how to write a negative constructive speech debate

LD Debate Prep

A 501(c)(3) nonprofit dedicated to freely accessible debate resources

Building a Case

Now that you have learned how to cut a card, it is time to put this skill to the test by building a case (which consists of multiple cards)! Each time a new topic is released, be prepared to build both an Aff and a Neg case – you will have to defend both sides each tournament, usually alternating each round. That is to say that even if you feel strongly for or against a particular side, you must advocate for both. This truly shows the beauty of debate, focusing on honing researching abilities, improving speaking skills, and trying new things rather than being a space to solely express personal political beliefs (although these may be incorporated to a certain extent)!

An LD case is somewhat of a reflection back on what has already happened in the world, drawing connections as to what may happen in the future as a result. The debater acts sort of like an observer or commentator. The goal of LD is to determine which side accurately represents what we believe or value. Thus, people sometimes refer to it as a “value debate”. LD debaters are in the round to debate whether the resolution is good or not as a whole. The judge votes for the debater who has best proved the validity of their side of the resolution. This is in contrast to another style called Policy debate, in which debaters mimic real-life policy-makers and try to pass the resolution as a piece of legislation or policy. In Policy debate, the judge votes for whoever has proven the best policy action to be enacted. Although, there are some aspects of Policy that LD adopts, such as passing a plan or counterplan (policies), but stay tuned for a future lesson on that.

In LD, if we were to Affirm “Resolved: the appropriation of outer space by private entities is unjust” , we would be saying that the resolution is correct and accurately describes what we value, due to reasons of e.g. space debris and other contention(s) explaining the unjust actions that private entities have done in outer space, as well as what will happen in the future as a result of these actions.

This section will cover how to make a case for both Aff and Neg sides. I would highly suggest that you read through this section and compare the components to the example cases attached (minimize tabs into split screen or have 2 devices [the ideal sweaty online debate setup] in front of you). Otherwise, go through it once and check out the cases attached. Either way, the use of examples can help strengthen one’s understanding.

1AC – Aff Constructive Case

Here’s the Microsoft Word version of an example Aff case I will be referring to:

I would recommend using Word, but if it doesn’t work, here’s the PDF:

Statement of the Resolution

Starting with “I affirm…” followed by the resolution word for word (“Resolved: …”) can help to clarify the topic for your judge and opponent. This is useful especially at the beginning of the month when a new topic is first used at tournaments, so your judge knows what everyone is talking about.

Definitions

Next, you as the Aff want to briefly define important words in the resolution. Using the JanFeb 2022 example, “Resolved: The appropriation of outer space by private entities is unjust”, we need to know what this cluster of jargon means. Using sources such as Dictionary.com, Merriam-Webster, or other dictionaries and academic literature, search up the meaning of the nouns and verbs of the resolution. Then, cut some cards from these sources (check the attached doc “Space Aff Example Case”).

Otherwise, sometimes when you don’t define words, your opponent can easily work around your nonexistent boundaries, twist the entirety of your case, or run something called “theory”, which will make you lose because you didn’t define words in the resolution – something you were expected to do as a valuable norm in debate. In general, just include definitions, even if briefly, and be prepared to defend them with credible evidence.

What follows directly after definitions is the mention of your framework , where you basically explain to the judge from what perspective they should view the round, a.k.a. what matters under the topic. The framework consists of two parts: a value and a value criterion .

Firstly, your value is an ultimate goal that is good, which you want to achieve. The two most commonly used are morality and justice , though it doesn’t really matter what value you end up choosing. You just have to choose a subjective quality that can be at-large agreed upon. When presenting it in-round, just say something like “My value is justice”. You don’t have to define it, because the main focus of the framework is to be able to justify and defend your value criterion.

Next, your value criterion (or just “criterion” for short) is most vital to outlining and describing your position. It is usually a short phrase such as “My value criterion is to maximize human well-being” or “My value criterion is to act in accordance with international law” (followed by evidence of why we should prefer it). Basically, the criterion is the method you believe is best able to achieve the value (justice or morality) that you previously mentioned.

In the situation that you and your opponent agree on value criterion, there is no need for a clash of frameworks (or “ framework debate “). For our purposes, we will be focusing on debates centered around utilitarianism (nicknamed “util”), or the philosophy that the greatest pleasure for the greatest amount of people is the most moral / just (the previous example of “maximizing human well-being”). This criterion says that in order to achieve justice, we must act in a way that provides the greatest possible pleasure/well-being to everyone involved. Utilitarianism is the most basic and intuitive criterion out there, yet a majority of rounds often use utilitarianism as the framework and therefore center around which side provides the greatest pleasure for society. Criterions, such as util, are often also called “frameworks” for simplicity (e.g. “util framework”) since the criterion is basically the only thing that matters for the entirety of the framework.

Aside from util debates, the framework that the Aff introduces may be contested by the Neg, thus the debate being centered around the clash of ideals between two very different criterions. We will go through different frameworks and their interactions through framework debate in a future unit! For now, util debates are our focus.

For a util debate to occur, the Aff would introduce their criterion of “maximizing human well-being” or something similar, and have evidence (ideally in the form of a card) to back up the reason why this round should be evaluated as such. The reasoning could be anywhere from how it is a natural survival instinct for humans to seek pleasure and avoid pain, moral uncertainty (preventing human extinction is key to surviving and having more time to figure out the true meaning of morality), and how policymakers have to justify their actions to the public thus the need to act in the overall best interest of the population. Next, the Neg would agree with the util framework of the Aff (by just saying a single sentence “I concede to the Aff framework, moving on…”), but we’ll get to that later when discussing the 1NC in-depth.

In the attached “Space Aff Example Case”, the Moen 16 evidence explains how justice is achieved by maximizing well-being. It states that we know inherently how pleasure is good and pain is bad. Util believes that striving for pleasure and avoiding pain are the end goals for humans, as shown in our daily activities and long-term aspirations. Thus, the round should also be determined according to util.

Contentions

After the Aff reads definitions and framework, they get to the main part of util debates: contentions! A case typically involves 2-3 contentions, although sometimes just 1 is sufficient if truly well-explained. Any more than 3 contentions risk being under-explained and will be easier for your opponent to take down, so it is not recommended.

A contention is one point or justification to Affirm/Negate, which operates under your framework. Because your framework alone cannot prove why you should win, you must describe examples and instances which support the validity of the resolution, using studies, predictions, and trends. For example, “Contention 1: Space Debris Collisions” explains how private companies are polluting outer space with debris, which is bad because it causes collisions and hence countries may go to nuclear war over confusion as to why their nuclear early-warning satellites are being destroyed. Nuclear war will take many lives, thus it connects to your value criterion (util), and hence your value (justice). Only after all of this explanation does your framework make sense in the context of Affirming the resolution.

The basic structure of a single contention can be thought of as divided into three main parts:

• Claim (a title or sentence to introduce the contention)
• Warrant (a long chain of logic, connecting the resolution to the impact )
• Impact (the benefit / harm / end goal – why does this contention matter?)

The claim can be thought of as an initial statement to introduce the contention, although this usually comes in the form of a title. For example, “Contention 1: Space Debris Collisions” as a header is sufficient.

Jumping all the way down to the impact , it is basically a single card that explains a catastrophic or horrible outcome that proves the resolution in favor of the Aff. At the very end of each contention in the example Aff case, this is exactly what Witze 20 (nuclear war) and Krosofsky 21 (climate change) seek to do. They outline horrible humanity-ending / extinction scenarios that will happen if you don’t vote Affirmative, explaining why the Aff position is important to prevent this disaster, as well as its relevancy to the util framework. Bear with these overdramatized impacts: debaters need to make their impacts matter. Preventing extinction is the most important thing under a utilitarian framework, therefore this choice is strategic and recommended if you want to outdo your opponent and win. Notice how this outdoing of large-scale disasters only occurs under utilitarianism, because the framework states that it matters to maximize pleasure and minimize pain – the logic is that there is nothing worse than the pain of mass extinction and death. Nuclear war and climate change are the most popular extinction impacts, but others include artificial intelligence apocalypse (extinction at the hands of AI), a large-scale deadly pandemic as a result of bioterrorism, terrorism (which eventually leads to nuclear war), etc.

