Debate Events Offered

The team competes in three events. They differ in how many students are on a side, what kind of question they argue, and how long a round runs.

Public Forum debate asks whether something does more good than harm on balance. The topic changes every month or two, so the research stays current: a recent one asked whether the country should pause construction of the largest data centers.

Public Forum was designed to be understood by an attentive member of the public, and in Wisconsin that matters, because most judges are parents and community members rather than debate specialists. Clear beats fast in this event, every time.

How a round runs. Before the round a coin flip decides which side each team takes and which team speaks first. Then the speeches get shorter on purpose.

• Two four-minute constructive speeches, one per side, which build each team's case.
• Two four-minute rebuttals, which answer the other team's case.
• Two three-minute summaries, which narrow the round to the arguments that matter.
• Two two-minute final focus speeches, which give the judge one or two reasons to vote.
• Three three-minute crossfires in between, where both debaters may ask and answer questions.
• A few minutes of prep time per team, spent however the team likes across the round.

Formal plans and counterplans are not allowed here. A team defends the resolution as it is written.

Lincoln-Douglas debate asks what ought to be done and how we would know: moral and philosophical questions rather than predictions. A recent topic asked whether colonizing outer space is a moral imperative. Topics rotate every two months, so a debater rebuilds their case about three times a year.

A traditional case runs on a value, the ideal the judge should prioritize, such as justice or human dignity, and a criterion, the test for reaching it. The rest of the case has to connect back to both.

How a round runs. One debater does every job: research, speaking, questioning, note-taking and strategy.

• Affirmative constructive, six minutes: define the terms, set the framework, read the case.
• Negative constructive, seven minutes: the negative case plus answers to the affirmative one.
• First affirmative rebuttal, four minutes: answer all seven minutes of that, and rebuild.
• Negative rebuttal, six minutes: narrow to the best path and compare the two frameworks.
• Second affirmative rebuttal, three minutes: one path, their best objection, the ballot.
• Two three-minute cross-examinations, one in each direction.
• Four minutes of prep time each, split however the debater likes.

The affirmative speaks first and last; the negative gets one long speech in the middle. Answering a seven-minute speech in four minutes is the pressure this event is built around.

Policy debate asks whether one specific plan should be adopted, and it uses a single resolution for the whole season: this year, whether the federal government should establish national health insurance. That makes the research exceptionally deep. Quoted evidence is read aloud in the round, and a quoted passage is called a card.

The affirmative reads a plan, why the situation is not already improving, what is going wrong now, and evidence that the plan would work. The negative answers the case directly and can also run separate arguments: a disadvantage (the plan causes a worse new problem), a counterplan (a different plan without the downside), topicality (the plan is not what the resolution asked for) or a kritik (a challenge to the assumptions behind the plan).

How a round runs.

• Four eight-minute constructive speeches, two per side, where new arguments are allowed.
• Four five-minute rebuttals, two per side, which may only extend and answer.
• Four three-minute cross-examinations, one after each constructive speech.
• Several minutes of prep time per team.

Partners have different roles and win or lose together. The hardest speech in the event is the first affirmative rebuttal, which has five minutes to answer thirteen consecutive negative minutes.

Cross-examination is the part of a round where one side asks the other direct questions. It is not a speech. Debaters use it to clarify what the other side is claiming, to find a gap in the reasoning, or to make an opponent commit to a position they can then answer. Public Forum calls its version crossfire, and in crossfire both debaters may ask as well as answer.

Prep time is a bank of minutes each side may spend during the round, between speeches, to decide what the next speech has to do. When it runs out, the next speaker starts anyway. Learning to spend it deliberately is one of the first real skills a debater picks up.

One judge, usually sitting at the back of the room with a pen, decides the round. They are often a parent or a community member rather than a debate specialist.

The judge takes notes on every argument as it is made, on a running record debaters call a flow. At the end they decide which side gave the better reasons to vote for it, write down the reason for decision explaining why, and submit a ballot. In most Wisconsin tournaments they also give each speaker a score for how well they spoke.

Judges do not decide who was louder or who they personally agree with. An argument that nobody answers is usually treated as true, so coverage matters, and the side that explains why its strongest argument outweighs the other side's usually wins.

Parents can judge, and the team needs judges to compete at all. What that involves is answered on the parent questions page.

A typical Wisconsin tournament is at a host high school on a Saturday. Students arrive around 8:00 AM and compete into the afternoon, with several rounds through the day, gaps between them, and elimination rounds at the end for the students who advance. Food during the day is one of the costs families cover; the parent questions page sets out the rest.