SUPERIOR TO A SELlSH DEMOCRAT
0OLICE AND INTELLIGENCE POWERS SHOULD BE LIMITED
0UBLIC SECURITY IS MORE IMPORTANT THAN INDIVIDUAL RIGHTS
0RISONERS SHOULD HAVE THE RIGHT TO VOTE
#HILDREN SHOULD NOT HAVE A RIGHT TO PRIVACY
(ATE SPEECH SHOULD NOT BE CONSIDERED FREE SPEECH
Review Copy
Copyright 2006 Gravitas Publishing
4ALK THE 4ALK
#ITIZENS SHOULD BE ALLOWED TO INITIATE BINDING REFERENDA
-EDICAL PROFESSIONALS SHOULD HAVE THE RIGHT TO STRIKE
#IVIL DISOBEDIENCE IS A LEGITIMATE EXPRESSION OF DEMOCRATIC WILL
)NDIVIDUALS HAVE TOO MANY RIGHTS AND FREEDOMS
4HE MINIMUM VOTING AGE SHOULD BE LOWERED
430-8-'7
0UBLICLY
FUNDED HEALTHCARE IS A HUMAN RIGHT
4HE BUSINESS OF GOVERNMENT IS BUSINESS
! NATIONAL IDENTITY CARD SHOULD BE IMPLEMENTED
#AMPAIGN FUNDING SHOULD BE MORE STRICTLY REGULATED
4HE PRESENT GOVERNMENT SHOULD COMPENSATE VICTIMS OF PAST ABUSES
)'3231=
0ROGRESSIVE TAXES SHOULD BE REPLACED BY SINGLE
RATE TAXES
&ARMERS AND RANCHERS SHOULD RECEIVE SUBSIDIES
4HE NATIONAL DEBT SHOULD BE PAID OFF FASTER
0UBLIC CORPORATIONS SHOULD BE PRIVATIZED
4HE RICH PAY TOO MUCH TAX
4HE MINIMUM WAGE SHOULD BE ABOLISHED
)2:-6321)28
'LOBAL WARMING IS THE ENEMY
#APITALISM AND ENVIRONMENTALISM CANNOT CO
EXIST
.ATIONAL PARKS SHOULD BE PROTECTED AGAINST TOURISM
2ECREATIONAL lSHING AND HUNTING SHOULD BE PROHIBITED
2ECYCLING SHOULD BE MANDATORY
%NDANGERED SPECIES SHOULD BE PROTECTED
-28)62%8-32%0
-ULTILATERALISM IS PREFERABLE TO UNILATERALISM
4HE THREAT OF FORCE IS THE BEST WAY TO CREATE PEACE
4HERE SHOULD BE A @-ARSHALL 0LAN FOR !FRICA
! @STRIKE lRST POLICY SHOULD BE USED TO CONFRONT ENEMIES
Review Copy
Copyright 2006 Gravitas Publishing
!PPENDIX ! $EBATE 2ESOLUTIONS
4HE 5NITED .ATIONS SHOULD HAVE A MILITARY
4HE 5NITED .ATIONS HAS BEEN A FAILURE
4HE TESTING OF NUCLEAR WEAPONS SHOULD BE BANNED
&OLLOWING ORDERS IS NO EXCUSE FOR COMMITTING WAR CRIMES
3TABLE DICTATORSHIPS ARE PREFERABLE TO UNSTABLE DEMOCRACIES
5NIVERSAL HUMAN RIGHTS DO NOT EXIST
0OLITICAL ASSASSINATIONS ARE JUSTIlED ACTS OF WAR
0%;
4HE DEATH PENALTY IS CRUEL AND UNUSUAL PUNISHMENT
0UNISHMENT IS MORE IMPORTANT THAN REHABILITATION
#RIMINALS HAVE TOO MANY RIGHTS AND FREEDOMS
4ORTURE IS NEVER JUSTIlED
,ET A HUNDRED GUILTY GO FREE IF IT SAVES ONE INNOCENT
*URY DUTY SHOULD BE OPTIONAL
#RIMINALS SHOULD SERVE THEIR FULL SENTENCES
#OURT TRIALS SHOULD BE TELEVISED
)LLEGAL IMMIGRANTS SHOULD RECEIVE CRIMINAL TREATMENT
*UDGES HAVE A ROLE TO PLAY AS SOCIAL ACTIVISTS
#RIMINAL TRIALS SHOULD BE DECIDED BY A JUDGE ALONE
4HE JUSTICE SYSTEM IS TOO SOFT ON CRIMINAL ACTIVITY
$RUNK DRIVERS SHOULD BE BANNED FROM DRIVING PERMANENTLY
#RIMINALS SHOULD NOT BE ALLOWED TO PROlT WHILE IN PRISON
9OUNG OFFENDERS SHOULD BE TRIED AS ADULTS
!N UNJUST LAW SHOULD BE BROKEN
4HE LAW SHOULD PROTECT PEOPLE FROM THEMSELVES
$RIVING WHILE TALKING ON A CELL PHONE SHOULD BE ILLEGAL
+)2)6%0
0EOPLE SHOULD OBEY RULES OVER THEIR CONSCIENCES
)NDIVIDUALS HAVE NO IMPACT ON THE WORLD
4HE ENTREPRENEUR IS MORE IMPORTANT THAN THE ARTIST
)T IS PREFERABLE TO BE RIGHT THAN TO BE SUCCESSFUL
#HANCE HAS A GREATER ROLE THAN CHOICE
#ONVICTION IS MORE HONORABLE THAN CONSENSUS
!UTHORITY SHOULD ALWAYS BE QUESTIONED
4HE FAMILY IS MORE IMPORTANT THAN THE GOVERNMENT
Review Copy
Copyright 2006 Gravitas Publishing
4ALK THE 4ALK
,EADERS ARE RESPONSIBLE FOR THE ACTIONS OF THEIR TEAMS
+NOWLEDGE IS GAINED THROUGH EXPERIENCE
34)2
/PEN DEBATE RESOLUTIONS SHOULDNT BE TAKEN LITERALLY )F THEY ARE THEYRE
BOUND TO BE ABSTRACT BEYOND TANGIBLE DEBATE 4HIS TYPE OF RESOLUTION
REQUIRES THE !FlRMATIVE TEAM TO LINK THE RESOLUTION TO A MORE CONCRETE
ISSUE WHICH ALLOWS IT TO PRESENT VIRTUALLY ANY CASE THAT IT WANTS 4HE
.EGATIVE TEAM MUST RESPOND BASED ON THE DElNITION PRESENTED MAK
ING IT NEXT TO IMPOSSIBLE TO PREPARE FOR THE DEBATE IN ADVANCE
7AG THE DOG UNTIL THE WOLVES COME OUT
4HE PEN IS MIGHTIER THAN THE SWORD
4HE EGG CAME BEFORE THE CHICKEN
4HE 9ANKEES DESERVE RESPECT
-C$ONALDS IS THE WAY OF THE FUTURE
4HE COW SHOULD BE MILKED DRY
!PPLES SHOULD NOT BE COMPARED TO ORANGES
4HERE IS NO BLACK AND WHITE ONLY SHADES OF GREY
3ILVER IS GOOD BUT GOLD IS GREAT
2OSES ARE RED VIOLETS ARE BLUE
)TS MUSIC TO THE EARS AND FOOD TO THE SOUL
4HE CHICKEN HAS TO CROSS THE ROAD
4HE RIGHT TO BE WRONG IS A RIGHT
'OOD FENCES MAKE GOOD NEIGHBORS
4HE END IS WITHIN REACH
Review Copy
Copyright 2006 Gravitas Publishing
(WWLUKP_)
.YHKMRK'VMXIVME
4HE SET OF CRITERIA USED TO EVALUATE DEBATERS DEPENDS ON THE REGION
LEVEL AND STYLE OF DEBATE %VEN IF THE CRITERIA ARE SIMILAR THE TOTAL
NUMBER OF POINTS THE WEIGHT PLACED ON EACH AREA AND THE SCORING
GUIDELINES MAY VARY SIGNIlCANTLY )N GENERAL A JUDGE HAS TWO RESPON
SIBILITIES ASSIGN SCORES TO EACH SPEAKER AND DECIDE WHICH TEAM WON
THE DEBATE 4HIS SECTION EXPLORES SOME OF THE QUESTIONS JUDGES USUALLY
ASK THEMSELVES WHEN EVALUATING A DEBATE
4HESE CRITERIA ALSO SERVE AS A USEFUL SUMMARY AND REMINDER OF
MANY OF THE BOOKS MOST IMPORTANT CONCEPTS 7HEN YOU PREPARE TO
DEBATE AND AS YOU CONTINUALLY EVALUATE YOUR PERFORMANCE THINK ABOUT
HOW YOURE MEASURING UP ON THESE DIMENSIONS 9OU WANT YOUR JUDGES
TO BE ABLE TO PUT A @CHECK MARK BESIDE EACH OF THE QUESTIONS
-2(-:-(9%07'36)
7HEN EVALUATING YOU INDIVIDUALLY JUDGES ARE THINKING ABOUT HOW WELL
YOU CONTRIBUTED TO THE OVERALL DYNAMIC OF THE DEBATE $ID THE MATTER
YOU PRESENTEDARGUMENTS AND REFUTATIONADD VALUE TO THE DEBATE
!ND DID THE MANNER IN WHICH YOU PRESENTED ITORGANIZATION AND DELIV
