Public Forum Curriculum

Home , Case (policy debate), Evidence (policy debate), Impact calculus, Policy debate, Urban Debate League

Atlanta Urban Debate League Public Forum Curriculum

Find us online at: youtube.com/atlantadebate facebook.com/atlantadebate instagram.com/atlantadebate twitter.com/atlantadebate Public Forum Curriculum Atlanta Urban Debate League Table of Contents Contents Table of Contents ...... 2 What Is Public Forum? ...... 3 What’s New?: An Introduction ...... 3 What Is Public Forum? ...... 3 Who Should Debate In Public Forum? ...... 3 Which Is Better: Policy or Public Forum? ...... 3 What’s Different?: Policy v. Public Forum ...... 4 Topic Release (Calendar) ...... 5 Sample Resolution ...... 5 How Do I Debate?: Speech Times & Speaker Positions ...... 6 What Is My Role?: Sides & Speaker Positions ...... 7 Choosing Sides ...... 7 Choosing A Speaker Position ...... 7 Asking & Answering Questions: What Is Crossfire? ...... 8 What Is Crossfire? ...... 8 Which Debater(s) Participate In Crossfire?...... 8 What Is A Good Crossfire? How Does It Help Me Win? ...... 8 Writing A Case ...... 9 Case Structure ...... 9 The Introduction ...... 9 Framework ...... 9 Contentions ...... 9 Conclusion ...... 9 Sample Case ...... 10 Introduction ...... 10 Framework ...... 10 Contentions ...... 10 Conclusion ...... 11 Research & Evidence ...... 12 Evidence & Public Forum ...... 12 Getting Started ...... 12

Public Forum Curriculum Atlanta Urban Debate League What Is Public Forum? What’s New?: An Introduction

Beginning in SY 2021 – 2022, the Atlanta Urban Debate League will offer Public Forum (PF), a new event for High School competitors. The goal is to provide an accessible, audience-friendly alternative to policy debate!

What Is Public Forum?

Public Forum is an audience-friendly, partner event where participants debate a series of month(s)- long topics (resolutions) focused on current events. Unlike Policy Debate, where competitors debate the merits of a plan, Public Forum debates whether the resolution is on-balance a good or bad idea. Competitors in Public Forum should expect: ➢ Month(s)-Long Topics (Resolutions) ➢ Partner Debate (2 v. 2) ➢ Shorter Speech Times ➢ Audience-Friendly Style ➢ Lay (Less Experienced) Judging Who Should Debate in Public Forum?

Any high school student participating in a high school debate tournament can debate in Public Forum! Since Public Forum has monthly topics and lay (less experienced) judging, it is an ideal event for students who: ➢ Want To Try Debate ➢ Are Novices / Learning Debate ➢ Have Seasonal / Outside Commitments (e.g. Student Athletes) ➢ Prefer An Audience-Friendly Public Speaking Style ➢ Prefer A Less Formal Argument Structure Which Is Better: Policy or Public Forum?

Neither! All debate is good debate. Public Forum and Policy Debate are different events with different goals. ➢ Public Forum mimics a public debate on current events. The goal is to persuade an average person to support (or not support) a given topic.

➢ Policy Debate mimics the technical, evidence-based approach of government decision- making. The goal is to persuade a policy expert to support (or not support) a government policy.

Public Forum Curriculum Atlanta Urban Debate League What’s Different?: Policy v. Public Forum

Policy Debate v. Public Forum Both Events Policy Debate Public Forum Debate an assigned topic Policy has a year-long Public Forum topics change. (resolution). resolution. ➢ Fall Semester topics change every 2 months. ➢ Spring Semester topics change every month. Have assigned sides. Policy focuses on government Public Forum focuses on current policy. events. ➢ One team affirms (supports) the resolution. ➢ The Affirmative proposes a ➢ The “Pro” side defends the ➢ One team negates plan. resolution as a whole. (opposes) the resolution. ➢ The Negative defends ➢ The “Con” side opposes either the status quo or a the resolution. competitive policy. Have a judge vote for which team ➢ Judges in policy debate ➢ Judges in Public Forum did the better debating. vote “for” or “against” the decide if the topic is plan. generally a good or bad ➢ They tend to be more idea. experienced and ➢ They tend to be less technical. experienced (lay) and focus on the big picture. Use research to support Policy debate uses a formal Public Forum uses a less formal arguments. evidence structure (“cards”). evidence structure.