The most important takeaway and clarification is to keep in mind that when debaters say “the impact is nuke war” or “climate change”, their whole point is to try to prevent something bad from happening. Rather than introducing a proactive / positive impact (like generating happiness or handing out free fried chicken buckets to everyone), it’s usually about preventing something SUPER TERRIBLE from happening (that being humanity-ending disaster). In more utilitarian words, debate cases explain how to prevent pain rather than create pleasure .

Now that we understand the utilitarian impact as an extinction event, how do we get from allowing private companies into outer space to the end of humans? This is where the warrant of the contention comes in to fill the gaps.

Right after the title/ claim , you would jump straight to reading cards (tagline -> author -> highlighted text). The warrant of a contention is the longest part, consisting of multiple cards which thoroughly explain how you get from Affirming the resolution to a specific benefit (the impact , e.g. preventing nuclear war). Think of the resolution as “Point A” and the impact as “Point B”: the warrant acts as a path that connects Point A to Point B. The warrant consists of multiple internal links , which are individual cards that build atop the one before it, until the contention’s story is fully coherent and complete with the impact. These multiple internal links come to form a link chain (literally a chain of internal links), a.k.a. link story , or just story .

Referring to the cards of the first contention, let’s take “Space Debris Collisions” as an example of the link chain / warrant leading up to the impact :

• Daehnick and Harrington 21 establishes that private companies are going to outer space and launching thousands of satellites right now. These satellites will remain up there for many years as “space debris”, and the card goes on to explain how unmanageable this problem is becoming.
• Ramanathan 21 expands on space debris, stating how private company satellites are involved in multiple near misses frequently, implying that collisions will increase as a result of private companies in outer space.
• Johnson 13 describes how more space debris buildup is created as a result of collisions, creating a cascading effect (known as the “Kessler Effect” or “Kessler Syndrome”), which fills Earth’s orbit full of debris.
• Graham 05 shifts over to describe how unreliable Russia’s space-based nuclear early warning satellite system is, and reinforces this with a recent example of miscalculation by Russian officials.
• Barrett 16 is the final piece in the puzzle (that is the warrant), explaining that space debris may destroy a Russian early warning satellite. Russia may mistake this as American aggression and decide to strike first. The outcome is Russia launching nukes as an ensuing nuclear war follows.
• Finally, Witze 20 is the nuclear war impact card, giving a concrete description of how devastating a nuke war between countries would be.

The second contention, “Rocket Launch Pollution”, is shorter than the first. Therefore, it can be more simply explained:

• Ben-Itzhak 22 establishes private space companies’ commercial endeavors.
• Piesing 22 explains how practices of private space companies, such as space tourism, mean launching rockets. These rockets produce large amounts of greenhouse gases and pollute Earth’s environment.
• Krosofsky 21 is the climate change impact, describing the consequences of global warming several years later (extinction, extreme weather, fewer resources, etc).

The strength and credibility of the warrant are at many times a deciding factor in the round, rather than whose extinction impact is the biggest: we don’t have to worry about nuclear war if the evidence presented isn’t that solid to support it. This is why spending time cutting good cards and truly understanding the link chain story is necessary!

1NC – Neg Constructive Case

What the Negative case introduces is much the same as the Affirmative case, although having the advantage of being reactionary to the Aff and knowing the opponent’s case already, thus being able to adapt strategy accordingly. The Negative constructive case is followed by a rebuttal section (1NC + 1NR), as previously explained in the Speech Order unit, therefore the time that Neg uses to introduce definitions, framework, and contentions will be less than the Aff (likely 4 to 4.5 minutes). This part will mainly cover how to fill those few minutes of the first half of this Neg constructive speech.

Again, same with the Aff, this step is optional. Since the Aff likely already introduced the resolution and spent 6 minutes on a case already, everyone should have a good idea of what the round is about.

“I negate the resolution. I will agree with their definitions and framework. Moving on to Contention 1…” is usually sufficient, that is, if there isn’t anything to contest. You would hope that the Aff definitions are reasonable and not (in the odd case) ridiculous, but that is up the Neg to determine and have a debate about definitions. For example, take a topic about nuclear proliferation: if they define “nuclear” as the center of a cell, and “arms” as in human limbs, “nuclear arms” would mean something completely different from what the topic is trying to get at. Therefore, this would require you to justify why your definition(s) should be preferred over the Aff’s.

Next, the Neg would decide whether to contest (disagree with) or concede (agree with) the Aff framework. In the case of contesting framework, Neg would have to put some work into introducing and justifying a new framework completely different from the Aff’s (again, covered later on – for now, util debates are our focus). On the other hand, conceding to the util framework of the Aff just requires you to indicate so with one sentence. Afterwards, you may jump straight to reading contentions.

Contentions recommendations are the exact same as the Aff ones, except Neg spends slightly less time on them to make way for the rebuttal part of the speech.

Contention 1 talks about asteroid mining:

• Garretson 21 establishes how private companies innovate for space faster, better, and cheaper than governments.
• Krishnan 20 says that space mining by private companies is underway and will be full-scale soon.
• Britt 21 further explains how mining asteroids is sustainable and safe, while reinforcing the idea that private entities will be the ones to do this and listing examples of specific companies making progress.
• MacWhorter 16 points out the large amount of pollution occurring as a result of mining operations on Earth. The logic is that private companies will extract resources from outer space, resulting in less pollution happening near or on Earth, contributing to less global warming. Simultaneously, these resources may become more accessible over time, compared to a finite Earth supply.
• Krosofsky 21 is the same impact card from the 2nd Aff contention about climate change.

Contention 2 is somewhat of a unique contention, as its impact refers to multiple Earth-extinction events collectively being able to wipe out humanity rather than just one, but nonetheless follows the same format:

• Brown 22 states that private entities, such as Musk’s SpaceX, have the motivation and infrastructure to set up colonies in outer space, namely Mars.
• Dorrier 14 explains that humanity placing all its bets on Earth’s survival is a bad choice, in case an unexpected extinction event suddenly wipes us out.
• Rincon 18 further describes Stephen Hawking’s view that the probability of catastrophe adds up and becomes certain over an extended period of time, hence needing to quickly spread out to more planets as a species in order to counter that threat.

Previous: Formatting Evidence

Next: rebuttals.

• Already have a WordPress.com account? Log in now.
• Subscribe Subscribed
• Copy shortlink
• Report this content
• View post in Reader
• Manage subscriptions
• Collapse this bar

• Sign up For Free

LD and PF Club Team registration for the 2022-2023 debate season is now open!

• Join Our Newsletter

E:  [email protected]

• Schedule a Private Call

101: Introduction to Policy

What is Policy?

How to win a Policy Debate Round

How to Judge a Policy Debate Round

Speakers (1A, 2A, 1N, 2N)

Policy Debate Round Format

First Affirmative Constructive (1AC)

Cross Examinations

First Negative Constructive (1NC)

Second Affirmative Constructive (2AC)

Second Negative Constructive (2NC)

First Negative Rebuttal (1NR)

First Affirmative Rebuttal (1AR)

Second Negative Rebuttal (2NR)

Second Affirmative Rebuttal (2AR)

102: Beyond the Basics

Constructing a Case

Mastering the Constructives

Mastering the Rebuttals

Final Speeches

The Second Negative Constructive

This is the Second Negative Constructive, or 2NC, for 8 minutes in high school and 9 in college. Coupled with the subsequent First Negative Rebuttal, the neg has the “block” of 13 minutes straight in high school (15 in college) to attack Aff arguments, giving the Neg a huge advantage. With so much time, how does the Neg spend it? Typically, the longer 2NC is used for extending a single quick piece of offense and then spending the rest of the speech dismantling the Aff’s case, extending case answers from the 1NC. This speech will also answer any lingering theoretical/procedural questions.

• Call/text: (617) 682-9697
• [email protected]
• 617-391-3067

The First Negative Constructive (1NC)

The second speech in the debate is the First Negative Constructive (1NC).

This is an eight minute speech delivered by the first negative speaker.

The speech is more difficult than the 1AC, as it cannot be entirely prepared in advance, but it is not that difficult.

In order to give an effective 1NC at your first tournament, it is important that you prepare some generic, off-case positions in advance that will likely apply to most cases that you debate. This way you will have something prepared no matter what the other team argues.