ERYMAKE YOU AN EFFECTIVE COMPELLING SPEAKER 4HERE ARE USUALLY
lVE CATEGORIES THAT A JUDGE CONSIDERS #ONTENT 2EFUTATION /RGANIZATION
$ELIVERY AND 0ROCEDURE
#ONTENT POINTS
s 4HEMES $ID THE DEBATERS ARGUMENTS CENTER AROUND A SINGLE THEME
OR A CLOSELY RELATED SET OF THEMES 7ERE THE THEMES SELECTED APPROPRI
ATE AND CLEARLY PRESENTED 4HE WISE USE OF CENTRAL THEMES PROVIDES A
SENSE OF COHERENCY TO THE CASE )T ALLOWS THE DEBATE TO COME DOWN TO A
CORE GROUP OF KEY IDEAS
Review Copy
Copyright 2006 Gravitas Publishing
4ALK THE 4ALK
s !RGUMENTS (OW STRONG WERE THE ARGUMENTS USED TO SUPPORT THE
OVERALL THEMES 7AS IT EASY FOR YOU TO UNDERSTAND EACH ARGUMENT
AND TO DESCRIBE IT WITH A SHORT PHRASE #AREFULLY SELECTED ARGUMENTS
INSTANTLY PROVIDE A SENSE OF STRENGTH TO THE DEBATERS CASE
s %XPLANATIONS $ID THE SPEAKER USE SOUND EXPLANATIONS AND LOGIC TO
EXPAND ON THE ARGUMENTS (OW WELL DID THE EXPLANATIONS COVER THE
KEY DIMENSIONS OF EACH POINT 4HE DEBATER SHOULD GO BEYOND STATING
AN ARGUMENT AND EXPECTING YOU TO AGREE WITH IT (IS OR HER EXPLANATION
SHOULD STRENGTHEN THE POINT AGAINST ANY POSSIBLE ATTACKS
s %VIDENCE 7AS SUFlCIENT EVIDENCE AND EXAMPLE EMPLOYED TO SUPPORT
THE EXPLANATIONS 7AS THE BACKUP PRESENTED EFFECTIVE AND RELEVANT
TO THE ARGUMENT IT WAS INTENDED TO ENHANCE )F ANY OF THE DEBATERS
CLAIMS ARE QUESTIONABLE OR UNCLEAR YOU SHOULD EXPECT THEM TO BE SUP
PORTED )T SHOULD ALSO BE MADE VERY CLEAR TO YOU HOW THE EVIDENCE
PROVES THE ARGUMENT IN QUESTION
2EFUTATION POINTS
s #OMPLETENESS 7AS THE CLASH COMPLETE COVERING EVERY RELEVANT POINT
OF THE OPPOSING TEAMS CASE 4HE DEBATER SHOULDNT LEAVE ANY OF THE
OPPOSING TEAMS KEY POINTS UNTOUCHED !S YOU TRACK THE DEBATE ON YOUR
mOW SHEET CHECK OFF EACH ARGUMENT THAT THE DEBATER HAS REFUTED
s 0RIORITIZATION $ID THE CLASH FOCUS ON THE MOST IMPORTANT AREAS OF
THE OTHER TEAMS CASE 4HERES NO REQUIREMENT THAT A DEBATER SPEND
EQUAL TIME REFUTING EACH ARGUMENT 4HE DEBATER SHOULD BE ABLE TO DIS
TINGUISH BETWEEN THE OTHER TEAMS CENTRAL AND LESS IMPORTANT POINTS
ADJUSTING HIS OR HER EMPHASIS ACCORDINGLY
s %FFECTIVENESS 7AS THE CLASH SUCCESSFUL AT EXPOSING mAWS IN THE
OPPONENTS ARGUMENTS 4HE REFUTATION OF EACH POINT SHOULD BE THOR
OUGH ENOUGH TO RAISE SERIOUS DOUBTS )T SHOULD HIT ON THE KEY WEAK
NESSES AND EXPLAIN PERSUASIVELY WHY EACH ARGUMENT IS WRONG
/RGANIZATION POINTS
s )NTRODUCTION $ID THE INTRODUCTION EFFECTIVELY LAY OUT THE CORE THEMES
AND DIRECTION OF THE TEAMS CASE 4HE WAY A DEBATER BEGINS SHOULD PRE
Review Copy
Copyright 2006 Gravitas Publishing
!PPENDIX " *UDGING #RITERIA
PARE YOU FOR WHATS TO COME (E OR SHE SHOULD COMPEL YOU TO LISTEN TO
THE FORTHCOMING MATERIAL
s #ONCLUSION $ID THE CONCLUSION BRING THE CASE TOGETHER AND WRAP IT
UP IN A WAY THAT MADE IT UNDERSTANDABLE ! CONCLUSION WHILE SHORT
SHOULD HIT ON THE KEY ISSUES AND OUTCOMES OF THE DEBATERS SPEECH
s 3TRUCTURE 7AS THERE A CLEAR STRUCTURE THAT BROKE THE CASE DOWN INTO
CLEAR AND LOGICAL PARTS $ID THE ORDER IN WHICH THE POINTS WERE PRE
SENTED MAKE SENSE 4HE WAY A DEBATER STRUCTURES A CASE SHOULD MAKE
IT EASY FOR YOU TO FOLLOW AND TAKE NOTES
s &LOW 7ITHIN EACH POINT DID THE SPEAKER HAVE A CLEAR AND LOGICAL
mOW 4HIS DOESNT MEAN THAT THE DEBATER IS REQUIRED TO PROVIDE OBVI
OUS @SIGNPOSTS WITHIN EACH POINT (OWEVER AS THE DEBATER MOVES
THROUGH THE POINT THE mOW SHOULD SEEM SMOOTH AND EFFECTIVE
s 4RANSITIONS 7HEN MOVING BETWEEN POINTS WERE THERE SMOOTH TRAN
SITIONS $ID THEY MAKE IT CLEAR WHAT THE SPEAKER HAD JUST ACCOMPLISHED
AND WHERE HE OR SHE WAS GOING NEXT %XCELLENT TRANSITIONS GUIDE YOU
THROUGH THE SPEECH HELPING TIE TOGETHER THE DISTINCT POINTS
$ELIVERY POINTS
s %YE #ONTACT $ID THE SPEAKER MAINTAIN STRONG EYE CONTACT WITH THE
ENTIRE AUDIENCE 4HE DEBATERS EYE CONTACT SHOULD CONVEY CONlDENCE
AND ENGAGEMENT 9OU SHOULDNT SEE THE DEBATER SPENDING MOST OF HIS
OR HER SPEAKING TIME READING TEXT FROM A PAGE
s 0ACE 7AS THE SPEAKING SPEED APPROPRIATE FOR THE AUDIENCE $ID IT
ALLOW EVERYONE TO UNDERSTAND CLEARLY THE POINTS BEING MADE 4HIS
DOESNT MEAN THAT THE DEBATER HAS TO TALK AT THE SAME RATE THROUGHOUT
THE ENTIRE SPEECH AS VARIETY CAN ADD CHARACTER AND LIVELINESS
s 0OSTURE $ID THE SPEAKER MAINTAIN STRONG POSTURE AND PRESENCE ,IKE
SOLID EYE CONTACT GOOD POSTURE AND BODY MOVEMENT MAKE A DEBATER
APPEAR MORE CONlDENT AND ENGAGING
s #LARITY (OW CLEARLY DID THE SPEAKER ARTICULATE THE CONTENT 7AS IT
EASY TO UNDERSTAND WHAT HE OR SHE WAS SAYING 7HILE IT CERTAINLY ISNT
Review Copy
Copyright 2006 Gravitas Publishing
4ALK THE 4ALK
NECESSARY TO ARTICULATE EVERY SINGLE SYLLABLE ROBOTICALLY THE WORDS AND
PHRASES SHOULDNT SEEM MUMBLED OR SLURRED
s %XPRESSION (OW DYNAMIC WAS THE SPEAKERS DELIVERY $ID THE DEBAT
ER VARY HIS OR HER PITCH AND VOLUME APPROPRIATELY 4HIS REALLY COMES
DOWN TO YOUR OVERALL IMPRESSION 4HINK ABOUT HOW INTERESTED YOU WERE
AS THE DEBATER SPOKE
s 'ESTURES 7ERE HAND GESTURES USED EFFECTIVELY TO ADD MEANING TO
THE DELIVERY (AND GESTURES SHOULD mOW NATURALLY ACCORDING TO THE
DEBATERS STYLE )TS IMPORTANT THAT THEY DONT SEEM REPETITIVE BUT THEY
SHOULDNT BE mASHY TO THE POINT OF DISTRACTION
0ROCEDURE POINTS
s 0ROCESS $ID THE DEBATER FOLLOW THE CORRECT PROCEDURE FOR THE STYLE OF
DEBATE 7ERE THE TIME LIMITS OBSERVED 7ERE THE OTHER DEBATERS THE
JUDGES AND THE MODERATOR ADDRESSED APPROPRIATELY 7HILE THESE FAC
TORS DONT IMPACT THE SUBSTANTIVE PART OF THE DEBATE THEY DO SPEAK TO
THE DEBATERS RESPECT FOR THE RULES AND TRADITIONS OF COMPETITION