Require a FULL CITATION for all ➢ “Cards” are extended block ➢ Sources may be quoted or sources. quotes with a formal paraphrased (like a school citation. essay or research paper). ➢ Most speeches heavily rely ➢ Students do their OWN on reading, extending, or research. comparing “cards.” ➢ A “packet” is NOT provided. Follow an assigned speech Policy debate has longer speech Public Forum has shorter speech structure. times. times.

Have the “Pro” / Affirmative speak ➢ Both sides have two ➢ Both sides have one first. constructives and two constructive and one rebuttals. rebuttal. ➢ The Negative speaks ➢ The Summary & Final back-to-back (the “Block”). Focus speeches focus on the “big picture.” Have debaters ask and answer Policy Debate has cross- Public Forum has crossfire questions. examination. (mutual cross-examination).

➢ After a constructive, ONLY ➢ After certain speeches, the opposing team asks BOTH teams ask and questions. answer questions.

Public Forum Curriculum Atlanta Urban Debate League What’s The Topic?: Topic Areas & Rotation Unlike Policy Debate, Public Forum has a series of month(s)-long resolutions (topics). Each topic can be divided into two parts: ➢ Topic Area: A general research area released prior to the school year. o In the Fall Semester, topic areas cover a two-month cycle. o In the Spring Semester, topic areas cover a one-month cycle. o Each resolution during the cycle will fall within the assigned Topic Area. o This IS NOT the resolution debaters affirm or negate. ➢ Resolution: A specific premise that debaters affirm or negate. o In the Fall Semester, resolutions are on a two-month cycle. o In the Spring Semester, resolutions are on a one-month cycle. o Each resolution is announced one month prior to being debated. ▪ For example, the resolution for March would be released on February 1st. ➢ All Topic Areas / Resolutions can be found on the National Speech & Debate Association website (www.speechanddebate.org/topics/) Topic Release (Calendar) ➢ Summer: All topic areas and potential resolutions are released following the conclusion of the National Speech & Debate Association National Tournament. o Topic Areas are decided prior to the start of the school year and will not change. o The Public Forum Wording Committee assigns a set of two potential resolutions to each topic area. ➢ Early August o September / October Resolution Released ➢ October 1st o November / December Resolution Released ➢ December 1st o January Resolution Released ➢ January 1st o February Resolution Released ➢ February 1st o March Resolution Released ➢ March 1st o April Resolution Released ➢ May 1st o National Speech & Debate Tournament Resolution Released Sample Resolution ➢ Resolved: The North Atlantic Treaty Organization should substantially increase its defense commitments to the Baltic States. o The Topic Area (Europe) was released in June 2021. o The Resolution (North Atlantic Treaty Organization) was released on August 8, 2021. o The word “should” indicates desirability. ▪ The Pro side will argue NATO should INCREASE its defense commitments. ▪ The Con side will argue that NATO should NOT increase its defense commitments. o There are NO PLANS. Each side must defend the resolution is generally (or on-balance) a good or bad idea.

Public Forum Curriculum Atlanta Urban Debate League How Do I Debate?: Speech Times & Speaker Positions

Public Forum Speech Times Speech Length Speaker Purpose Constructive (Pro) 4:00 1st Speaker (Pro) ➢ The Constructive Speeches lay the Constructive 4:00 1st Speaker (Con) foundation for the debate. (Con) ➢ Each side will make 2 – 3 arguments (Contentions) in favor of (Pro) or against (Con) the resolution. ➢ This speech is researched and written prior to the tournament. Crossfire 3:00 1st Speaker ➢ The 1st Speakers from each team (Pro & Con) ask and answer questions. ➢ A Crossfire is like cross-examination, except each debater can BOTH ASK and ANSWER questions.

