Boston Debate League



WelcomeThank you for agreeing to coach (or return as a coach) in the Boston Debate League! The time and energy of teacher-coaches is the lynchpin of debate in Boston and we hope you have a great time getting to know your students in a new context. If the past experience of coaches is any guidance, you’re almost certain to be blown away by what the young debaters are capable of doing. Admittedly, coaching can be challenging at times, especially in light of all the other responsibilities teachers face. Still, almost any returning coach will tell you that the student transformations make the sacrifice worth it. Young people who fear speaking up in class suddenly become engaged, vocal learners. Students struggling with discipline issues begin to modify their behavior, having learned alternate outlets for expressing their thoughts or decided that they have something to lose. Without your dedication, these opportunities would not be possible.The mission of the Boston Debate League is to measurably improve students’ academic achievement and their expectations of themselves by engaging as many BPS high school and middle school students as possible through academic debate. The BDL sees debate not as an activity for a small group of students but rather as a strategy for affecting academic culture school-wide. At the most basic level, this means that debate is accessible and appropriately challenging to students of all skill levels. It also implies that debate can be a defining part of the school’s identity, with the beneficial effects spilling over to students who aren’t even on the squad. So, by recruiting, retaining, and training students, coaches are part of a broader effort to boost academic expectations around the school. This binder is intended to provide you with accessible curriculum tools and help you navigate some of the expectations of being a coach. While your own experience as an educator and knowledge of your students will serve you incredibly well, the ideas included here are great starting points for running your team and planning your practices. These lessons should help you build large debate teams and transform your school’s culture. They represent years of collective wisdom of debate coaches here in Boston and around the country. That said, feel free to make modifications to the ideas as you see fit and please let other coaches know when you have new ideas that have worked. The more strategies are tested and shared, the strong the league will be as a whole. Thanks again for taking on your school’s debate squad. The BDL staff is here to help you be the best coach you can be, so please don’t hesitate to reach out with any questions or suggestions. We look forward to a great 2014-2015 season!Sincerely,The Boston Debate LeagueTable of ContentsTab 1: Introduction TOC \o "1-3" \h \z \u Welcome PAGEREF _Toc363056549 \h 2Curriculum Goals and Purpose PAGEREF _Toc363056550 \h 5How to Use this Text PAGEREF _Toc363056551 \h 6How to Read these Practice Plans PAGEREF _Toc363056552 \h 7Tab 2: Debate Practice Activities PAGEREF _Toc363056553 \h 8Philosophy of a Good Debate Practice PAGEREF _Toc363056554 \h 9Community Building Activities PAGEREF _Toc363056555 \h 10Warm Up Activities PAGEREF _Toc363056556 \h 24EBA-Style Debate Activities PAGEREF _Toc363056557 \h 36Tab 3: Novice Curriculum PAGEREF _Toc363056558 \h 77Planning a Novice Practice PAGEREF _Toc363056559 \h 78Week 1 PAGEREF _Toc363056560 \h 78Week 2 PAGEREF _Toc363056561 \h 89Week 3 PAGEREF _Toc363056562 \h 101Tab 4: Learning the Case PAGEREF _Toc363056563 \h 117The Affirmative Case PAGEREF _Toc363056564 \h 118Answering the Affirmative Case PAGEREF _Toc363056565 \h 133Tab 5: Disadvantages PAGEREF _Toc363056566 \h 150Disadvantages PAGEREF _Toc363056567 \h 151Intro to Disadvantages PAGEREF _Toc363056568 \h 156Parts of a Disadvantage PAGEREF _Toc363056569 \h 158Answering a Disadvantage PAGEREF _Toc363056570 \h 167Defending Your DA in the Neg Block: Impact Analysis and Overviews PAGEREF _Toc363056571 \h 174Tab 6: Counterplans PAGEREF _Toc363056572 \h 179Counterplans PAGEREF _Toc363056573 \h 180Intro to Counterplans PAGEREF _Toc363056574 \h 185Parts of a Counterplan PAGEREF _Toc363056575 \h 187Answering a Counterplan PAGEREF _Toc363056576 \h 190Defending a Counterplan PAGEREF _Toc363056577 \h 194Tab 7: Kritiks PAGEREF _Toc363056578 \h 198Kritiks PAGEREF _Toc363056579 \h 199Intro to Kritiks PAGEREF _Toc363056580 \h 204Intro to the Development K - Economic Engagement PAGEREF _Toc363056581 \h 209Parts of a Kritik PAGEREF _Toc363056582 \h 214Answering a Kritik PAGEREF _Toc363056583 \h 218Defending a Kritik PAGEREF _Toc363056584 \h 222Tab 8: Topicality PAGEREF _Toc363056585 \h 226Topicality PAGEREF _Toc363056586 \h 227Intro to Topicality - What is Topicality? PAGEREF _Toc363056587 \h 230Intro to Topicality - Why is Topicality Important? PAGEREF _Toc363056588 \h 232Parts of a Topicality Argument PAGEREF _Toc363056589 \h 234Answering Topicality PAGEREF _Toc363056590 \h 241Defending Topicality PAGEREF _Toc363056591 \h 250 Curriculum Goals and PurposeThe purpose of this curriculum is to provide you with resources and activities that will make large practices dynamic and simple to plan. It was designed based on feedback from Boston’s coaches who posed three big questions to us:What do we do when 50 or more students show up to our practice? How do we meaningfully engage all of them for the entire practice?If our debaters join the team because they like to argue, how can we create a practice where all students spend a large portion of their time engaging in argument? Even if I create the most student centered practice where the coach talks just 20% of the time and the students collectively talk 80% of the time, does that mean anything to an individual student who only gets into engage in an argument themselves for a few minutes, having to wait while everyone else has a turn? How can I create lessons where all students spend a substantial amount of time engaging in argument while learning debate content and skills.It is easy to make fun practices and it is easy to make practices where students learn content and skills that will help them do better at the next tournament (the two key elements any practice needs to have), but how do we do both at the same time. We know that as debate teams get larger, traditional debate activities become nearly impossible to lead. They tend to rely on small groups of students debating or speaking while others are forced to watch, or they are very teacher centered with a teacher or coach in front of the classroom as students share answers. The lessons in this curriculum are designed to overcome those problems. They are based on the Boston Debate League’s Evidence Based Argument (EBA) Initiative. EBA was designed for classroom teachers to use debate to teach their everyday content to a class of 30 or more students. When applied to after-school debate practices, EBA activities can be a great way to teach large groups of students both the content and skills they need to participate in policy debate. While following this curriculum, you’ll find that your learning and development as a debate coach will grow, too. The lessons are designed with your dual role as a teacher and a learner in mind. We’ve broken down the toughest debate content into language and examples that will enable you to teach them with confidence—even if you don’t know the debate content going in.On the next page, you’ll find a detailed guide to using this text. While reading, keep in mind the philosophy behind these activities: the best practices are student-centered, challenging, and fun!How to Use this TextThis curriculum is filled with resources to help you develop and structure your team while leading interesting and engaging practices. The content is organized into two main sections:Debate ActivitiesTab 2 will help you prepare for practice. It includes Community Building and Warm Up activities, and it explains the different kinds of activities you’ll see throughout the text. Every practice plan in this curriculum is based on our six core activities. Read through the activities and familiarize yourself with them—understanding the basics will make understanding the curriculum better. More important than that, as you start coaching you’ll probably have practice ideas that go beyond this curriculum, and you can build on these activity templates to put your ideas into action. LessonsTabs 3 through 8 focuses on specific skills and content you’ll want to cover throughout the debate season. They’re organized into subsections by content area; counterplans have their own subsection, as do disadvantages, as do kritiks, et cetera. Each subsection is further divided three ways: At the beginning of each subsection, you’ll find a narrative explaining the basic principles of the content. You can use that narrative to brush up on your own debate knowledge, and you can also use it as a reference handout for your debaters. For example, at the beginning of the Counterplans unit, there are pages explaining what a counterplan is, how to run one, how to answer one, and how to defend one. This information is organized into tables and prose, and is often accompanied by examples.After the narrative, you’ll find an assortment of activity plans—many of these activity plans are followed by corresponding worksheets and handouts. Think of the activity plans as a kind of menu. You can select the ones that are best for your students, and you can plug in any evidence you want to cover that day. We’ve highlighted areas in the lesson plans where you can easily insert new material. For example, let’s say you know you want to cover the Nuclear Power Disadvantage during your next practice. You can flip to the disadvantages section and see which lessons are marked for Junior Varsity debaters and which are marked for Varsity debaters. Choose the lessons and activities that sound the best to you, and then just plug in the Nuclear Power Disadvantage evidence! Later, you can use the same menu of lessons and activities to teach the Turbine Disadvantage by simply changing the prompts and evidence you use.We hope this text will be an organized, accessible guide for planning your debate year! How to Read these Practice PlansAnswering a Counterplan – Table Debate(The activity titles are organized in the following manner: “content/skill – activity.” For example, this lesson teaches the skill “answering a counterplan” and it does so through a “table debate” activity.)Prior KnowledgeSWBATSome lessons will require a little prior knowledge. For example, if you’re teaching “Answering a Counterplan,” your debaters will need to know the parts of a counterplan first.The SWBAT (students will be able to) section tells you what your debaters will be able to do by the end of the lesson. Think of this as the goals section.ClaimsSome lessons will use claims, warrants, or prompts. For example, if you’re doing a Four Corners activity, this section might provide 3-5 prompts for that activity.ActivityWhat standard activity is this, or what is it based off of? The activity section will refer to the page in the EBA-Style Debate Activities section where you can read the activity description and the “teacher moves/student moves” direction for the activity.ProcedureHere you will find a step-by-step procedure for the lesson. Sometimes, phrases like “proceed with a standard table debate activity” will appear. If you are new to running table debates, just refer back to the EBA-Style Debate Activities section for the activity description and “teacher moves/student moves” directions.TimeThe estimated time for the activity. The times are flexible and you can adjust them as you see fit by adding/subtracting prompts, shortening/lengthening speech times, etc.as Mentor/Student Leader(s)These are suggestions for how your mentor/student leader(s) can help you during the lesson. It is important for mentors and student leaders to be involved in the practice, and they can be a great help to you you’re coaching!MaterialsThe materials section refers to any handouts, worksheets, or other materials you will need to use during the lesson.Tab 2: Debate Practice ActivitiesIn this Section:Philosophy of a Good Debate Practice........................................... PAGEREF PhilosophyofaGoodDebatePractice \* MERGEFORMAT 9 Community Building Activities..................................................... PAGEREF CommunityBuildingActivties \* MERGEFORMAT 10Warm Up Activities.................................................................... PAGEREF WarmUpActivities \* MERGEFORMAT 24EBA-Style Debate Activities......................................................... PAGEREF EBAStyleDebateActivities \* MERGEFORMAT 36Philosophy of a Good Debate PracticeA good debate practice is built on a number of key principles. These principles can be incorporated through all kinds of activities, practice formats, and teaching styles—there’s definitely not one right way to lead a practice! However, all of the best practices aim to include the following things:Student participation. Every debater should speak for at least 25% of each practice. An observer should be able to walk into any debate class, zoom in on a random student, and observe them speaking for a substantial amount of time. Students join debate because they like to argue, and they won’t stay with it or go to practice if most of the time they are just answering questions posed by the teachers, maybe getting called on every 15 minutes or so. While mini-lectures and guided discussions are often a necessary component of an effective and efficient lesson, it is very possible for students to learn that same information without a teacher in front of the room.Student-centered learning. Student-centered learning is the single most important component of a good debate practice. Debate activities should always place students in the driver’s seat of their own learning; it is one of the things that makes debate so different from school. Students get to decide what they are going to learn and argue. The curriculum is determined by them, not the coach. Peer engagement. Students should spend more time engaging each other than being engaged by the coach. Argumentation forces students to develop the habit of tackling what is initially difficult. When students engage peer ideas they internalize strategies needed for multifaceted thinking. In debate, students’ competitive nature forces them to think fully about complex topics or texts in order to win, requiring them to balance potentially contradictory ideas. Making arguments. Students should be regularly asked to make and defend controversial claims. Giving students the opportunity to advocate for something engages them in the content while building genuine excitement about debate. Prioritizing student voice in the practice, especially in the form of regular oral argumentation, is vital for creating an environment where students own their education and begin to think of themselves as intellectuals. Using text as evidence. When making arguments, students should cite supporting evidence to bolster their interpretation of a text. To use texts effectively, students must first read them closely to determine their key points. They then draw connections to the argument they are trying to build, identifying key quotations from the text that will be most useful. Finally, they clearly explain the reasons they chose particular quotations to demonstrate their relevance to the overall argument. Community Building ActivitiesCommunity Building Activities are fun ice-breaker/getting-to-know-you exercises to do with your team. It is important that the debaters feel like their team is a community. While they will get to know each other as debaters, they should also get to know each other’s personalities, likes, dislikes, etc.Do Community Building Activities regularly throughout the debate season to build team spirit. These are a great way for the team to get to know debaters in other divisions, and an even greater way to get them hooked on debate!Two Truths and a LieSWBATLearn facts about their peers.PromptsN/AProcedureAsk each person in the group to think of and write down two facts about themselves, and one lie.Each person in the group takes a turn telling the group their three items.The group then has to agree on which fact they think is a lie. Once the group announces their decision, the speaker tells the group the correct answer. The group then can talk about any of the interesting things they just learned about the new person.Time5-7 minutesMentor/Student Leader(s)N/AMaterialsScrap paperMy name is and I like to… SWBATLearn the names of and facts about their peers.PromptsN/AProcedureBreak up your practice into groups of 8. Have each group stand in a circle.The first person says, "My name is ______and I like to ______ (insert hobby and act out a motion from that hobby.) The next person says “My name is ______and I like to _______” and then repeats the first students name and hobby and acts out a motion from that hobby.Everyone else in the circle will repeats the process, adding on one additional person’s name and hobby each time.This continues until the last person goes, at which time the entire group will repeat the process once more. For the second round, everyone will start with themselves and then continue clockwise around the room until everyone’s name, hobby, and action is repeated. Once each person does this, the activity will end. Time15-20 minutesMentor/Student Leader(s)Have a mentor/ student leader monitor each group of 8.MaterialsN/ASilent InterviewsSWBATLearn names of and facts about their peers.PromptsN/AProcedureDivide the team into groups of 8-10.In these groups, have everyone pair-up with someone that the do not know well. Ask the participants to introduce themselves to their partner. Instruct the group that from this point forward, speaking is not allowed. This includes whispering, mouthing words, and making sounds, too! Inform the group that they must tell their partner 3 things about themselves without speaking, similar to a charades game. These things cannot be physical characteristics. Once all of the partners have finished miming to each other, call everyone back to their group; have each group circle-up. Ask for each pair to verbally introduce their partner to their group of 8-10, as well as the three things that they learned (or think they learned).Time3-5 minutesMentor/Student Leader(s)Have a mentor/ student leader monitor each group of 8 to 10.MaterialsN/AI Have NeverSWBATLearn facts about their peers.PromptsN/AProcedureEveryone is sitting in a circle of chairs except for the person in the middle. The person in the middle calls out something they have never done.?For Example "I have never been to New York." or "I have never been Sky Diving." The people who are sitting in the chairs who have DONE what this person has NEVER done must get up and switch seats. However, they cannot switch seats with the person sitting directly next to them. The object is for the person in the middle is to quickly take a seat from those that are switching seats before they become occupied again. Time7 minutesMentor/Student Leader(s)N/AMaterialsChairsBe My BuddySWBATLearn names of and facts about their peers.PromptsFor this activity you must find a different person with whom you share a similarity with for each of the following topics:Favorite subjectBookDessertMoviesTransportationAncient EgyptDebateSchoolSportsMusicGames from childhoodTime machineThe THospitalsIce creamCandyWeekendsWeekdaysProcedureYou must find a different person for each topic. In the buddy column write your buddy’s name. In the similarity column write how you and your buddy are similar in relation to the row’s topic. You can only use a person once.Time7 minutesMentor/Student Leader(s)N/AMaterialsSheet of paper with the topics already written on them.Shared and UniqueSWBATLearn names of and facts about their peers.PromptsN/AProcedureAsk participants to form groups of five?people with the people around them. The first half?of the activity is the Shared part.? Instruct a note taker?for each group to create a list of?many common traits or qualities that?members of the group have in common. The second half is the Unique part. On a second sheet of paper have them record Unique traits and qualities; that is,?items that only apply to?one person in the group.? Instruct the group?to?find at least two unique qualities and strengths?per person. Time10-12 minutesMentor/Student Leader(s)N/AMaterialsPaper and pensLink UpSWBATLearn names of and facts about their peers.PromptsN/AProcedureOne person stands and talks about him/herself. When someone in the group has something in common with something they’ve said, they get up and link arms with the person speaking person. Only one person at a time. They declare the thing that they had in common and then begin talking about him/herself until someone else comes up with something in common with them. The activity continues until all group members are “Linked Up.”Time5-10 minutesMentor/Student Leader(s)N/AMaterialsN/AWho am I?SkillsStudents will get to know their fellow debate team members.PromptsPre-write or have your students write the names of a famous person on the back of an index card so that everyone can have a unique famous person (living or not) assigned to them.ProcedurePass out index cards with a living or dead famous person on it to every debater.Tape your famous person to another debater without them seeing the persons name.Debaters will be asked to identify the names of the famous person taped to their back (e.g. Lil Wayne, Barack Obama) by asking questions of their teammates who cannot tell them explicitly who they are but who can answer their questions in a yes/no format. If the member receives a “yes” answer, they can continue to ask that individual questions until they receive a “no” answer.??Then they must continue on to ask someone else.?When a group member figures out who they are, they take off the tag, put it on the front of their shirt, and write their own name on it.??The member then can help other members find out who they are.??The exercise concludes when all members have discovered who they are.Time10 minutesMentor/Student Leader(s)N/AMaterialsIndex CardsTapeAll My Friends and NeighborsSkillsStudents will get to know their fellow debate team members and lessen their fears of speaking in front of a group.PromptsExample prompts with underlined sentence starters:I am calling on all my friends and neighbors that love history.ORThis is a shout out to all my friends and neighbors that play basketball every week.ProcedurePlayers take off their shoes and stand in a circle in front of their shoes with one person in the middle who announces "This is a shout out to all my friends and neighbors ...who like ice cream” (finishing with a common trait such as "like action movies" or "like ice cream"). The players who identify with that trait must run to a new spot that is not next to their current spot as the player in the middle tries to find a seat for herself. Whoever does not find a place in the circle becomes the middle person.Activity repeats as many times as desired.Time10-20 minutes.Mentor/Student Leader(s)N/AMaterialsN/AInner Circle, Outer Circle SkillsStudents will get to know their fellow debate team members.PromptsExample prompts:“What is your favorite ice cream flavor?”“What is the first question you would ask an alien?”