Individual Debate
Lincoln Douglas Debate
Lincoln Douglas Debate is "one on one"
argumentation in which the debaters attempt to convince the judge of their side
of the proposition of value.
Debating a Proposition of Value
Lincoln Douglas
debaters do not advocate establishing any new policy or advocate changes in
existing policy.
Format Each speaker has an equal amount of time to persuade
the judge.
Speech Type
|
Time Allotted
|
Affirmative Constructive
|
Six Minutes
|
Cross-Examination by the Negative speaker
|
Three Minutes
|
Neg. Constructive
|
Seven Minutes
|
Cross-Examination by the Aff. Speaker
|
Three Minutes
|
Aff. Rebuttal
|
Four Minutes
|
Neg. Rebuttal
|
Six Minutes
|
Second Aff. Rebuttal
|
Three Minutes
|
Duties of the Speakers
The affirmative speaker is required to support
the resolution.
The negative speaker must oppose the resolution. The negative
may or may not present a negative case.
Both speakers bear the burden of clash
in rebuttals. Each must speak to their opponent's position in the debate.
All
arguments a speaker intends to stand on must be introduced in the first speech
each makes.
Making a Decision
Lincoln Douglas debate is a debate over values. Since it is impossible
to prove a value, the decision should go to the debater who best upholds their
side of the resolution through effective analysis, evidence reasoning,
refutation, and delivery. In LD debate, logic and persuasion are stressed. None
of this relieves the LD debater from the need to use evidence in supporting
assertions of fact.
Preparation Time
Each debater has three minutes of
preparation time, which they may use as they please before speeches. They may
not use preparation time before cross-examination time. Cross-examination may
not be waived and used as preparation time or vice versa. Preparation time
should be called out at one-minute intervals by the timekeeper unless otherwise
specified.
Constructive/Rebuttals
All arguments a debater intends to stand on
during the debate must be raised in constructives. Rebuttals are used to expand
and extend issues which the speaker has already raised. No new arguments are to
be introduced in rebuttals. New arguments issued in rebuttals are to be
disregarded. New evidence and analysis are allowed in rebuttals as long as they
are being used to buttress positions which were introduced in constructives.
Team Debates
Sides
Teams have been assigned to debate affirmative or negative.
The affirmative must uphold the resolution.
The negative must oppose the
resolution either by defending the present system or by presenting an
alternative to the resolution (known as counter-plan).
Speech Time
Speech
time is limited and must occur in the following order:
Speech Type
|
Time Allotted
|
First Affirmative Constructive
|
Eight Minutes
|
Cross-Examination by a Negative Speaker
|
Three Minutes
|
First Negative Constructive
|
Eight Minutes
|
Cross-Examination by an Affirmative Speaker
|
Three Minutes
|
Second Affirmative Constructive
|
Eight Minutes
|
Cross-Examination by the other Negative Speaker
|
Three Minutes
|
Second Negative Constructive
|
Eight Minutes
|
Cross-Examination by the other Affirmative Speaker
|
Three Minutes
|
First Negative Rebuttal
|
Five Minutes
|
First Affirmative Rebuttal
|
Five Minutes
|
Second Negative Rebuttal
|
Five Minutes
|
Second Affirmative Rebuttal
|
Five Minutes
|
Preparation
Time
Each
team has eight minutes of preparation time, which they may use as long as they
please before speeches. They may not use preparation time before
cross-examination time. Cross-examination time may not be waived and used as
preparation time. Preparation time should be called out at one-minute intervals
by the timekeeper unless otherwise specified.
Oral
Prompting
Oral
prompting by the partner of the person speaking is expressly prohibited. This
is in effect during speeches and during cross-examination. No oral time signals
may be given by contestants. Oral prompting shall be penalized by the loss of
the debate by the offending team. If evidence is requested during
cross-examination, the seated partner may assist the witness in finding it.
Constructive/Rebuttals
All
arguments a team intends to stand on during the debate must be raised in
constructive. Rebuttals are to expand and extend issues which the speaker has
already raised. No new arguments are allowed to be introduced in rebuttals
except during the first affirmative rebuttal when responses to second negative
constructive arguments are permitted. New arguments issued in rebuttals should
be disregarded.
New evidence and analyses are allowed in rebuttals as long as
they are being used to buttress positions that were introduced in
constructives.
Evidence
Should
a serious challenge to the legality of evidence used in the round be issued
during the debate, the judges should allow the round to finish and then return
to the judges' room for further direction. Judges may only request evidence
from debaters if and only if its legality has been questioned. Judges may not
call in evidence at the end of a debate to reread it.
During
cross-examination, the questioner may request to see evidence read by their
opponents. All evidence must be returned to the team which owns at the end of
cross-examination.
Full
Citations
The
first time evidence is read in a debate round, the debater must read the full
citations on that piece of evidence. Full citations include: author, full
source title, date, and page number. Full citations are not necessary if the
same source is cited a second time. Failure to read full citations shall void
the impact of that evidence in the debate.
Note
Taking
Judges
are encouraged to take notes during the round. Only contestants and judges are
allowed to take notes during the round. Observers may not flow the debate.
Making
a Decision
There
are many models for judging debate. Two of the most popular are called
"Stock Issues" and "Policy Maker".
Stock Issues Judging
Criterion
This criterion claims that there are five main voting issues in
debate.
Topicality: Does the affirmative plan reasonably adhere to the
limitation of the resolution?
Significance: Is there justification to
change from the present system.
Inherency: Is there a clear barrier
which prevents the present system from solving the problem better than the
present system?
Solvency: Can the proposed plan solve the problem
better than the present system?
Disadvantages: Do the advantages
claimed by the affirmative outweigh the disadvantages claimed by the negative?
Policy Maker Judging Criterion
This criterion claims that the winning team is
the one that presents the superior policy option.
The Affirmative should win
the round if its policy option meets the resolution and gains advantages that
outweigh the disadvantages presented by the Negative team.
The Negative team
should win the round if it proves that the affirmative team's plan is not
topical or if the disadvantages outweigh the advantages.
Regardless of the
model used to judge the debate, please allow the debaters to resolve the issues
themselves. Sides were assigned, the teams did not choose to debate the side of
the resolution they are defending. Try not to allow your own personal feelings
about an issue to influence the outcome of the debate.
Please Make an
Independent Decision
Please do not discuss your decision with other judges
until after the ballots have been turned in.
While looking over the schedule outline, I noticed the Lincoln Douglas Debate, but I never saw that there was a specific time to hold a debate.
ReplyDeleteHow often should we hold debates?
What subjects do you recommend holding them about?
I know there are places that say we can have an activity, is that where the debates would fit in?