NEW
Font size
WorksheetsTeam - up
Total questions: 50
Worksheet time: 38mins
pieces of evidence
turn
cards
harm
cross-x
What the aff side does to cause bad things to happen
turn
link
brink
harm
Collection of arguments supporting the resolution
case
negative
topicality
solvency
proof that the bad things won't happen in the status quo
link
harm
turn
brink
when arguments are summarized
rebuttal
prep-time
position
constructive
type of argument that states what the other team said is opposite
turn
harm
run
brink
what the aff side does to cause bad things to happen
link
harm
brink
turn
what the aff side does to cause bad things to happen
harm
turn
brink
link
proof that the bad things won't happen in the status quo
link
harm
brink
turn
when arguments are introduced
rebuttal
position
constructive
prep-time
The amount of time that you have to prepare
prep-time
advantage
constructive
rebuttal
burden of the negative in arguing a DA, impacts action in round
uniqueness
disadvantage
brink
inherency
the present system
affirmative
topicality
negative
status quo
proof that the bad things won't happen in the status quo
link
harm
brink
turn
barrier preventing the adoption of the plan in the status quo, cause absence of the resolution
inherency
uniqueness
advantage
disadvantage
The side that favors changing the status quo in order to conform to the resolution
Topicality
Affirmative
Disadvantages
Advantages
A claim and warrant
topicality
warrant
argument
refutation
Situation that something that could go either way
Impact
Kritik
claim
Brink
Offensive ways to attack
Off case
Debate
Resolution off Debate
Plan
Falls under the topic of the debate
Refutation
affirmative
topicality
Time frame
In order for the affirmative team to win, their plan must retain all of the stock issues, which are Harms, Inherency, Solvency, Topicality, and Significance. For the negative to win, they only need to prove that the affirmative fails to meet one of the stock issues.
True
False
Resolution
the proposition or subject offered to debate
refers to the reasonable interpretation and limits of the resolution
the argument presented is pertinent to the resolution in spirit or literally, it is topical
the current state of affairs, the present system
Spirit of the Resolution
the current state of affairs, the present system
the argument presented is pertinent to the resolution in spirit or literally, it is topical
the proposition or subject offered to debate
refers to the reasonable interpretation and limits of the resolution
Affirmative
the argument presented is pertinent to the resolution in spirit or literally, it is topical
the current state of affairs, the present system
arguing in favor of the resolution
the side that opposes the resolution
Negative
arguing in favor of the resolution
refers to the reasonable interpretation and limits of the resolution
the side that opposes the resolution
the proposition or subject offered to debate
Contention
claims made for or against the resolution – usually stated in one declarative sentence
rebuilds arguments after attacks, refutes arguments of the opposing team, and summarizes the debate
the key points in a debate that are crucial to the outcome, reasons why the judge should give the decision to a team
a concept, standard, or ideal that makes a judgment; used in LD debate
A person who are unfamiliar with debate theory; your average person off the street
Lay Judges
Ballot
Time Signals
Ballot
Ad hominem fallacy
attacking a person rather than the argument
claiming that something is true because of popular belief
Ad populum fallacy
attacking a person rather than the argument
claiming that something is true because of popular belief
Octo-Finals
Elimination rounds comprised of the top 16 debate teams/16 debaters
Elimination rounds comprised of the top 8 debate teams/debaters
Elimination rounds consisting of the top four debate teams/debaters
an elimination round involving the top two teams/debaters in debate
BYE
teams with equal records debate each other in order to determine which teams advance
a complete debate (at tournaments you have a minimum of 4 preliminary rounds
a round in which you don't compete; usually because there are an uneven number of teams/debaters.
an experienced judge’s educational philosophy, the model or view that guides their decision
an experienced judge’s educational philosophy, the model or view that guides their decision - what they deem important in a round and what they do not want to see or hear
Lay Judges
Judging Paradigms
everything in the first affirmative constructive
stock issues
case
plan
advantage
the present system
case
status quo
status pro
advantage
The "stock issues" are...
watching the stock market
things the aff must be able to prove
all the good things that should happen as a result of the aff's plan
making sure you have enough evidence
The Stock Issue of Inherency in Policy Debate.
a debate about whether the problem is harmful or not
a debate about whether the aff's plan will solve the problem
a debate about whether the aff's plan fits the resolution
a barrier that keeps the problem of the debate stuck in the status quo (things aren't getting better)
solvency
a debate about whether the problem is harmful or not
a debate about whether the aff's plan will solve the problem
a debate about whether the aff's plan fits the resolution
a barrier that keeps the problem of the debate stuck in the status quo (things aren't getting better)
harms
a debate about whether the problem is harmful or not
a debate about whether the aff's plan will solve the problem
a debate about whether the aff's plan fits the resolution
a barrier that keeps the problem of the debate stuck in the status quo (things aren't getting better)
topicality
a debate about whether the problem is harmful or not
a debate about whether the aff's plan will solve the problem
a debate about whether the aff's plan fits the resolution
a barrier that keeps the problem of the debate stuck in the status quo (things aren't getting better)
what the aff proposes to do to solve the status quo
disadvantage
counterplan
advantage
plan
Who has the burden of proof in a policy debate?
negative
affirmative
What is the burden of refutation?
The negative must successfully refute all of the Aff's stock issues in order to win the debate.
The negative must successfully refute at least one of the Aff's stock issues in order to win the debate.
CROSS-EXAMINATION
Time used to get ready to speak
Questioning an opponent
Speech for building arguments
Speech for clarifying, extending, answering, and telling the judge why you win.
CONSTRUCTIVE
Time used to get ready to speak
Questioning an opponent
Speech for building arguments
Speech for clarifying, extending, answering, and telling the judge why you win.
REBUTTAL SPEECH
Time used to get ready to speak
Questioning an opponent
Speech for building arguments
Speech for clarifying, extending, and answering, and telling the judge why you win.
PREP TIME
Time used to get ready to speak
Questioning an opponent
Speech for building arguments
Speech for clarifying, extending, answering, and telling the judge why you win
If a debater does not answer an argument right away, that is called:
Mis-Direction
Strategic Choice
Dropped Argument
Opportunity Cost
A string of arguments that tell a specific story is called a:
Strategy
Case or Position
Cross-Examination
Rebuttal
Which comes first in a debate round
Constructive speech
Cross-examination
Rebuttal speech
Preparation time
What two speeches make up the negative block
2NC and 2NR
1NC and 1NR
2NC and 1NR
1NC and 2NR