“Would you travel to the Mars? For how much?”ProcedureHave each student write down a question that they would like another debater to answer. Collect the questions.Have half of students stand in a circle facing outwards. Then have a looser outer circle will form with students facing inwards towards their peers. The teacher will then read off questions, one-at-a-time. After each questions is read and answered, students in the outer circle will rotate clockwise to meet a new teammate, until the questions are all read or until everyone in the outer circle talked to everyone in the inner circle.Time15-20 minutes.Mentor/Student Leader(s)N/AMaterialsPre-prepared list of 20 questions if your students do not develop the questions before the activity begins.Tall StoriesSWBATLearn names of and facts about their peers.PromptsN/AProcedureThe leader starts a story with a sentence that ends in SUDDENLY. The next person then has to add to the story with his own sentence that ends in SUDDENLY. Continue the story until everyone has contributed.TimeUntil everyone contributesMentor/Student Leader(s)The student leaders should focus on adding to the story in a way that will help others contribute and not in a way that shuts the game down.MaterialsN/ACatch Me If You CanSWBATLearn names of and facts about their peers.PromptsN/AProcedurePlayers should be paired up.?All players divide into two lines (facing in) shoulder to shoulder, with partners facing each other.?Participants should be given approximately 30 seconds to look at their partners, taking in all details about the individual.??The leader then instructs the two lines to turn and face away from the center.??One or both lines has 15-20 seconds to change something about their appearance (e.g. change a watch to different wrist, unbutton a button, remove a belt, etc.).??The change must be discrete, but visible to the partner.??The players again turn in to face each other and have 30 seconds to discover the physical changes that have been made.??Time3-5 minutesMentor/Student Leader(s)N/AMaterialsN/A TransformationSWBATHave fun with their new team members.PromptsN/AProcedureHave the group in a circle.?Everyone starts out as an egg by squatting down low and waddling like an egg. "Eggs" find another egg and play a game of rock-paper-scissors. The winners turn into a chicken.Chickens move on to find other chickens, and eggs continue to play against other eggs.?Each time a player wins an r-p-s bout, they evolve into the next stage. Inevitably, one person will be left as the lone player in each stage of evolution until the end of the game as the winner of the final pair in each stage wins and moves on.The game ends when all but the lone person in each stage evolve to the final stage.Time15-20 minutesMentor/Student Leader(s)N/AMaterialsN/AWarm Up ActivitiesWarm Up Activities are fun, focusing activities that are great ways to start a debate practice. Some Warm Up Activities focus on certain debate skills while others focus on topic-related content. If you want a creative way to get your students into the debate mindset, start your practice with a Warm Up Activity!Human BarometerSWBATDecide upon and defend a place on a spectrum, based on a given prompt.PromptsExamples:We should never ban our citizens from traveling to other countries.We have a responsibility to help any country in ernments should always allow companies to make as much money as they can.ProcedureSet up the room so that there is sufficient space for students to stand against the wall.Place the two signs on opposite ends of the room.Instruct students to place themselves on the spectrum once the prompt is read.Read one of the prompts aloud.Pick on a few students to share why they chose the position they did. (It is sometimes helpful to go to students at distinct points on the spectrum first.)“Fold” the spectrum in half: Students on the farthest ends of there should now be two lines facing each other (with the students on the farthest ends of the spectrum facing each other).Instruct students on one half of the spectrum to persuade the other half to move.Time5-10 MinutesMentor/Student Leader(s)N/AMaterialsPrepared promptsWho or What Am I?SWBATRecall key terms based on the given clues.PromptsExamples:Energy PovertyRenewable EnergyFossil FuelsProcedureIn groups students have titles on their forehead that everyone else but they can see.Other group members drop hints to people in the group.Continue until everyone figures out who/what they are.Time5 MinutesMentor/Student Leader(s)During the activity, walk around to make sure everyone follows the rules and that no group is stuck.MaterialsPrepared promptsPersonalize It!SWBATRecall debate terminology and conceptsPromptsExamples:Tax SubsidyHuman RightLoan GuaranteesProcedureWrite the topic to be taught on the board and then talk about how the topic relates to them by using a personal reference or story. The students are then to figure out how they can relate the topic to a personal reference or story.Time10 MinutesMentor/Student Leader(s)Keep track of time. Each team should have no more than one minute for each questionMaterialsBlank paper.Ranking Terms and ConceptsSWBATReview the key debate terminology and concepts within a case or negative argument.PromptsExample from Offshore Wind Affirmative – Novice: Rank the following terminology and concepts from most important to understanding the case/argument to least important to understanding the case/argument:Renewable EnergyWind TurbineOffshore Wind FarmFossil FuelsDrillingSupplemental Nutrition Assistance ProgramEnergy PovertyHuman RightTax SubsidyLoan GuaranteesProcedureWrite or project a list of terms and concepts to be ranked on the board.Instruct the students to rank the terminology and concepts from most important to understanding the case/argument to least important to understanding the case/argument. Optional: Follow up with a 2-person table debate about which of the top 2 terms or concepts is the most important.Time10 MinutesMentor/Student Leader(s)Circulate around the room and help students recall key terms and concepts found in their core files.MaterialsBlank paperWordsearch – Vocabulary DevelopmentSWBATRecall key terms based on the given clue.PromptsExample:There are 4 basic ways that you can respond to your opponents arguments. Using the mnemonic Dr. MO, find the 4 terms (Deny, Reverse, Minimize, Outweigh – facilitator note: include if you wish).Other example: “Offshore Wind Affirmative” –terms, e.g., tax subsidy, wind turbine, renewable energy, human right (search as if one word).ProcedureStudents will find as many words in the time allotted with or without a list of terms. Time5 MinutesMentor/Student Leader(s)N/AMaterialsPrinted word search puzzle.(Create your own at . Once created, select printable pdf for a professional looking word search puzzle.)Find the Question – Vocabulary DevelopmentSWBATRecall key terms based on the given clues.PromptsFrom Offshore Wind Aff – Novice’s glossary:Definition: Lack of access to modern energy services, such as electricity.Term: What is Energy Poverty?Definition: A limited resource composed of the remains of living organisms – examples include oil, natural gas, and coal Term: What is Fossil Fuels?Definition: The largest nutrition assistance program administered by the USDA, serving more than 46 million low-income Americans per year. The goals of SNAP are to improve participants' food security and their access to a healthy diet.Term: What is SNAP?Definition: Energy from an energy resource that is replaced rapidly by a natural process Term: What is Renewable Energy?Definition: A group of wind turbines built in bodies of water to produce energy Term: What is Offshore Wind Farm?ProcedureSupply students with a worksheet with the prompts.Allow for up to thirty seconds for each question.Review the answers aloud as a class.Time3-5 MinutesMentor/Student Leader(s)N/AMaterialsPrepared promptsMyth Busters – Vocabulary DevelopementSWBATDiscuss statements and pick out whether they are true or falsePromptsFrom Offshore Wind Aff – Novice’s glossary:Energy Poverty is a medical condition that causes people to be very low on energy.Loan Guarantee is a promise by one party (the guarantor) to take care of the debt obligation of a borrower if that borrower is unable to pay back the loanA tax subsidy is a tax that businesses have to pay to do business in the United States.Renewable Energy is an energy source that needs to be renewed regularly, such as gasoline in your car. ProcedureSupply students with a worksheet with the prompts.Allow for up to thirty seconds for each question.Review the answers aloud as a class.Time3-5 MinutesMentor/Student Leader(s)N/AMaterialsPrepared promptsTongue TwistersSWBATDevelop and continue practice on their speaking skillsPromptsExample tongue twisters:Peter Piper picked a peck of pickled peppers.A peck of pickled peppers Peter Piper picked.If Peter Piper picked a peck of pickled peppers,Where's the peck of pickled peppers Peter Piper picked?Denise sees the fleece,Denise sees the fleas.At least Denise could sneezeand feed and freeze the fleas.Luke Luck likes lakes.Luke's duck likes lakes.Luke Luck licks lakes.Luck's duck licks lakes.Duck takes licks in lakes Luke Luck likes.Luke Luck takes licks in lakes duck likes.ProcedureInstruct students to read the tongue twisters over and over until time runs out.They should be reading at comfortable speeds.Time5 MinutesMentor/Student Leader(s)N/AMaterialsPrepared promptsBrainstorm RaceSWBATRecall key terms based on the given clues.PromptsExample Prompts:Human rightsEnergy PovertyRenewable EnergyProcedureFind out what your group knows about a topic before you begin a new lesson. Divide them into teams of four and present the topic. Ask them to brainstorm and list as many ideas or questions as they can come up with in a given amount of time. Here’s the kicker---they cannot speak. Each student must write his or her ideas on the board or paper you’ve provided. Optional: The team with the most relevant terms, wins a snack or other small prize.Time3-5 MinutesMentor/Student Leader(s)Walk around and help teams that are confused or stuck.Optional: Check off and tally relevant terms.MaterialsPrepared promptsBoard of PaperMarkersFlowing Drill (JV+)SWBATDevelop and continue practice on their flowing skillsPromptsN/AProcedurePrepare the drill by having a shuffled deck and ensuring you have a flat clear surface to place the cards.Go over the proper way to flow (i.e. spacing)For about one minute, place the cards down one by one and call the names of the cards. Place the cards down vertically. After you finish the first column you may want to go through the order (by having students call them out).For your next “speech” repeat the same process, except this time make the cards “answer” each other. (For example: “My opponent said two of hearts but jack of diamonds.”) You can also group, extend and drop the “arguments” to make things a little more complicated.Once again go over the “speech” with the class.Be sure to place the cards down for each speech in a way that mimics a flow so that students can potential look at them later to compare them to their own flows. Time5-10 MinutesMentor/Student Leader(s)N/AMaterialsA deck of cardsDebate Quiz (JV+)SWBATRecall debate terminology and conceptsPromptsWhat are the four stock issues?ProcedureQuiz them on some of the debate terminology before group activity begins. Once time is up discuss the answer as a group. Time5-10 MinutesMentor/Student Leader(s)N/AMaterialsPrepared promptsEBA-Style Debate ActivitiesOn the following pages, you will find the six main activities that are used throughout this curriculum. The activities were adapted from the Boston Debate League’s Evidence Based Argumentation (EBA) program, and their goal is to engage the entire classroom, no matter what its size. We’ve applied these tried-and-true activities to this year’s debate topic by inserting specific claims and warrants, designing handouts, and creating other tools that will make it easy for you to hold large debate practices. Read through the descriptions so the individual practice plans will be easier to understand, and feel free to refer back to these pages for any ideas or clarification you might need.In this Section:Four Corners............................................................................. PAGEREF AAAFourCornersDesc \* MERGEFORMAT 39Worksheet(s)................................................................... PAGEREF AAAFourCornersWkst \* MERGEFORMAT 41Evidence Scavenger Hunt........................................................... PAGEREF AAAEvidenceScavengerDescription \* MERGEFORMAT 46Worksheet(s).................................................................. PAGEREF AAAEvidenceScavengerWKST \* MERGEFORMAT 48Defeating/Defending the Argument.............................................. PAGEREF AAADefeatingtheArgumentrDescription \* MERGEFORMAT 50Worksheet(s).................................................................. PAGEREF AAADefeatingtheArgumentrWKST \* MERGEFORMAT 53Table Debates........................................................................... PAGEREF AAATableDebateDescription \* MERGEFORMAT 55Worksheet(s)................................................................... PAGEREF AAATableDebateWKST \* MERGEFORMAT 60Round Robin Debate.................................................................. PAGEREF AAARoundRobinDescription \* MERGEFORMAT 67Worksheet(s)................................................................... PAGEREF AAARoundRobinWKST \* MERGEFORMAT 71Multiple Perspective Debate......................................................... PAGEREF AAAMultiPerspDescription \* MERGEFORMAT 72Worksheet(s)................................................................... PAGEREF AAAMultiPerspWKST \* MERGEFORMAT 75EBA Activities Cheat Sheet.......................................................... PAGEREF AAAEBAActivitiesCheatSheet \* MERGEFORMAT 37EBA Activities Cheat SheetWhile the activities described in this section can be used and adapted for many purposes and in many ways, the following are some of the most popular uses of these activities Four CornersAnalyze and understand a specific piece of evidence- Use the tag of the card as the statement and students should strongly agree, agree, disagree, or strongly disagree with the tag, followed up by a second round where they agree, disagree etc. if the tag is supported by the evidence (note that these are two different activities).Understand a specific argument. Take the shell of a DA or the solvency contention of an affirmative and do four corners activities around each piece of evidence individually (whether the evidence supports the tag) followed up by one where students can agree, disagree, etc. if they think overall the DA shell or solvency contention is well supported by evidence. When they share out, make them refer to quotes from the evidence to support their answer. This can be a warm up activity- open every practice with a four corners around a specific piece of evidence or two- by the end of the year, it will add up. Evidence Scavenger HuntA good introduction to a new file- Give students claims or arguments and they have to find the evidence that either supports or answers those claims. To better understand evidence- have them find warrants in pieces of evidenceDefeating the Argument Team ChallengeAfter a tournament, come up with a list of arguments that your teams lost to. Divide the students into groups and go over the arguments one by one- having the students come up with the best way to defeat that argument next time they hear it. Incorporate evidence into this by having them find a good piece of evidence to use to defeat the argument. Argument depth- focus on one particular argument, and try to develop as many solid warrants to defeat/defend it. Write them on the board and as a class pick the top onesTable Debates and Round Robin DebatesThe primary benefit of these activities is that they provide a way for ALL students to argue and debate during each practice, rather than one group debating while others watch. Doing a short version of one of these each practice is a great idea to make sure all students are engaged in every practiceShorter versions of these debates can focus on whether a particular piece of evidence is good or which warrant in a piece of evidence is the best. Longer versions can be mini-debates where students give just 1 minute speeches answering and defending just a DA or the case. This is a great way to both learn the evidence and skills such as flowing and clashing. Multi-Perspective DebateOn the negative, use this activity to determine the best way to answer a case or part of a case or responding to a particularly effective answer to one of your off-case positions. Each group can either defend that their argument is the best response, or be forced to defend that their piece of evidence is the best piece of evidence to respond. On the affirmative, it can be answering an off case position like a DA or CP or a particularly effective case attack. Each group would defend their analytical or evidence based response as the best way to answer it.#1 Four CornersIn this activity, each corner of a classroom is labeled with a sign: “strongly agree,” “agree,” “disagree,” or “strongly disagree.” The coach presents a claim, and each student moves to the corner with the sign that best represents her views on the statement. Once in their corners, students will be given a specified time to 1) discuss what the best warrants are for believing their position and 2) choose someone to present the warrants that defend their position to the rest of the group. Four Corners lessons introduce an element of physical activity into debate and provides a relatively safe opportunity for students to practice the development of claims and warrants in groups.The Four Corners activity has many uses. It can be an “Introduction to Argumentation” activity if it’s used with claims drawn from current events or popular culture. It can introduce debaters to specific cases if it’s used with claims drawn from the core files. How students are asked to defend their positions will depend on the activity’s purpose. If basic argumentation is the goal, each student might be required to say “My claim is...” and “My warrant for this claim is...” When arguing about a specific case, every student might need to cite one piece of evidence from the core files, and in such cases they might need several minutes to find that evidence before moving to their corners. More experienced debaters can be asked to produce more complex arguments: multiple warrants for each claim, perhaps, or the refutation of counterarguments. Coach and Student Moves for Four CornersStepCoach MoveStudent Move1Make four signs: (1) STRONGLY AGREE, (2) AGREE, (3) DISAGREE, (4) STRONGLY DISAGREE. Post one in each corner of the classroom.2Prepare a list of controversial claims--usually between 4 and 7.3Read one of the claims. Optionally, show the claim on a projector or pre-write it on the “4-Corners Pre-Activity” worksheet as well.Move to the corner with the sign that best represents your views on the claim. Standing in the center of the room or in the middle of a wall is not allowed. If using text, take time to find evidence supporting your beliefs before moving to a corner.4If you want, give each group time to talk and select their strongest warrants. Then call on a student to share. Repeat as desired (suggested order: agree, disagree, strongly agree, strongly disagree).If given time to talk with others in your corner, 1) discuss what the best warrant is for selecting your corner and 2) decide who will speak out for your group.Defend your position (if called upon) and listen (if not).5Invite students to change positions if a speaker convinces them to do so.Change positions if desired.6Repeat steps 3-5 for each statement.Repeat steps 3-5 as required.Four Corners Pre-ActivityComplete the claim by filling in the blank and provide a warrant for the following:Claim (Controversial statement)Warrant (Reason claim is true)____________________ would be the easiest to answer.____________________’s evidence would need to be updated the most often.____________________ would be the hardest to answer.____________________ would be the easiest to find evidence for.AgreeDisagreeStrongly AgreeStrongly Disagree#2 Evidence Scavenger HuntTo begin this activity, the coach reads students a claim about an argument. This claim can be something factual, or it can be an interpretive claim that is supported or disproved by specific portions of the text. In pairs, students decide whether they agree with the claim. Then they find a piece of evidence in the text to support their position. Finally, they fill out a graphic organizer with three columns: in the left column they record the claim, in the middle column they copy the evidence, and in the right column they analyze the text by explaining how their textual evidence works to prove or disprove the claim.This can be made into a game that rewards the first pair to fill out all three columns accurately and thoroughly. To ensure that other pairs still do the work, a coach could award one point for every satisfactory answer and just one extra point (2 points) to the team that finishes first. Alternately, speed could be made a non-issue and students could simply work to complete their graphic organizers at their own pace. For example, a coach might have the claims written on half sheets of paper at the front of the room; when a pair is done with one row on their graphic organizer, they can come show it to the coach and, if their work is approved, be given the next claim for which to find evidence. The number of claims (i.e., the number of rows in the graphic organizer) varies according to coaches' preferences.An Evidence Scavenger Hunt works well as an activity to get students to learn both the specific and general arguments of an affirmative case, negative file, or any negative argument (e.g. DAs). In addition, it helps debaters learn how debate arguments and files are organized and how to navigate that evidence using taglines and/or other titles (e.g. harms, uniqueness) to find warrants that support desired claims. It combines competition and collaboration, encouraging students to read quickly yet accurately to both identify and analyze textual evidence. Coach and Student Moves for Evidence Scavenger HuntStepCoach MoveStudent Move1Select or modify an Evidence Scavenger Hunt Worksheet and if necessary, create a set of claims.2Have students pair up and give each pair an Evidence Scavenger Hunt Worksheet.3Read a claim aloud and write it or project it on the board.Write the claim in the left column of your graphic organizer.4Monitor pairs as they...Decide with your partner whether you agree with the claim.5Monitor pairs as they...Look through the text for evidence to support your view on the claim.6Monitor pairs as they...When you find a suitable piece of evidence, write and cite it in the middle column of your graphic organizer.7Monitor pairs as they...In the right column of your graphic organizer, explain briefly how your evidence supports or refutes the claim. Make sure you analyze the text rather than simply re-wording it.8Check answers for accuracy and depth of analysis. Award points as desired when students...Notify the coach when you have completed the row.9Repeat steps 3-8 as desired.Repeat steps 3-8 as required.Evidence Scavenger HuntStudents will race in pairs to both find textual evidence and to explain how the text supports their claim. Every team that correctly answers that statement will receive 1 point, the first group to answer in each round will receive 2 points, and the group that answers the statement best will receive 3 points.ClaimWarrantTextual Evidence (Find it!)Analysis – How does your work support the claimMedical shortages contribute to massive loss of life in Cuba.