Rebuttal (Pro) 4:00 2nd Speaker ➢ The Rebuttal Speeches answer the Rebuttal (Con) 4:00 2nd Speaker arguments made by the other team during its Constructive. ➢ A good rebuttal speaker will both DEFEND his or her “case” and ANSWER the other team’s arguments. Crossfire 3:00 2nd Speaker ➢ The 2nd Speakers from each team (Pro & Con) ask and answer questions. Summary (Pro) 3:00 1st Speaker (Pro) ➢ The Summary Speech “summarizes” Summary (Con) 3:00 1st Speaker (Con) the debate. ➢ A good summary focuses on defending (or answering) the most important arguments and tells the judge how they should be evaluated. ➢ Debaters should NOT try to answer every argument made during the Rebuttal. Grand Crossfire 3:00 All Speakers ➢ ALL SPEAKERS ask and answer questions. ➢ A good Grand Crossfire focuses on the arguments made in the Summary Speeches. Final Focus (Pro) 2:00 2nd Speaker (Pro) ➢ The Final Focus focuses the debate Final Focus (Con) 2:00 2nd Speaker (Con) on 1 – 2 arguments. ➢ Impact Calculus is a must. Write the ballot for the judge.

Preparation Time 3:00 ➢ Each team is assigned three minutes of preparation time.

Public Forum Curriculum Atlanta Urban Debate League What Is My Role?: Sides & Speaker Positions

Like policy debate, each debater will have a side (Pro / Con) and a Speaker Position (1st / 2nd). Choosing Sides ➢ Each team will either affirm or negate the resolution. o The team that affirms the resolution is the “Pro” team. o The team that negates the resolution is the “Con” team. ➢ When pairings for a round are released, each team will be assigned the Pro or Con side. o Each team will affirm and negate the resolution twice, for a total of four rounds. ➢ In League tournaments, the speaking order and sides are chosen for you. o Each team will be assigned a side on the pairing before the debate. o The “Pro” speaks first and the “Con” speaks second. o Non-League tournaments may flip a coin for sides and speaking order. ▪ This IS NOT the case for tournaments hosted by the AUDL. Choosing a Speaker Position ➢ Before the tournament, each team will need to decide who is the 1st / 2nd Speaker for EACH side. ➢ The 2nd Speaker is the “Captain” of the team. They are responsible for: o Writing & Researching the Constructive Speech o Giving the Rebuttal & Final Focus Speeches o Making In-Round Decisions o Assisting the 1st Speaker with the Constructive & Summary Speeches ➢ The 1st Speaker “assists” the 2nd Speaker. They are responsible for: o Learning & Delivering the Constructive Speech o Giving The Constructive & Summary Speeches o Assisting the 2nd Speaker with The Rebuttal & Final Focus Speeches ➢ To keep things equal, speaker position should VARY by side. o Example: Cayden and Simion are debating. ▪ On the Pro side, Cayden is the 2nd Speaker and Simion is the 1st Speaker. ▪ BUT, on the Con side, Simion is the 2nd Speaker and Cayden is the 1st Speaker.