s #OURTESY 7AS THE DEBATER RESPECTFUL AND COURTEOUS TO EVERYONE IN
THE ROOM $ID HE OR SHE AVOID MAKING PERSONAL ATTACKS OR DEROGA
TORY COMMENTS 4HERES NOTHING WRONG WITH A DEBATER BEING ASSER
TIVE EVEN AGGRESSIVE "UT ABOVE ALL THE COMPETITOR SHOULD BE MAKING
A POSITIVE CONTRIBUTION TO THE EXPERIENCE OF EVERYONE IN THE ROOM
s 1UESTIONS $ID THE DEBATER ASK STRONG TARGETED QUESTIONS TO CHAL
LENGE THE OPPONENTS POINTS 7ERE THE QUESTIONS RELEVANT TO THE ISSUE
AT HAND 4HIS APPLIES TO 0OINTS OF )NFORMATION IN PARLIAMENTARY DEBATE
THE QUESTION PERIOD IN DISCUSSION DEBATE AND AFTER EACH CONSTRUCTIVE
SPEECH IN CROSS
EXAMINATION DEBATE
s !NSWERS (OW EFFECTIVELY AND COMPLETELY DID THE DEBATER ANSWER
THE OTHER TEAMS QUESTIONS $ID HE OR SHE APPEAR CONlDENT AND mU
ENT WHEN PROVIDING THE ANSWERS )F THE ANSWERS WERE IN RESPONSE TO A
0OINT OF )NFORMATION IN PARLIAMENTARY DEBATE DID THE DEBATER TRANSI
TION BACK TO THE SPEECH IN A SMOOTH WAY 4HE COMPETITOR HAS TO STRIKE
A GOOD BALANCE BETWEEN ANSWERING THE QUESTION FULLY AND NOT APPEAR
ING TO BE ON THE DEFENSIVE
Review Copy
Copyright 2006 Gravitas Publishing
!PPENDIX " *UDGING #RITERIA
4OTAL 3CORE POINTS
*UDGES ARE OFTEN ASKED TO FOLLOW SCORING RANGES WHICH ARE TARGETS PRE
SCRIBED BY TOURNAMENT DIRECTORS TO ENSURE CONSISTENT EVALUATIONS FROM
ROOM TO ROOM ! TYPICAL GUIDE FOR A TOTAL SCORE OUT OF POINTS IS TO
STICK WITHIN A RANGE OF TO POINTS 4HIS WOULD RESULT IN AN AVERAGE
SCORE OF POINTS PLUS OR MINUS ONE POINT DEPENDING ON THE OVERALL
STRENGTH OF DEBATE IN THE ROOM 3OME JUDGES PREFER TO USE THE SPECIlC
CRITERIA DISCUSSED PREVIOUSLY TO ARRIVE AT A SCORE WHEREAS OTHERS USE
THEM ONLY AS A GUIDELINES TO REACH A TOTAL SCORE (ERE ARE DESCRIPTIONS
OF THE DIFFERENT LEVELS
POINTS 2ARELY SHOULD A DEBATER RECEIVE A SCORE THIS LOW ! SCORE
UNDER POINTS INDICATES THAT THE DEBATER DIDNT FULlLL HIS OR HER ROLE
IN THE DEBATE 4HE SPEECH WAS INCOMPLETE AND VIRTUALLY IMPOSSIBLE FOR
ANY REASONABLE PERSON TO FOLLOW
TO POINTS 3OME DEBATERS PARTICULARLY BEGINNERS MAY FALL WITHIN
THIS SCORING RANGE 4HERE WAS CLEARLY PREPARATION AND THOUGHT PUT INTO
THE CASE 5NFORTUNATELY SIGNIlCANT ERRORS AND SHORTCOMINGS HURT THE
OVERALL EFFECTIVENESS
TO POINTS ! SCORE WITHIN THIS RANGE IS CONSIDERED AVERAGE 4HE
DEBATER PRESENTED ARGUMENTS REASONABLY WELL (E OR SHE CLASHED WITH
THE OTHER TEAMS POINTS BUT MAY NOT HAVE BEEN THOROUGH ENOUGH IN
MANY PLACES 4HE STYLE WAS ADEQUATE AND THE STRUCTURE WAS FAIRLY
CLEAR BUT NEITHER ELEMENT WAS EXCEPTIONAL
TO POINTS 4HIS SCORE INDICATES AN EXCELLENT PERFORMANCE 4HE
DEBATER PRESENTED ARGUMENTS CLASHED WITH THE OTHER TEAMS POINTS
AND ARTICULATED THE CASE IN A CONlDENT ORGANIZED AND EFFECTIVE MAN
NER (E OR SHE CLEARLY STOOD OUT IN THE ROUND
POINTS ! SCORE THIS HIGH SHOULD BE RESERVED FOR A TOP
NOTCH PERFOR
MANCE 4HERE SHOULD PROBABLY BE ONLY A HANDFUL IN THE TOURNAMENT
THE RECIPIENTS OF WHICH WOULD ALMOST CERTAINLY BE CONTENDERS FOR THE
TOP SPEAKER AWARDS 4O EARN THIS SCORE EVERY ASPECT OF DEBATE HAS TO BE
DONE EXCEPTIONALLY WELL
POINTS 9OURE FALLING OFF YOUR CHAIR BECAUSE YOUVE BEEN DAZZLED
Review Copy
Copyright 2006 Gravitas Publishing
4ALK THE 4ALK
BEYOND YOUR WILDEST EXPECTATIONS 9OU WOULD PAY MONEY TO SEE THIS
PERSON DEBATE AGAIN OR EVEN FOR AN AUTOGRAPH
POINTS 4HE DEBATER IS PERFECT 3UPERHUMAN ACTUALLY
8)%1()'-7-32
5SUALLY THE TEAM WITH THE HIGHER SPEAKING SCORE BETWEEN THE TWO
DEBATERS WINS THE DEBATE $OESNT IT MAKE SENSE THAT THE DEBATERS WITH
STRONGER ARGUMENTS AND MORE EFFECTIVE REFUTATION SHOULD WIN )N THE
VAST MAJORITY OF CASES THIS IS TRUE "UT THERE ARE SOME DEBATE TOURNA
MENTS THAT ALLOW @LOW POINT WINS 4HIS MEANS THAT A TEAM COULD HAVE
BEEN LESS PROlCIENT IN ITS DEBATING SKILLS SUCH AS STYLE AND PROCEDURE
BUT STILL HAVE WON THE OVERALL ARGUMENT 4HERE ARE TWO QUESTIONS THAT
A JUDGE SHOULD ASK IN DECIDING WHO WON THE DEBATE BOTH OF THEM DIF
FERENT WAYS OF STATING A SIMILAR MEASURING STICK
s 4RIAL TEST )F YOU WERE A JUDGE IN A TRIAL ON THIS ISSUE AND HAD TO DECIDE
OBJECTIVELY WHICH TEAM MADE A STRONGER CASE WITH ITS ARGUMENTS AND
REFUTATION WHO WOULD YOU SELECT /R IF YOU WERE RANDOMLY ASSIGNED TO
EITHER SIDE IN A COURTROOM BATTLE ON THIS RESOLUTION WHICH TEAM WOULD
YOU WANT TO BE YOUR LEGAL COUNSEL
s "URDEN TEST 7HICH TEAM DID A MORE EFFECTIVE JOB AT MEETING ITS BUR
DEN IN THE DEBATE 4HAT IS WHICH ONE WAS MORE SUCCESSFUL AT FULlLLING
ITS OBLIGATIONS ACCORDING TO THE DElNITIONS PRESENTED AND YOUR INTER
PRETATION OF EACH TEAMS RESPONSIBILITIES
Review Copy
Copyright 2006 Gravitas Publishing
.SVZZHY`
9OU WERE PROMISED A BOOK LIGHT ON TECHNICAL JARGON (OPEFULLY THIS
PROMISE HAS BEEN FULlLLED 4HE BOOK DID HOWEVER PRESENT A NUMBER
OF UNCOMPLICATED AND EASY TO LEARN TERMS THAT ARE PART OF THE SPEECH
AND DEBATE LEXICON 4HIS GLOSSARY IS DESIGNED TO GIVE YOU A QUICK REFER
ENCE AND A SHORT REFRESHER ON MANY OF THESE EXPRESSIONS
!CADEMIC DEBATE 4HE MOST BASIC FORM OF DEBATE 4HERE ARE NORMALLY
FOUR CONSTRUCTIVE SPEECHES BETWEEN THE TWO TEAMS AS WELL AS TWO
REBUTTAL SPEECHES )N THIS STYLE THERE ARE NO OPPORTUNITIES FOR DEBATERS
TO ASK CRITICAL QUESTIONS TO ONE ANOTHER
!FlRMATIVE 4HE TEAM THAT ARGUES FOR THE RESOLUTION IN ACADEMIC DIS
CUSSION AND CROSS
EXAMINATION STYLES OF DEBATE /PENS AND USUALLY
CLOSES THE DEBATE 3OMETIMES CALLED THE 0ROPOSITION TEAM
!RGUMENT ! SINGLE SPECIlC IDEA PRESENTED TO BUILD A TEAMS CASE GEN