“The deaths resulted from infectious diseases, the decreased quality and availability of food and water, and an enfeebled medical care system hampered by the lack of drugs and supplies”Without access to cheaper drugs and supplies in the US many Cuban’s die, unnecessarily from preventable diseases. Access to these drugs would be a simple fix that would prevent many deaths.ClaimWarrantTextual EvidenceAnalysis – How does the text support the claim#3 Defeating/ Defending the Argument Team ChallengeThere are 2 versions of this activity:a) Defeating the Argument Team Challengeb) Defending the Argument Team ChallengeIn Defeating the Argument Team Challenge your team will be defeating an argument that many of your team members have had trouble answering. There will be 3 steps: 1) The coach or a debater presents a claim or argument your team has had trouble answering.2) In groups, students create counterargument and debate which of their counterarguments best defeats the argument presented.3) Each groups shares their best response to the counterargument. In Defending the Argument Team Challenge the team will be defending an argument that many of your team members have been unable to defend. There will be 4 steps: 1) The coach or a debater presents one of your claims or arguments that your team often loses.2) Students write down and then share the toughest counterarguments against the claim in the second box.3) Students create responses to the counterargument debate in groups and debate what the best response to the counterargument is.4) Each group shares their best response to the counterargument.In the end of both versions of this activity, although everyone in the class is on the same side of an argument the team that best defends or defeats the argument wins! It thus combines what is best about both competition and cooperation.As it is described here, the activity focuses on how to defeat and defend arguments. It could be adapted, however, to hone any number of argumentation skills. Groups could compete to incorporate textual evidence most smoothly into their arguments, use the greatest variety of warrants to support their claims, organize their arguments most clearly, and so on. Content could of course be privileged over argumentation skills at any time; for instance, students might be rewarded on how well they understand the evidence rather than on how creatively they respond to arguments analytically.Coach and Student Moves for Defeating the Argument Team ChallengeStepTeacher MoveStudent Move1Lead a discussion in which the class generates an argument to be defended or defeated.. (Or, if time is a more pressing issue than buy-in, just provide the squad with the argument 2Divide the squad into groups of 3-5.3Set a timer for three minutes. While it runs, monitor students to make sure they are on task.Take three minutes to draft a one-minute speech defeating or defending the argument. Select a representative who will deliver your speech.4Set a timer for one minute. While it runs, have one group’s representative...Take one minute to deliver your speech while the rest of the class listens.5Repeat step 4 until all groups have shared.Repeat step 4 until all groups have shared.6Lead a discussion in which students...Discuss which group’s speech was the strongest and why.7Repeat steps 2-6 as desired.Repeat steps 2-6 as required.Defeating the Argument Squad ChallengeInstructions: In this exercise your team will be defeating an argument that many of your team members have had trouble answering. There will be 3 steps: 1) present a claim or argument your team has had trouble answering, 2) debate in your groups which counterargument best defeats the argument presented, 3) groups share their responses to the counterargument.Remember: Argument = Claim + Warrant; Claim: debatable statement & Warrant: reason why the claim is true“Unbeatable” claim or argument (claim + warrant) Counterarguments – Dr. MO the claim and challenge the warrant.Remember: Dr. MO – Deny (claim is not true), Reverse (opposite of the claim is true), Minimize (claim is not important), or Outweigh (your claim is less important than our claim)Bonus: Rank the top 3 counterarguments provided by your teammates!1)2)3)Defending the Argument Squad ChallengeInstructions: In this exercise your team will be defending an argument that many of your team members have been unable to defend. There will be 4 steps: 1) present one of your claims or arguments that your team often loses 2) write the toughest counterargument against the claim in the second box, 3) debate in your groups what the best response to the counterargument is, 4) groups will share their responses to the counterargument.Remember: Argument = Claim + Warrant; Claim: debatable statement & Warrant: reason why the claim is trueYour claim or argument (claim + warrant) Counterargument– argument presented against your claim or argument that you rarely defeat.Responses to Counterargument - turn back to re-affirm your claim—while “Dr. MO”ing the counterarguments claim and challenging the warrant.Remember: Dr. MO – Deny (claim is not true), Reverse (opposite of the claim is true), Minimize (claim is not important), or Outweigh (your claim is less important than our claim) #4 Table DebatesA) OverviewIn this activity the coach will split all of the debaters into groups (typically 2 or 3 debaters per group) and facilitate simultaneous debate rounds. Group size is dictated by the number of positions the activity requires, e.g., if there were 3 warrants in a card and you want to debate which one is best there naturally could be 3 debaters per group or if you wanted 2-debaters per position, 6 debaters per group. Once the group size is determined and students split into groups, students should select a position to advocate for and defend. After prep-time is used to prepare debaters for their first speech, which usually involves filling our a pre-flow handout, the debate may begin. To start, have all of the debaters arguing “position 1” rise simultaneously and give a timed speech advocating their position to their group members (not to the coach). Then have all of the debaters arguing position 2 rise and simultaneously give a timed speech advocating their position to the other group members (not to the coach). If there are 3 or more positions then continue with the same procedure. If desired, provide prep-time and have another round of speeches where the debaters will defend their positions and directly respond to the arguments made by their fellow group members. At the end of the table debate the coach may ask debaters to share an argument that one of their group members made that they found persuasive. Or they may also discuss what position won the debate and why; remember to focus the discussion on arguments, not on people. Coach and Student Moves for Table DebatesStepCoach MoveStudent Move1Divide the class into groups whose size matches the number of debatable positions and instruct each group to...Designate each person in your group a letter A-Z.2Provide a position for each debater by letter, e.g., all As will argue that cross examination is the hardest part of a debate round.3Set a timer for 2 minutes of “prep time” to ensure that every debater has time to prepare a specified number of reasons in support of their position.Debaters, create a specified number of reasons to support your position and write them down in the given handout or on a sheet of paper.4Set a timer for 1 minute. Ask all of the first speakers to rise and remind them to number their reasons during their 1-minute speech. Meanwhile, walk around the room and listen in on the groups for both the purpose of feedback and classroom management. It is recommended to give debaters time cues every 15 seconds. First Speaker: stand and affirm your position in a 1-minute speech. Second Speaker: listen, take notes in the given worksheet and prepare to refute their position. 5Set a timer for 1 minute. Ask all of the Second Speakers to rise and remind them to number their 2 reasons during their 1 minute speech. While it runs, walk around the room and listen in on the groups for both the purpose of feedback and classroom management. It is recommended to give debaters time cues every 15 seconds. Second Speaker: stand and advocate for your position in a 1-minute speech. First Speaker: listen, take notes in the given worksheet and prepare to refute their position later. 6If there are 3 or more positions then continue with the same procedure as in 4 and 5 as many times as necessary.Coach and Student Moves for Table Debates (Continued)7Optionally, provide 1 minute of prep time and then repeat steps 4-5 to give students a chance to...Prepare for 1 minute and then respond to your opponents’ arguments and elaborate on your own in further 1-minute speeches if required.8Optionally, lead a whole-class discussion in which students...Explain which side won the debate in your group and why. Talk about arguments rather than about the people who made them.B) 4 Examples of common Table Debate formats (many more possible):Example 1) 2-Person Claim Table DebatesIn this version of table debates a claim (i.e. a debatable statement; e.g. “C-X is the most exciting part of a debate round”) is provided that one side will affirm (e.g. “C-X is the most exciting part of a debate round”) and one side will negate (e.g. “C-X is not the most exciting part of a debate round”). Each side should prepare a specified number of warrants, usually 2, in affirmation or negation of their claim which, depending on the coach’s teaching objectives may or may not require textual evidence from the core files. Claim Table Debates are a quick and efficient way to activate prior knowledge or to provide students with a motivating reason to understand the main claims (taglines) in the core files. They are thus particularly useful as introductions to the case and its cards. Example 2) 3-Person Warrant Table DebatesIn 3-Person Warrant Table Debates, students will argue which warrant (reason) best proves the claim is true. Unlike Claim Table Debates where 2 debaters argue for/ against a given claim (e.g. We should have school uniforms), in this activity 3 debaters agree that the claim is true and instead each one of the 3 debaters argues that their warrant best proves the claims is true; e.g. warrant 1 - school uniforms prevent clothing-based bullying, warrant 2 - school uniforms save families money, warrant 3 – school uniforms build a sense of school community. This activity is an engaging and efficient way to motivate students, in groups of 3 to learn the cards in the core files by having them debate about which of its warrants best proves the claim (in the tagline) is true. This activity could be easily modified to accommodate groups of 2 or 4 debaters with the adding or subtracting of a warrant.Example 3) Four Speech Table DebatesIn Four Speech Table Debates students give a total of 4 shortened speeches on one part of a debate (e.g. harms, a DA, a K, solvency). Before the Four Speech Table Debates prep time will be given to review the appropriate evidence and to pre-write arguments for the first two speeches on the provided flow. Keep in mind speech times can vary between 1 minute and full time (i.e. 8-minute constructive or 5-minute rebuttal) depending on the coach’s learning objectives and the demands of the argument or skill being practiced. These activities can begin in the 1AC if the focus is on an affirmative case, the 1NC if the focus is on negative arguments (e.g. counterplans), or even the 2NC/1NR if the focus is on giving rebuttals. This activity focuses on students simultaneously applying newly learned debate arguments and skills. Debaters will be motivated to learn and comprehend arguments and skills in preparation for one-on-one or two-on-two debates. Although the prep time given to students in preparation for this form of table debates can be significantly longer than claim, or even warrant table debates it is still a relatively time-efficient, student-centered activity.Example 4) Shortened Debate Round In shortened debate rounds, students give simultaneous (all the affirmatives argue at once to their negatives and vice versa) and shortened speeches with a limited amount of arguments and/or a focus on a specific skill using abbreviated content. For example, you may practice the skill of giving roadmaps and signposting using just the taglines from the cards and their corresponding warrants which are put in your own words in 3-minute constructives, 2-minute rebuttals, and 1-minute cross examinations. Alternatively, you may choose to just have a DA vs Case debate with a full 1AC followed by 3-minute constructives, 1-minute cross examinations, and 2-minute rebuttals focusing on just the DA and the case. In either case, prep-time should be given in-between each speech as this is a whole group activity and some debaters may need prep-time while others will merely appreciate it. Coaches are encouraged to be flexible and creative with the breakdown of times given their learning objectives. C) The Feedback ProblemThe problem with running traditional debate activities is that they require a 4 to 1, debater to coach ratio with extra students watching and taking notes, i.e., being unengaged. The trouble with table debates is that with a much higher debater to coach ratio, debaters often miss out on coach feedback that could help them improve. There are 4 main ways to alleviate the feedback problem: Varsity debaters and/or mentors could take turns listening to debaters and providing feedback after table debates.Each group could add an extra student who could serve as a judge who could provide feedback.After each table debate the squad could engage in an Argument Finale wherby each group writes their best argument from their group’s winning position on the board and then gives a 30 second speech to the squad about why their argument is the best, and The coach could have debaters provide feedback to one another after each table debate regarding what they did and did not find persuasiveFour Speech Table Debates – 1AC StartFour Speech Debates focus on just four speeches at a time (no CX) for one ‘flow” at a time, e.g., inherency, harms, solvency. After the 1AC and 1NR prep time will be given at the coach’s discretion.1AC1NC2AC2NC/1NRNote: When speaking start by saying “#1 my opponent said _____, my response to that is_____”Note: When speaking start by saying “#1 my opponent said _____, my response to that is_____”Four Speech Table Debates – 1NC StartFour Speech Debates focus on just four speeches at a time (no CX) for one ‘flow” at a time, e.g., harms, a DA, a K, solvency. Debaters will be given time before the round to review the evidence and arguments made in the 1AC and the 1NC. After the 1NC and 2AC prep time will be given at the coach’s discretion.1NC2AC2NC/1NR1ARNote: When speaking start by saying “#1 my opponent said _____, my response to that is_____”Note: When speaking start by saying “#1 my opponent said _____, my response to that is_____”Claims Table DebatesBefore the activity begins if you’re for the claim write your two warrants in the top two boxes in the 1AC column and if you’re against the claim write your two warrants in the top two boxes in the 1NC column. During table debates the 1AC will start by providing two warrants for the given claim. Beginning in the 1NC each debater will state or defend their 2 warrants while attacking their opponent’s two arguments.1AC (For)1NC (Against)2AC (For – 2nd speech)2NC (Against – 2nd speech)Your 1st WarrantYour 2nd WarrantTheir 1st WarrantTheri 2nd Warrant3-Person Claims Table DebatesBefore the activity begins write your two warrants in the 1st speech column that corresponds with your number or letter (i.e. A=1, B=2, C=3). During table debates each speaker will speak twice, with everyone giving a first speech before using prep time to prepare a rebuttal against their 2 opponents. Debater 1 – 1st SpeechDebater 2 – 1st SpeechDebater 3 – 1st SpeechDebater 1 – 2nd SpeechDebater 2 – 2nd SpeechDebater 3 – 2nd SpeechWarrant Table Debates – Which warrant best proves the claim is true?In warrant table debates, unlike claim table debates, both debaters assume the claim is true and instead debate which warrant best proves the claim is true. Before the activity begins each debater should write the two reasons they believe their warrant best proves the claim is true in the top two boxes in the appropriate column (i.e. warrant 1 or warrant 2). During table debates Warrant 1 will start by providing two reasons why their warrant best proves the claim is true. Beginning with warrant 2 debates should state or defend their 2 reasons their claim is best while attacking their opponent’s warrant.Warrant 1 Best Proves the claim is true because…Warrant 2 Best Proves the claim is true because…Warrant 1 Best Proves the claim is true because…Warrant 2 Best Proves the claim is true because…Your 1st Reason your warrant best proves the claim is true.Your 2nd 1st Reason your warrant best proves the claim is true.Their 1st Reason their warrant best proves the claim is true.Their 2nd reason their warrant best proves the claim is true.Three Person Warrant Table Debates – Which warrant best proves the claim is true?1st Round of Speeches2nd Round of SpeechesWarrant 1 Best Proves the claim is true because…Warrant 2 Best Proves the claim is true because…Warrant 3 Best Proves the claim is true because…Warrant 1 Best Proves the claim is true because…Warrant 2 Best Proves the claim is true because…Warrant 3 Best Proves the claim is true because…Shortened Debate Round – __ minute constructive, __ minute rebuttals, __ minute Cross-X1AC1NC2AC2NC1NR1AR2NR2ARRead a shortened version of the Affirmative Case. Since you only have 2-3 minutes, read the tags, the case in your own words, or select cards.Read a DA.Select pieces of evidence to attack case line-by-line.Respond to the DA.Extend arguments from 1AC and respond to the 1NC line-by-line. Arguments split between the 2NC and the 1NR. Extend harm and solvency cards from the 1NC.Arguments split between the 2NC and the 1NR. Extend DA and Inherency arguments from the 1NC. 1AR responds to all of the arguments made by the 2NC and 1NR as quickly as possible.-Respond to 1AR, tell the judge why you won the round. Why is the plan a bad idea?Respond to 2NR, tell the judge why you won the round. Why is the plan a good idea?*Explain why plan is good.Note: When speaking start by saying “#1 my opponent said _____, my response to that is_____”*Explain why plan is net badNote: To extend evidence say “The 1NC said _____ but please extend the 1AC _____evidence that…”*Explain why plan is net good.*Explain why plan is net bad*Explain why plan is net bad*Explain why plan is net good.Tip: Anticipate what they’ll argue and preempt it. Say “they’ll tell you that x will happen, but that’s wrong because of y and z.”*Explain why plan is net bad*Explain why plan is net good#5 Round-Robin DebatesThe name of this activity refers to the fact that students take turns being the affirmative, negative, and judge, switching roles after each round of debating. They work in groups of three, with each person in a group designated “A,” “B,” or “C.” The coach supplies a claim, and person A in each group stands to deliver a short speech in defense of that claim. Then person B in each group stands to refute the claim while person C decides who wins (based on criteria provided by the coach—see below). Persons A and B may give a round of rebuttal speeches if desired, but when the debate is over and C has named a winner it is time to change both the claim and the roles: for the next debate, B and C will argue while A judges.Round-Robin Debates allow all students in a class to debate simultaneously in small-group, low-stakes situations. They also place the burden of choosing a winner on the students, who must understand and articulate what exactly constitutes a winning argument. Finally, this activity forces students to argue for claims they do not choose themselves--a valuable exercise in critiquing their own assumptions.Round Robins can be used to help students gain in-depth understanding of an issue or even the cards that support a given argument (e.g. privatization counterplan). They might develop original warrants on a single claim or set of evidence cards; for example, argue that the status quo is better fixed by a counterplan rather than the plan. You might also use the core files to help debaters see clashing perspectives on an issue, and to practice distilling and emphasizing the main claim and supporting warrants of an author’s argument.The criteria for judging in these debates will vary. Some coaches might have students judge holistically or generate their own criteria for picking a winner. Others might implement a point system in which the judge awards one point each time a speaker cites evidence from a text, two points each time someone directly refutes an opponent’s argument, and so on. In this way coaches can ensure that the Round-Robin debates directly fulfill their specific skill objectives for the practice. For purposes of scaffolding and accountability, judges can also be provided with worksheets that will help them make their decisions.Coach and Student Moves for Round-Robin DebatesStepCoach MoveStudent Move1Place students in groups of three and designate each group member “A,” “B,” or “C.”2Provide a claim; a debatable statement (e.g. x is the best for the economy or any tagline from a card).3Assign roles for to each debater (e.g. A is Affirmative, B is Negative, and C is the Judge) and set a timer for 2 minutes of “prep time” to ensure that every debater has a chance to prepare two warrants in support of their claim.Debaters, create 2 warrants to support your claim and write them down in the Round Robin Debate Worksheet; Judge - support the debaters in writing their warrants. 