Types of off-case positions include topicality, disadvantages, counterplans , and kritiks .

What specific types of off-case positions you have for your first tournament will depend on what is best for your area (rules/expectations), what your coach thinks is best, and what your varsity debaters are prepared to teach you.  And since it is your first tournament, you need to strike a balance between having a diversity of arguments and being prepared to debate the arguments you have.

At a minimum, I would suggest being prepared with at least one generic disadvantage, such as federalism. Most (but not all) cases will call for the federal government regulate water and federal regulations in the environmental area arguably undermine state authority.

Disadvantages are the easiest of the off-case arguments for new students to understand, so I suggest starting with those.

I also suggest including a topicality argument, even a basic one.”  If you make a topicality argument in a debate and the other team drops it (and you point out that they dropped it), you will win the debate. So, sometimes it is good to make topicality arguments even if those arguments are a bit weak, because they are all or nothing for the affirmative team.

Beyond a disadvantage and topicality, I suggest consulting your coach and varsity debaters as to whether or not you should start your first tournament(s) with a counterplan and/or kritik. As you can see from those first essays, those arguments are more complicated. If you do add a counterplan, I suggest the states counterplan. If you add a kritik, I suggest the capitalism kritik.

After you present your off-case arguments (which will probably take at least four minutes of your speech), you should move on to tackling your opponents’ case.

The easiest way to do this at your first tournament is have a set of arguments against common advantages (water pollution, economy) and some solvency arguments against popular cases (lead regulations fail, reducing agriculture subsidies doesn’t help).  For now, keep these arguments to a minimum, as you have a lot to do before your first tournament.

The 1NC is harder than the 1NC, because you cannot entirely write it out in advance. That said, there is a lot you can do in advance to prepare what will likely go in your speech.

So, to outline, a 1NC at your first tournament would be something like:

Topicality argument (1 minute) Disadvantage 1 (2 minutes) Disadvantage 2 (2 minutes) Attack case advantages (2 minutes) Attack solvency (1 minute)

After you gain some experience, a 1NC will look like

Topicality argument (30 seconds) Disadvantage 1 (90 seconds) Disadvantage 2 (90 seconds) Counterplan (30 seconds) Kritik (90 seconds) Attack case advantages (2 minutes) Attack solvency (30 seconds)

Recent Posts

• Extemp: Latin America
• Extemp: Africa
• NSDA Congress Evidence
• Additional Trade Cards
• Congress (NSDA 2024): A Bill to Ensure Sufficient Nurse Staffing

• PRO Courses Guides New Tech Help Pro Expert Videos About wikiHow Pro Upgrade Sign In
• EDIT Edit this Article
• EXPLORE Tech Help Pro About Us Random Article Quizzes Request a New Article Community Dashboard This Or That Game Popular Categories Arts and Entertainment Artwork Books Movies Computers and Electronics Computers Phone Skills Technology Hacks Health Men's Health Mental Health Women's Health Relationships Dating Love Relationship Issues Hobbies and Crafts Crafts Drawing Games Education & Communication Communication Skills Personal Development Studying Personal Care and Style Fashion Hair Care Personal Hygiene Youth Personal Care School Stuff Dating All Categories Arts and Entertainment Finance and Business Home and Garden Relationship Quizzes Cars & Other Vehicles Food and Entertaining Personal Care and Style Sports and Fitness Computers and Electronics Health Pets and Animals Travel Education & Communication Hobbies and Crafts Philosophy and Religion Work World Family Life Holidays and Traditions Relationships Youth
• Browse Articles
• Learn Something New
• Quizzes Hot
• This Or That Game
• Train Your Brain
• Explore More
• Support wikiHow
• About wikiHow
• Log in / Sign up
• Education and Communications
• Communication Skills
• Public Speaking

How to Write a Debate Speech

Last Updated: May 10, 2024 Fact Checked

This article was co-authored by Patrick Muñoz . Patrick is an internationally recognized Voice & Speech Coach, focusing on public speaking, vocal power, accent and dialects, accent reduction, voiceover, acting and speech therapy. He has worked with clients such as Penelope Cruz, Eva Longoria, and Roselyn Sanchez. He was voted LA's Favorite Voice and Dialect Coach by BACKSTAGE, is the voice and speech coach for Disney and Turner Classic Movies, and is a member of Voice and Speech Trainers Association. There are 9 references cited in this article, which can be found at the bottom of the page. This article has been fact-checked, ensuring the accuracy of any cited facts and confirming the authority of its sources. This article has been viewed 1,504,957 times.

So, you've joined debate, and it's time to write a debate speech. There are some tried and true methods to writing an effective debate speech. If you understand them, and the components that make up a standard debate speech, you will increase your chances of success.

Sample Speeches

Preparing for the Debate Speech

• You may be asked to stand affirmative or negative. In LD (Lincoln-Douglas debate), the first affirmative speech will be at most 7 minutes long, and the first negative speech will be at most 6 minutes. [1] X Research source
• The speakers then present arguments against the earlier affirmative or negative speech that was just read. Speakers must listen carefully and be able to counter arguments. There are two segments involving cross-examination (CX), in which the debaters are allowed to ask questions and openly debate the topic. This is most often called cross-examination, or cx for short, and occurs after the first affirmative speech, and the first negative speech.
• The best thing you can do to better understand LD/PF/Policy debate is practice and research.

• Brainstorm the topic, and research it before you sit down to write. Write out a list of key components for both sides of the issue. If you are on a debate team, do this together. Each member could discuss the key component list, in order to figure out which issues you want to cover in each speech.
• Spend some time at the library or on the Internet using credible sources to research the key reasons that seem strongest. Use books, scholarly journals, credible newspapers, and the like. Be very cautious about unverified information bandied about on the Internet.
• You will also want prepare to deal with the strongest arguments your opponent(s) might make. Ignoring the other side’s best arguments can weaken your rhetorical appeal.

• A basic debate outline should contain six parts: An attention-getter, your stated stance (aff or neg)/ restatement of the resolution, your definitions, your value, criterion, and contentions.
• You can break each of those six parts into subcategories. It’s often a good idea to write the contentions last, focusing on the value and criterion to hold it up first.

Writing the Debate Speech

• You should address the jury or audience with formal salutations. For example, you could say something like, “Good morning, ladies and gentlemen.” Debates are very formal in tone.
• Making a good first impression with the judges is very important. This leads judges to assume the debater is persuasive. One technique to write a strong introduction is to contextualize the topic, especially in relation to real world events. [6] X Trustworthy Source American Bar Association Leading professional organization of lawyers and law students Go to source
• Introductions can also focus on prominent examples, quotations, or on a personal anecdote that can help establish a rapport with the audience and judges. Be careful using humor; it involves risks and can lead to awkward silences if not done right. Find a relevant specific that illustrates the underlying point.

• Don’t muddle your position. It needs to be extremely clear whether you affirm or negate the resolution, so don’t hem and haw and contradict yourself. The audience also should not have to wait until the end to find out. Make your stance very clear, and do it early on
• For example, you could say, “my partner and I firmly negate (or affirm) the resolution which states that unilateral military force by the United States is justified to prevent nuclear proliferation.” [7] X Research source

• A good rule of thumb is to back up your position with 3-4 strong points of supporting argumentation. You definitely need to have more than 1 or 2 key points to back up the stance you have taken.
• The body of the speech – the key points and their development – should be, by far, the longest part of the debate speech (perhaps 3 ½ minutes to 30 seconds for an opening and for a conclusion, depending on the rules of the debate you are doing).

• Focus on the causes of the problem, the effects of the problem, expert opinion, examples, statistics, and present a solution. Try to use visual images, not just generic terms – show don’t tell, and illustrate a point with details.
• Appeal to the motives and emotions of the listener with a light touch. Appeal to their sense of fair play, desire to save, to be helpful, to care about community, etc. Ground examples in how people are affected.
• Try using rhetorical questions, which make your opponents consider the validity of their point; irony, which undermines their point and makes you seem more mature and intelligent; simile, which gives them something to relate to; humor, which gets the audience on your side when done well; and repetition, which reinforces your point.