ERALLY POSSIBLE TO SUMMARIZE IN ONE SENTENCE %ACH TEAM SHOULD HAVE
BETWEEN FOUR AND SIX INDIVIDUAL ARGUMENTS IN ITS CASE -AY ALSO BE
CALLED A CONTENTION OR A POINT
"ILL !N ALTERNATIVE NAME FOR THE RESOLUTION IN A PARLIAMENTARY DEBATE
0ARLIAMENTS PASS LAWS CALLED "ILLS AND THE USE OF THIS TERM IS INTENDED
TO MATCH THIS PRACTICE
")24 3HORT FOR THE PHRASE h"E IT RESOLVED THATv /FTEN PLACED BEFORE THE
RESOLUTION IN ACADEMIC DISCUSSION AND CROSS
EXAMINATION DEBATES
"ODY LANGUAGE 4HE WAY THAT A SPEAKER USES POSTURE MOVEMENT GES
TURES AND EXPRESSION TO PROJECT A STRONG VISUAL IMPRESSION
"URDEN 4HE EXTENT TO WHICH EACH TEAM HAS TO PROVE ITS CASE FOR OR
AGAINST THE RESOLUTION 5SUALLY THE !FlRMATIVE TEAM HAS A SLIGHTLY
Review Copy
Copyright 2006 Gravitas Publishing
4ALK THE 4ALK
GREATER BURDEN BECAUSE IT DElNES THE TERMS 4HE DEGREE OF BURDEN
MAY ALSO DEPEND ON THE RELATIVE DIFlCULTY OF EACH SIDE
#ASE 4HE SET OF ARGUMENTS EXPLANATIONS AND EVIDENCE PRESENTED FOR
OR AGAINST A RESOLUTION 5SUALLY CONSISTS OF ONE OR TWO CENTRAL THEMES
EACH SUPPORTED BY MULTIPLE POINTS
#LASH #OUNTERING THE OPPONENTS CASE POINT BY POINT 4HIS TYPE OF
SPECIlC TARGETED REFUTATION TAKES PLACE MOSTLY IN THE CONSTRUCTIVE
SPEECHES LEAVING THE REBUTTAL SPEECHES FOR MORE GENERAL CRITICISM OF
THE OTHER TEAMS ARGUMENTS
#ONSTRUCTIVE SPEECH ! SPEECH THAT INVOLVES NEW CONSTRUCTIVE ARGU
MENTS DEFENSE OF PREVIOUS CONSTRUCTIVE ARGUMENTS AND REFUTATION OF
THE OPPONENTS CASE .ORMALLY THE lRST FOUR SPEECHES OF A DEBATE OR
TWO BY EACH TEAM ARE THE CONSTRUCTIVE SPEECHES
#OUNTER PLAN ! .EGATIVE TEAM CASE STRATEGY THAT INVOLVES AGREEING
WITH THE NEEDS FOR CHANGE BUT PROPOSING A SUBSTANTIALLY DIFFERENT PLAN
TO SOLVE THE PROBLEM
#RITERIA ! SET OF OBJECTIVES THAT A SYSTEM MUST MEET IN ORDER TO BE
JUDGED EFFECTIVE OR APPROPRIATE #RITERIA ARE SOMETIMES USED BY THE
!FlRMATIVE TEAM TO FRAME THE DEBATE IN A WAY IT CONSIDERS FAVORABLE
#ROSS
EXAMINATION DEBATE ! STYLE OF DEBATE THAT INVOLVES QUESTIONING
OF A SPEAKER BY SOMEONE FROM THE OPPOSING TEAM TO HIGHLIGHT WEAK
NESSES OR TO ATTAIN ADMISSIONS ! CROSS
EXAMINATION USUALLY THREE TO
FOUR MINUTES LONG TAKES PLACE FOLLOWING EACH CONSTRUCTIVE SPEECH
$ElNITION #LARIlCATION AND INTERPRETATION OF THE RESOLUTIONS TERMS
BY THE lRST SPEAKER OF THE !FlRMATIVE TEAM $ElNITIONS MAY BE USED
TO NARROW A BROAD DEBATE TO A MORE FOCUSED SUBJECT "OTH TEAMS MUST
ABIDE BY THE DElNITIONS THROUGHOUT THE ROUND
$ISCUSSION DEBATE ! DEBATE STYLE THAT INCLUDES A DISCUSSION PERIOD
UP TO MINUTES LONG BETWEEN THE CONSTRUCTIVE PART OF THE DEBATE
AND THE BEGINNING OF THE REBUTTAL SPEECHES 4EAMS TAKE TURNS ASKING
CRITICAL QUESTIONS TO EACH OTHER
Review Copy
Copyright 2006 Gravitas Publishing
'LOSSARY
&LOW SHEET ! COLUMNED SHEET USED TO KEEP TRACK OF EACH SPEAKERS
ARGUMENTS AND REFUTATION !RROWS ARE OFTEN DRAWN BETWEEN EACH
ARGUMENT AND THE MATCHING CLASH TO HELP VISUALIZE THE BACK AND FORTH
mOW OF THE DEBATE 5SED BY BOTH JUDGES AND COMPETITORS
'OVERNMENT 4HE TEAM ARGUING FOR THE "ILL IN A PARLIAMENTARY DEBATE
4HE 0RIME -INISTER 0- OPENS THE DEBATE WITH A CONSTRUCTIVE SPEECH
AND ENDS THE DEBATE WITH A REBUTTAL SPEECH 4HE -INISTER OF THE #ROWN
-# SPEAKS IN BETWEEN THE 0RIME -INISTERS SPEECHES
(ECKLE ! SHORT WITTY AND TO THE POINT INTERJECTION IN PARLIAMENTARY
DEBATE (ECKLES WHICH ARE USUALLY HUMOROUS SHOULD BE NOT BE QUES
TIONS OR ARGUMENTS 4HEY ARE BEST RESTRICTED TO NO MORE THAN lVE WORDS
AND THEN SO ONLY USED OCCASIONALLY IF AT ALL
(OUSE 4HE CHAMBER OR ROOM WHERE A PARLIAMENTARY DEBATE TAKES
PLACE 4HERE ARE SPECIlC RULES AND TRADITIONS OF THE (OUSE THAT THE
DEBATERS MUST FOLLOW
)MPROMPTU SPEAKING #OMMUNICATING WITH LIMITED OR NO NOTES EITHER
SPONTANEOUSLY OR WITH MINIMAL PREPARATION )MPROMPTU SPEAKING IS
USED IN A VARIETY OF SITUATIONS SUCH AS DEBATE ROUNDS QUESTIONS AFTER
A SPEECH AND CLASS OR COMMITTEE DISCUSSIONS
)NFORMATIVE SPEECH ! SPEECH TO EXPLAIN OR CLARIFY AN ISSUE OR TO PRO
VIDE INSTRUCTION ON A PROCESS !N INFORMATIVE SPEECH IS BASED HEAVILY
ON FACTUAL INFORMATION AND REQUIRES IN PARTICULAR CLEAR DESCRIPTIONS
,EADING QUESTIONS 1UESTIONS THAT IMPLY OR PUSH FOR THE DESIRED
ANSWER 4HIS IS THE MOST EFFECTIVE TYPE OF QUESTION TO ASK IN A CROSS
EXAMINATION 5SUALLY STARTS WITH PHRASES LIKE h7OULD YOU ACKNOWL
EDGE THAT xv OR h)SNT IT TRUE THAT xv
-EMORIZED SPEAKING 0RESENTING A SPEECH WORD FOR WORD WITHOUT ANY
NOTES 7HILE THIS METHOD CAN BE VERY TIME
CONSUMING AND FOR MOST
PEOPLE MAKES IT TOUGH TO SEEM NATURAL IT MAY BE USEFUL TO MEMORIZE
KEY PARTS OF A SPEECH
-ODEL 0ARLIAMENT ! SIMULATION OF A POLITICAL DEBATE IN WHICH PARTICI
PANTS REPRESENT DIFFERENT POLITICAL PARTIES IN A LEGISLATURE 4HE MEMBERS
Review Copy
Copyright 2006 Gravitas Publishing
4ALK THE 4ALK
DEBATE AND VOTE ON "ILLS TO BE PASSED INTO LAW )N THE 5NITED 3TATES THIS
TYPE OF FORUM IS GENERALLY KNOWN AS 3TUDENT #ONGRESS
-ODEL 5NITED .ATIONS ! TYPE OF FORUM DEBATE IN WHICH PARTICIPANTS
EACH REPRESENT COUNTRIES ON A 5NITED .ATIONS COMMITTEE SUCH AS THE
3ECURITY #OUNCIL OR A 'ENERAL !SSEMBLY 4HE DEBATES TAKE PLACE ON
RESOLUTIONS THAT ARE PUT FORTH BY MEMBER STATES
.EEDS
PLAN
BENElTS ! TYPE OF !FlRMATIVE TEAM CASE IN A POLICY
DEBATE INVOLVING REASONS TO CHANGE THE PRESENT SYSTEM PLANS FOR
IMPLEMENTING THE STATED CHANGES AND ANTICIPATED BENElTS OF THE PRO
POSED REFORMS 4ELLS THE JUDGES hWHY WHAT AND SO WHATv IN SUPPORT
OF THE RESOLUTION
.EGATIVE 4HE TEAM THAT ARGUES AGAINST THE RESOLUTION IN ACADEMIC