Public Forum Curriculum Atlanta Urban Debate League

Asking & Answering Questions: What Is Crossfire? What Is Crossfire? ➢ Crossfire is a form of mutual cross-examination in which debaters BOTH ask and answer questions. ➢ Crossfire takes place after each set of speeches except the Final Focus. o After the Constructives & Rebuttals, the debaters who just spoke will participate in a “Crossfire.” o After the Summary Speeches, ALL debaters will participate in a “Grand Crossfire.” ➢ In Crossfire, each side will ask and answer questions about the debate. o The team who spoke last (the “Con”) asks the first question. o Both teams alternate asking and answering questions. o Example ▪ Cayden (Pro) and Simion (Con) just finished the Constructive Speeches. ▪ Since Simion spoke last, he asks the first question. ▪ Cayden answers the question, then asks a question of his own. ▪ Both Cayden and Simion alternate until time expires. Which Debater(s) Participate In Crossfire? ➢ Crossfire (1 v. 1) takes place after both the Constructives and Rebuttals. o The two debaters who just spoke participate in Crossfire. o The debater who spoke last (from the “Con” side) asks the first question. ➢ Grand Crossfire (2 v. 2) takes place after the Summary Speeches. o ALL debaters participate in the Grand Crossfire. o The team who spoke last (the “Con) asks the first question. o The 2nd Speaker of each team takes the lead for his / her side.

What Is a Good Crossfire? How Does It Help Me Win?

➢ Crossfire has three goals: o Get information from the judge. o Get information from your opponents o Defend your arguments (or attack those of your opponent) ➢ An excellent Crossfire helps you win by defending / attacking key arguments in the debate. To do this, Crossfire must be ORGANIZED and MAKE ARGUMENTS. o To ensure Crossfire stays organized, your team: ▪ Should NOT talk over the other team ▪ Should NOT ask excessive follow-up questions ▪ Should BE RESPECTFUL of the other team ▪ Should ALTERNATE asking and answering questions ▪ Should ANSWER questions precisely and concisely o To ensure Crossfire makes argument, your team: ▪ Should ASK clear, specific questions related to key arguments in the debate. ▪ Should FOCUS on one or two arguments. Time is short! ▪ Should REFERENCE evidence / research that supports your argument ▪ Should AVOID open-ended (or Yes / No) questions ➢ For more tips, check our policy debate curriculum on atlantadebate.org! All the tips for a good Cross- Examination apply to Crossfire.

Public Forum Curriculum Atlanta Urban Debate League Writing a Case Case Structure A Public Forum case consists of four parts: Introduction, Framework, Contentions, and Conclusion. The Introduction ➢ An Introduction identifies the resolution, identifies the side (“Pro” / “Con”), and presents a thesis that previews the arguments of the Constructive. o Reading the resolution helps the judge know what the topic is! o Identifying your side (“Pro” / “Con”) tells the judge what position your team will take. o A clear thesis previews your contentions. ➢ An Introduction should take no more than 15 – 20 seconds. Framework ➢ Framework tells the judge how to evaluate the arguments in the debate. o Framework often refers to the wording of the resolution. o Common Frameworks include: ▪ Cost-benefit analysis: The judge should weigh the costs and benefits of the topic. ▪ Utilitarianism: The judge should prioritize the greatest good for the greatest number. ▪ Human Rights: The judge has a moral obligation to uphold human dignity. ▪ National Security: The judge should prioritize the national security of the United States. • This is common on topics of government policy. ➢ Framework should take no more than 15 – 20 seconds. Framework arguments will develop during the debate. Contentions ➢ Contentions are arguments for or against the resolution. Most cases have 2 – 3 contentions. ➢ A Contention is structured like a paragraph. It includes: o A topic sentence identifying the argument. o Research / evidence proving the argument is true. o A concluding statement restating the argument or explaining why it’s important (the impact). ➢ Contentions should take up MOST of the speech.

Conclusion ➢ The Conclusion summarizes your contentions, restates your thesis, and urges the judge to vote for your side. o Summarizing your contentions helps the judge identify your arguments o Restating your thesis crystallizes your position. o Urging the judge to vote for your side is a no-brainer. It’s why they’re there! ➢ A Conclusion should be no more than 15 – 20 seconds. It’s very short.