• Aristotle believed that speakers were more persuasive if they combined elements of logos (persuasion by reasoning) with pathos (having an element of emotional appeal) and ethos (an appeal based on the character of the speaker) - for example, that they seem intelligent or of good will.
• There are two ways to use logic – inductive (which makes the case with measurable evidence like statistics or a specific anecdote or example) and deductive (which makes the case by outlining a general principle that is related to the specific topic to infer a conclusion from it - as in, I oppose all wars except those involving imminent self defense; thus, I must oppose this one because it's a war that was not in imminent self defense, and here's why). Or the reverse.
• You should use pathos sparingly. Emotional appeal on its own can be dangerous. Logos - the appeal to reason - should be at the core. However, logical appeal without any pathos at all can render a speech dry and dull. Consider what you are trying to make your audience feel. Explaining how a topic affects real people is one way to use pathos well.

Concluding the Debate Speech

• One strong way to conclude a debate speech is to bookend the conclusion with the opening, by referring back to the introduction and tying the conclusion into the same theme.
• Quotations can be a good way to end a speech. You can also end with a brief summation of the key arguments of the speech to ensure they remain fresh in judges’ minds.

• Use a clear , loud voice, and be careful to watch pacing. You don’t want to speak too loud or too slowly. Remember that confidence goes a long way toward persuasion.

Expert Q&A

Reader Videos

• Never add new points in your speech because you still have time, as you might not present it in the best way. When you are nervous, you might even say an argument in favor of the other side and you don't want that. Thanks Helpful 32 Not Helpful 2
• Never degrade your topic. Thanks Helpful 33 Not Helpful 3
• Don't use all your points in your debate- in an actual debate, it is sometimes useful to have other information to cite if the argument starts going their way Thanks Helpful 30 Not Helpful 3

Tips from our Readers

• You can make a sample opening and closing speech beforehand so you can focus more time on developing your arguments during the actual debate.
• Make sure to include rebuttals in your speech, as they are just as important as your main arguments.
• Practice as much as possible — it will make you more confident and help you maintain eye contact.
• Imagine you're just practicing with a friend rather than performing in front of an audience.
• Take deep breaths before starting to ease nerves.

• Remember, just because you can write a debate speech, it doesn't mean you can say a debate speech effectively. Practice! Thanks Helpful 22 Not Helpful 5

You Might Also Like

• ↑ http://www.learndebating.com/english/DEBATING.pdf
• ↑ https://guides.lib.uw.edu/research/faq/reliable
• ↑ Patrick Muñoz. Voice & Speech Coach. Expert Interview. 12 November 2019.
• ↑ https://www.hamilton.edu/academics/centers/oralcommunication/guides/how-to-outline-a-speech
• ↑ https://www.americanbar.org/groups/litigation/resources/newsletters/trial-evidence/five-tips-engaging-opening-statements/
• ↑ http://www.oxfordsd.org/Page/5582
• ↑ https://writingcenter.unc.edu/tips-and-tools/argument/
• ↑ https://www.comm.pitt.edu/persuasive-speaking
• ↑ https://www.comm.pitt.edu/speech-anxiety

About This Article

To write a debate speech, start by researching the topic thoroughly with credible and scholarly sources, and make an outline of your argument including an introduction, thesis argument, key points, and conclusion. Write the thesis argument and develop 3-4 strong points of argumentation. Be sure to clearly state your stance, and utilize expert opinions, statistics, and examples to support your opinion. To finish the speech, write an interesting introduction that incorporates your thesis and a brief conclusion that summarizes your main points. If you want to learn more, such as how to make your debate speech persuasive, keep reading the article! Did this summary help you? Yes No

• Send fan mail to authors

Reader Success Stories

Did this article help you?

Kaveesha Pathiranahewa

Dec 1, 2021

Payton Ayoardi

Jul 25, 2021

David Williams

Nov 21, 2017

Luyanda Nondalo

Feb 6, 2017

Featured Articles

Trending Articles

Watch Articles

• Terms of Use
• Privacy Policy
• Do Not Sell or Share My Info
• Not Selling Info

Get all the best how-tos!

Sign up for wikiHow's weekly email newsletter

Improve your practice.

Enhance your soft skills with a range of award-winning courses.

Complete Guide to Debating: How to Improve your Debating Skills

August 1, 2018 - Gini Beqiri

Debating can look intimidating from the sidelines, with speakers appearing confident, passionate and unwavering, but it consists of skills that anybody can learn. Debating may not be something that you encounter in your everyday work but these skills can be incredibly valuable. In this article we provide a guide to the basics of debating.

What is debating?

A debate is a structured contest over an issue or policy. There are two sides – one supporting, one opposing.

Benefits of debating include:

• Allowing you to think about aspects and perspectives you may not have considered.
• Encourages you to speak strategically.
• Improving  public speaking skills .
• Learning how to create a persuasive argument.
• When you have to argue against your personal view you realise that there are two sides to the argument.

Debating examples

The U.K. Prime Minister, Theresa May, answers questions:

This example video shows Theresa May answering questions from MPs in the House of Commons. Notice her strong debating skills and how she answers difficult questions under pressure.

Watch the full video here:  Prime Minister’s Questions: 16 May 2018

Debate structure

There are multiple formats a debate can follow, this is a basic debate structure:

• A topic is chosen for each debate – this is called a resolution or motion. It can be a statement, policy or idea. The motion is usually a policy which changes the current state of affairs or a statement which is either truth or false. The motion typically starts with “This House…”
• The Affirmative team support the statement
• The Negative team oppose the statement
• Sometimes you will be asked to take a position in the debate but in other debates you will be allocated your position.
• Teams are provided with time to prepare – usually one hour
• Each speaker presents for a set amount of time
• Speakers alternate between the teams, usually a speaker in the Affirmative team starts, followed by a Negative speaker, then the second Affirmative speaker presents, followed by the second Negative speaker etc.
• The debate is then judged.
• There may be an audience present but they are not involved in the debate

Once you have learned how to debate in one format you can easily switch to another.

Roles of the speakers

Each speaker must typically do the following:

First Affirmative

• Contextualise the debate – clearly set out your team’s interpretation of the topic and the significant issues they disagree with.
• Provide definitions if necessary.
• Outline the team line and the team split – this is where you outline your team’s case and summarise the way your arguments have been divided between your speakers.
• Provide 2-3 arguments supporting the motion.

First Negative

• Clearly state your definition
• Provide your arguments as to why this is the superior definition
• Rebut the Affirmative’s arguments supporting their definition
• Outline a team line and team split.
• Rebut the arguments made by the First Affirmative.
• Deliver 2-3 arguments against the motion.

Second Affirmative

• If needed, resolve any definitional issues.
• Rebut the First Negative’s arguments.
• Deliver 2-3 arguments supporting the motion.

Second Negative

• Rebut the arguments made by the Affirmative team up to this point, with a focus on the Second Affirmative’s arguments.

Third Affirmative

• Rebut specific issues raised by Second Negative and defend any other important attacks on your team’s case.
• Conclude your speech with a brief summary (1-2 minutes) of your team’s case. You should include the key issues which you and the Negative team disagreed on during this.
• You can introduce new material but this is interpreted as poor team planning.

Third Negative

• This is the same structure as the Third Affirmative.

There are many variations of the three against three debate, a commonly known one is Points of Information. This is used a lot in  university debates . During a speech the opposition is allowed to ask a question or make a point.

They stand up and say “point of information” or “on that point” etc. The speaker can choose to accept or reject the point. If accepted, the point of information can last around 15 seconds and the speaker can ask for it to stop at any time.

Debate definitions

Younger debaters tend to waste time defining terms so you must first decide whether you need to define a term. Ask yourself: will my speech be confusing if I don’t define this term? Could the opposition misinterpret what I mean without a definition? For example, the motion could be “we should ban plastic straws”. It’s clear what “plastic straws” are but what does “ban” mean?

Two factors which determine the definition of the debate:

1. Context  – what is happening in the area that relates to this issue? For example, maybe the government of a country is debating banning smoking in public buildings and you decide to define the term “passive smoking” during the debate. If a significant event related to the topic has occurred then it should be the focus of the debate, for instance, a shocking report may have recently been revealed in the media showing the widespread effects of second-hand smoking.