DISCUSSION AND CROSS
EXAMINATION STYLES OF DEBATE !LTHOUGH THE .EG
ATIVE TEAM HAS SOME mEXIBILITY IN HOW IT MAKES ITS CASE ITS ARGUMENTS
MUST lT WITH THE DElNITIONS PRESENTED BY THE !FlRMATIVE TEAM
/PPOSITION 4HE TEAM OPPOSING THE "ILL IN A PARLIAMENTARY DEBATE 4HE
-EMBER OF THE /PPOSITION -/ BEGINS THE /PPOSITIONS CASE 4HE
,EADER OF THE /PPOSITION ,/ SPEAKS SECOND AND DIVIDES HIS OR HER
SPEECH INTO CONSTRUCTIVE TIME AND REBUTTAL TIME
/UTLINE SPEAKING 3PEECH DELIVERY USING A SHORT LIST OF IDEAS ALLOWING
FOR MAXIMUM ENGAGEMENT WITH THE AUDIENCE 4HE MOST BASIC FORM OF
OUTLINE SPEAKING IS A LIST OF THE SPEECHS MAIN POINTS BUT SOME SPEAK
ERS PREFER TO INCLUDE SUB
POINTS AS WELL
0ARLIAMENTARY DEBATE ! STYLE BASED IN PART ON THE TRADITIONS OF LEG
ISLATURES AROUND THE WORLD )N ADDITION TO FORMAL TERMS AND RULES IT
FEATURES DIFFERENT TYPES OF INTERJECTIONS SUCH AS 0OINTS OF )NFORMATION
0OINTS OF /RDER 0OINTS OF 0ERSONAL 0RIVILEGE AND HECKLES
0ERSUASIVE SPEECH ! SPEECH INTENDED TO CONVINCE THE AUDIENCE OF
A PERSPECTIVE OR OF THE NEED TO TAKE ACTION ON AN ISSUE !LTHOUGH ITS
SUPPORTED BY FACTUAL INFORMATION PERSUADING THE AUDIENCE MEMBERS
WITH SOUND LOGIC AND BOTH RATIONAL AND EMOTIONAL APPEALS IS CENTRAL TO
THE SPEAKERS APPROACH
Review Copy
Copyright 2006 Gravitas Publishing
'LOSSARY
0LAN ! SET OF POLICY PROPOSALS BROUGHT FORTH BY THE !FlRMATIVE TEAM TO
MEET ITS STATED NEEDS FOR CHANGE ! PLAN OUTLINES THE NUMEROUS STEPS
THAT THE AGENTS OF CHANGE MUST TAKE IN ORDER TO ADDRESS THE PRESENT
SYSTEMS SHORTCOMINGS IN AN EFFECTIVE AND FEASIBLE WAY
0OINT OF )NFORMATION ! BRIEF CHALLENGING QUESTION DURING AN OPPO
NENTS CONSTRUCTIVE SPEECH IN PARLIAMENTARY DEBATE 4HE PERSON WHO
HAS THE mOOR MAY DECIDE EITHER TO ACCEPT OR REJECT A 0OINT OF )NFORMA
TION REQUEST AS THE OPPOSING DEBATER RISES
0OINT OF /RDER !N ACCUSATION THAT A DEBATER HAS BROKEN A RULE OF PAR
LIAMENTARY DEBATE JUDGED BY THE 3PEAKER AS hWELL TAKENv OR hNOT WELL
TAKENv .OT RECOMMENDED FOR EXPOSING FRIVOLOUS VIOLATIONS SUCH AS
PLACING HANDS IN ONES POCKETS OR HOLDING A PEN
0OLICY DEBATE ! DEBATE INVOLVING A PLAN THAT ADDRESSES THE !FlRMA
TIVES STATED NEEDS FOR CHANGE 4HE DEBATE USUALLY FOCUSES ON TWO
DIMENSIONS NAMELY WHETHER CHANGE IS NECESSARY AND IF SO WHETHER
THE !FlRMATIVES PLAN IS DESIRABLE
1UALIlCATION 0ROVIDING AN EXPLANATION WHEN ANSWERING THE CROSS
EXAMINERS hYES OR NOv QUESTION 1UALIFYING AN ANSWER ALLOWS THE
SPEAKER TO DEFEND HIS OR HER CASE MORE EFFECTIVELY (OWEVER THE QUALI
lCATION SHOULD NOT BE SO LENGTHY THAT IT SEEMS LIKE A SPEECH
2EBUTTAL 4HE lNAL SPEECH OF THE DEBATE BY EACH TEAM %ACH REBUTTAL
SPEAKER AIMS TO BRING THE DEBATE DOWN TO KEY THEMES AND UNDERLYING
PRINCIPLES AND TO SUGGEST TO THE JUDGES WHAT THE DECIDING ISSUES ARE
"OTH REFUTATION OF THE OPPOSING TEAMS OVERALL CASE AND SUMMARY OF
ONES OWN CASE ARE IMPORTANT
2EFUTATION 4HE PROCESS OF EXPLAINING WHY AN OPPONENTS ARGUMENTS
ARE INCORRECT )NVOLVES POINT BY POINT CLASH IN THE CONSTRUCTIVE SPEECH
ES AND OVERALL REFUTATION IN THE REBUTTALS ! DEBATER MAY REFUTE AN
OPPONENTS POINTS ON A VARIETY OF GROUNDS SUCH AS IRRELEVANT INFORMA
TION CONTRADICTORY STATEMENTS OR FAULTY LOGIC
2ESOLUTION 4HE TOPIC OF THE DEBATE GENERALLY PRESENTED AS A STATE
MENT AND PRECEDED BY A PHRASE SUCH AS h"E IT RESOLVED THATv ")24
OR h4HIS (OUSE BELIEVES THATv 4("4 )TS TERMS NEED TO BE INTERPRETED
Review Copy
Copyright 2006 Gravitas Publishing
4ALK THE 4ALK
AND CLARIlED BY THE !FlRMATIVE TEAM 4HE RESOLUTION IS SUPPORTED BY
THE !FlRMATIVE TEAM AND OPPOSED BY THE .EGATIVE TEAM
3CRIPT SPEAKING $ELIVERY USING A WORD FOR WORD TEXT 4HIS METHOD IS
COMMONLY USED BY BEGINNERS WHO ARENT YET COMFORTABLE WITH HAVING
ONLY AN OUTLINE )TS ALSO USED BY SPEAKERS WHO NEED TO PRESENT PRECISE
THOUGHTS AND WORDS SUCH AS SCIENTISTS AND POLITICIANS
3PEAKER 4HE MODERATOR OF A PARLIAMENTARY DEBATE 4HE 3PEAKER INTRO
DUCES EACH DEBATER AND RULES ON 0OINTS OF /RDER AND 0OINTS OF 0ERSONAL
0RIVILEGE $EBATERS ADDRESS THEIR ARGUMENTS THROUGH THE 3PEAKER AS IS
THE CASE IN FUNCTIONING LEGISLATURES
3PECIlC KNOWLEDGE !N IMPROMPTU DEBATE SITUATION IN WHICH THE
!FlRMATIVE TEAM PRESENTS A CASE THAT RELIES ON FACTS NOT COMMONLY
KNOWN OFTEN OF A SCIENTIlC OR HISTORICAL NATURE ! SPECIlC KNOWLEDGE
CASE MAY PLACE THE .EGATIVE TEAM AT AN UNFAIR DISADVANTAGE
3TATUS QUO (OW THE CURRENT SYSTEM OPERATES 4HE !FlRMATIVE TEAM
IN A POLICY DEBATE WILL PROPOSE CHANGING THE STATUS QUO WHEREAS THE
.EGATIVE TEAM WILL USUALLY DEFEND THE PRESENT SYSTEM
37/4 ANALYSIS 4HE PROCESS OF LOOKING CLOSELY AT THE 3TRENGTHS 7EAK
NESSES /PPORTUNITIES AND 4HREATS OF A DEBATE CASE 4HIS METHOD CAN
BE USED TO EVALUATE AND MAKE IMPROVEMENTS TO A CASE BEFORE PRESENT
ING IT IN A DEBATE ROUND
4("4 !N ABBREVIATION FOR h4HIS (OUSE BELIEVES THATv PLACED BEFORE A
RESOLUTION IN PARLIAMENTARY DEBATE GENERALLY OF A VALUES NATURE
4HEME ! GENERAL IDEA THATS SUPPORTED BY SEVERAL POINTS )N A TEAMS
CASE THERE ARE TYPICALLY ONE OR TWO CENTRAL THEMES $EBATERS COM
MONLY TALK ABOUT THEIR THEMES AS A WAY OF TYING TOGETHER AND PROVID
ING CONTEXT TO DIFFERENT ARGUMENTS
4(7 !N ABBREVIATION FOR h4HIS (OUSE WOULDv PLACED BEFORE A PARLIA
MENTARY DEBATE RESOLUTION USUALLY OF A POLICY NATURE
4IME
PLACE
SET ! TYPE OF DElNITION IN WHICH THE !FlRMATIVE TEAM LAYS
OUT A SITUATION FOR DEBATE EITHER A lCTIONAL OR REAL SCENARIO OR A POINT
Review Copy
Copyright 2006 Gravitas Publishing