4Set a timer for 1 minute. Ask all of the As to rise and remind them to number their 2 warrants during their 1 minute speech. While it runs, walk around the room and listen in on the groups for both the purpose of feedback and classroom management. It is recommended to give debaters time cues every 15 seconds. A: stand and affirm the claim in a 1-minute speech. B: listen, take notes in the given worksheet and prepare to refute the claim. C: listen, take notes, and award points as appropriate.5Set a timer for 1 minute. Ask all of the Bs to rise and remind them to number their 2 warrants during their 1 minute speech. While it runs, walk around the room and listen in on the groups for both the purpose of feedback and classroom management. It is recommended to give debaters time cues every 15 seconds. B: stand and negate the claim in a 1-minute speech and attack As arguments. B: listen, take notes in the given worksheet and prepare to refute the claim. C: listen, take notes, and award points as appropriate.6Provide 1 minute of prep time. Circulate around the room, providing support to students as they write out the defense of their claim and attack of their opponents.Prepare for your next speech where you will need to attack your opponent’s arguments while defending your own.Coach and Student Moves for Round-Robin Debates(Continued)7Set a timer for 1 minute. Ask all of the As to rise and remind them to number their 2 warrants during their 1 minute rebuttal. While it runs, walk around the room and listen in on the groups for both the purpose of feedback and classroom management. It is recommended to give debaters time cues every 15 seconds. A: stand and rebut B’s opening arguments in a 1-minute speech. B: listen and prepare to rebut A's opening arguments. Record your notes on the given worksheet. C: listen, take notes, and award points as appropriate.8Set a timer for 1 minute. Ask all of the Bs to rise and remind them to number their 2 warrants during their 1 minute rebuttal. While it runs, walk around the room and listen in on the groups for both the purpose of feedback and classroom management. It is recommended to give debaters time cues every 15 seconds. B: stand and rebut A’s opening arguments in a 1-minute speech. A: listen and prepare to rebut A's opening arguments. Record your notes on the given worksheet. C: listen, take notes, and award points as appropriate.9Ask the judges to share their decision with the two debaters. You may also invite or call on a judge (“C”) or two to share with the whole team.C: explain which side won in your group and why. Talk about arguments rather than about the people who made them.10Repeat steps 2-9 with another claim if desired.Repeat steps 2-9 as required with Affirmative (A) Negative, Negative (B) Judge, Judge (C) Affirmative.11Repeat steps 2-9 with yet another claim if desired.Repeat steps 2-9 as required with Affirmative (C) Negative, Negative (A) Judge, Judge (B) Affirmative.Round Robin DebatesIn groups of 3 each debater will take turns being the affirmative, negative, and the judge. After both the affirmative and negative alternate and give 2 speeches each and the judge provides feedback the roles will rotate; affirmative negative, negative judge, and the judge affirmative. This will repeat until all 3 debaters get to experience each role.Claim:_________________________________________________________________________1AC (For)1NC (Against)2AC (For – 2nd speech)2NC (Against – 2nd speech)Your 1st WarrantYour 2nd WarrantTheir 1st WarrantTheir 2nd WarrantJudge Feedback#6 Multiple Perspective DebateA) OverviewIn a multi-perspective debate, students are divided up into groups of 4-6. Each group is responsible for defending something different, maybe that their piece of evidence on a particular question is the best or their case or DA is the best or their impact outweighs the others. Within each group, every student has a distinct role: one delivers the opening statement, one asks cross-examination questions, another answers questions posed by other groups, a different person attacks another groups arguments, another defends their own group’s arguments after they are attacked, and yet another delivers the closing statement. If groups are smaller, some roles can be combined. Each group is responsible both for defending its own perspective and for effectively critiquing the arguments made by other teams.The debate starts with a round of opening statements, with one student from each group giving a 1 minute opening statement about why their groups argument is the best. This is followed by a round of cross-examination, attacks, defenses, and closing statements. Coaches should take care to make sure each group will be challenged by at least one opponent to avoid any ganging-up on one team.These debates can take a nearly infinite number of forms. They can be adapted to suit the size of a class, the length of practice, or the layout of a room. B) Possible Outline of Debate with Built in Speaking Responsibilities:Opening statements [one for each group- 1 min each] – Each student should list 4 reasons (with warrants and hopefully evidenced support) why their position is the best.Prep [1 min total] – Prepare your questions for your assigned group.Cross examination [on person in each group questions another group- 1 min each]Cross-Examiner - Ask questions to clarify an argument from the opening statement or critical questions that will produce an argument that can be used against them in later speeches.Cross-Examinee – Respond to questions asked by assigned cross-examinerPrep [2 minutes] –Using the answers received during cross-examination and your own ideas prepare your attack against all 4 of their points.Attack [One person from each groups attacks an assigned group- 1 min each]– Attack all points made by opponent.Prep [2 minutes] Defense –[one person from each groups responds to the attacks just made- 1 minute] Defend all your teams arguments by explaining why your position is still the best by responding to each of the attacks made against your group.Prep [2 minutes]Closing statements [one person from each group- 1 min each ]– State why the judge(s) should believe your position is the best.C) Coach and Student Moves for Multiple Perspective DebateEventTime AllottedCoach’s MovesStudents’ MovesPrep for opening 4 minCoach will ensure that each team has 4 reasons why their group is the best.Students will help the opening statement presenter prepare and organize their groups 4 reasons why their group is the best. Selection of roles/ Getting Settled+ 3 minCoach will facilitate the process by verbally confirming and checking that each student has a role and that every role in the debate is taken. Students will self-select what roles they will take on during the debate and Opening statement4 min total w/ 1 min for each groupCoach keeps time and coordinates and quos students to perform roles successfully.Opening statement presenter Lists 4 reasons why their method is the best.Cross examinations3 min total, 45 seconds eachCoach keeps time and calls up the cross examiners and cross examinees one at a time.Cross-examiner Asks their assigned team clarifying or critical questions and cross-examinees respond.Prep-time2 minsCoach will ensure that teams attack each one of their assigned opponent’s points.Students will help each other prepare for their Attack on their pre-assigned groups.Attack4 min w/ 1 min for each groupCoach keeps time and coordinates and quos students to start.Attacker, responds critically to all 4 points that their assigned group makes.Prep-time2 minsCoach will ensure that teams defend each one of their assigned opponent’s attacks against them.Students will help each other prepare for their Defense against the attack from their pre-assigned groups.Defense4 min w/ 1 min for each groupCoach keeps time and coordinates and quos students to start.Defender will defend all 4 of their group’s arguments by explaining why their opponent is wrong and why their method is still the best.Prep-time2 minsCoach will ensure teams are ready to give closing. Start thinking about who should win.Students will help each other prepare for their closing statement.Closing4 min w/ 1 min for each groupCoach keeps time and coordinates and quos students to start. Students will instruct the judge/teacher how they should decide the match and then prove how their group best fits their voting criteria. Total time32 minsMultiple Perspective DebateClaim/Prompt: ____________________________________________________________________GroupOpening Statement (60 s)Attack (60 s)Defense (60 s)Closing Statement (60 s)1 - …for the following 3 reasons:1)2)3)Group 4’s attack on Group 11)2)3)Group 1’s defense to Group 4’s attack1)2)3)Judge, you should vote for group 1 because… 2 -…for the following 3 reasons:1)2)3)Group 1’s attack on Group 21)2)3)Group 2’s defense of group 1’s attack1)2)3)Judge, you should vote for group 2 because…GroupOpening Statement (60 s)Attack (60 s)Defense (60 s)Closing Statement (60 s)3 - …for the following 3 reasons:1)2)3)Group 3’s attack on Group 21)2)3)Group 2’s defense to Group 3’s attack1)2)3)Judge, you should vote for group 3 because… 4 -…for the following 3 reasons:1)2)3)Group 3’s attack on Group 41)2)3)Group 4’s defense of group 3’s attack1)2)3)Judge, you should vote for group 4 because…Tab 3: Novice CurriculumIn this Section:Planning a Novice Practice.......................................................... PAGEREF PlanningaNovicePractice \* MERGEFORMAT 78 Week 1.................................................................................... PAGEREF Week1 \* MERGEFORMAT 81Week 2.................................................................................... PAGEREF Week2 \* MERGEFORMAT 91Week 3.................................................................................... PAGEREF Week3 \* MERGEFORMAT 101Coaching Novices for their First TournamentIntroductionNovice practices should be varied and engaging in a way that is tailored to brand-new debaters. First, novice practices should include community building activities. Debate is a team sport and many students choose to remain on the debate team because they feel like they are part of a debate family. Start forming this “family” early in order to build an atmosphere where debaters support one another and want to continue working with one another. (For a list of community building activities, see page PAGEREF CommunityBuildingActivties \* MERGEFORMAT 10.)As a coach, you might feel overwhelmed by the amount of material novice debaters need to learn. Don’t let these anxieties get to you. Your overall goal is simple - make the students feel like they are prepared enough to be willing to attend their 1st tournament. Introduce your students to the basics of debate; help them understand the general concepts and the specifics will follow as they get more experienced.To help you do this, we’ve created a three week guide leading up to your novice debater’s first tournament. As always, we want to support you in your recruitment and retention of debaters with diverse learning needs. With this in mind, in this curriculum you will also find:Additional prior knowledge supports – additional lessons, a video curriculum of concepts linked to the case (offshorewindvideos), grade-appropriate text, and academic-vocabulary support.Additional literacy supports - for your ELL students and students who read below-grade level we added a visual glossary for the Offshore Wind Affirmative, see page 84, and online audio and text, side-by-side at OffshoreAudio.Remember, the debate year is broken into the Fall season (October to December) and the Winter season (January to March). The novice case will switch when the seasons switch and there will be some additional curriculum updates at that time.Overview of the First 3 WeeksThe first week of novice practices will focus on two objectives: 1) introducing basic argumentation skills and 2) building up your debater’s prior knowledge so that they can access the first novice case. The activities you will find in this section are activities that are used throughout the entire curriculum in a number of different ways. You can adapt these activities to suit your student needs and you can even use them with the more experienced divisions to ease them into the topic.The second week of novice practices will focus on understanding the affirmative case files. The activities you’ll find in this section build on the argumentation skills learned in Week 1 while simultaneously teaching the affirmative evidence. Again, you can adapt these activities to any case and you can also use them with the more experienced divisions. The third week of novice practices will focus on understanding the negative case files. The activities you’ll find in this section build on the argumentation skills learned in Week 1 while simultaneously teaching the negative evidence. Instead of merely asserting arguments, students will also practice responding to arguments in defensive and offensive ways.This three week guide ends with a practice debate round. Use it to give your debaters a taste of what the tournament will be like, but don’t do too much tournament preparation beyond that. Most debaters do not truly begin to learn or love debate until they’ve participated in a few tournaments. This is normal. At this point, the important thing is to get them excited—not overwhelmed. Have senior debaters tell them about their positive experiences and answer questions that will help allay novice fears. They have a basic understanding of argumentation and they’re becoming familiar with the evidence. That’s exactly where they need to be!Planning for the First TournamentSample Practice Calendar All debaters get hooked at their first tournament. Thus your goal with novices is to get them to the first tournament by making them FEEL ready. The truth is that no one is truly ready for their first tournament (coaches included) until after their first tournament. Further, since debaters do not truly understand why practice is important and are not truly motivated to invest their time until after they compete, there is no use in having extra practices beyond the ones need to make them FEEL ready. With this in mind, if you are not an ELT school, try to keep your practice to 3 to 4 weeks - less is more. Constructing Practice AgendasBelow is a rough guide for chunking out your debate practices. It is based on what our coaches have told us generally works for them and their teams. As you can see, the table below includes practice parts, rough times for each part, and corresponding resources and/or examples. As an educator, you know that being responsive to students’ needs often means being flexible with your approach to practices. With this in mind, please view this as a helpful starting point and not a necessary or expected format. Do what works for you and your team.TimePart of PracticeResources/ Examples5 minutesWarm Up Activity/Agenda OverviewSee Warm-up Activities (page PAGEREF WarmUpActivities \* MERGEFORMAT 24)10-20 minutesTeam Building ActivitySee Community Building Activities (page PAGEREF CommunityBuildingActivties \* MERGEFORMAT 10) 20-40 minutes1-2 Debate Activities (depending on length of practices)See Weeks 1-3 (page PAGEREF Week1 \* MERGEFORMAT 81)5 minutesWrap up/ Debate Announcements/ Preview of next practicee.g. “Next week is tournament week and on Tuesday we will kick off the week with a lot of arguing about why offshore wind energy is a bad idea. Make sure you sign up for the tournament with your partner and get ready to do a lot of exciting debates next week.”Week 1The first week of novice practices will focus on 1) introducing basic argumentation skills and 2) building up your debater’s prior knowledge so that they can access the first novice case. The activities you will find in this section are activities that are used throughout the entire curriculum in a number of different ways. You can adapt these activities to any case (use them for both the Fall and Winter season affirmatives!), and you can also use them with the more experienced divisions.Intro to Basic Argumentation Skills - Four CornersThis first Four Corners activity will get debaters used to the idea that an argument consists of a claim and a warrant. A claim is a statement; a warrant is a reason or piece of evidence that proves the claim is true. The debaters will respond to general claims drawn from current events, popular culture, etc. (some sample claims are listed below). Later, you can repeat this activity with topic-related claims.SWBATMake an argument using the format argument = claim + warrant.ClaimsStandardized test are bad for students Smartphones are ruining the way we interact with each otherClothing should be freeDisposable water bottles should be illegalActivityFour Corners. See page PAGEREF FourCornersDescription \* MERGEFORMAT 39.ProcedureThis is a standard Four Corners activity. If your students only state a claim, prompt them to give a warrant to support that claim. Time10-15 minutesMentors/ Student LeadersDuring the activity: Distribute mentors and student leaders evenly to each corner. They will help facilitate discussion in each corner and ensure that the students in the corner are prepared to deliver a coherent warrant.Debriefing: Share one overall positive and address one overall concern in a teachable manner.MaterialsFour Corners signs. See page PAGEREF FourCornersSigns \* MERGEFORMAT 42.Intro to Basic Argumentation Skills - Table DebateThis first Table Debate activity will introduce the ideas of presenting and rebutting (answering) arguments. Students will present and rebut arguments on both sides of a debate—answering one another’s arguments head-on is essential to what we call clash. The debaters will respond to general claims drawn from current events, popular culture, etc. (some sample claims are listed below). Later, you can repeat this activity with topic-related claims.SWBATRespond to rebuttalsClaims/ WarrantsEveryone should go to college The legal drinking age should be 18 Drug users should be hospitalized and not arrested School should start later in the dayActivityTable Debate. See page PAGEREF TableDebateDescription \* MERGEFORMAT 55.ProcedureThis is a standard Table Debate activity. Time10-15 minutesMentors/ Student LeadersDuring prep-time: Have student leaders perform Step 1 of the activity (demonstrating how to rebut).During the speeches: Circulate around the room, listening for things you want to reinforce later and things that need to be corrected later. Remember to remind students to use claims and warrants.Debriefing: Share one overall positive and address one overall concern in a teachable manner.MaterialsTable Debate worksheet. See page PAGEREF TableDebateWKST \* MERGEFORMAT 60.Prior Knowledge (Optional): Vocabulary - Four Corners/Table Debate Students will continue learning the “argument = claim + warrant” format while beginning to become comfortable and familiar with the vocabulary used in the novice case. The goal in these activities is not to have students memorize definitions but to gain enough understanding to be able to comprehend the words use in context. These activities are geared towards scaffolding students whose prior knowledge, reading skills, and/or vocabulary would make it exceedingly difficult for them to learn or use the vocabulary in context. SWBATMake an argument using the format argument = claim + warrant.ClaimsFor this activity select which words/phrases from the “BDL Picture Glossary” (see page PAGEREF CubaVisualGlossary \* MERGEFORMAT 84) you want to familiarize your students with. Once selected the use the following claim along with the two pictures for each term/phrase in the glossary:Out of the 2 pictures used to help illustrate the meaning of _______________ (insert word/phrase here), the picture to the left is the most ____________ (e.g. useful).ActivityFour Corners. See page PAGEREF FourCornersDescription \* MERGEFORMAT 39.ProcedurePass out the “BDL Picture Glossary.”Project the “BDL Picture Glossary” on the wall and focus in on one word/phrase. Fill in the claim and read it to the students.Proceed with a standard four corners. See page PAGEREF FourCornersDescription \* MERGEFORMAT 39.Repeat as desired with other words/phrases in the glossary.Time5 - 20 minutesMentors/ Student LeadersDuring the activity: Distribute mentors and student leaders evenly to each corner or part of the room. They will help facilitate discussion in each corner or in each pair and ensure that the students in the corner or pairs are prepared to deliver a coherent warrant.Debriefing: Share one overall positive and address one overall concern in a teachable manner.Materials“BDL Picture Glossary. See page PAGEREF CubaVisualGlossary \* MERGEFORMAT 84.Four Corners signs. See page PAGEREF FourCornersSigns \* MERGEFORMAT 42.Picture GlossaryPicture 1Picture 2Term/PhraseDefinitionExampleNon-exampleRenewable Energy Energy from an energy resource that is replaced rapidly by a natural processSunlightOilWind TurbineA device that converts the pushing force of the wind into electrical power A fan-like structure that generates power A whirligig/pinwheelOffshore Wind FarmA group of wind turbines built in bodies of water to produce energyWind farms located 20 km off the Kent Coast in the United KingdomWind farms in OregonFossil FuelsA limited resource composed of the remains of living organisms – examples include oil, natural gas, and coalOilNuclear energyPicture 1Picture 2Term/PhraseDefinitionExampleNon-exampleDrillingA hole is drilled through the ground or seabed to extract petroleumDigging into the ground to look for oilDigging for goldSupplemental Nutrition Assistance ProgramThe largest nutrition assistance program administered by the USDA, serving more than 46 million low-income Americans per year. The goals of SNAP are to improve participants' food security and their access to a healthy diet.A monthly allowance placed on a debit card to be used only to buy foodReceiving food from a food bankEnergy PovertyLack of access to modern energy services, such as electricity.Being unable to afford to heat your home during the winterNot living in an area with enough sunlight to install solar panels (when you already have a way to access electricity)Picture 1Picture 2Term/PhraseDefinitionExampleNon-exampleHuman RightBasic, fundamental rights to which every person is entitled to because they are human beingsIllegalizing the torture of prisonersBeing allowed to wear flip-flops to schoolTax SubsidyA form of financial support given by governments to specific industries, often with the intention of promoting business growth or technological innovationInvestment tax credits money are subtracted from the total amount a taxpayer owes to encourage investment or other behaviorsReceiving a grant from the federal governmentLoan GuaranteesA promise by one party (the guarantor) to take care of the debt obligation of a borrower if that borrower is unable to pay back the loanYour parents handle a loan that is in your name if you default on it.Your parent takes out a loan in their name for your education.Prior Knowledge: Electricity: From Hand-cranks to Fossil Fuels to Wind -- Four Corners/Table Debate Students will continue learning the “argument = claim + warrant” format while beginning to learn claims and warrants related to the novice case. Remember the difference between topic and case. The topic refers to the resolution (“Resolved: The United States federal government should substantially increase its non-military exploration and/or development of the Earth’s oceans.”) while a case refers to any of the specific sets of plan-based arguments that fall under the resolution. In short, “case” is more specific than “topic.” At this point, we just want the novice debaters to gain the prior knowledge necessary to debate the Offshore Wind case. We’ll focus on case-specific arguments the following week.SWBATMake an argument using the format argument = claim + warrant.ClaimsThe following claims are associated with each of the headings in “How is electricity made? What are fossil fuels? Renewable Energy and Wind Power”:How is electricity made?: The best way the US could convince citizens to use less electricity is by making them use a hand-crank generator to power their cell phones for a monthWhat are fossil fuels?: The best way to explain why the cost of oil will increase to your friend is ________ [table debates: each side should provide and defend their own explanation/ Four corners: the teacher should provide an example].Renewable Energy and Wind Power: If installed and updated regularly I would only use wind power to provide electricity for my home.ActivityFour Corners or Table Debates. See page PAGEREF FourCornersDescription \* MERGEFORMAT 39 or PAGEREF TableDebateDescription \* MERGEFORMAT 55, respectively.ProcedurePass out the “Electricity: From Hand-cranks to Fossil Fuels to Wind” handout. See page 90.Provide students with the “How is electricity made?” Claim: The best way the US could convince citizens to use less electricity is by making them use a hand-crank generator to power their cell phones for a monthOptional: Before having students read the “How is electricity made?” section in preparation for 4-corners or a table debate show the videos from “Video Playlist for Offshore Wind – Novice” section labeled “Prior Knowledge: Optional: How is electrify made?” (See page PAGEREF VideoPlaylistCuba \* MERGEFORMAT 115). Have students read the section labeled “How is electricity made?” on the Electricity: From Hand-cranks to Fossil Fuels to Wind” handout. See page 91.Proceed with either a standard four corners or table debate, see page PAGEREF FourCornersDescription \* MERGEFORMAT 39 or PAGEREF TableDebateDescription \* MERGEFORMAT 55, respectively. Repeat for the remaining 2 claims for the sections “What are fossil fuels?” and “Renewable Energy and Wind Power.”Time20-30 minutesMentors/ Student LeadersDuring the activity: Distribute mentors and student leaders evenly to each corner or part of the room. They will help facilitate discussion in each corner or in each pair and ensure that the students in the corner or pairs are prepared to deliver a coherent warrant.Debriefing: Share one overall positive and address one overall concern in a teachable manner.MaterialsVideos from “Video Playlist for Offshore Wind – Novice’s” section labeled “Prior Knowledge” (See page PAGEREF VideoPlaylistCuba \* MERGEFORMAT 115) How do we get electricity and why should we care?: Fossil Fuels, Power Plants, and Renewable Energy” handout.” See page 91.Four Corners signs. See page PAGEREF FourCornersSigns \* MERGEFORMAT 42.Electricity: From Hand-cranks to Fossil Fuels to WindHow is electricity made? What are