Debate Format and Overview
I. Interpretation of the Resolution
The team supporting the resolution in debate is referred to as the proposition. The team negating the
resolution is referred to as the opposition. The proposition team makes a case for the motion for
debate. This motion is generally a statement of value or perceived fact with which there is room to
disagree. Examples might include anything from "Peer pressure is more beneficial than harmful" to
"violent video games should banned" to "the United States should ratify the Kyoto accord". The topic is
announced prior to the start of the debate. The opposition opposes the case made by the proposition
team. There are three debaters or teams of debaters per side; each gives one speech.
II. The Debate Format
A. The format in debate consists of six speeches and proceeds as follows:
First Proposition Constructive 5 minutes
First Opposition Constructive 5 minutes
Second Proposition Constructive 5 minutes
Second Opposition Constructive 5 minutes
Opposition Rebuttal 3 minutes
Proposition Rebuttal 3 minutes
B. In debate each speech has a specific purpose.
1. First Proposition Constructive
The speaker makes a case for the motion of the debater, providing proof for the topic with three or four
major points.
2. First Opposition Constructive
This speaker makes several arguments against the proposition team’s case, and refutes the proposition’s
major points.
3. Second Proposition Constructive
This speaker should rebuild and extend the proposition’s case. This means that this speaker must extend
and amplify the original proposition points and refute the opposition’s major arguments against the
proposition case.
4. Second Opposition Constructive
This speaker amplifies the opposition arguments against the proposition case, providing new
information about why the opposition team should win the debate. This speaker should respond to the
proposition’s answers to the opposition team’s original arguments.
5. Opposition Rebuttal
The speaker must pull the debate together and explain why, given all of the arguments in the debate,
the opposition team should still win the debate. This speaker should finalize refutation of the
proposition’s major points.
6. Proposition Rebuttal
This speaker should summarize the issues in the debate and explain why, despite the opposition’s
arguments, the proposition team should win the debate. This speaker should refute the opposition’s
major points.
C. Points of information and heckling are permitted in middle school debate.
1. Points of Information
A debater may request a point of information (either verbally or by rising) at any time after the first
minute and before the last minute of any constructive speech. The debater holding the floor may accept
or refuse points of information. If accepted, the debater making the request has fifteen seconds to make
a statement or to ask a question. During the point of information, the speaking time of the floor debater
continues.
2. Heckling
Properly performed, heckling increases interaction among participants and makes the debate more
dynamic. Debaters may use positive heckles (knocking on the table or saying “hear, hear”) to signify
their support for a current speaker. Debaters may also use negative heckles (saying “shame” in a low
voice) to signal an opponent’s misrepresentation of an argument. In all circumstances, debaters should
be judicious in their use of heckling. Heckling should not be used simply to express disagreement, the
very purpose of the debate itself is to encourage the expression of disagreement in structured speeches.
A judge may penalize heckling that becomes disruptive when allocating speaker points.
III. Judging Guidelines
For universal protocols on judging any speech or debate event, please refer to Judge Accreditation
Process and Standards. Specific elements of judging middle school debate follow.
A. Weighing Arguments
A debate judge must regard the formulation of arguments as an important skill, as something that
should be encouraged among fledging debaters. Lucid paraphrases of opposing arguments followed
clear rebuttals (formulations like “they say” “we reply”), demonstrations of strategic awareness of
argument extensions, and the use of persuasive evidence should be looked upon favorably. The
introduction of new arguments in the rebuttals should be discouraged. If an idea does not have a firm
grounding in the constructive that precedes it, it can prove to be an unfair burden for a team’s
opponents. Intellectual honesty should be rewarded. Obnoxious behavior should receive an appropriate
response. At the end of the round, judges should refer to their notes or "flow" and arrive at an unbiased
decision regarding which team did the most persuasive job arguing the issues raised.
B. Writing a Ballot, Offering Suggestions, and Assigning Speaker Points
Judges should be generous in writing their ballots and in offering constructive suggestions. A thirty-point
scale should be used in assigning speaker points, but the age level of the debaters should remain in the
forefront of the judge's mind. As such, an effort should be made not only to bolster the debaters'
confidence, but also to encourage them to pursue debate in the future.