'LOSSARY
IN HISTORY %ACH TEAM MUST DEBATE WITHIN THESE PARAMETERS WITHOUT
BRINGING IN DETAILS THAT WOULDNT BE KNOWN AT THE TIME OR PLACE
4RANSITION -OVING FROM ONE POINT TO ANOTHER SUCH THAT THE SPEECH
mOWS SMOOTHLY 5SUALLY TELLS THE AUDIENCE WHAT HAS JUST BEEN ACCOM
PLISHED AND WHAT CAN BE EXPECTED NEXT
4RUISM ! DElNITION OF A RESOLUTION THATS ALWAYS TRUE MAKING IT VIRTU
ALLY IMPOSSIBLE TO DEBATE 4RUISMS ARE NOT ALLOWED AS THEY PLACE THE
.EGATIVE TEAM IN AN UNFAIR POSITION
6ALUES DEBATE ! DEBATE FOCUSING ON COMPETING PRINCIPLES RATHER THAN
ON A PLAN OF ACTION 4HE TEAMS ARGUE WHETHER A PARTICULAR CIRCUMSTANCE
OR IDEA IS RIGHT OR WRONG
Review Copy
Copyright 2006 Gravitas Publishing
Review Copy
Copyright 2006 Gravitas Publishing
)PISPVNYHWO`
-ANY OF THE WEB RESOURCES THAT ARE LISTED BELOW HAVE BEEN USEFUL
REFERENCES FOR THIS PUBLICATION 3INCE THE SPACE LIMITATIONS OF A SINGLE
BOOK MADE IT IMPOSSIBLE TO COVER FULLY THE EXPANSIVE lELD OF SPEECH
AND DEBATE THEY WILL PROVIDE USEFUL SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION ON
TOURNAMENTS STYLES AND TECHNIQUES
9OU MAY ALSO lND WITHIN THESE RESOURCES PERSPECTIVES THAT ARE
DIFFERENT THAN WHAT YOUVE READ IN THIS BOOK 4HESE PERSPECTIVES ARE
NEITHER RIGHT NOR WRONG AS SPEECH AND DEBATE IS A SUBJECTIVE ART INTER
PRETED DIFFERENTLY BY A VARIETY OF PEOPLE )N THE TRUE SPIRIT OF DEBATE
YOURE ENCOURAGED TO EVALUATE THESE RESOURCES FOR YOURSELF AND TO
DETERMINE WHAT WORKS BEST FOR YOU
!LBERTA $EBATE AND 3PEECH !SSOCIATION
HTTPWWWCOMPUSMARTABCAADEBATE
!USTRALIAN $EBATING &EDERATION
HTTPWWWADFASNAU
#ANADIAN 3TUDENT $EBATING &EDERATION
HTTPWWWCSDF
FCDECA
#ANADIAN 5NIVERSITY 3OCIETY OF )NTERCOLLEGIATE $EBATE
HTTPWWWCUSIDCA
#ROSS
%XAMINATION $EBATE !SSOCIATION
HTTPWWWCEDADEBATEORG
$EBATABASE
HTTPWWWDEBATABASECOM
$EBATE #ENTRAL
HTTPDEBATEUVMEDU
Review Copy
Copyright 2006 Gravitas Publishing
4ALK THE 4ALK
%NGLISH
3PEAKING 5NION
HTTPWWWBRITISHDEBATECOM
)NTERNATIONAL $EBATE %DUCATION !SSOCIATION
HTTPWWWIDEBATEORG
$EBATING BY 3IMON 1UINN
HTTPWWWLEARNDEBATINGCOM
-ANITOBA 3PEECH AND $EBATE !SSOCIATION
HTTPWWWSJRMBCADEBATE
.ATIONAL &ORENSICS ,EAGUE
HTTPWWWNmONLINEORG
.ATIONAL 0ARLIAMENTARY $EBATE !SSOCIATION
HTTPWWWPARLIDEBATEORG
/NTARIO 3TUDENT $EBATING 5NION
HTTPWWWOSDUOISEUTORONTOCA
/N 4HAT 0OINT
HTTPWWWONTHATPOINTCOM
1UEENSLAND $EBATING 5NION
HTTPWWWQDUORGAU
7ORLD 3CHOOLS $EBATING #HAMPIONSHIPS
HTTPWWWSCHOOLSDEBATECOM
Review Copy
Copyright 2006 Gravitas Publishing
(JRUV^SLKNTLU[Z
4O SAY THAT THIS BOOK IS hBY !LIM -ERALIv ALONE WOULD BE GIVING MYSELF
TOO MUCH CREDIT ) DIDNT MAKE ANY NEW DISCOVERIES NOR DID ) INVENT ANY
NOVEL METHODS ) AM NOT A PIONEER IN THE lELD BUT A BENElCIARY OF IT
-Y CONTRIBUTION TO THIS BOOK WAS COMPILING INFORMATION AND INSIGHTS
TAUGHT TO ME BY MANY PEOPLE OVER MANY YEARS 4O THESE INDIVIDUALS )
OFFER MY SINCERE GRATITUDE
&IRST AND FOREMOST ) WANT TO THANK THE LEADERS WHO MADE COM
PETITIVE SPEECH AND DEBATE POSSIBLE FOR ME )N PARTICULAR MANY PEOPLE
WITHIN THE !LBERTA $EBATE AND 3PEECH !SSOCIATION DESERVE MY APPRE
CIATION $OZENS OF DEDICATED VOLUNTEERS PARTICULARLY DEBATE COACHES
AND TOURNAMENT DIRECTORS GAVE UP WEEKEND AFTER WEEKEND TO ALLOW
ME TO TAKE UP MY PASSION FOR DEBATING (UNDREDS OF JUDGES PROVIDED
PRICELESS ADVICE AND CONTINUAL ENCOURAGEMENT
/VER SEVEN YEARS AS A COMPETITIVE DEBATER ) HAD THE OPPORTUNITY TO
WORK WITH DOZENS OF PARTNERS IN HUNDREDS OF TOURNAMENT AND PRACTICE
ROUNDS ) WANT TO THANK MY DEBATE PARTNERS FROM THE /LD 3CONA !CA
DEMIC (IGH 3CHOOL $EBATE 3OCIETY THE 5NIVERSITY OF !LBERTA $EBATE
3OCIETY AND THE 5NIVERSITY OF 7ESTERN /NTARIO $EBATE 3OCIETY 7E REL
ISHED OUR VICTORIES TOGETHER AND WE REmECTED ON OUR DEFEATS TOGETHER
7E HELPED EACH OTHER BUILD ON WHAT WE DID RIGHT AND IMPROVE ON WHAT
WE DID WRONG 3INCE ) BELIEVE THAT THE GREATEST SOURCE OF KNOWLEDGE IS
EXPERIENCE THE TOPIC OF ONE OF MY TOUGHER DEBATE ROUNDS ITS CLEAR
TO ME THAT MY EXPERIENCES IN COMPETITIVE DEBATING HAVE CONTRIBUTED
IMMENSELY TO THIS BOOK
-Y COMPETITORS PROVIDED THE RIVALRY THAT MADE DEBATE ENJOYABLE
AND CHALLENGING 7HILE THEY MAY HAVE BEEN MORE DEDICATED TO DEFEAT
ING ME THAN TO HELPING ME THEY ACTED AS INDISPENSABLE @SOUNDING
BOARDS FOR MY ARGUMENTS 4HE SPIRIT OF COMPETITION BROUGHT OUT THE
BEST IN EACH OF US AND ) KNOW THAT WE SHARED SOME GREAT MOMENTS
READ INTENSE NAIL
BITING BATTLES OVER MANY YEARS
3OME OF MY BEST DEBATE EXPERIENCES HAVE COME WELL OUTSIDE THE
WORLD OF COMPETITIVE DEBATE ) WANT TO THANK THE PEOPLE WHO HAVE
Review Copy
Copyright 2006 Gravitas Publishing
4ALK THE 4ALK
CHALLENGED ME AS )VE PUT MY DEBATE SKILLS INTO PRACTICE !T THE 5NIVER
SITY OF 7ESTERN /NTARIOS 2ICHARD )VEY 3CHOOL OF "USINESS MY FELLOW
STUDENTS HAVE PUSHED ME TO DEFEND MY VIEWS DURING LITERALLY HUN
DREDS OF CHALLENGING DEBATES ON REAL BUSINESS CASES -Y ASSOCIATES IN
THE WORLD OF POLITICS HAVE ENCOURAGED ME TO ARTICULATE AND DEFEND MY
OPINIONS ON THE ISSUES THAT SHAPE SOCIETY )T IS FROM THE INTELLIGENT AND
WELL
SPOKEN PEOPLE ) AM PRIVILEGED TO BE SURROUNDED BY EVERY DAY THAT
) HAVE EXPERIENCED THE ULTIMATE TEST IN DEBATE
&INALLY THANK YOU TO THE FRIENDS AND FAMILY WHO TOLD ME TO hKEEP
PUSHING ITv WHEN ) STALLED FOR A WHILE UNSURE OF WHAT TO WRITE NEXT
!LTHOUGH AUTHORING THIS BOOK TOOK LONGER THAN ) HAD ORIGINALLY ANTICI
PATED AND PROMISED ) HOPE THAT YOUVE FOUND IT WORTH THE WAIT
Review Copy
Copyright 2006 Gravitas Publishing
0UKL_
!