fossil fuels? Renewable Energy and Wind PowerHow is electricity made? It is relatively easy to produce electricity. Electricity is made when a coil of wire is spun between magnets. -161925018605500-4762533655Coil of wire00Coil of wire033845500-288607533655Hand-crank generator00Hand-crank generator282892527178000-345757581661000-352425043561000-160972594996000-1619250673735Magnets00Magnets The pictures to the left depicts the most basic power plant – a hand-crank generator (of electricity). In this image a person is turning, by hand, a coil of wire within a magnet. This process produces the electricity powering the light bulb. Would you be excited to power your cell phone using a hand-crank?254317510248900010668007677150036417253302000Although hand-crank generators work, power plants rely on other forms of energy to turn the coil of wire between magnets. The majority of power plants burn gas or coal or capture the sun’s rays to heat water into steam. This steam pushes into the turbine blades (like a reverse fan), which turns the coil of wire inside the magnets, to produce electricity. Notice that steam and turbine blades replaced a person spinning this by hand.What are fossil fuels?68% of Power plants in the U.S. use the heat from burning gas, oil, or coal to the produce steam. As mentioned earlier, this steam blows into the turbine’s blades that spin the coil of wire between magnets and produces electricity. Coal, natural gas , and oil are all fossil fuels. Fossil fuels are formed when living things die in an environment that prevents decay and if they end up buried deep enough and long enough (100 million + years) for pressure and heat to create them. -4762535814000-4762535560“Fossil fuels”00“Fossil fuels”Some people joke that fossil fuels, like oil, comes from dinosaurs. While most of the dead material is from plants and only a small fraction is from dinosaurs, the picture to the left still illustrates an important point: fossil fuels are a non-renewable source of energy. Once we burn all of our “dinosaur” remains, it would take another 100 million plus years to replace them. These same fuels provide the grand majority of the energy we need for our cars, homes, and businesses.In your lifetime the price of oil has increased dramatically because everyone needs it and there are only so many oil wells and the only ones left are expensive to reach. Meanwhile, the cost of natural gas has decreased recently because of new technology that has led to a boom in the exploration of natural gas in the U.S. Where will the price of fossil fuels go in the future? Imagine the cost of water in the desert v. the cost of water in Poland Springs, Maine - why might the price be different? Renewable Energy and Wind Power21336003048000All power plants produce electricity by spinning a coil of wire in-between magnets. Wouldn’t it be great if there was a way to spin the coil of wire using a source of energy that we would never run out of? That’s the idea behind renewable energy. Renewable energy is a power source that utilizes either natural forces (e.g. sunlight, wind) or can be renewed within a relatively short timeframe (e.g. corn-based ethanol) and thus unlike fossil fuels does not take 100s of millions of years to create.Wind power is one renewable energy source and creates 4.13% of U.S. electricity. The great thing about wind turbines is that unlike other power plants it does not need to heat water into steam to spin a turbine (think the reverse of a fan), instead wind, when it blows, turns the turbine. Like all power plants the turbine spins the coil of wire within magnets to produce electricity. Technology is getting better all the time, but it is still considered relatively expensive as the industry is comparatively young and as natural gas is so cheap. Week 2The second week of novice practices will focus on understanding the affirmative files. The activities you’ll find in this section build on the argumentation skills learned in Week 1 while simultaneously teaching the affirmative evidence. Again, you can adapt these activities to any case (use them for both the Fall and Winter season affirmatives!), and you can also use them with the more experienced divisions.Before starting these activities it may be helpful to show your debaters the videos related to the Offshore Wind Affirmative specifically:*Heat v. Eat is an Issue*Energy Poverty in America: [0:00-1:36]Unhealthy versus health food – a cost comparison: [0:14 – 2:30]*The Plan can solve the issue*Production Tax Credit Explained: [0:00 -2:33]You could also play this as an intro to any one of the activities in week 2 to help introduce the affirmative files and to build up their prior knowledge.Learning the Affirmative - 4 corners (or Table Debates)Students will review the difference between a claim and a warrant while learning the major claims and warrants of the affirmative case. During this activity, students will hear the case’s claims, decide to what extent they agree or disagree with the claim, and be asked to provide a warrant as their reasoning. SWBATMake a complete argument (claim + warrant) about concepts related to the Offshore Wind Affirmative.ActivityFour Corners, see page PAGEREF FourCornersDescription \* MERGEFORMAT 39 (or Round Robin Debates, see page PAGEREF RoundRobinDescription \* MERGEFORMAT 67).ProcedurePass out the “Is the Claim True? Learning the Affirmative” handout.Have students read Claim 1 and the card that supports it. Optional: To help students who have trouble accessing the text, go to audio and play each card twice while students read the file quietly in preparation to debate each claim.Then have them choose a corner depending on how strongly they agree or disagree with the claim.At each corner, the students should discuss their reasons (warrants) for agreeing or disagreeing with the claim.At least one student from each corner should share out.Repeat for the following claims.Time20 minutesMentors/ Student LeadersDuring the activity: Distribute mentors and student leaders evenly to each corner. They will help facilitate discussion in each corner and ensure that the students in the corner are prepared to deliver a coherent warrant.Debriefing: Share one overall positive and address one overall concern in a teachable manner.Materials“Is the Claim True? Learning the Affirmative” handout. See page PAGEREF ClaimTrue \* MERGEFORMAT 93.Four Corners signs. See page PAGEREF FourCornersSigns \* MERGEFORMAT 42.Online audio files (audio)Is the Claim True? Learning the Offshore Wind Affirmative Directions: Read the following claims. Then read the card (piece of evidence) that supports the claim. Do you agree with the claim? What text supports your claim? Do you disagree? Make up your own argument against the claim!CLAIM 1 – Increased fuel costs should concern all Americans.American Coalition for Clean Coal Electricity, 2012On average, energy costs have nearly doubled as a fraction of annual family budgets since 2001. The unequal distribution of incomes in the United States imposes disproportionate energy cost burdens on minority and senior households. The average after-tax incomes of low- and middle-income U.S. families have not grown since 2001. Meanwhile, inflation has eroded 27% of the value of American families’ incomes. The prices of petroleum-based fuels, particularly gasoline and home heating oil, have increased significantly in the past decade. The rapid escalation of consumer energy prices, along with stagnant income growth, magnifies the impact of energy costs on all American families.Source: Offshore Wind Affirmative – Novice, pg 6CLAIM 2 - Increased heating costs will negatively impact your health.Dr. Bhattacharya et al., Researcher at Stanford Medical School, 2003We investigated how well poor American families protect themselves against nutritional risks due to budget shocks resulting from cold weather. We found that poor families reduced their expenditures on food in?response to unusually cold weather, whereas richer families did not. Among poor families, we estimated that a monthly temperature that was 10°F colder than normal would result in a reduction in expenditures on food in the home of $11 per month and an increase in fuel expenditures of $37 per month. In poor households, adults and children alike reduced their caloric intake by 10% during the winter months, whereas members of richer families did not reduce their caloric intake during the winter. It is striking that these nutritional outcomes corresponded so closely with expenditure outcomes. The close correspondence between the CEX and NHANES III results for poor and richer families lends support to our findings. Our results suggest that poor American families face stark choices in cold weather. In particular, they increase their home fuel expenditures at the cost of expenditures on food and nutritional well-being. Our evidence also suggests that poor parents are only imperfectly able to protect their children from cold-weather resource shocks. Both children and adults reduce their caloric intake during winter months.Source: Offshore Wind Affirmative – Novice, pg 6CLAIM 3 – Poor nutrition is the greatest problem facing Americans.Mozes, Reporter at The Washington Post, 2008Members of poor households in which it is consistently hard to afford enough high-quality food end up eating nutritionally risky diets, Canadian researchers reveal. The new study is the first to show that food insecurity directly translates into poor nutrition. It also suggests that in such homes, adults and teens, rather than very young children, are the most likely to be subsisting on diets low in vitamins, minerals, fruits, vegetables, grains and meat. "Over the long term, [food insecurity] could be expected to precipitate and complicate diet-related chronic diseases, such as diabetes and heart disease," cautioned study co-author, Sharon Kirkpatrick, a doctoral candidate in the department of nutritional sciences at the University of Toronto. Kirkpatrick and study co-author Valerie Tarasuk published the findings in the March issue of The Journal of Nutrition. According to a 2002 U.S. Department of Agriculture report, just over 11 percent of American households are food-insecure. The study highlights similar estimates for 2006, suggesting that 12.6 million U.S. households experience food insecurity, while 4.6 million have one or more family members going without food. Recent Canadian research indicates that just over 9 percent of households are food-insecure. Against such numbers, Kirkpatrick and Tarasuk set out to analyze eating habits, detailed in interviews conducted by Statistics Canada between 2004 and 2005. The survey included 35,000 Canadians between the ages of 1 and 70 drawn from all socioeconomic groups. Among younger children, Kirkpatrick and Tarasuk found that living in food-insecure homes translated into lower milk consumption and -- among those between 1 and 3 -- lower consumption of fruits and vegetables. However, overall, this group appeared to be relatively untouched by the food-security status of the household in terms of the amount of calories or micronutrients consumed. Adolescents, however, were a different story. Boys between the ages of 14 and 18 living in food-insecure environments appeared to be particularly vulnerable to general micronutrient inadequacy in their diets, while also consuming less milk, fruit and vegetables than their peers. Adolescent girls were also impacted. Teen diets for both sexes living in food-insecure homes were found to be deficient in vitamin A, protein and magnesium while compensated with food higher in fat content, relative to those from food-secure homes. Adults in food-insecure settings consumed less protein, fat and fiber, and, in some cases, followed diets strikingly insufficient in vitamins and minerals. Among food-insecure men between the ages of 31 and 70 and food-insecure women between the ages of 51 and 70, overall caloric intake and meat consumption was also lower. And for most, carbohydrates accounted for a larger slice of their overall diet at the expense of fruit and milk consumption. "The poor dietary patterns of those in food-insecure households provide a moral imperative for policy responses to address the root causes of this problem in both Canada and the U.S.," said Kirkpatrick. Dr. Walter Willett, chairman of the department of nutrition at the Harvard School of Public Health, agreed the issue warrants greater attention. "The issue of diet quality in low-income and food-insecure groups is a very serious issue, because the flip side of the low intake of minerals and vitamins is that these kind of low-quality diets are usually characterized by large amounts of starch and refined sugar," he said. "And, it's fair to assume, these people are not loading up on brown rice and quinoa [an organic grain]. So, we're talking about empty calories that predispose people to becoming overweight and definitely increase the risk for heart disease and diabetes. So, this needs to be looked at further."Source: Offshore Wind Affirmative-Novice, Pg. 7CLAIM 4 – The only thing preventing offshore wind energy is federal dollars (tax credits).Caperton, Conathan, and Weidman, 2012Specifically, NRG placed the blame for this outcome squarely on the shoulders of Congress: Two aspects of the project critical for success have actually gone backwards: the decisions of Congress to eliminate funding for the Department of Energy’s loan guarantee program applicable to offshore wind, and the failure to extend the Federal Investment and Production Tax Credits … which have rendered the Delaware project both unfinanceable and financially untenable. While the challenges facing this project are big, they’re solvable. As NRG alludes to, targeted, efficient incentives from the federal government would allow this project to move forward. The production tax credit Currently, offshore wind projects are eligible for the production tax credit. This is a credit based on how much electricity a wind turbine generates, and is currently worth 2.2 cents per kilowatt-hour. Unfortunately, this credit expires at the end of 2012, and a long-term extension of the credit is uncertain. CAP has called on Congress to extend the credit for four more years, which will provide needed policy certainty for investors in wind projects. The investment tax credit While NRG Bluewater Wind would clearly benefit from a production tax credit extension, other incentives may be more useful for this project. For onshore wind projects—with relatively predictable performance over the life of the project—the production tax credit is very valuable. For offshore wind, however, the credit is less valuable to the project developer. Because offshore wind turbines are relatively new technology and are deployed in environments that have never been used for energy generation, developers can’t predict how much power a turbine will generate as accurately as they can with onshore wind. Thus, developers aren’t as certain about how big their tax credits will be, which affects the profitability of the project. Congress could fix this problem by making offshore wind eligible for the investment tax credit. Instead of getting a tax credit as power is generated, the investment tax credit would allow offshore wind developers to get an upfront credit for 30 percent of their initial investment, encouraging more to invest. This is much more useful for technologies with more performance uncertainty—like offshore wind—and would be a smart example of matching the tax code to the unique circumstances facing innovative industries.Source: Offshore Wind Affirmative-Novice, pg. 8Learning the Affirmative - Evidence Scavenger Hunt The Evidence Scavenger Hunt will expose novice debaters to the format and content of the case files. They will become familiar with the layout of a card (a piece of evidence), be able to identify a tagline (the bolded summary at the top of the card), and do more practice with claims and warrants. Evidence Scavenger Hunts are important because they make reading cards a fun activity, and they teach debaters how to scan evidence for important content.SWBATFind evidence (a warrant) in the card that supports its tagline.Claims/ WarrantsSee handoutActivityEvidence Scavenger Hunt. See page PAGEREF EvidenceScavengerDescription \* MERGEFORMAT 46.ProcedureHand out the Evidence Scavenger Hunt! worksheet (See page PAGEREF FTEMassTransitAff \* MERGEFORMAT 96).Students should fill in the middle column (“Identify the card…”) with the page number, author’s last name, and date.Students should fill in the rightmost column (“Warrant”) with a sentence or two that supports the tagline. The first row is completed as an example. An answer key can be found on page PAGEREF FTEAKMassTransitAff \* MERGEFORMAT Error! Bookmark not defined.. Note: This activity can also be done in pairs or small groups.Time25 minutes. Mentors/ Student LeadersCirculate the room and assist students in completing their worksheets.MaterialsFind the Evidence! (Offshore Wind Affirmative) worksheet. See page PAGEREF FTEMassTransitAff \* MERGEFORMAT 96.Core FilesFind the Evidence! Offshore Wind AffirmativeDirections: First, read the claim and find the card (pages 5-11 in the Offshore Wind Affirmative) it comes from. Then, a piece of evidence (warrant) in that card that supports the tagline. The first one is done for you. TaglineIdentify the Card it Comes FromWarrant (Supporting Statement/Evidence)Wind energy is not expensive, the subsidies given to wind energy are small compared to the subsidies for fossil fuels – wind is not more expensive it just needs more government assistance to displace gas and coalPG.12 Pollack, Senior Researcher at The Pew Charitable Trusts, 2012“Government decided a century ago to have a fossil fuel-oriented economy, and spent nearly half a trillion dollars over that time period to develop the industry and its infrastructure. Government created this Goliath, and now is telling David that it can’t give him a slingshot because that wouldn’t make it a fair fight.Poor nutrition in the long term increases the risk for chronic diseases, such as diabetes and heart disease – it is a moral imperative to solve this problemSince 2001, family income has not increased, while the cost of heating oil has increased – this creates a burden on American families who need to heat their homes.Once the industry overcomes these cost hurdles, American families will pay less to heat their homes with cheap wind energy, allowing low-income families to afford a more nutritious diet Congress can help the wind energy industry overcome cost hurdles by offering investment tax credit and loan guaranteesFind the Evidence! Offshore Wind Affirmative-ANSWER KEY TaglineIdentify the Card it Comes FromWarrant (Supporting Statement/Evidence)Wind energy is not expensive, the subsidies given to wind energy are small compared to the subsidies for fossil fuels – wind is not more expensive it just needs more government assistance to displace gas and coalPG.12 Pollack, Senior Researcher at The Pew Charitable Trusts, 2012“Government decided a century ago to have a fossil fuel-oriented economy, and spent nearly half a trillion dollars over that time period to develop the industry and its infrastructure. Government created this Goliath, and now is telling David that it can’t give him a slingshot because that wouldn’t make it a fair fight.Poor nutrition in the long term increases the risk for chronic diseases, such as diabetes and heart disease – it is a moral imperative to solve this problemPG. 8 Mozes, 2008"Over the long term, [food insecurity] could be expected to precipitate and complicate diet-related chronic diseases, such as diabetes and heart disease,"Since 2001, family income has not increased, while the cost of heating oil has increased – this creates a burden on American families who need to heat their homes. PG.6 American Coalition for Clean Coal Electricity, 2012“The prices of home heating oil, have increased significantly in the past decade. The rapid escalation of energy prices, along with stagnant income growth, magnifies the impact of energy costs on families.”Once the industry overcomes these cost hurdles, American families will pay less to heat their homes with cheap wind energy, allowing low-income families to afford a more nutritious diet PG.9 Savitz, 2010“Developing the 127 gigawatts of offshore wind energy described above – instead of drilling for oil and gas, would cost about $1.13 trillion, $36 billion less than the oil and gas costs over 20 years. Americans would get more energy for less money”Congress can help the wind energy industry overcome cost hurdles by offering investment tax credit and loan guaranteesPG.11 Caperton, Conathan, and Weidman, 2012“Congress could fix this problem by making offshore wind eligible for the investment tax credit. Instead of getting a tax credit as power is generated, the investment tax credit would allow offshore wind developers to get an upfront credit for 30 percent of their initial investment, encouraging more to invest”Learning the Affirmative - Table Debate Like the Evidence Scavenger Hunt, the Warrant Debate gets students familiar with the cards, taglines, claims, and warrants. However, it also gives students one of their first debating experiences. In debate, they will often hear the term “weigh” to describe the process of evaluating and comparing opposing evidence, harms, impacts, etc. The Warrant Debate will get them to weigh the warrants of the affirmative case. They will need to verbally defend why their warrant is the most compelling warrant in the group. As they debate in this activity, they will become more familiar with the claims and warrants of the affirmative case, and they will get more comfortable with verbalizing their thoughts about the evidence.SWBATUnderstand each cards claim (tagline) and weigh the warrants that support the claim within the text. Claims/ WarrantsSee handout.ActivityTable Debate. See page PAGEREF TableDebateDescription \* MERGEFORMAT 55.ProcedureHand out the What’s the Best Warrant? worksheet See page PAGEREF WTBWMassTransitAff \* MERGEFORMAT 100.Put students into pairs. Randomly assign one person to defend “warrant 1” and the other person to defend “warrant 2.” For each card and claim on the worksheet, they will debate which of the two warrants is the best.Optional: To help students who have trouble reading, go to audio and play each card twice while students read the file quietly in preparation to debate which warrant best proves the claim is true.Follow the procedures for a standard Warrant Debate.Tip: Remind students that they are not arguing whether the claim is true or not. Instead, they need to argue that their warrant is the best reason for believing the claim to be true.Time8 minutes per claim.Mentors/ Student LeadersDuring prep-time – assist students with developing two reasons why their warrant best proves the claim is true.During the speeches – circulate around the room, listening for things you want to reinforce later and things that need to be corrected later. Debriefing – share one overall positive and address one overall concern in a teachable manner.MaterialsWhat’s the Best Warrant? (Offshore Wind Aff) worksheet. See page PAGEREF WTBWMassTransitAff \* MERGEFORMAT 100.Online audio files (audio)What’s the Best Warrant?Offshore Wind AffirmativeDirections: Read the two warrants for each claim listed below. Your coach will assign you to defend one of them, and you’ll have to tell your table debate opponent why your warrant is the best warrant to support that claim. Refer to the card to help you make your argument.Card: Offshore Wind Affirmative, USA Today, 2014Claim: The wind power industry is not growing rapidly.Warrants: “It takes about nine months to plan a wind farm, so the one-year extension in January 2013 didn’t trigger a flurry of new wind farm construction”“Last year, investments in renewable energy fell 14 percent globally and 10 percent in the United States”Card: Offshore Wind Affirmative, American Coalition for Clean Coal Electricity, 2012Claim: Times are getting harder for AmericansWarrants:On average, energy costs have nearly doubled as a fraction of annual family budgets since 2001.The average after-tax incomes of low- and middle-income U.S. families have not grown since 2001. Meanwhile, inflation has eroded 27% of the value of American families’ incomes…Card: Offshore Wind Affirmative, Dr. Bhattacharya et al., Researcher at Stanford Medical School, 2003Claim: When money is tight, if the price of heating your home increases, you spend less on food.Warrants:“Among poor families, we estimated that a monthly temperature that was 10°F colder than normal would result in a reduction in expenditures on food in the home of $11 per month and an increase in fuel expenditures of $37 per month”“In poor households, adults and children alike reduced their caloric intake by 10% during the winter months, whereas members of richer families did not "Card: Offshore Wind Affirmative, Mozes, Reporter at The Washington Post, 2008Claim: The less money you can spend on food the less nutritious the food you buy will be.Warrants (some of the text below is not underlined in the original card)“Teen diets for both sexes living in food-insecure homes were found to be deficient in vitamin A, protein and magnesium while compensated with food higher in fat content”“low-income and food-insecure groups … diets are usually characterized by large amounts of starch and refined sugar," …And… not loading up on brown rice and quinoa [an organic grain]”Card: Offshore Wind Affirmative, Savitz, VP for U.S. Oceans and Director of Coast Alliance, 2010Claim: Wind Energy is the best fuel for the future.Warrants:“…unlike the oil and natural gas resources, offshore wind is not finite and, unlike the oil and gas, will not become depleted.”