Public Forum Curriculum Atlanta Urban Debate League Sample Case Introduction

Hello! I’m Clay, and today I’ll be affirming the resolution, Resolved: The North Atlantic Treaty organization should substantially increase its defense commitments to the Baltic states. Today, the Pro team will prove that increased NATO defense commitments to the Baltics are necessary to deter Russian aggression. Framework The Framework for today’s debate is National Security. Since the Declaration of Independence, sovereignty and national security have gone hand in hand. As Edwin Meese, a Fellow at the Heritage Foundation, explains: “The Declaration of Independence announced the sovereignty of the United States and, with it, the ‘full Power to levy War.’ Accordingly, the Constitution’s Framers viewed the security of the nation to be the foremost responsibility of the federal government.”1 Contentions Contention One Is Russian Aggression. Sub-Point A is The Past: Russia has a history of unjustified, aggressive policies in the region. Consider, for example, the 2008 Russian invasion of Georgia, which forced thousands of ethnic Georgians from their homes. Similarly, the 2014 invasion of Crimea resulted in an ongoing civil war between Russian-backed separatists and government forces that resulted in over 40,000 casualties. As Radio Free Europe reports, “Some 13,000 people have been killed, a quarter of them civilians, and as many as 30,000 wounded in the war in eastern Ukraine since it broke out in April 2014.”2 From the 1968 invasion of Czechoslovakia to the 2014 invasion of Crimea, it is clear that Russian military aggression is not a bug, it’s a feature. As Matt Cesare, an analyst with the Foreign Policy Research Institute, explains: “The West has seen military exercises led by Russia turn into full-blown interventions before. The invasion of Czechoslovakia in 1968 is one such example… That same logic could be partly applied to the Baltic states.”3 Sub-Point B is The Present: Unfortunately, the invasion of Ukraine was only the beginning. As Paul Grod, President of the Ukrainian World Congress, concludes: “Since the attack on Ukraine began in 2014, Russian’s revisionist campaign of aggression has gone global. Moscow has conducted assassinations, cyberattacks, disinformation campaigns, and a range of other provocations in Europe, North America, and beyond.”4 In fact, the threat of Russian invasion is so likely that, according to Sarah White, a Senior Research Analyst at the Lexington Institute, “[t]he Baltic States – Estonia, Latvia, and Lithuania – have been one of the most commonly identified future hot spots and a particularly disastrous area for conflict to break out.”5

1 Meese, Edwin. Ronald Reagan Distinguished Fellow Emeritus At The Heritage Foundation. Who Is Responsible For America’s National Security?. The Heritage Foundation. August 19, 2011. https://www.heritage.org/the- constitution/report/who-responsible-americas-security 2 Miller, Christopher. Journalist For Radio Free Europe. Death Toll Up to 13,000 In Ukraine Conflict, Says U.N. Rights Office. Radio Free Europe/ Radio Liberty. February 26, 2019. https://www.rferl.org/a/death-toll-up-to-13-000-in-ukraine- conflict-says-un-rights-office/29791647.html 3 Cesare, Matt. Fall 2020 Intern With The Eurasia Program At The Foreign Policy Research Institute. Russian Encroachment in the Baltics: The Role of Russian Media and Military. December 14, 2020. Foreign Policy Research Institute. https://www.fpri.org/article/2020/12/russian-encroachment-in-the-baltics-the-role-of-russian-media-and-military-2/ 4 Grod, Paul. President of the Ukrainian World Congress. NATO must stand with Ukraine against Russian aggression. The Atlantic Council. June 12, 2021. https://www.atlanticcouncil.org/blogs/ukrainealert/nato-must-stand-with-ukraine- against-russian-aggression/ 5 White, Sarah. Senior Research Analyst At The Lexington Institute. Russian Aggression In The Baltic Will Not Look Like Crimea. Real Clear Defense. May 21, 2021. 10