2. Spirit of the motion  – topics are chosen for a reason so what sort of debate was imagined when the topic was chosen? Looking at the spirit of the motion will ensure that you pick a definition that will produce a well-balanced and important debate.

If the topic is vague then you will have more choice of definitions. You have a duty to pick a clear definition and one that will create a good debate. If not, this may cause a definitional challenge which will ruin the debate and frustrate the judges.

For example, the topic may be “we spend too much money on the stars”. Stars can refer to celebrities or astronomy so you need to choose a definition.

• Look at the context and see if there has been a recent significant event related to either topics – the media is the best place to look.
• Then apply second test – which definition will lead to the best debate, which will be more interesting and debatable?

If one answer passes both tests then that’s your definition. If they tie then either is a good definition.

When providing your definition explain the context used to form the definition. This is important because your understanding of the context may be different from others due to various factors, such as, religion, culture, gender etc.

Learn more about using  AI to practice your debating skills .

Basic argument structure

There are various ways of dividing up cases according to groups of arguments, such as, social/economic/political etc. You could assign each speaker to handle a group.

Place the most important arguments first, for example, “The media has more influence on self-esteem than anybody else. This is true for three reasons. Firstly (most important argument)… Secondly…, Thirdly (least important argument)…”

To structure an argument follow these steps:

• Claim  – present your argument in a clear statement. This claim is one reason why you’re in favour of/against the motion.
• Evidence  – the evidence supporting your claim, such as, statistics, references, quotes, analogies etc.
• Impact  – explain the significance of the evidence – how does this support your claim?

Arguments are weakest at the evidence stage as it’s easy to argue against, for example, the evidence may consist of isolated examples or there may be counter evidence. But it’s not a good technique because the opposition can provide more evidence or rebut your criticisms.

It’s difficult to rebut claims because they are usually reasonable but if you can attack a claim then that speaker’s whole argument falls apart. So if you think a claim is vulnerable then rebut it but you will need a strong explanation to show why it doesn’t matter.

European  human rights debating  for sixth form students from across London.

There are common flaws you can look for to form a rebuttal:

1. False dichotomy  – this is where the speaker is trying to falsely divide the debate into two sides even though there are more alternatives than they state. It’s likely the speaker is doing this on purpose but in some cases they do not understand the debate.

2. Assertion  – this is when a speaker presents a statement which isn’t actually an argument because there is no reason to believe that the statement is valid. It may just be an assumption. You can point out that there has not been enough examination to prove this validity and then give a reason why the assertion is (probably) not valid.

3. Morally flawed  – arguments can be morally flawed, for example, “All criminals given a prison sentence should be given the death penalty instead, this will save the country money and space.” What has been argued is true but it’s clearly morally flawed.

4. Correlation rather than causation  – a speaker may suggest a link between two events and suggest one led to the other. But the speaker may not explain how one caused the other event which can make an argument invalid.

5. Failure to deliver promises  – sometimes a speaker might fail to complete a task they promised to deliver. For instance, they may state that they will provide evidence supporting a certain claim but they may lose track of what they have said and not actually do this.

6. Straw man  – the opposing team introduces an argument and then rebuts it. They may use an extreme example of your proposal or perhaps they were hoping that you would make this argument.

7. Contradiction  – an argument the other team presents may contradict one of their previous arguments. You must point out that the arguments cannot be true simultaneously and then explain how this reduces their case’s credibility.

8. Compare the conclusion to reality  – think “what would happen if what they (the other team) are suggesting is implemented right now?” This usually shows that it’s more complicated than they have suggested and the changes can cause secondary problems.

Judges generally score the speakers looking at this criteria:

• Content / Matter  – What the debaters say, their arguments and evidence, the relevance of their arguments.
• Style / Manner  – How the debaters speak, including the language and tone used.
• Strategy / Method  – The structure of the speech, the clarity and responding to other’s arguments.

Debating event at  the Oxford Union

Important skills for debating

To meet the judges criteria you will have to develop certain skills, consider the following:

• You points must be relevant to the topic.
• Provide evidence whenever you can and not your personal opinion.
• You must put aside your personal views and remain objective when you debate so your argument remains logical. You can be passionate about a topic but interest can turn into aggression and passion can turn into upset.
• Consider the audience’s attention span – make it interesting, for example, don’t just present lots of complicated statistics.
• Ethos – the ethical appeal
• Pathos – the emotional appeal
• Logos – the logical appeal
• Use notes but keep them brief and well organised. Use a different piece of paper for rebuttals.
• Similar to looking at conclusions to create rebuttals, think comparatively by asking yourself “How does my plan compare to what’s happening now/what would happen in the world if the other team won?” You can win the debate if you can make comparative claims about why your arguments matter more than the other team.
• Only tell jokes if you’re naturally good at it otherwise this can backfire.
• Flexibility is important because you might get allocated the side of the argument you don’t agree with. You’ll have to work hard to overcome your views. Also use this insight to think of the potential arguments you might make and then plan for counter arguments.
• Speak clearly and concisely.
• You must talk fast enough to have the time to deliver your speech but slow enough so you can be understood.
• Project your voice to the back of the room.
• Incorporate dramatic pauses.
• Emphasise important words and vary your tone appropriately.
• Have a relaxed pose and posture.
• Avoid filler words.
• Know your material.
• Emphasise using gestures and avoid nervous gestures.
• Maintain eye contact with the audience.
• Keep your language simple to avoid confusion.
• Refer to the opposite side as: “My opponent”.
• When making a rebuttal say: “My opponent said…, however…”
• Don’t exaggerate – avoid the words “never” or “always” etc.
• Avoid saying that a speaker “is wrong”, instead say that “your idea is mistaken”.

What to avoid

• Falsifying, making up or altering evidence.
• Publicly disagreeing with the judges’ decision.
• Attacking a speaker rather than an idea.
• Acting aggressively or offensively towards debaters, judges, audience etc.
• Interrupting other debaters as this can suggest that your argument isn’t very strong.
• Disagreeing with facts or obvious truths.

British Parliamentary debating

British Parliamentary debating  is a popular form of debating so we will briefly explain it: There are four teams made up of two speakers each. Two teams are on the government’s side and the other two teams are the opposition but all the teams are trying to win rather than one side. The motion is given 15 minutes before the debate begins and teams are assigned to positions randomly. They alternate their speeches, with the government’s side starting. Speeches are usually 5-7 minutes.

The first two speakers on the government side are called the “opening government” and the first two speakers on the opposition’s side are called the “opening opposition”. The last two speakers on the government’s and opposition’s side are called the “closing government” and “closing opposition” correspondingly.

The speakers’ roles in the opening half of the debate are similar to the roles of the first and second speakers in the three against three debate described previously. The only difference is that the second opening government and second opening opposition speakers include summaries at the end of their speeches – this is because they will also be competing with the teams in the closing half of the debate.

The closing government and closing opposition aim to move the debate on but not contradict their side’s opening team. As well as rebuttal, the majority of the third speaker’s time consists of presenting either: new material, new arguments, a new analysis from a different perspective or extending previously presented arguments. This is called an “extension” which must be something that sets their team apart and makes them unique.

The last two speeches of the closing teams are summary speeches – they summarise the debate and disagreements between the team. Their most important goal is to explain why their side has won the debate. They are not allowed to present new arguments but they can present new evidence and rebuttal.

During the speeches points of information are offered regularly. Speakers should only accept a maximum of two points of information. The first and last minute is protected time where points of information cannot be offered.

Rather than a side trying to win, all the teams are trying to win – this allows different perspectives to be explored. The teams are then ranked 1st to 4th in the debate.

Debate topics

Almost anything can be debated, here are some popular topics – these have been written as questions but they can be easily adapted into statements:

• Is animal experimentation justified?
• Should we legalise the possession of cannabis for medicinal use?
• Should we recognise Bitcoin as a legal currency?
• Is torture acceptable when used for national security?
• Should mobile phones be banned until a certain age?
• Does technology make us more lonely?
• Should guns be banned in the U.S.?
• Should we make internet companies liable for illegal content shared on their platforms?
• Will posting students’ grades publicly motivate them to perform better?
• Should animals be used for scientific testing?
• Do violent video games make people more violent?
• Should the death penalty be stopped completely?
• Should smoking in public places be completely banned?
• Should doping be allowed in professional sports?
• Should all zoos be closed?
• Should consumers must take responsibility for the plastic waste crisis?
• Is euthanasia justified?
• Is the boarding school system beneficial to children?