“Developing the 127 gigawatts of offshore wind energy described above – instead of drilling for oil and gas, would cost about $1.13 trillion, $36 billion less than the oil and gas costs over 20 years.”Week 3The third week of novice practices will focus on understanding the negative files. The activities you’ll find in this section build on the argumentation skills learned in Week 1 while simultaneously teaching the negative evidence. Instead of merely asserting arguments, students will also practice responding to arguments in defensive and offensive ways.Before starting these activities it may be helpful to show your debaters the videos related to the Offshore Wind Negative, specifically:*Heat v. Eat is not an Issue*Heat v. Eat is not an issue – low cost fuel works now: [0:00-1:36]Heat v. Eat is not an issue – SNAP is effective: [0:00 – 1:39]*The Plan cannot solve the issue/ Plan will do More Harm than Good*Plan cannot solve Eat v. Heat – funding not the issue: [0:00 -2:33]Plan will do more harm than good – negatively impacts health in other countries: [0:00 – 3:15]sYou could also play this as an intro to any one of the activities in week 3 to help introduce the negative files and to build up their prior knowledge.Learning the Negative - Evidence Scavenger Hunt The Evidence Scavenger Hunt will expose novice debaters to the format and content of the case files. They will become familiar with the layout of a card (a piece of evidence), be able to identify a tagline (the bolded summary at the top of the card), and do more practice with claims and warrants. Evidence Scavenger Hunts are important because they make reading cards a fun activity, and they teach debaters how to scan evidence for important content.SWBATFind evidence (a warrant) in the card that supports its tagline.Claims/ WarrantsSee handoutActivityEvidence Scavenger Hunt. See page PAGEREF EvidenceScavengerDescription \* MERGEFORMAT 46.ProcedureOptional: Before starting the activity show the debaters the “Video Playlist for Offshore Wind” videos. See page PAGEREF VideoPlaylistCuba \* MERGEFORMAT 115 or go to OSWvideos.Hand out the Find the Evidence! worksheet (See page 107)Students should fill in the middle column (“Identify the card…”) with the page number, author’s last name, and date.Students should fill in the rightmost column (“Warrant”) with a sentence or two that supports the tagline. The first row is completed as an example. An answer key can be found on page PAGEREF FTEOSWNegative \* MERGEFORMAT 104 PAGEREF FTEAKMassTransitNeg \* MERGEFORMAT Error! Bookmark not defined.. Note: This activity can also be done in pairs or small groups.Time25 minutes. Mentors/ Student LeadersCirculate the room and assist students in completing their worksheets.MaterialsFind the Evidence! (Offshore Wind Negative) Worksheet. See page 107.Core FilesFind the Evidence! Offshore Wind NegativeDirections: First, read the claim and find the card (pages 4-13 in the Offshore Wind Negative) it comes from. Then, a piece of evidence (warrant) in that card that supports the tagline. The first one is done for you. TaglineIdentify the Card it Comes FromWarrant (Supporting Statement/Evidence)Using less energy is the only way to solve. Fuel prices are subject to change, only energy efficient housing will protect those living in poverty.PG. 9 Sir Marmot, Director of the International Institute for Society & Health, 2011“The Government should aim to make improving energy efficiency standards a priority: any step forward in achieving certain minimum standards in the existing housing stock will reduce the risk of fuel poverty for current and future households and bring associated health benefits.”Funding is not the issue, regulations are seen by developers as inconsistent and time consuming – scaring investors and preventing industry growth.Countries that utilize renewable energy, such as wind turbines, see some of the highest energy costs in the world – this will only increase energy povertyCoal is already addressing the need for low cost energy, wind energy is expensive. Coal will continue to reduce heating costs into the future as it becomes more efficient.Proponents of wind energy ignore how every step of construction and implementation hurts public health in other countries.Find the Evidence! Offshore Wind Negative-ANSWER KEY TaglineIdentify the Card it Comes FromWarrant (Supporting Statement/Evidence)Using less energy is the only way to solve. Fuel prices are subject to change, only energy efficient housing will protect those living in poverty.PG.9 Sir Marmot, Director of the International Institute for Society & Health, 2011“The Government should aim to make improving energy efficiency standards a priority: any step forward in achieving certain minimum standards in the existing housing stock will reduce the risk of fuel poverty for current and future households and bring associated health benefits.”Funding is not the issue, regulations are seen by developers as inconsistent and time consuming – scaring investors and preventing industry growth.PG.7 Copping, 2010Developers reported that experience with offshore wind project permitting was “fairly painful”, “extremely challenging”, “overly arduous”, “relative easy because it?s in state waters”, “uncertain and unnecessarily slow”, and “poorly defined resulting in unnecessarily large investment risk because sites can?t be secured”.Countries that utilize renewable energy, such as wind turbines, see some of the highest energy costs in the world – this will only increase energy povertyPG.11 The Economist, 2014Many governments are pumping money into renewable sources of electricity, such as wind turbines, solar farms, hydroelectric and geothermal plants. But countries with large amounts of renewable generation, such as Denmark and Germany, face the highest energy prices in the rich world. In Britain electricity from wind farms costs twice as much as that from traditional sources;Coal is already addressing the need for low cost energy, wind energy is expensive. Coal will continue to reduce heating costs into the future as it becomes more efficient.PG.5 Sutton,2014low-cost power using today's advanced coal technologies that extends lives, builds economies and improves natural and indoor environments. Proponents of wind energy ignore how every step of construction and implementation hurts public health in other countries.PG. 13 Driessen,2012Turbines require enormous quantities of concrete, steel, copper, fiberglass, and rare earth minerals—all of which involve substantial resource extraction, refining, smelting, manufacturing, and shipping. Land and habitat impacts, rock removal and pulverizing, solid waste disposal, burning fossil fuels, air and water pollution, and carbon dioxide emissions occur on a large scale during every step of the processLearning the Negative - Table Debate Like the Evidence Scavenger Hunt, the Warrant Debate gets students familiar with the cards, taglines, claims, and warrants. However, it also gives students one of their first debating experiences. In debate, they will often hear the term “weigh” to describe the process of evaluating and comparing opposing evidence, harms, impacts, etc. The Warrant Debate will get them to weigh the warrants of the negative case. They will need to verbally defend why their warrant is the most compelling warrant in the group. As they debate in this activity, they will become more familiar with the claims and warrants of the negative case, and they will get more comfortable with verbalizing their thoughts about the evidence.SWBATUnderstand each cards claim (tagline) and weigh the warrants that support the claim within the text. Claims/ WarrantsSee handout.ActivityTable Debate. See page PAGEREF TableDebateDescription \* MERGEFORMAT 55.ProcedureHand out the What’s the Best Warrant? worksheet See page PAGEREF WTBWMassTransitAff \* MERGEFORMAT 100.Put students into pairs. Randomly assign one person to defend “warrant 1” and the other person to defend “warrant 2.” For each card and claim on the worksheet, they will debate which of the two warrants is the best.Optional: To help students who have trouble reading, go to audio and play each card twice while students read the file quietly in preparation to debate which warrant best proves the claim is true.Follow the procedures for a standard Warrant Debate.Tip: Remind students that they are not arguing whether the claim is true or not. Instead, they need to argue that their warrant is the best reason for believing the claim to be true.Time8 minutes per claim.Mentors/ Student LeadersDuring prep-time – assist students with developing two reasons why their warrant best proves the claim is true.During the speeches – circulate around the room, listening for things you want to reinforce later and things that need to be corrected later. Debriefing – share one overall positive and address one overall concern in a teachable manner.MaterialsWhat’s the Best Warrant? (Offshore Wind Aff) worksheet. See page PAGEREF WTBWMassTransitAff \* MERGEFORMAT 100.Online audio files (audio)What’s the Best Warrant?Offshore Wind NegativeDirections: Read the two warrants for each claim listed below. Your coach will assign you to defend one of them, and you’ll have to tell your table debate opponent why your warrant is the best warrant to support that claim. Refer to the card to help you make your argument.Card: Offshore Wind Negative, Sutton, VP of Global Communications at Peabody Energy, 2014Claim: We should use coal-based energy.Warrants: “today's high-efficiency supercritical coal plants have state-of-the-art controls and ultra-low emission rates. Every large, advanced coal plant brings the equivalent carbon benefit of removing 1 million cars from the road.”"Policies that force use of more expensive, less reliable energy push costs throughout the economy and place the heaviest burden on the world's poor and low-income citizens.”Card: Offshore Wind Negative, USDA Food and Nutrition Service, January 2014Claim: SNAP will continue to improve preventing nutrition-related health problems.Warrants:“Through SNAP-Ed, USDA provides funding to states to implement nutrition education interventions designed to help participating families make healthy choices.”“No one solution can solve the problems of poor diet and obesity among American children and families, which is why USDA and its program partners continue to seek out and implement evidence-based solutions”Card: Offshore Wind Negative, Zeller, Journalism Fellow at MIT, 2013Claim: For offshore wind, the problem is red tap, not fundingWarrants:“In most cases, projects would still need to undergo a full environmental review -- and the agonizingly protracted scoping and litigation that so often comes with it. ““it doesn't address the conflicting positions of different agencies or the possibility of multiple agency appeals, perhaps even in different courts. It still doesn’t put a time limit on things."Card: Offshore Wind Negative, The Economist, 2014Claim: Offshore Wind energy is expensive to make Warrants: “The best sites are often far from big cities (on Scottish hillsides, French lakes or American deserts) which makes them expensive to connect.”“a lot of renewable generation must still pay to maintain traditional kinds of power stations ready to fire up when demand peaks. And energy from these stations also becomes more expensive because they may not run at full-blast.”Card: Offshore Wind Negative, Driessen, Senior Policy Advisor for the Committee for a Constructive Tomorrow, 2012Claim: Creating turbines for offshore wind energy is bad for the environment. Warrants:Turbines require enormous quantities of concrete, steel, copper, fiberglass, and rare earth minerals—all of which involve substantial resource extraction, refining, smelting, manufacturing, and shipping.Extracting neodymium, praseodymium, and other rare earths for wind turbine magnets and rotors involves pumping acid down boreholes, to dissolve and retrieve the minerals. Other acids, chemicals, and high heat further process the materials. Learning the Negative - Round Robin DebateSWBATUse particular pieces of negative evidence to attack the affirmative. Defend against negative attacks.?? Claims/ WarrantsLowering energy costs will not solve the problem, energy efficient housing will (Offshore Wind Negative, pg. 9 v. Offshore Wind Affirmative, pg. 12)Heat v. Eat is not an Issue – low cost coal keeps energy costs low for families now (Offshore Wind Negative, pg. 5 v. Offshore Wind Affirmative, top card on pg. 6 ) Offshore Wind Energy is very expensive and will only make impoverishment worse (Offshore Wind Negative. Pg. 10 or 11 v. Offshore Wind Affirmative, top card on pg. 9 )ActivityRound Robin Debate. See page PAGEREF RoundRobinDescription \* MERGEFORMAT 67.ProcedureThis is a modified Round Robin Debate activity:Show debaters how the table of contents is organized for the affirmative and negative. Use the example: “Let’s say your opponent reads the negative card on page 13 with the tagline: ‘Proponents of wind energy ignore how every step of construction and implementation hurts public health in other countries.’ Looking at the top of the card, notice that it is titled ‘Plan will do more harm than good – negatively impacts health in other countries.’ Now, look on the affirmative table of contents – does any section heading seem to address this kind of argument? The section titled, “Plan Can Solve/ Plan is Good” seems to fit well. In fact, in this section you will find “Answers to: Plan will do more harm than good – negatively impacts health in other countries,’ which is on page 13 in the affirmative packet and does directly respond to the negative’s claim. This is the card you should read in against this piece of evidence in your speech. Ask your debaters to get into groups of 3 and to decide who is group member 1, 2, and 3.Now present the first claim.Next assign roles, e.g., “group member 2 is affirmative, 3 is negative, and 1 is the judge.”Either tell group member 3 the page number of or ask her to find the negative card associated with the given claim. In her first speech, all she does is read this card.Afterwards, prep time is given for Person 2 (the affirmative) to find a piece of Affirmative evidence to rebut Person 3 (the negative).Person 2 now makes an affirmative response to that piece of evidence.Prep time.Person 3 (the negative) answers person 2’s (the affirmative’s) points, using as much information from the original piece of text as possible. Person 2, the affirmative, delivers a rebuttal. Person 1 acts as a judge and gives feedback on all the speeches.The roles rotate and a new piece of evidence becomes the focus of the debate (e.g. now for claim #2, group member 1 moves from judge to Affirmative, group member 2 moves from Affirmative to Negative, and group member 3 moves from Negative to Judge).Time15-25 minutesMentors/ Student LeadersDuring prep-time: Assist students with developing warrants for their claim.During the speeches: Circulate around the room, listening for things you want to reinforce later and things that need to be corrected later.Debriefing: Share 1 overall positive and address 1 overall concern in a teachable manner.MaterialsRound Robin Debate worksheet. See page PAGEREF RoundRobinWKST \* MERGEFORMAT 71.Novice Affirmative and Negative.Preparing for the First Tournament - Shortened Debate RoundSWBATPractice the motions and procedures of a debate round. Claims/ WarrantsN/AActivityShortened Debate RoundProcedureNote: Speech times and a diagram of “tournament configuration” desks are on the handout following this page. Put the desks in tournament configuration. Assign experienced debaters and student leaders/mentors to serve as judges. Have students deliver shortened speeches based on the novice case files. There might be multiple shortened debate rounds happening at once, depending on how many novice debaters are on your team.Circulate around the room as the speeches are delivered. Remember to keep time and give verbal warnings as the clock runs down. Instead of students requesting prep time (as they would in a typical round), give one minute of prep time before the 2AC, the 2NC, the 2NR, and the 2AR. Use the words “prep time” so debaters get familiar with the concept.Group debrief. Do a Four Corners Activity to understand the debaters’ reactions. Some prompts are: “I felt confident about giving my speech, I felt nervous about reading in front of the judge, Cross-X was my favorite part, I am worried about giving an 8 minute speech.”Give positive feedback based on what you, the judges, and the student leaders/mentors heard during the speeches. Time35 minutesMentors/ Student LeadersDuring the speeches: Circulate around the room, listening to students’ answers and assisting with any struggles OR serve as a judge and prepare to give feedback to the students.Debriefing: Share out positive things you saw during the round and explain why they were good things to say/do.MaterialsNovice Case Files“This is a Debate Round!” Handout. See page PAGEREF ThisIsADebateRound \* MERGEFORMAT 114.“Speech Order, Timing, and Basic Responsibilities” Handout. See page PAGEREF Novicespeechordertimingandresp \* MERGEFORMAT 112.Speech Order, Timing, and Basic ResponsibilitiesA policy debate round is comprised of an array of different speeches given by each team. What follows is the order in which those speeches occur, the amount of time allotted for each speech, and the purpose of that speech. High school students speak for longer than middle school students. Each affirmative (A) and negative (N) team is comprised of a first (1) and second (2) speaker. As a general rule, the debater who is not about to give a speech handles the cross-examination (cross-x).First Affirmative Constructive Speech (1AC), 8 minutes for HS, 4 minutes for MSThe first affirmative debater (1A) will read a pre-written opening speech which introduces the problem and the affirmative team’s plan for fixing it.Cross-Examination, 3 minutes for HS, 2 minutes for MSThe second negative debater (2N) cross-examines the 1A who presented opening arguments.The cross-examination may include clarifying questions, will set up the negative team for their case, and will point out flaws in the affirmative case.Cross-examination may either be open, when all four debaters take part, or closed, when only those stated here take part. If all the debaters agree on open, as judge you may allow this. If they do not all agree, please keep the cross-examination closed. First Negative Constructive Speech (1NC), 8 minutes for HS, 4 minutes for MSThe first negative debater (1N) will present arguments that show why the affirmative’s case is a bad idea.Cross-Examination, 3 minutes for HS, 2 minutes for MSThe 1A will cross-examine the 1N.The 1A should focus on asking questions that either attack the negative’s position or strengthen the affirmative’s position.Second Affirmative Constructive Speech (2AC), 8 minutes for HS, 4 minutes for MSThe second affirmative debater (2A) responds to every argument made by the negative team and reiterates the strong arguments of their case.Cross-Examination, 3 minutes for HS, 2 minutes for MSThe 1N crosses the 2A.Second Negative Constructive Speech (2NC), 8 minutes for HS, 4 minutes for MSThe 2N re-presents some of the key arguments from the earlier negative speech, digging deeper into those arguments, and making sure the judge is reminded of key evidence.The negative team will also answer any affirmative responses to arguments.This is the last opportunity for the Negative to present new arguments; no new arguments are allowed in the rebuttals. New evidence that supports previously made arguments is still allowed.Cross-Examination, 3 minutes for HS, 2 minutes for MSThe 2A crosses the 2N.First Negative Rebuttal (1NR), 5 minutes for HS, 2 minutes for MSThe 1N addresses the arguments from the affirmative speech that his/her partner did not focus on.First Affirmative Rebuttal (1AR), 5 minutes for HS, 2 minutes for MSThe 1A will respond to the arguments made against affirmative case.The 1A may make new responses to new arguments presented in the 2NC, but may not otherwise present new arguments.Second Negative Rebuttal (2NR), 5 minutes for HS, 2 minutes for MSThe 2N responds to the affirmative arguments with their strongest counter-arguments, emphasizing the points he/she thinks should convince the judge to vote negative.Second Affirmative Rebuttal (2AR), 5 minutes for HS, 2 minutes for MSThe 2A summarizes the affirmative attacks on the negative and asserts why the judge should vote for the affirmativePrep Time, 8 minutes for HS, 5 minutes for MSEach team is allowed additional time to use in between speeches in order to prepare for their next speech.Preparation time is counted per team, not per speaker.This is a Debate Round!Full Speech Times1AC1NC2AC2NC1NR1AR2NR2AR1st Affirmative Constructive1st Negative Constructive2nd Affirmative Constructive2nd Negative Constructive1st Negative Rebuttal1st Affirmative Rebuttal2nd Negative Rebuttal2nd Affirmative Rebuttal8 minutes8 minutes8 minutes8 minutes5 minutes5 minutes5 minutes5 minutesFollowed by:3 minute CX2NC cross-examines 1ACFollowed by:3 minute CX1AC cross-examines 1NCFollowed by:3 minute CX1NC cross-examines 2ACFollowed by:3 minute CX2AC cross-examines 2NCPrep time: 8 minutes per team. Prep time can be used at any time except for before CX.Shortened Speech Times (For practice rounds. Your coach may adjust these as s/he sees fit!)1AC1NC2AC2NC1NR1AR2NR2AR3 minutes3 minutes3 minutes3 minutes1.5 minutes1.5 minutes1.5 minutes1.5 minutes1.5 minute CX1.5 minute CX1.5 minute CX1.5 minute CXPrep time: 4 minutes per team. Prep time can be used at any time except for before CX.Tournament Desk Configuration49453801225550414972512319001160145123190036576012319004989830260352N002N4208780260351N001N1212850260352A002A409575260351A001A2714625273050JUDGE00JUDGE266636582550Optional: Prior Knowledge for OSWSectionURLDurationOptional: How is electrify made?: What are fossil fuels?DescriptionWhy are fossil fuels going to become more expensive? (1)0:00-2:001:40-3:40Optional: Introduction to Wind Power Playlist for Offshore Wind – NoviceOSW – AffirmativeSectionURLDuration*Heat v. Eat is an Issue*Energy Poverty in America - 1:36Unhealthy versus healthy cost comparison (food)*The plan can solve the issue*Production Tax Credit Explained -2:33OSW – NegativeSectionURLDuration*Heat v. Eat not an Issue*Heat v. Eat is not an issue – low cost fuel works now -2:06Heat v. Eat is not an issue – SNAP is effective*Plan Cannot Solve the Issue/ Plan will do More Harm than Good*Plan cannot solve Eat v. Heat – funding not the issue -1:44Plan will do more harm than good – increases costs for impoverished familiesSee above - “No Harm – American fuel…”See abovePlan will do more harm than good – negatively impacts health in other countries -3:15Tab 4: Learning the CaseIn this Section:The Affirmative Case................................................................. PAGEREF TheAffirmativeCase \* MERGEFORMAT 118 Answering the Affirmative Case .................................................. PAGEREF AnsweringtheAffirmativeCase \* MERGEFORMAT 133The Affirmative CaseLearning the Affirmative Case in the JV-V divisions is much like learning the Affirmative Case in the Novice division. However, starting in JV, debaters learn about the stock issues (the central aspects of a case), they become more proficient at using the “Answer to” files, and they begin debating line-by-line.The lessons and activities in this section will deal with the stock issues, and learning the Offshore Wind case with an emphasis in debating line-by-line and using the “answer to” files. As always, these activities can be applied to cases beyond the two that are described here.The Stock IssuesThe Stock Issues refer to the central aspects of a case that prove why the Plan (example of the resolution) is a good idea. They are referred to as: Topicality, Harms, Inherency, and Solvency. Here is an explanation of The Stock Issues using an example affirmative.Stock Issue*Question it AsksExampleTopicalityHow is the plan an example of the topic/resolution?