!CADEMIC STYLE DEBATE
!DAPTATION
!RGUMENTS
ATTITUDES
ON BEHAVIOR
CHAIN OF ARGUMENTS
CULTURE
EFFECTIVENESS
ENFORCEABILITY
EVIDENCE AS AN ARGUMENT
FEASIBILITY
HISTORICAL
IMAGE
INmUENCE
INTENT
ON JUSTIlCATION
LABELING
LEGITIMACY
MORALITY
NORMS
ON PERCEPTION
PRECEDENT
REMEDIES
RESULTS
SIGNALS
ON SYSTEMS
!RISTOTLE
!RTICULATION
"
"ILL
Review Copy
"ODY LANGUAGE
"RAINSTORMING
"REATHING
#
#ASE 3EE !RGUMENTS
#LARITY
#LASH
ATTACKING ASSUMPTIONS
BREAKING LINKS
CATCHING CONTRADICTIONS
CLASHING AFTER CONSTRUCTING
CLASHING BEFORE CONSTRUCTING
CLASHING WITH CLASH
COUNTERING CORRELATIONS
CUMULATIVE
FACING THE FACTS
INDICATING IRRELEVANCE
ISSUING CHALLENGES
MAKING CAREFUL CONCESSIONS
WHAT TO REFUTE
#LASS DISCUSSIONS
#OALITIONS
#OMMITTEE MEETINGS
#OMPROMISING
#ONCLUSIONS
#ONlDENCE
Copyright 2006 Gravitas Publishing
4ALK THE 4ALK
#ONSISTENCY
#ONSTRUCTIVE SPEECHES
#ONTRADICTIONS
#OUNTER PLAN
#RITERIA
AS HIGH RISK STRATEGY
AS LITMUS TEST
#ROSS BENCHES
#ROSS EXAMINATION
ANSWERING QUESTIONS
ATTACKING ARGUMENTS
ATTAINING ADMISSIONS
CLEARING UP CONFUSION
CONTROL OF THE QUESTIONING
EXPOSING ERRORS
LEADING QUESTIONS
LINE OF QUESTIONING
MULTIPART QUESTIONS
OPEN ENDED QUESTIONS
PRE REFUTING REFUTATION
SEMI DIRECTED QUESTIONS
SERIES OF QUESTIONS
SETTING UP POINTS
SPEECHMAKING IN
STImING THE QUESTIONER
USING THE CROSS EXAMINATION
#UE CARDS
$
$EBATE
BOTH SIDES
AS FORMAL ARGUMENT
AS FORMAL DISCUSSION
Review Copy
AS SPORT
THE WILL TO WIN
$EBATERS
FRAME OF MIND
AS NATURALLY COMPETITIVE
AS THOUGHT LEADERS
VITAL ROLE OF
$ElNITION
$ELIVERY
$ETAILS
$ISCUSSION STYLE DEBATE
$RESS
%
%MPHASIS
%THICS
%TIQUETTE
%VIDENCE
%XPLANATIONS
%XPRESSION
%YE CONTACT
Copyright 2006 Gravitas Publishing
)NDEX
COMMERCIALIZATION OF SPORT
CORPORATE SPONSORSHIP
ENVIRONMENTAL STANDARDS
FOOD LABELING
FREE TRADE
GENETICALLY
MODIlED FOODS
GENETIC ENGINEERING
GLOBAL POVERTY
GLOBAL WARMING
HEALTH CARE PRIVATIZATION
)$ CARDS
INCOME TAXES
)NTERNET CENSORSHIP
JOINT PEACEKEEPING
-ECTIZAN
MEDIA FUNDING
MEDIA INmUENCE
-ERCK
MINIMUM VOTING AGE
POLITICAL TERM LIMITS
POST
SECONDARY FUNDING
PRIVATE SCHOOLS
RECYCLING
RIGHT TO PRIVACY
SCHOOL DROPOUT RATE
SCHOOL LOCKER SEARCHES
SCHOOL UNIFORMS
SOLUTIONS TO POVERTY
SPACE TOURISM
SPEEDING DRIVERS
STANDARDIZED TESTS
STUDENT PERFORMANCE
4RUTH AND 2ECONCILIATION #OM
MISSIONS
7AR #RIMES 4RIBUNALS
&
&ACIAL EXPRESSION
&LOW SHEET
&ORUMS
'
'AMES
#ROSSlRE
$EBATE $UEL
/N 4HAT 0OINT
0ASS THE "ATON
2APID 3PEAK
3URVIVOR
4HE 'REAT 2ACE
4RAFlC ,IGHTS
'ESTURES
(
(ABITS
(ECKLING
(UMOR
)
)MAGERY
)MPRESSION
)MPROMPTU DEBATING
)MPROMPTU SPEAKING
)NFORMATIVE SPEAKING
)NTRODUCTIONS
)SSUES
ARTS FUNDING
ART INSTITUTIONS
CLINICAL TRIALS
Review Copy
*
*UDGES
CONSENSUS DECISION
Copyright 2006 Gravitas Publishing
4ALK THE 4ALK
0ODIUM
0OINT OF )NFORMATION
,
,ISTENING
0OINT OF /RDER
0OINT OF 0ERSONAL 0RIVILEGE
0OLICY DEBATE
-EMORIZATION
0OSTURE
-IND MAP
-ISTAKES
0ROPOSITION 3EE 2ESOLUTIONS
-ODEL 0ARLIAMENT 0ROPS
0UBLIC OPINION
-ODEL 5NITED .ATIONS 1
1UOTATIONS
-OVEMENT
VOTING INDEPENDENTLY
.