Debate topics for children

If you’re trying to think of debate topics for a classroom, consider the following:

• Should mobile phones be allowed at school?
• Is global warming a problem?
• Should violent video games be banned?
• Is school detention beneficial?
• Are celebrities good role models?
• Does social networking have a beneficial effect on society?
• Are single sex schools more effective than co-ed schools?
• Do celebrities get away with more crime than non-celebrities?
• Is cloning animals ethical?
• Are humans to blame for certain animal extinctions?

Debating societies

If you’re interested in debating consider searching for a society or debating events near you:

• Most universities have a debating society and their webpages usually contain lots of useful information and tips.
• Toastmasters
• Use Meetup to find debates close to you

Specific to the UK:

• Sylvans Debating Club
• The Association of Speakers Clubs

How to Write a Winning Debate Speech

What is a Debate?

A classroom debate involves students delivering persuasive speeches to present and support their opinions on a given subject. This activity helps develop critical thinking and communication skills, enabling students to gain a more comprehensive grasp of various topics.

Debate speeches are written according to a set of rules so a moderator can assess their effectiveness and allow others to question or challenge their statements within a formal debate.

A classroom debate is not an unruly fight or pointless argument but a structured formal conversation on a chosen topic in which two teams argue for or against it to convince the neutral moderator that they hold the stronger position.

Debating is a form of persuasive communication, and while we will be sticking to the fundamentals of how to write a debating speech, we also have a great guide to persuasive essay writing that elaborates on specific persuasive techniques.

Complete Teaching Unit on Class Debating

This unit will guide your students to write excellent DEBATE SPEECHES and craft well-researched, constructed ARGU MENTS ready for critique from their classmates.

Furthermore, this EDITABLE UNIT will provide the TOOLS and STRATEGIES for running highly engaging CLASSROOM DEBATES.

How To Run A Classroom Debate

Before jumping in headfirst to write your debating speech, ensure you understand how a debate is run to maximise your strategy and impact when it counts.

Debates occur in many different contexts, such as public meetings, election campaigns, legislative assemblies, and as entertainment on television shows. These contexts determine the specific structure the debate will follow.

This guide provides a basic step-by-step debate structure we can comfortably run with students in a classroom. By familiarizing students with this structure, they will effortlessly transition to other debate frameworks.

Running a classroom debate can be an engaging and educational activity that helps students develop critical thinking, communication, and research skills. Here’s a step-by-step guide on how to organize and facilitate a successful classroom debate:

1. Choose a Topic For Your Debate.

Also called a resolution or a motion , the topic is sometimes chosen to debate. This is usually the case in a school activity to practice debating skills. 

The resolution or motion is usually centered around a true or false statement or a proposal to change the current situation. Often, the motion starts, ”This House believes that….”

Select a topic relevant to your curriculum and the students’ interests. Ensure that it is debatable and has multiple perspectives. Further down this article, you can find a list of popular classroom debating topics.

2. Form Two Debating Teams

Two teams of three speakers each are formed. These are referred to as ‘ The House for the Motion ’ or the ‘ Affirmative ’ team and ‘The House Against the Motion ’ or the ‘ Negative ’ team.

Preparation is an essential aspect of debating. The speech and debate team members will need time to research their arguments, collaborate, and organize themselves and their respective roles in the upcoming debate.

They’ll also need time to write and rehearse their speeches. The better prepared and coordinated they are as a team, the greater their chances of success in the debate.

3. Assign Roles to Students.

Each team member should have a specific role, such as speaker, researcher , or rebuttal specialist . This encourages teamwork and ensures that each student is actively involved.

4. Research and Preparation:

• Allocate time for teams to research and prepare their arguments. Encourage students to use multiple sources, including books, articles, and reputable websites. Make sure you read our complete guide to powerful student research strategies.

5. Set Debate Format:

• Define the debate format, including the structure of each round. Common formats include opening statements, cross-examination, rebuttals, and closing statements.

6. Establish Rules:

• Set ground rules for the debate, such as time limits for each speaker, etiquette, guidelines for respectful communication, and consequences for rule violations.

7. Conduct a Practice Debate:

• Before the actual debate, conduct a practice round. This helps students become familiar with the format and allows you to provide feedback on their arguments and presentation skills.
• On the day of the debate, set up the classroom to accommodate the format. Ensure that each round has a clear structure, and designate a timekeeper to keep the debate on schedule.

9. Facilitate Q&A Sessions:

• After each team presents their arguments, allow time for questions and cross-examination. This encourages critical thinking and engagement among the students.

10. Evaluate and Debrief:

• After the debate, provide constructive feedback to each team. Discuss the strengths and weaknesses of their arguments, presentation skills, and teamwork. Also, please encourage students to reflect on what they learned from the experience.
• Have a class discussion about the debate, exploring different perspectives and opinions. This can deepen students’ understanding of the topic and enhance their critical thinking skills.

Consider integrating the debate topic into future lessons or assignments. This reinforces the learning experience and allows students to delve deeper into the subject matter.

Remember to create a supportive and respectful environment throughout the debate, emphasizing the importance of listening to opposing views and engaging in constructive dialogue.

Each speaker takes a turn making their speech, alternating between the House for the Motion, who goes first, and the House Against the Motion. Each speaker speaks for a pre-agreed amount of time.

Ensure your debate is held in front of an audience (in this case, the class), and occasionally, the audience is given time to ask questions after all the speeches have been made.

Finally, the debate is judged either by moderators or by an audience vote. 

Download our Debate Organizer

Stay fousssed with this handy template to keep all your ideas organized.

How To Write A Debate

How to start a debate speech.

In highly competitive speech and debate tournaments, students are only provided the topic on the day, and limited time is allowed for preparation, but this is not recommended for beginners.

Regardless of the stakes of your classroom debate, the speechwriting process always begins with research. Thorough research will provide students with both the arguments and the supporting evidence for their position on a topic and generate forward-thinking about what their opponents might use against them.

Writing Your Introduction

The purpose of the introduction in a debate speech is to achieve several things:

• Grab the attention of the audience,
• Introduce the topic
• Provide a thesis statement
• Preview some of the main arguments.

Grab The Attention Of Your Audience With Strong Hooks

Securing the audience’s attention is crucial, and failure to do this will have a strong, negative impact on how the team’s efforts will be scored as a whole. Let’s explore three proven strategies to hook your audience and align their thinking to yours.

Introduce Your Topic With Efficiency and Effectiveness

Once the audience’s attention has been firmly grasped, it’s time to introduce the topic or the motion. This should be done straightforwardly and transparently to ensure the audience understands the topic of the debate and the position you are approaching it from.

For example, if the topic of the debate was school uniforms, the topic may be introduced with:

Provide Your Thesis Statement

A thesis statement is a concise declaration summarizing the points and arguments of your debating speech.

• It presents a clear stance on a topic and guides the reader on what to expect in the content.
• A good thesis statement is debatable and allows for opposing viewpoints and discussion.
• It serves as a roadmap for the writer, ensuring coherence and focus in the piece.
• It helps the audience understand the purpose and direction of the work from the beginning.

The thesis statement should express the student’s or the team’s position on the motion. Clearly explaining the speaker’s side of the debate. An example can be seen here.

Provide A Preview Of Your Arguments

The final part of the introduction section of a debate speech involves previewing the main points of the speech for the audience.

There is no need to go into detail with each argument here; that’s what the body of the speech is for. It is enough to provide a general thesis statement for each argument or ‘claims’ – (more on this to follow).

Previewing the arguments in a speech is especially important as the audience and judges only get one listen to a speech – unlike a text, which can be reread as frequently as the reader likes.

debate introduction examples for students

Attention grabbers task.

After explaining the different types of attention grabbers and the format for the rest of the introduction to your students, challenge them to write an example of each type of opening for a specific debate topic. 

When they’ve finished writing these speech openings, discuss with the students which one best fits their chosen topic. Then, they can continue by completing the rest of the introduction for their speech using the format described above.

You might like to try a simple topic like “Homework should be banned.” you can choose from our collection further in this article.