[This is taken for granted unless the negative runs a topicality argument against the affirmative. Unless the negative runs topicality, the affirmative does not need to explicitly explain why it is topical.]Resolution: The US Federal Government should substantially increase its funding for mental ical plan: The US Federal Government should require free mental health counseling for all students accused of bullying.Non-topical plans: The State of Massachusetts should provide free pre-school for all 4-year olds. (The resolution necessitates that the plan must be done by the federal government, not the state and that they plan deals with mental health, not education).Stock Issue – aka HIPSQuestion it AsksExampleHarmsWhat is the problem? Why does the problem matter?Students who are bullied are more likely to drop out of school and commit suicide.InherencyWhy isn’t something being done about it?There is a lot of school bullying and it will not stop itself and furthermore, nothing we are doing now will stop it.(Plan) – stock issues prove this is a good idea.What action/policy can we take/put in place to solve the problemThe US Federal Government should require free mental health counseling for all students accused of bullying.SolvencyHow can we solve the problem?Students bully other students because of their own mental health issues, so if they are counseled and they become better, they will stop bullying others. If students are not bullied they will not drop out of school or commit suicide because of bullying.*One of the most common ways of organizing a case and the way our core files are organized is in the following order: Inherency, Harms, (Plan,) and Solvency (All good Plans start “In High School”). Sometimes you will hear debaters talking about their case’s “advantages.” Typically, this means that the cases are organized similarly with Advantages (combination of inherency and harms) presented first, followed by Solvency.The Stock Issues – Creating a Story Students will learn the Stock Issues by creating their own “story,” i.e. a simplified affirmative case. Prior KnowledgeSWBATNoneUnderstand the Stock Issues.ActivityTable Debate. See page PAGEREF TableDebateDescription \* MERGEFORMAT 55.ProcedurePass out the “The Stock Issues – Creating a Story” worksheet. See page 168.Write the acronym HIPS (Harms, Inherency, Plan, and Solvency) vertically on the board. Briefly explain what the stock issues and the plan are. Guide the students through creating an example as a group. Feel free to use the example from “The Stock Issues – Creating a Story TEACHER WORKSHEET,” which creates a plan geared towards solving the problem of school bullying.Then, have students work in pairs to create their own story/case.Pass out the “Four Speech Table Debates – 1AC Start” Worksheet, see page PAGEREF FourSpeechTableDebates1ACStart \* MERGEFORMAT 60. Have students fill in the 1AC using “The Stock Issues – Creating a Story” worksheet.In pairs have the students pre-write their 1NC.Continue with a standard Four Speech Table Debate. See page PAGEREF AAATableDebateDescription \* MERGEFORMAT 55.Time10-15 minutesMentors/ Student LeadersDuring the activity: Assist students in completing their worksheets.Debriefing: Share one overall positive and address one overall concern in a teachable manner.Materials“The Stock Issues – Creating a Story” worksheet. See page 124.“Four Speech Table Debates – 1AC Start” worksheet. See page PAGEREF FourSpeechTableDebates1ACStart \* MERGEFORMAT 60. The Stock Issues – Creating a StoryThe Stock Issues refer to the central aspects of a case. They are referred to as: Topicality, Harms, Inherency, Plan, and Solvency. Here is an explanation of The Stock Issues using an example affirmative.Stock Issue – aka HIPSQuestion it AsksExampleCreate Your Own!HarmsWhat is the problem? Why does the problem matter?InherencyWhy isn’t something being done about it?PlanWhat action/policy can we take/put in place to solve the problemSolvencyHow can we solve the problem?Now, arrange your story in the same order our cases are organized:Inherency – Harms –Plan:Solvency –The Stock Issues – Creating a Story – TEACHER WORKSHEETThe Stock Issues refer to the central aspects of a case. They are referred to as: Topicality, Harms, Inherency, Plan, and Solvency. Here is an explanation of The Stock Issues using an example affirmative.Stock Issue – aka HIPSQuestion it AsksExampleCreate Your Own!HarmsWhat is the problem? Why does the problem matter?Students who are bullied are more likely to drop out of school and commit suicide.InherencyWhy isn’t something being done about it?There is a lot of school bullying and it will not stop itself and furthermore, nothing we are doing now will stop it.PlanWhat action/policy can we take/put in place to solve the problemThe US Federal Government should require free mental health counseling for all students accused of bullying.SolvencyHow can we solve the problem?Students bully other students because of their own mental health issues, so if they are counseled and they become better, they will stop bullying others. If students are not bullied they will not drop out of school or commit suicide because of bullying.Now, arrange your story in the same order our cases are organized:Inherency – Harms –Plan:Solvency –The Stock Issues – Evidence Scavenger Hunt Students will review the Stock Issues while learning the major parts of the Affirmative Case. Prior KnowledgeSWBATNoneUnderstand the Stock Issues and be introduced to the Affirmative CaseActivityEvidence Scavenger Hunt. See page PAGEREF EvidenceScavengerDescription \* MERGEFORMAT 46.ProcedurePass out the affirmative case from the Core Files.Pass out the “Find the Evidence! Learning the Stock Issues” worksheet. See page PAGEREF FTELearningStock \* MERGEFORMAT 124.Have students work in pairs to complete the Evidence Scavenger Hunt worksheet. Share out. An example answer key for Offshore Wind can be found on page PAGEREF FTELearningStockMTAK \* MERGEFORMAT 125.Time10-15 minutesMentors/ Student LeadersDuring the activity: Assist students in completing their worksheets.Debriefing: Share one overall positive and address one overall concern in a teachable manner.Materials“Find the Evidence! Learning the Stock Issues” worksheet. See page PAGEREF FTELearningStock \* MERGEFORMAT 124. Core FilesFind the Evidence! Learning the Stock IssuesDirections: Take out your affirmative case files. Find evidence that supports each stock issue and record it in the “Case Text” column. (Note: Because topicality only needs to be explicitly stated if the negative runs a topicality argument, it has been left off of this worksheet.)Stock Issue Question it AsksCase Text (short hand is fine)HarmsWhat is the problem? Why does the problem matter?InherencyWhy isn’t something being done about it?PlanWhat policy can we put in place to solve/prevent the harms?SolvencyHow can we solve the problem?Find the Evidence – Offshore Wind Aff – ANSWER KEYStock IssueQuestion it AsksCase Text (full version – short hand is fine)HarmsWhat is the problem? Why does the problem matter?1) Since 2001, family income has not increased, while the cost of heating oil has increased – this creates a burden on American families who need to heat their homes.(American Coalition for Clean Coal Electricity, 2012)2) To pay for increased energy costs, impoverished families spend less on food, negatively impacting their nutritional well-being(Dr. Bhattacharya et al 2003)3) Poor nutrition in the long term increases the risk for chronic diseases, such as diabetes and heart disease – it is a moral imperative to solve this problem(Mozes 2008) InherencyWhy isn’t something being done about it?The Wind Energy Industry is not growing because Congress is slow to pass funding legislation (USA Today 2014) PlanWhat policy can we put in place to solve/prevent the harms?The United States Federal Government should offer a long-term extension of tax credits to offshore wind energy projects located in U.S. territorial waters. SolvencyHow can we solve the problem?Congress can help the wind energy industry overcome cost hurdles by offering investment tax credit and loan guarantees (Caperton, Conathan, and Weidman, 2012) Learning the Affirmative – with Multiple Harms and Extensions - Evidence Scavenger Hunt Prior Knowledge NoneSWBATFind evidence (a warrant) in the card that supports its tagline.Claims/ WarrantsSee handouts, but below is a brief description of what each handout covers:For the Offshore Wind Affirmative the worksheet helps students understand the arguments within the Heat v.. Eat harm, the Global Warming advantage, and extension cards.ActivityEvidence Scavenger Hunt. See page PAGEREF EvidenceScavengerDescription \* MERGEFORMAT 46.ProcedureHand out the Find the Evidence! worksheet for Offshore Wind. See page PAGEREF FTEMassTransitAffJV \* MERGEFORMAT 127.Hand out the affirmative case evidence from the Core FilesHave students work in pairs to complete the worksheetDebrief. Answer key for Offshore Wind can be found on page PAGEREF FTEAKMassTransitAffJV \* MERGEFORMAT 129 Tip: For each claim, before you have them start, give students a 4-page range to search (e.g. “You can find the card related to claim X between pages 8 and 11 in the OSW Aff packet”). The packet has 29 pages, which understandably is pretty overwhelming for many students. A 4-page range gives them a sense of efficacy and can help maximize the activity’s benefits. Later you can scaffold them into using the glossary to narrow their search. Time25 minutes. Mentors/ Student LeadersCirculate the room and assist students in completing their worksheets.MaterialsFind the Evidence! Worksheet. Offshore Wind. See page PAGEREF FTEMassTransitAffJV \* MERGEFORMAT 127.JV or Varsity Core FilesFind the Evidence!Offshore Wind AffDirections: First, read the claim and find the card it comes from. Then, find a piece of evidence in that card that supports the tagline and show how the text supports the claim (analysis). The first one is done for you. ClaimIdentify the Card it Comes FromWarrant (Supporting Statement/Evidence)Textual Evidence Analysis – How does the text support the claim?ExampleHigh gas prices force impoverished families to sacrifice food and nutrition for warmth. Dr. Bhattacharya et al. 2003 “temperature that was 10°F colder than normal would result in a reduction in expenditures on food in the home of $11 per month and an increase in fuel expenditures of $37 per month.”There is a correlation between the amount of food purchased and the drop in temperature. Impoverish families take $11 out of their food budget in order to pay $37 dollars more on gas when the temperature drops 10°.Affordable energy is the needed for clean water, food and medicine.The continued trajectory of the U.S. manufacturing sector will worsen the U.S. economyGovernment support ensures more investment in wind turbinesClaimIdentify the Card it Comes FromWarrant (Supporting Statement/Evidence)Textual Evidence Analysis – How does the text support the claim?Offshore Wind would be better for the job sector than fossil fuelsPoor nutrition risk chronic diseasesWind offers stable fuel prices The U.S. is heavily Dependent on fossil fuels – this drives climate change and environmental disasters.Find the Evidence!- Offshore Wind Aff – ANSWER KEYClaimIdentify the Card it Comes FromWarrant (Supporting Statement/Evidence)Textual Evidence (examples)Analysis – How does the text support the claim? (2 examples, multiple answers are acceptable)High gas prices force Impoverished families to choose sacrifice food and nutrition for warmth.Dr. Bhattacharya et al. 2003 (pg. 6)“temperature that was 10°F colder than normal would result in a reduction in expenditures on food in the home of $11 per month and an increase in fuel expenditures of $37 per month.”There is a direct tradeoff between eating and heating - Impoverish families take $11 out of their food budget in order to pay $37 dollars more on gas when the temperature drops 10°.Affordable energy is the needed for clean water, food and medicine. Tully 2006 (pg. 11)“Electricity cooks food, powers household appliances, supports a healthy temperature (heating or air conditioning), provides clean water (by powering pumps”Several acceptable answers.The continued trajectory of the U.S. manufacturing sector will worsen the U.S. economy Musial and Ram 2010 (pg. 21)“A continued decline in manufacturing activity will likely increase our nation’s trade deficit; eliminate stable, high-wage jobs for skilled domestic workers; and generally reduce the potential for robust economic growth”Several acceptable ernment support ensures more investment in wind turbinesSims 2013 (pg. 29)ORUSA Today 2014 (pg. 5)“the basic economic and financial conditions for offshore wind success are not in place. Without them, investors are not comfortable providing capital for these projects,”OR“One reason was investors’ uncertainty that Congress would renew a federal wind tax subsidy. “People didn’t know it would be passed ... so they weren’t creating new projects”Investors believe the sector will struggle to get off the ground and they do not want to put money in a project that would potentially inevitably fail. (Continue on next page)ClaimIdentify the Card it Comes FromWarrant (Supporting Statement/Evidence)Textual Evidence Analysis – How does the text support the claim?Offshore Wind would be better for the job sector than fossil fuelsMausolf 2012 (pg. 22)Or Savitz 10[Answers to: Wind industry jobs aren’t cost effective] (pg. 24)“The number of people the wind industry employs surpassed the number of workers employed by the coal industry in 2008” or “natural gas and oil industry would create 39,079 jobs in 2030… offshore wind farms… 212,000 permanent American jobs annually”Several acceptable answers.Poor nutrition risk chronic diseasesMozes 2008 (pg. 7)“low intake of minerals and vitamins is that these kind of low-quality diets are usually characterized by large amounts of starch and refined sugar…increase the risk for heart disease and diabetes”Several acceptable answers.Wind offers stable fuel prices Savitz, 2010 [Answers to: Wind energy is more expensive than alternatives] (pg. 13)“offshore wind power is insulated from fuel price volatility since its fuel, the wind, is free. The major costs associated with offshore wind farms…are set-up costs”Several acceptable answers.The U.S. is heavily Dependent on fossil fuels – this drives climate change and environmental disasters.Savitz,, 2010 [1ac 4/6] (pg. 8)“ 85 percent of all of the country’s energy was coming from fossil fuels like oil, natural gas, and coal… and much of the environmental damage done by mining, drilling, and burning fossil fuels is irreversible…fossil-fuel based energy production has hidden costs, including climate change.”Several acceptable answers.Learning the Affirmative - with Multiple Harms and Extensions - Table Debate Prior Knowledge NoneSWBATUnderstand each card’s claim (tagline) and weigh the warrants that support the claim within the text. Claims/ WarrantsSee handouts, but below is a brief description of what each handout covers:For the Offshore Wind Affirmative the worksheet helps students understand the warrants within the Heat v.s. Eat harm, the Global Warming advantage, and extension cards.ActivityTable Debate. See page PAGEREF TableDebateDescription \* MERGEFORMAT 55.ProcedureHand out the What’s the Best Warrant? worksheet for Offshore Wind. See page PAGEREF WTBWMassTransitAffJV \* MERGEFORMAT 132.Put students into pairs. Randomly assign one person to defend “1” and the other person to defend “2.” For each card and claim on the worksheet, they will debate which of the two warrants is the best.Follow the procedures for a standard Table Debate.Tip: Remind students that they are not arguing whether the claim is true or not. Instead, they need to argue that their warrant is the best reason for believing the claim to be true.Time4 minutes per claim.Mentors/ Student LeadersDuring prep-time – assist students with developing two reasons why their warrant best proves the claim is true.During the speeches – circulate around the room, listening for things you want to reinforce later and things that need to be corrected later. Debriefing – share one overall positive and address one overall concern in a teachable manner.MaterialsWhat’s the Best Warrant? Worksheet for Offshore Wind. See page PAGEREF WTBWMassTransitAffJV \* MERGEFORMAT 132. JV or Varsity Core FilesWhat’s the Best Warrant?Offshore Wind Aff – Additional Harms and ExtensionsDirections: Read the two warrants for each claim listed below. Your coach will assign you to defend one of them, and you’ll have to tell your table debate opponent why your warrant is the best warrant to support that claim. Refer to the card to help you make your argument.Answers to: Wind energy is more expensive than alternativesCard: Offshore Wind Affirmative, Savitz, 2010 (pg. 13)Claim (Tagline): Wind is the only fuel source that can offer a stable price.Warrants: Prices in the United States can be affected by hurricanes that limit oil and gas production in the Gulf of Mexico, or geopolitical conflicts, particularly in the Middle East and AfricaOffshore wind power is insulated from fuel price volatility since its fuel, the wind, is free. The major costs associated with offshore wind farms, like most renewable energy projects, are set-up costsAdvantage Add-on: Jobs/Manufacturing Card: Offshore Wind Affirmative, Mausolf, 2012 (pg. 22)Claim (Tagline): Expanded offshore wind production would be great for the job market.Warrants: U.S. waters would create more than 43,000 permanent operations and maintenance wind capacity …would require more than 1.1 million job-years to manufacture and install the turbinesSolvency extension Card: Offshore Wind Affirmative, Stirling, 2014 (pg. 14)Claim (Tagline): Wind is the least costly fuel source available to the United StatesWarrants: Offshore wind energy described above would cost about $36 billion less over 20 years than the estimated cost of producing the economically recoverable oil and natural gas.High oil prices not only increase the cost at the pump, they also increase the risks and potential harm to marine life from more extreme production processes.Answers to: Wind can’t supply enough energy to reduce emissionsCard: Offshore Wind Affirmative, Thaler, 2012 (pg. 20)Claim (Tagline): Offshore wind farms can reduce emissions and halt global warmingWarrants:A handful of offshore wind projects are planned to be built in American waters … These projects alone… could produce enough electricity to power nearly 800,000 American homes annually—and eliminate over 6 million metric tons of carbon dioxide each year Offshore wind could supplant 70 percent of the East Coast’s fossil-fuel based electricity. Providing this quantity of clean energy could cut 335 million metric tons of carbon dioxide emissions Answering the Affirmative CaseWhen you’re answering the affirmative, there are certain techniques you can use. This section will discuss on-case arguments (arguments that specifically answer the Stock Issues). Later, you’ll learn about off-case arguments—like disadvantages, counterplans, and kritiks—which are general arguments that can be applied to a number of different affirmative cases. The lessons and activities in this section will deal with answering the stock issues, and learning the Offshore Wind negative file. As always, these activities can be applied to cases beyond the two that are described here.Attacking the Stock IssuesAs the negative, it is your job to prove that the plan is a bad idea. A great place to start is by making on-case arguments against the affirmative’s stock issues, i.e., inherency, harms, and solvency (topicality is also a stock issue but it is discussed elsewhere). Example Case – Plan: Mandatory counseling for students caught bullying.On-Case Argument TypesExamples of On-Case ArgumentsInherency - There is a lot of school bullying and it will not stop itself and furthermore, nothing we are doing now will stop it.Non-Inherent (Inherency is often conceded):a) the problem is already being addressed – portrays the plan as overkill and thus a waste of resources.b) the problem is understood and we are moving towards a solution – helps portray the negative as strategic and pragmatic and the affirmative as rash.Non-Inherent:a) The school system already has an anti-bullying program that is effectively training teachers on how to stop and identify bullying.b) The school districts new anti-bullying program, attacks the school culture at its roots. A permanent shift in the culture will take many years, but will be worth the wait; let’s be patient (this new plan will take the same amount of time, but started later).Harms - Kids who are bullied hate school Drop OutNo harms – the problem identified by the affirmative is not a big deal.:a) magnitude/size of harm declining; situation improving (potentially because of current programs – simultaneous inherency and harm attack)b) harm has a low risk or probability of occurring.c) Weak internal links Harm Turn – the harm/problem is actually a good thing.No harms:a) Anti-bullying programs are reducing the number of bullies and minimizing their impact.b) It is rare that a student drops out of school because of bullying alone.c) bullying hurts feelings, it does not create drop outs. In fact bullies are more likely to drop out than the bullied. Harm Turn – More students need to be effected by bullying before our nation commits itself to eliminating bullying in all of its forms. Allowing bullying to continue will eventually result in the motivation for permanent change.Solvency – Counseling will stop kids from bullying and if students are not bullied they will not drop out of school to avoid being bullied.No solvency – the plan does not prevent/solve the problem:a) Only sounds good, plan insufficient – the plan may sound good but in reality there are many obstacles to solving the problem.b) Alternate causality – other causes will cause the problem to continue even with the plan.Solvency Turn – the