Public Forum Curriculum Atlanta Urban Debate League Contention Two Is Deterrence: The threat of Russian invasion if real; the only question is what the North Atlantic Treaty Organization can do about it. Increased NATO defense commitments are vital to deter Russian aggression. Sub-Point A Is Alliances: Consider, for example, the statements of our allies, who are calling for increased commitment. As Lithuanian Defense Minister Raimundas Karoblis told Defense News, “[The] U.S. is the most powerful ally and its deterrent effect is not comparable to other allies. I am convinced that Russian would not dare to test NATO if U.S. military units are deployed on [a] persistent basis in the three Baltic states.”6 This is not an isolated statement. Poland, for example, recently offered to pay the U.S. over two billion dollars to host forward deployed forces. Sub-Point B Is Permanent Presence: NATO has bolstered its presence in the Baltics since 2014. For example, NATO recently introduced Enhanced Forward Presence (or eFP) units to the region. However, as Sally Painter, a Senior Adviser to the Atlantic Council, concludes: “[T]he non-permanent nature of these programs is not sufficient to guarantee the full military capabilities of the Baltics nor to bring peace of mind to its citizens. Given increased Russian presence in the region, each country must rely heavily on the collective defense agreement of the North Atlantic Treaty if it hopes to stand a chance… The United States together with its European partners… must do more.”7 Permanent presence is the key. Our allies, like Lithuania and Poland, are asking for permanent commitments. NATO must follow-through. Conclusion The conclusion, then, is clear. To prevent Russian military aggression in the Baltics, NATO must increase its defense commitments to include a permanent military presence. Vote “Pro” to deter Russian aggression and protect U.S. national security.

https://www.realcleardefense.com/articles/2021/05/21/russian_aggression_in_the_baltics_will_not_look_like_crimea_778 176.html. 6 Judson, Jen. Journalist For Defense News. Do The Baltics Need More U.S. Military Support To Deter Russia?. Defense News. July 16, 2019. https://www.defensenews.com/land/2019/07/15/do-the-baltics-need-more-us-military-support-to- deter-russia/ 7 Painter, Sally. Senior Adviser to the Atlantic Council. U.S. Must Remain Committed To NATO and the Baltic States. September 8, 2020. 11

Public Forum Curriculum Atlanta Urban Debate League Research & Evidence

Public Forum is open evidence. While the League provides a “packet” for policy debate, competitors in Public Forum must research and write their own cases. Evidence & Public Forum ➢ Public Forum has different evidence standards than policy debate. While policy debate uses long, extended block quotes (“cards”), Public Forum is similar to an essay / research paper for school. This means that you can: o Paraphrase Sources o Quote Short Phrases AND / OR Full Sentences o Use Ellipses ➢ You must provide a FULL CITATION for any source referenced or paraphrased. This citation should include: o Author Name (First / Last) o Author Qualifications o Title o Publication Name o Publication Date o URL (If Website) o The above elements must be available somewhere in the students’ cases, but they do NOT need to be formatted based on any formal citation style (e.g., MLA, APA). Getting Started Doing research can be intimidating. However, Public Forum topics are based on current events. If you watch the news (or even browse Reddit), then you probably have a head start! To get started, do the following: ➢ Step #1: Background Reading. o Take 15 – 20 minutes to Google key words from the resolution. Write down any topic words / phrases that keep coming up. ➢ Step #2: Narrow Your Search o Using the “key words” you wrote down from your initial search, focus on specific ideas to learn more about. ▪ For example, I googled “NATO,” “defense commitment,” and “Baltic states.” My results often included words like “Russian aggression,” “encroachment,” “deterrence,” and “Ukraine.” ▪ By doing more searches with the above key words, I found articles on the history of Russian involvement in the Baltics and opinion pieces about NATO. This let me write the sample Public Forum case! o When you find a good quote, a qualified source, or anything you want to put in your case, bookmark it! ➢ Step #3: Save & Insert o Repeat Steps 1 & 2. o Once you have a critical mass of articles (10 -15), start writing your case!