Writing T he Body of the Speech

The body paragraphs are the real meat of the speech. They contain the in-depth arguments that make up the substance of the debate, and How well these arguments are made will determine how the judges will assess each speaker’s performance, so it’s essential to get the structure of these arguments just right.

Let’s take a look at how to do that.

How to structure an Argument

With the introduction out of the way, it’s time for the student to get down to the nitty-gritty of the debate – that is, making compelling arguments to support their case.

There are three main aspects to an argument in a debate speech. They are:

• The Warrant

Following this structure carefully enables our students to build coherent and robust arguments. Ttake a look at these elements in action in the example below.

Brainstorming Arguments

Present your students with a topic and, as a class, brainstorm some arguments for and against the motion.

Then, ask students to choose one argument and, using the Claim-Warrant-Impact format, take a few moments to write down a well-structured argument that’s up to debate standard.

Students can then present their arguments to the class. 

Or, you could also divide the class along pro/con lines and host a mini-debate!

Concluding a Debate Speech

The conclusion of a speech or a debate is the final chance for the speaker to convey their message to the audience. In a formal debate that has a set time limit, the conclusion is crucial as it demonstrates the speaker’s ability to cover all their material within the given time frame.

Avoid introducing new information and focus on reinforcing the strength of your position for a compelling and memorable conclusion.

A good conclusion should refer back to the introduction and restate the main position of the speaker, followed by a summary of the key arguments presented. Finally, the speaker should end the speech with a powerful image that will leave a lasting impression on the audience and judges.

Examples of strong debate Conclusions

The Burden of the Rejoinder

In formal debates, the burden of the rejoinder means that any time an opponent makes a point for their side, it’s incumbent upon the student/team to address that point directly.

Failing to do so will automatically be seen as accepting the truth of the point made by the opponent.

For example, if the opposing side argues that all grass is pink, despite how ridiculous that statement is, failing to refute that point directly means that, for the debate, all grass is pink.

Our students must understand the burden of the rejoinder and ensure that any points the opposing team makes are fully addressed during the debate.

The Devils Advocate

When preparing to write their speech, students should spend a significant proportion of their team collaborating as a team. 

One good way to practice the burden of the rejoinder concept is to use the concept of Devil’s Advocate, whereby one team member acts as a member of the opposing team, posing arguments from the other side for the speaker to counter, sharpening up their refutation skills in the process.

20 Great Debating Topics for Students

• Should cell phones be allowed in schools?
• Is climate change primarily caused by human activities?
• Should the voting age be lowered to 16?
• Is social media more harmful than beneficial to society?
• Should genetically modified organisms (GMOs) be embraced or rejected?
• Is the death penalty an effective crime deterrent?
• Should schools implement mandatory drug testing for students?
• Is animal testing necessary for scientific and medical advancements?
• Should school uniforms be mandatory?
• Is censorship justified in certain circumstances?
• Should the use of performance-enhancing drugs be allowed in sports?
• Is homeschooling more beneficial than traditional schooling?
• Should the use of plastic bags be banned?
• Is nuclear energy a viable solution to the world’s energy needs?
• Should the government regulate the fast food industry?
• Is social inequality a result of systemic factors or individual choices?
• Should the consumption of meat be reduced for environmental reasons?
• Is online learning more effective than traditional classroom learning?
• Should the use of drones in warfare be banned?
• Is the legalization of marijuana beneficial for society?

These topics cover a range of subjects and offer students the opportunity to engage in thought-provoking debates on relevant and impactful issues.

OTHER GREAT ARTICLES RELATED TO DEBATING

The Ultimate Guide to Opinion Writing for Students and Teachers

Top 5 Persuasive Writing Techniques for Students

5 Top Persuasive Writing Lesson Plans for Students and Teachers

23 Persuasive writing Topics for High School students

How to Write Perfect Persuasive Essays in 5 Simple Steps

Debating strategies for students.

Research and preparation are essential to ensure good performance in a debate. Students should spend as much time as possible drafting and redrafting their speeches to maximize their chances of winning. However, a debate is a dynamic activity, and victory cannot be assured by pre-writing alone.

Students must understand that the key to securing victory lies in also being able to think, write (often in the form of notes), and respond instantly amid the turmoil of the verbal battle. To do this, students must understand the following keys to victory.

When we think of winning a debate, we often think of blinding the enemy with the brilliance of our verbal eloquence. We think of impressing the audience and the judges alike with our outstanding oratory.

What we don’t often picture when we imagine what a debate winner looks like is a quiet figure sitting and listening intently. But being a good listener is one of our students’ most critical debating skills.

If students don’t listen to the other side, whether by researching opposing arguments or during the thrust of the actual debate, they won’t know the arguments the other side is making. Without this knowledge, they cannot effectively refute the opposition’s claims.

Read the Audience

In terms of the writing that happens before the debate takes place, this means knowing your audience. 

Students should learn that how they present their arguments may change according to the demographics of the audience and/or judges to whom they will be making their speech. 

An audience of retired school teachers and an audience of teen students may have very different responses to the same arguments.

This applies during the actual debate itself too. If the student making their speech reads resistance in the faces of the listeners, they should be prepared to adapt their approach accordingly in mid-speech.

Practice, Practice, Practice

The student must practice their speech before the debate. There’s no need to learn it entirely by heart. There isn’t usually an expectation to memorize a speech entirely, and doing so can lead to the speaker losing some of their spontaneity and power in their delivery. At the same time, students shouldn’t spend the whole speech bent over a sheet of paper reading word by word.

Ideally, students should familiarize themselves with the content and be prepared to deliver their speech using flashcards as prompts when necessary.

Another important element for students to focus on when practising their speech is making their body language, facial expressions, and hand gestures coherent with the verbal content of their speech. One excellent way to achieve this is for the student to practice delivering their speech in a mirror.

And Finally…

Debating is a lot of fun to teach and partake in, but it also offers students a valuable opportunity to pick up some powerful life skills.

It helps students develop a knack for distinguishing fact from opinion and an ability to assess whether a source is credible or not. It also helps to encourage them to think about the other side of the argument. 

Debating helps our students understand others, even when disagreeing with them. An important skill in these challenging times, without a doubt.

Debating Teaching Strategies

Clearly Define Debate Roles and Structure when running speech and debate events: Clearly define the roles of speakers, timekeepers, moderators, and audience members. Establish a structured format with specific time limits for speeches, rebuttals, and audience participation. This ensures a well-organized and engaging debate.

• Provide Topic Selection and Preparation Time: Offer students a range of debate topics, allowing them to select a subject they are passionate about. Allocate ample time for research and preparation, encouraging students to gather evidence, develop strong arguments, and anticipate counterarguments.
• Incorporate Scaffolded Debating Skills Practice: Before the actual debate, engage students in scaffolded activities that build their debating skills. This can include small group discussions, mock debates, or persuasive writing exercises. Provide feedback and guidance to help students refine their arguments and delivery.
• Encourage Active Listening and Note-taking during speech and debate competitions: Emphasize the importance of active listening during the debate. Encourage students to take notes on key points, supporting evidence, and persuasive techniques used by speakers. This cultivates critical thinking skills and prepares them for thoughtful responses during rebuttals.
• Facilitate Post-Debate Reflection and Discussion: After the debate, facilitate a reflection session where students can share their thoughts, lessons learned, and insights gained. Encourage them to analyze the strengths and weaknesses of their arguments and engage in constructive dialogue. This promotes metacognitive skills and encourages continuous improvement.

By following these tips, teachers can create a vibrant and educational debate experience for their students. Through structured preparation, active engagement, and reflective discussions, students develop valuable literacy and critical thinking skills that extend beyond the boundaries of the debate itself.

A COMPLETE UNIT FOR TEACHING OPINION WRITING

Teach your students to write EXCELLENT PERSUASIVE ESSAYS and master INFLUENTIAL WRITING SKILLS using PROVEN TEACHING STRATEGIES with this 140-PAGE UNIT.

ALL RESOURCES AND ASSESSMENT TOOLS INCLUDED – NO PREP REQUIRED.

30+ 5-star Ratings ⭐⭐⭐⭐⭐

How to Quiet Our Negative Self-Talk

Why did self-talk, an evolutionarily adaptive trait, get turned on its head.

