WSDC Upper-Intermediate Debate Questions

In WSDC, what is a “principled argument”?

• A claim based entirely on empirical evidence and practical outcomes

• An argument that is supported only by examples from recent history

• A moral or ethical claim rooted in values independent of consequence

• A strategic claim used solely to win judge sympathy

What best defines the burden of rejoinder?

• The obligation of the affirmative to provide the main framing

• The duty of each side to rebut arguments made against them

• The right of reply speaker to summarize the round fairly

• The task of introducing new arguments in reply speeches

What is the strategic value of running a counter-model in a debate?

• It highlights a practical failure in the opposition’s plan

• It introduces new stakeholders into the debate

• It offers an alternative solution that better achieves the same goal

• It removes the need to defend the motion’s core wording

What is “comparative weighing” in WSDC argumentation?

• Providing rebuttal that is equal to both sides

• Showing why your impact is more important than theirs

• Comparing your content to the rules of WSDC

• Using weighing only in the final speech

Which of the following motions is most likely to be a “policy motion”?

• This House regrets the glorification of martyrdom

• This House believes that the state should subsidize cultural festivals

• This House prefers a world without national borders

• This House believes that individuals should not be patriotic

What is a “mechanism” in a policy debate?

• A stakeholder that is impacted by the debate outcome

• The method used to implement the proposed change

• The emotional motivation for a team’s moral stance

• The justification for a philosophical belief

Which of the following best defines “fiat” in debate theory?

• The rule that teams cannot introduce new arguments in reply

• The assumed ability of the team to implement the policy

• The requirement for the proposition to defend the status quo

• The rhetorical right to interrupt an opposing speaker

What distinguishes “framing” from “contextualization”?

• Framing offers a moral lens; contextualization offers historical background

• Framing refers to speaker order; contextualization refers to stakeholder roles

• Framing structures how issues are weighed; contextualization explains their relevance

• Framing is for reply speakers only; contextualization is for 1st speakers only

What is a “knife” in WSDC terminology?

• An overused example used to cut the opponent’s case

• A contradiction between two arguments on the same team

• A last-minute rebuttal in the reply speech

• A model that fails to protect all stakeholders

What is a “tight” motion?

• A motion where the opposition has no viable ground

• A motion with strict word limits on each speaker

• A motion that is repeated too often in tournaments

• A motion that is phrased without any ambiguity