.ERVOUSNESS
/
/RGANIZATION
0
0ARLIAMENTARY STYLE DEBATE
0AUSING
0ERSUASIVE SPEAKING
0ITCH
0LAN
Review Copy
2ATE
2EBUTTAL
2EFUTATION
3EE ALSO #LASH
2ELEVANCY
2ESOLUTIONS
ON FACTS
ON POLICIES
ON VALUES
Copyright 2006 Gravitas Publishing
)NDEX
2OLE
3
3CRIPT
3ETUP OF THE ROOM
3IGNPOSTING
3IMPLIlCATION
ANALOGIES METAPHORS AND
EXAMPLES
DIRECT LANGUAGE
INSIDE LANGUAGE
UNKNOWN ACRONYMS
US VS THEM DISTINCTIONS
3PECIlC KNOWLEDGE CASES
3PEECHES FROM THE mOOR
3PLIT
ECONOMIC AND SOCIAL
FAVORITE POINTS
lRST SPEAKER OUTLINES
HUNG CASE
NATIONAL AND INTERNATIONAL
SHORT
TERM AND LONG
TERM
SOCIETY AND INDIVIDUAL
3TAGE PRESENCE
3TANCE
3TATISTICS
3TRUCTURE BETWEEN POINTS
PHYSICAL LOCATION
PROBLEM AND SOLUTION
SORT SELECT AND SUMMARIZE
TIME AND PROGRESSION
TOPICS AND THEMES
3TRUCTURE WITHIN POINTS
CITE
CLAIM
COMMENT
CONCLUDE
3TUDENT #ONGRESS
Review Copy
3TYLE
37/4 ANALYSIS
OPPORTUNITIES
STRENGTHS
THREATS
WEAKNESSES
4
4EAMWORK
4ENSION
4HEME
4IME
PLACE
SET CASES
4ONE
4ONGUE TWISTERS
4OURNAMENT
4RANSITIONS
4RUISMS
6
6OICE
6OLUME
7
7ARMING UP
7ORLDS FASTEST TALKER
Copyright 2006 Gravitas Publishing
Review Copy
Copyright 2006 Gravitas Publishing
(IV\[[OL(\[OVY
!LIM -ERALI IS A PAST #ANADIAN 3TUDENT $EBATING &EDERATION .ATIONAL
#HAMPION (E DEVELOPED THE DEBATE TRAINING PROGRAM AT 4HE 3PEECH
3TUDIO )NC A SPEECH COMMUNICATION ACADEMY !LIM HAS COACHED
SPEECH AND DEBATE AT HIGH SCHOOLS AND HAS DIRECTED THE !LBERTA $EBATE
#HAMPIONSHIPS AND THE !LBERTA -ODEL ,EGISLATURE (E SERVES ON THE
!LBERTA $EBATE AND 3PEECH !SSOCIATIONS "OARD OF $IRECTORS
Review Copy
Copyright 2006 Gravitas Publishing
Review Copy
Copyright 2006 Gravitas Publishing
0SSOMRKJSVWLSVXXSXLITSMRXHIFEXIVIWSYVGIW#
;ERXEUYMGOVIJVIWLIVSR8EPOXLI8EPO#
-JWSZMWMXYWSRXLI[IF
XEPOXLIXEPOGE
Review Copy
Copyright 2006 Gravitas Publishing
Review Copy
Copyright 2006 Gravitas Publishing
You might also like
- The Sympathizer: A Novel (Pulitzer Prize for Fiction)From EverandThe Sympathizer: A Novel (Pulitzer Prize for Fiction)Rating: 4.5 out of 5 stars4.5/5 (122)
- A Heartbreaking Work Of Staggering Genius: A Memoir Based on a True StoryFrom EverandA Heartbreaking Work Of Staggering Genius: A Memoir Based on a True StoryRating: 3.5 out of 5 stars3.5/5 (231)
- Grit: The Power of Passion and PerseveranceFrom EverandGrit: The Power of Passion and PerseveranceRating: 4 out of 5 stars4/5 (589)
- The Little Book of Hygge: Danish Secrets to Happy LivingFrom EverandThe Little Book of Hygge: Danish Secrets to Happy LivingRating: 3.5 out of 5 stars3.5/5 (401)
- Shoe Dog: A Memoir by the Creator of NikeFrom EverandShoe Dog: A Memoir by the Creator of NikeRating: 4.5 out of 5 stars4.5/5 (537)
- Never Split the Difference: Negotiating As If Your Life Depended On ItFrom EverandNever Split the Difference: Negotiating As If Your Life Depended On ItRating: 4.5 out of 5 stars4.5/5 (842)
- Hidden Figures: The American Dream and the Untold Story of the Black Women Mathematicians Who Helped Win the Space RaceFrom EverandHidden Figures: The American Dream and the Untold Story of the Black Women Mathematicians Who Helped Win the Space RaceRating: 4 out of 5 stars4/5 (897)
- The Subtle Art of Not Giving a F*ck: A Counterintuitive Approach to Living a Good LifeFrom EverandThe Subtle Art of Not Giving a F*ck: A Counterintuitive Approach to Living a Good LifeRating: 4 out of 5 stars4/5 (5806)
- The Hard Thing About Hard Things: Building a Business When There Are No Easy AnswersFrom EverandThe Hard Thing About Hard Things: Building a Business When There Are No Easy AnswersRating: 4.5 out of 5 stars4.5/5 (345)
- Devil in the Grove: Thurgood Marshall, the Groveland Boys, and the Dawn of a New AmericaFrom EverandDevil in the Grove: Thurgood Marshall, the Groveland Boys, and the Dawn of a New AmericaRating: 4.5 out of 5 stars4.5/5 (266)
- The Emperor of All Maladies: A Biography of CancerFrom EverandThe Emperor of All Maladies: A Biography of CancerRating: 4.5 out of 5 stars4.5/5 (271)
- Team of Rivals: The Political Genius of Abraham LincolnFrom EverandTeam of Rivals: The Political Genius of Abraham LincolnRating: 4.5 out of 5 stars4.5/5 (234)
- The World Is Flat 3.0: A Brief History of the Twenty-first CenturyFrom EverandThe World Is Flat 3.0: A Brief History of the Twenty-first CenturyRating: 3.5 out of 5 stars3.5/5 (2259)
- Her Body and Other Parties: StoriesFrom EverandHer Body and Other Parties: StoriesRating: 4 out of 5 stars4/5 (821)
- The Gifts of Imperfection: Let Go of Who You Think You're Supposed to Be and Embrace Who You AreFrom EverandThe Gifts of Imperfection: Let Go of Who You Think You're Supposed to Be and Embrace Who You AreRating: 4 out of 5 stars4/5 (1091)
- Elon Musk: Tesla, SpaceX, and the Quest for a Fantastic FutureFrom EverandElon Musk: Tesla, SpaceX, and the Quest for a Fantastic FutureRating: 4.5 out of 5 stars4.5/5 (474)
- On Fire: The (Burning) Case for a Green New DealFrom EverandOn Fire: The (Burning) Case for a Green New DealRating: 4 out of 5 stars4/5 (74)
- The Yellow House: A Memoir (2019 National Book Award Winner)From EverandThe Yellow House: A Memoir (2019 National Book Award Winner)Rating: 4 out of 5 stars4/5 (98)
- The Unwinding: An Inner History of the New AmericaFrom EverandThe Unwinding: An Inner History of the New AmericaRating: 4 out of 5 stars4/5 (45)
- Pore Pressure - SLB 2004 PDFDocument84 pagesPore Pressure - SLB 2004 PDFMaria MNo ratings yet
- Quality Control ProcedureDocument12 pagesQuality Control ProcedureZiya Ahmed100% (6)
- Air Conditioning System PDFDocument48 pagesAir Conditioning System PDFspeedkar9No ratings yet
- Chemistry: Quarter 1 - Module 5: "Recognize Common Isotopes and Their Uses."Document13 pagesChemistry: Quarter 1 - Module 5: "Recognize Common Isotopes and Their Uses."Norman100% (2)
- Personal Nursing Leadership PaperDocument7 pagesPersonal Nursing Leadership Paperapi-625175559No ratings yet
- Warehouse Order ProcessingDocument67 pagesWarehouse Order ProcessingYogitha BalasubramanianNo ratings yet
- Review Related Literature (0115)Document5 pagesReview Related Literature (0115)Nesty SarsateNo ratings yet
- Soal LATIHAN PSAT Bahasa Inggris XIDocument19 pagesSoal LATIHAN PSAT Bahasa Inggris XIFebyliany NursabillaNo ratings yet
- BRANIGAN - Eduard - A Point of View in The CinemaDocument6 pagesBRANIGAN - Eduard - A Point of View in The CinemaSonia RochaNo ratings yet
- Schematic Diagram DVD-P370Document8 pagesSchematic Diagram DVD-P370Alexandre S. Corrêa0% (1)
- MC0082 - Theory of Computer ScienceDocument235 pagesMC0082 - Theory of Computer SciencePurushottam KumarNo ratings yet
- Accenture G20 YEA 2015 Open Innovation Executive Summary PDFDocument24 pagesAccenture G20 YEA 2015 Open Innovation Executive Summary PDFJulian Dario Combariza GonzalezNo ratings yet
- Write A Program Which Creates An Integer Array and Displays Sum of Its ElementsDocument17 pagesWrite A Program Which Creates An Integer Array and Displays Sum of Its Elementsshree BaranidaranNo ratings yet
- Cultural Product Innovation Strategies Adopted by The Performing Arts IndustryDocument33 pagesCultural Product Innovation Strategies Adopted by The Performing Arts IndustryMateo FemopaseNo ratings yet
- SOPDocument2 pagesSOPwingwiryawanNo ratings yet
- Catalogue HeizkaDocument48 pagesCatalogue Heizkavotinh20687No ratings yet
- Wa0001Document8 pagesWa0001varshasharma05No ratings yet
- Government of India: WWW - Infracon.nic - inDocument2 pagesGovernment of India: WWW - Infracon.nic - inViraj PatelNo ratings yet
- Variability in The Project Completion DateDocument12 pagesVariability in The Project Completion DateNguyễn Quốc ViệtNo ratings yet
- PrintDocument7 pagesPrintAkshay SagareNo ratings yet
- CV Adinda Putri MDocument1 pageCV Adinda Putri MVeena GamingNo ratings yet
- TvlistDocument6 pagesTvlistMichael CifuentesNo ratings yet
- Medium Ice Cube MachineDocument8 pagesMedium Ice Cube MachineAmit GaragNo ratings yet
- Speech Act Approach (Revised)Document15 pagesSpeech Act Approach (Revised)Udiana Puspa DewiNo ratings yet
- Adding Library Objects To Sbuilder BY Jon Masterson Scruffyduck SceneryDocument17 pagesAdding Library Objects To Sbuilder BY Jon Masterson Scruffyduck SceneryInterim InterimNo ratings yet
- 1 PTI Introduction1Document29 pages1 PTI Introduction1Creation YourNo ratings yet
- TroubleshootingDocument28 pagesTroubleshootingRisoSilvaNo ratings yet
- Examples For Autotrophs That Uses Chemosynthesis - Google SearchDocument1 pageExamples For Autotrophs That Uses Chemosynthesis - Google Searchn9hhb88r95No ratings yet
- The Feminist Critique of Language ApproachDocument1 pageThe Feminist Critique of Language ApproachIstiaque Hossain LabeebNo ratings yet
- IGS System-1Document11 pagesIGS System-1manojNo ratings yet