Posted May 11, 2024 | Reviewed by Ray Parker

• Find counselling near me
• Self-talk is powerful; you can transform yours to spark positivity and healing.
• Negative self-beliefs stem from early experiences and represent our deepest fears about ourselves and others.
• Reparenting is an evidence-based strategy that offers practical ways to heal your inner child.
• Adopt the self-statements of the securely attached, and you'll see shifts in your self-talk and your life.

We all talk to ourselves. Self-talk is what separates us from other species and leads us to the top of the food chain. Yet, it also contributes to self-sabotage , imposter syndrome , and beliefs that we aren't worthy of good outcomes in our lives.

Almost every patient who comes to me in my private practice is struggling with some type of negative self-belief . They struggle with poor self-image and low self-worth and think that their ideal self is likely to go unrealized in their lifetime. These deep-seated, strongly held negative beliefs can usually be traced back to their early childhood experiences and represent their greatest fears about how others might see them. What’s even more challenging is that these negative self-beliefs act as self-fulfilling prophecies: We’re convinced that we see ourselves accurately, and the rigidity of those self-perceptions gets in the way of healthy relationships, satisfying connections, and successful goal pursuits.

Our minds are naturally inclined to use simplified strategies to conserve mental energy and reduce cognitive load. In many ways, this is adaptive and necessary (for example, when we have to make decisions without time to analyze the nitty-gritty), but this cognitive miserliness can lead to biases and errors in our thoughts and actions. This is why our attachment experiences have such a profound impact on us as we grow: The stories we learn from our caregivers become the simplified strategies we use to see the world and ourselves. They become shortcuts to our self-concept that are hard to shake for two reasons. The first is because they’re so readily accessible. We are likely to quickly classify ourselves as being less capable, less worthy, or less lovable than others just because these thoughts have been with us and percolating for some time.

The second reason has to do with the brain’s self- confirmation bias . Going back to that cognitive miserliness, our brains prefer confirming an existing belief—even when it’s negative—to create a new one, so we are less likely to entertain a new idea or a new action that will change how we think about ourselves. We may even unconsciously seek evidence to cement these existing unproductive beliefs further. The influence of our self-concept goes beyond how we think about ourselves and impacts how we relate to others.

People with insecure attachment styles and, relatedly, negative self-concepts develop problematic attachment scripts, which are rigid, inflexible rules about how they should respond to different situations and people in their lives. When these scripts are followed, they create the disappointing results they’ve come to expect.

For example, if your self-beliefs tell you that you are unlovable, unworthy, and incapable, you may believe that no one can take care of your needs or that you don’t deserve good things in life. You may say, “I’m terrible at relationships, so why bother?” and subconsciously activate a script of detachment where you immerse yourself in solitude, work, or other ways of achieving a self-fulfilling prophecy. You may go from job to job unable to find a stable working environment or develop connections with coworkers. Although you may feel lonely , you might vehemently deny the need for relationships because you are so busy with work or other solo activities. Because you feel unwelcome or that you don’t fit in with the group, you may avoid family or other social gatherings.

Or you may have a gnawing, persistent worry that your loved ones don’t care about you. You may have subconsciously activated a script of dependency where you may indiscriminately cling to any relationships, come on too strong, or ask for repeated reassurances that exhaust the people in your life with your emotional neediness. You may be on high alert to signs that others are displeased or detaching from you and engage in extreme people-pleasing behaviors to gain acceptance. This creates a vicious cycle where your self-esteem is attached to how others respond to you. Your self-perception can turn on a dime and cause you to feel a lack of control. You may have difficulty making decisions without input from other people and feel stressed or scared when you’re alone for too long. You can find yourself obsessing over ways to avoid being hurt or rejected and running hot and cold with loved ones, and these erratic behaviors can provoke the very reactions from others that you most fear . It’s a classic cycle of self-sabotage that strengthens your negative self-beliefs and makes it even more challenging for you to heal your attachment wounds.

So what do you do if you find yourself struggling with these persistent negative self-beliefs, and how can we take advantage of the adaptive aspects of self-talk while healing those aspects that cause dark thoughts and unhealthy coping?

In my recent TEDx talk , I discuss how to transform your negative self-talk through 10 practical ways to reparent your inner child. Your negative self-talk reflects the unmet needs and unhealed wounds of that metaphorical little you that lives inside all of us. Reparenting, or the conscious act of providing ourselves with the consistent care and understanding we may have missed as children, is the most important tool you have to create healthier thoughts and behavior patterns. Your adult self has more agency, resources, and knowledge than your child self, and most of all, your adult self has the wisdom of your unique lived experience. This is why experiencing all that a secure attachment style has to offer starts with being securely attached to yourself.

Reparenting is a therapeutic strategy that has been around for ages and has been proven to work well for a variety of concerns, but it has more recently entered the mental health conversation in a bigger way because more and more people are becoming attuned to its potential benefits. And yet, it also seems like a tough idea to understand and to put into practice, perhaps because there are some misconceptions about what this coping strategy is all about. For example:

• It is a “woo-woo” idea. When some people hear this term, they inevitably draw parallels to ideas that feel unconventional, irrational, or lacking scientific support. This may be because people think that reparenting involves a form of imagination that doesn’t feel tangible or realistic. But reparenting work is very practical and tangible, especially when you understand it to be a form of self-care that allows you to be your best in every area of life.
• It's only for those with attachment issues: While reparenting therapy is rooted in attachment theory, it can benefit people with a wide range of issues beyond attachment insecurity. Whether someone struggles with self-esteem, boundary -setting, workaholism, or emotional regulation , reparenting techniques can help foster self-compassion and resilience .
• It involves blaming parents: Reparenting therapy does not seek to blame parents for past experiences or shortcomings. Instead, it focuses on understanding how early attachment dynamics influence present behaviors and beliefs. It's about recognizing and addressing the impact of those dynamics rather than assigning blame.
• It's about "re- parenting " through "re-attaching" to external figures or replacing the original caregiver . Reparenting therapy does not usually involve seeking out external figures to serve as surrogate parents. The primary goal is for individuals to develop self-compassion and self-nurturing skills and to equip them with the tools and resources to meet their own emotional needs and soothe their inner child.

For those who are still skeptics and question how reparenting looks on a day-to-day basis, here’s one reparenting technique that you can try right away. People with secure attachment tend to be equipped with more balanced and realistic self-talk that acknowledges the challenges they encounter in life while also establishing a firm self-belief in their ability to meet those challenges head-on.

Try adopting the self-talk of the securely attached by selecting one of the following statements as your self-affirmation today.

• I believe in and like myself.
• I can handle what comes my way.
• I can effect positive outcomes in my life.
• I can be independent and rely on others, too.

Write your selected self-statement down and post it in a visible place. Look in the mirror and repeat it to yourself a few times as you take deep breaths and consider the meaning of these statements and their potential impact on your life. Visualize yourself embodying these qualities, especially during stressful times. Most of all, believe in your own potential to heal past attachment wounds and associated negative self-talk—and know that you have worth and deserve good things in life, no matter what.

Ho, Judy (2024). How attachment influences self-image . TEDxReno.

Ho, Judy. (2024). The New Rules of Attachment: How to Heal Your Relationships, Reparent Your Inner Child, and Secure Your Life Vision. Hachette Book Group.

Judy Ho, Ph.D., ABPP, is a board-certified clinical and forensic neuropsychologist and Associate Professor of Psychology at Pepperdine University.

• Find a Therapist
• Find a Treatment Center
• Find a Psychiatrist
• Find a Support Group
• Find Online Therapy
• International
• New Zealand
• South Africa
• Switzerland
• Asperger's
• Bipolar Disorder
• Chronic Pain
• Eating Disorders
• Passive Aggression
• Personality
• Goal Setting
• Positive Psychology
• Stopping Smoking
• Low Sexual Desire
• Relationships
• Child Development
• Self Tests NEW
• Therapy Center
• Diagnosis Dictionary
• Types of Therapy

At any moment, someone’s aggravating behavior or our own bad luck can set us off on an emotional spiral that threatens to derail our entire day. Here’s how we can face our triggers with less reactivity so that we can get on with our lives.

• Emotional Intelligence
• Gaslighting
• Affective Forecasting
• Neuroscience