affirmative’s plan will increase the harm.No solvency:a) Given the time and budget constraints of schools, counseling would not be consistent or long enough to have a lasting impact. b) Bullies are created by abusive parents. Since, counseling students will not solve parental abuse., it will not stop bullying. Solvency Turn: Bullies who attend counseling sessions will learn about psychology from working with a counselor which they will use against their victims; transforming physical violence into permanent psychological and emotional damage. Learning the Negative - with Multiple Harms and Extensions - Evidence Scavenger Hunt Prior Knowledge NoneSWBATFind evidence (a warrant) in the card that supports its tagline.Claims/ WarrantsSee handouts, but below is a brief description of what each handout covers:For the Offshore Wind Negative the worksheet helps students understand the “Answers to” the Heat v.s. Eat harm, the Global Warming advantage, and other extension cards.ActivityEvidence Scavenger Hunt. See page PAGEREF EvidenceScavengerDescription \* MERGEFORMAT 46.ProcedureHand out the Find the Evidence! worksheet for Offshore Wind Neg. See page PAGEREF FTEMassTransitNegJV \* MERGEFORMAT 137.Hand out the negative case evidence from the Core FilesHave students work in pairs to complete the worksheetDebrief. Answer keys for Offshore Wind can be found on page PAGEREF FTEAKMassTransitNegJV \* MERGEFORMAT 139.Tip: To make this activity more accessible for all students, after you read the claim, give students the 4-page range to search for the correct card (e.g. “You can find the card related to claim X between pages 8 and 11 in the OSW Neg packet”). Time25 minutes. Mentors/ Student LeadersCirculate the room and assist students in completing their worksheets.MaterialsFind the Evidence! worksheet for Offshore Wind Neg. See page PAGEREF FTEMassTransitNegJV \* MERGEFORMAT 137.JV or Varsity Core Files.Find the Evidence!Offshore Wind NegDirections: First, read the claim and find a card that will support it (tip: use the glossary to guide you). Then, find text in that card that supports the claim. The first one is done for you. ClaimIdentify the Card it Comes FromWarrant (Supporting Statement/Evidence)Textual Evidence Analysis – How does the text support the claim?EXAMPLEHigh gas prices force Impoverished families to choose sacrifice food and nutrition for warmth.Dr. Bhattacharya et al. 2003 “temperature that was 10°F colder than normal would result in a reduction in expenditures on food in the home of $11 per month and an increase in fuel expenditures of $37 per month.”There is a correlation between the amount of food purchased and the drop in temperature. Impoverish families take $11 out of their food budget in order to pay $37 dollars more on gas when the temperature drops 10°.Wind cannot solve for climate change due to fossil fuel consumption Other countries produce CO2 emissionsClaimIdentify the Card it Comes FromWarrant (Supporting Statement/Evidence)Textual Evidence Analysis – How does the text support the claim? Wind energy cost tax payersJobs are not stable There will be delays to create infrastructure Jobs are not cost effectiveFind the Evidence! – OSW Neg – ANSWER KEYClaimIdentify the Card it Comes FromWarrant (Supporting Statement/Evidence)Textual Evidence Analysis – How does the text support the claim?ExampleHigh gas prices force Impoverished families to choose sacrifice food and nutrition for warmth.Dr. Bhattacharya et al. 2003 “temperature that was 10°F colder than normal would result in a reduction in expenditures on food in the home of $11 per month and an increase in fuel expenditures of $37 per month.”There is a correlation between the amount of food purchased and the drop in temperature. Impoverish families take $11 out of their food budget in order to pay $37 dollars more on gas when the temperature drops 10°.Wind cannot solve for climate change due to fossil fuel consumption Rosenbloom, 2006 (pg. 11)Electricity represents only 39% of energy use in the U.S. (in Vermont, 20%; and only 1% of Vermont's greenhouse gas emissions is from electricity generation). Pollution from fossil fuels also comes from transportation (cars, trucks, aircraft, and ships) and heatingSeveral acceptable answers.Other countries produce CO2 emissionsStern, 2014 (pg 10)coal was responsible for more than 80% of China’s 8Gt of CO2 emissions from fossil fuel combustion (Figure 5),38 which were in turn around a quarter of the world’s fossil fuel combustion CO2 emissions Several acceptable answers. Wind energy is expensive for taxpayers Goreham 2013 (pg. 5)US government extended the Wind Energy Production Tax Credit (PTC), providing 2.2 cents per kilowatt-hour for electricity generated from wind. The PTC will cost taxpayers $12 billion this year. Look for the DOE to offer loan guarantees to offshore wind developers. Altogether, government incentives pay 30 to 50 percent of the cost of a wind installation.? The consumer pays twice for offshore windSeveral acceptable answers.ClaimIdentify the Card it Comes FromWarrant (Supporting Statement/Evidence)Textual Evidence Analysis – How does the text support the claim?Offshore Wind Jobs are not stable Fernando 2010 (pg. 13)The result was net job losses in the manufacturing sector, which were compounded by low orders due to high inventory. Looking forward, the critical Recovery Act manufacturing incentives that were announced only at the start of this year will also need to be supplemented with the hard targets of a national Renewable Electricity Standard.? The underlying problem remains that wind power is far too dependent on taxpayer subsidies.Several acceptable answers.There will be delays to create infrastructure Giordano 2010 (pg. 17)since all vessels used for construction and operations and maintenance (O&M) . . . have been European,”[63] and United States law mandates that only United States-based vessels may work in United States waters, with little exception.[64] Thus, growth of domestic offshore wind energy also depends on the construction of new, customized vessels in the United States.Several acceptable answers.Jobs are not cost effective Bell 2011 (pg. 15) when a government artificially props up the industry with subsidies, higher electrical costs (31%) and tax hikes (5%), along with government debt follow.Each of those jobs was estimated to cost $800,000 per year to create, and 90% of those were temporarySeveral acceptable answers.Learning the Negative – with Multiple Harms and Extensions – Table Debate Prior Knowledge NoneSWBATUnderstand each cards claim (tagline) and weigh the warrants that support the claim within the text. Claims/ WarrantsSee handouts, but below is a brief description of what each handout covers:For the Offshore Wind Negative the worksheet helps students understand the “Answers to” the Heat v.s. Eat harm, the Global Warming advantage, and other extension cards.ActivityTable Debate. See page PAGEREF TableDebateDescription \* MERGEFORMAT 55.ProcedureHand out the What’s the Best Warrant? worksheet for Offshore Wind. See page PAGEREF WTBWMassTransitNegJV \* MERGEFORMAT 142.Put students into pairs. Randomly assign one person to defend “1” and the other person to defend “2.” For each card and claim on the worksheet, they will debate which of the two warrants is the best.Follow the procedures for a standard Table Debate.Tip: Remind students that they are not arguing whether the claim is true or not. Instead, they need to argue that their warrant is the best reason for believing the claim to be true.Time4 minutes per claim.Mentors/ Student LeadersDuring prep-time – assist students with developing two reasons why their warrant best proves the claim is true.During the speeches – circulate around the room, listening for things you want to reinforce later and things that need to be corrected later. Debriefing – share one overall positive and address one overall concern in a teachable manner.MaterialsWhat’s the Best Warrant? Worksheet for Offshore Wind. See page PAGEREF WTBWMassTransitNegJV \* MERGEFORMAT 142. JV or Varsity Core FilesWhat’s the Best Warrant?Offshore Wind NegDirections: Read the two warrants for each claim listed below. Your coach will assign you to defend one of them, and you’ll have to tell your table debate opponent why your warrant is the best warrant to support that claim. Refer to the card to help you make your argument.No Solvency- Other countries produce CO2 emissionsCard: Offshore Wind Negative, Stern, 2014 (pg. 10)Claim: Climate change is inevitable Chinese coal use accounts for nearly 20% of global greenhouse gas emissions and shows no signs of declining Warrants: …one fifth of the world’s CO2 emissions from fossil fuel combustion came from Chinese coal… Chinese coal consumption continues to grow, as most experts projectChina’s coal use is a major source of global … emissions and therefore increases the risks associated with climate change ...coal was responsible for more than 80% of China’s … CO2 emissions Wind energy is more expensive than alternativesCard: : Offshore Wind Negative, Goreham, 2013 (pg. 5)Claim: Wind energy is expensive; it is double that of coal and government subsidies put more costs on the poor.Warrants:US government …Tax Credit…will cost taxpayers $12 billion this year; government incentives pay 30 to 50 percent of the cost of a wind installation.? The consumer pays twice for offshore windOffering subsidies won’t solve – Delays (Infrastructure)Card: Offshore Wind Negative, Giordano, 2010 (pg. 17)Claim: There are technological barriers to implementationWarrants:a limitation on American offshore wind development, since all vessels used for construction and operations and maintenance . . . have been European,”[63] and United States law mandates that only United States-based vessels may work in United States watersTechnology must … assemble turbines at nearby land locations just prior to installation in the seabed… technologies that are substantially different from those employed in land-based installations,” and technology must “be tailored to U.S. offshore requirements, which differ from those in the European No Solvency- People will still use fossil fuels for energyCard: Offshore Wind Negative, Rosenbloom, 2014Claim: Wind energy can’t get rid of fossil fuel consumption – things like transportations and heating depend on fuel that produces emissions.Warrants:Pollution from fossil fuels also comes from transportation (cars, trucks, aircraft, and ships) and heating Despite the manic installation of wind facilities in the U.K., their CO2 emissions rose in 2002 and 2003. At a May 27, 2004, conference in Copenhagen, the head of development from the Danish energy company Elsam stated, "Increased development of wind turbines does not reduce Danish CO2 emissions.".Answering Arguments with DR. MOAnswering arguments is hard but, you’re in luck because DR. MO will help you win MOre arguments. ClaimCats make the best pets.DDenyArgue that the argument is simply untrue, e.g., “Cats do not make the best pets because…”R.ReverseArgue that the opposite of what they said is actually true, for example, “Cats are the worst pets because…”MMinimizeAcknowledge that their argument may have some truth to it, but say that it really doesn’t matter as much as they say it does, e.g., “Cats may make the best pets, but everyone knows that you don’t need a pet to be happy..”OOutweighAcknowledge that their argument may be true but something else matters much more than this tiny argument, e.g., “Cats are the best pets, but dogs aren’t just cute pets, they are a human’s best friend, which is why dogs are the better species for humans to live with.”Try DR. MO’s techniques by answering the sample arguments. Sample ArgumentsWhich DR. MO Technique?D/R/M/O?AnswerDownloading music for free is wrong.Schools should regularly drug test their students because America has a drug problem.The US should invade CanadaOwning nuclear weapons makes the US safe.Introduction to Line-by-LineClaim: Students should have to wear uniforms to school.1 - Speaker A1 - Speaker B2 - Speaker A [See 1A]2 - Speaker B [See 1B]Students should have to wear uniforms to school for the following 3 reasons:1) Stops Bullying - Uniforms prevent students from being judged/bullied by other students for what they wear.2) Builds Community –Just like in the military, uniforms help develop a sense of community and school identity that makes students like school more.3) Saves money - Uniforms will help parents save money as students won’t pressure them into buying clothes their families cannot afford so that they can fit in at schoolStudents should not have to wear uniforms to school:1) Makes bullying worse – Instead of just making fun of a kids clothes to make them feel bad, bullies will now step up their game and make fun of who a person is, leaving permanent emotional scars.2) Clothes ≠ Community – Community, even in the military is based off of shared experiences not wearing the same colors.3) ?Doubles Clothing Budget – Not only will students still want the same, expensive after school clothes but now students will compete over who wears the most expensive khakis, which are more expensive than jeans.Note: When speaking start by saying “#1 my opponent said _____, my response to that is_____”Students should have to wear uniforms to school:1)2)3)Note: When speaking start by saying “#1 my opponent said _____, my response to that is_____”‘Students should not have to wear uniforms to school:1)2)3)Note: When speaking start by saying “#1 my opponent said _____, my response to that is_____”Practicing Line-by-LineClaim: 1 - Speaker 11 - Speaker 22 - Speaker 12 - Speaker 2 [Fill this in from 1B][Affirm Claim]…for the following 3 reasons:1)2)3)[Negate Claim]…1)2)3)Note: When speaking start by saying “#1 my opponent said _____, my response to that is_____”[Restate Claim]…Now I will respond to speaker 2’s 3 answers.1)2)3)Note: When speaking start by saying “#1 my opponent said _____, my response to that is_____”[Negate Claim]…Now I will respond to speaker 1’s 3 answers.Learning the Negative Evidence by Stock Issue – Four Speech Table DebatePrior KnowledgeStudents should know the stock issues and should be familiar with the affirmative case that corresponds with the negative evidence being used for this activity. SWBATExplain the arguments they would make to attack a particular stock issue, either harms or solvency, within the assigned affirmative’s case.Claims/ WarrantsN/AActivityFour Speech Table Debate. See page PAGEREF TableDebateDescription \* MERGEFORMAT 55.ProcedureSelect either the harms (e.g. Eat v. Heat harm, Climate Change Harm) or solvency cards from an affirmative of your choice.Pass out the “Four Speech Table Debates – 1AC Start” worksheet.Then, in pairs, jot down an abbreviated version of the taglines from either one of the harms or the solvency cards in the column labeled 1AC. Give yourself at least an inches worth of space between each tagline.Before the activity begins students should work in pairs to select cards and/or create analytical arguments that match up with and address the affirmative’s taglines.Then take the card’s taglines or your analytical arguments and pre-flow them in the column labeled 1NC.Proceed with a standard Four Speech Table Debate that starts in the 1AC. Prompt students to answer arguments through a variety of ways (analytical arguments, extending their evidence, using extensions, etc.).Time20 minutesMentors/ Student LeadersBefore the activity – circulate around the room helping students MaterialsJV or Varsity Core Files.Four Speech Table Debates – 1AC Start. See page PAGEREF FourSpeechTableDebates1ACStart \* MERGEFORMAT 60.Attacking the Stock Issues – Multiple Perspective DebatePrior KnowledgeSWBATThe Stock Issues.Practice responding to the Stock Issues of the affirmative’s case.Claims/WarrantsMy evidence is the best evidence for answering (inherency/harms/solvency).ActivityMultiple Perspective DebateProcedurePick an affirmative case.Review the Stock Issues. Pass out the “Attacking the Stock Issues” handout (see page PAGEREF AttackingStockIssues \* MERGEFORMAT 134).Pick a stock issue (inherency, harms, or solvency).Divide the class into groups. Assign each group a piece of evidence that answers the stock issue you chose. (For example, if you chose the Eat v. Heat harm from the Offshore Wind Affirmative: Group 1 could be assigned “Solvency Turn - Renewable energy advances energy poverty,” Group 2 “No Solvency - Energy efficient housing is the only way to solve” and Group 3 “ No Harms - SNAP is Effective.” Proceed with a standard Multiple Perspective Debate. Each group is responsible for defending the argument that their assigned piece of evidence is the best for answering the stock issue.Repeat for the remaining stock issues.Debrief.Time35-40 minutesMentor/Student LeadersDuring prep-time: Assist students with developing their arguments.During the speeches: Circulate around the room, listening for things you want to reinforce later and things that need to be corrected later.Debriefing: Share 1 overall positive and address 1 overall concern in a teachable manner.Materials“Attacking the Stock Issues” handout. See page PAGEREF AttackingStockIssues \* MERGEFORMAT 134“Multiple Perspective Debate” worksheet. See page PAGEREF MultiPerspWKST \* MERGEFORMAT 75.Answering the Affirmative – Defeating the ArgumentPrior KnowledgeSWBATThe Stock Issues; Understanding of the negative files.Form different arguments to defeat the affirmative case.Claims/WarrantsN/AActivityDefeating the ArgumentProcedureChoose an affirmative case.Divide the class into groups. They will prepare to answer the affirmative case. Encourage the teams to use a variety of arguments (e.g.: no solvency, solvency turn, no harms, etc.). They can refer to the Attacking the Stock Issues handout (see page PAGEREF AttackingStockIssues \* MERGEFORMAT 134) if they need help. Proceed with a standard Defeating the Argument activity. Each group will prepare to answer the affirmative case in the most convincing way possible.Debrief.Time35-40 minutesMentor/Student LeadersDuring prep-time: Assist students with developing their arguments.During the speeches: Circulate around the room, listening for things you want to reinforce later and things that need to be corrected later.Debriefing: Share 1 overall positive and address 1 overall concern in a teachable manner.Materials “Defeating the Argument” worksheet. See page PAGEREF AAADefeatingtheArgumentrWKST \* MERGEFORMAT 53.Tab 5: DisadvantagesIn this Section:Narratives..................................................................................Parts of a Disadvantage.................................................164Answering a Disadvantage.............................................166Impact Analysis............................................................168Practice Plans..............................................................................Intro to DAs – Four Corners............................................169Parts of a DA – Three Person Table Debate.......................171Practicing DAs – Evidence Scavenger Hunt........................173Parts of a DA – Four Speech Table Debate........................177Answering a DA – Four Speech Table Debate.....................180Impact Analysis - Three Person Table Debate....................188Impact Analysis & Overviews - Table Debate.....................191DisadvantagesDisadvantages (also called “disads” or “DAs”) are negative arguments which prove the effects of the plan would be bad. Thus, the disadvantages are compared to the advantages to decide whether the effects of the plan are more advantageous than disadvantageous. There are many different parts to a disad and most disads have some or all of these parts. The three main parts are uniqueness, link, and impact. You can remember them by using the mnemonic device U.L.I pronounced “You Lie!” After the affirmative delivers their 1AC you should stand up and say “U.L.I.”! ExampleAffirmative’s plan: The United States Federal Government should remove all stop signs in the U.S. to help people get to work more quickly. Disadvantage: The plan will cause more automobile deaths and the increase in car accidents will make traffic worse.Parts of a DisadvantageExampleUniqueness - The uniqueness states that this problem will not happen in the future, or is happening now. This is referred to as the status quo, or what is going on right now.Currently there are more stop signs being placed strategically throughout Boston, making driving safer, reducing the number of accidents, and reducing the number of traffic jams accidents cause.Link - The link states why the affirmative plan causes this problem to happen. The negative usually reads a piece of evidence saying why the affirmative plan causes the way things are now to change.If stop signs are removed then there will be more accidents which will cause time-wasting traffic jams.Impact - The impact describes the problem that will happen and why it is bad. This impact is usually something very large and harmful. The negative uses this impact to say that the affirmative plan should not be done because although the plan might cause something good to happen, the problems the plan causes are worse.More people are injured/killed in car accidents and traffic time increases.Other Parts of DisadvantagesOther components of disadvantages are: Time FrameThe time frame is how long before the problem the disad presents happens. If there is an especially short time frame, then the problem the plan creates might happen before whatever good things the plan creates. If that happens, then the plan probably isn’t a good one. If there is a long time frame, then the good things the plan creates would happen before the problems it creates. If this is the case, the plan probably is a good idea.Short Time Frame ExampleThe plan is probably a bad idea.(The problems the plan creates will happen before the good things.)Car crashes will happen as soon as the stop signs are removed. Car accident deaths and injuries will spike immediately.Long time FrameExampleThe plan is probably a good idea.(The good things the plan creates will happen before the problems.)The stop signs will be removed from residential streets first. The drivers will get used to no stop signs before they are removed from major intersections, and travel time to work will improve immediately. Productivity and the economy will boost due to the ease of travel time to work. Deaths and injuries might only occur later on in the plan, when stop signs are removed from major intersections. Internal LinkSometimes when the plan changes something, it does not cause a problem right away. This is when an internal link is needed. The internal link states that when the plan causes something to change, which is the link, then that causes the problem, which is the impact.Link ImpactThe U.S. removes all stop signs Hundreds of people dieLink Internal Link ImpactThe U.S. removes all stop signs There is an exponential increase in the number of car crashes Hundreds of people dieAnswering DisadvantagesWhen the affirmative team answers a disadvantage, it can attack any or all parts of the argument. They should do this in the 2AC and then extend their answers in later speeches. Remember:For the negative to win their DA argument they have to demonstrate that the plan does more harm than good by successfully arguing uniqueness, link, and impact. They have to win 3 of 3.For the affirmative to win the DA argument they only have to defeat 1 of 3.Here are the arguments the affirmative can use to answer a disad:Non-uniqueThe non-unique argument states that the problem the disad presents will happen anyway in the status quo. If it were to happen anyway, it doesn’t matter if the affirmative plan causes the problem or not.No LinkThe “no link” argument states that the affirmative plan doesn’t actually cause the problem the disad presents.No ImpactThe “no impact” argument states that the problem the disad presents is not serious or harmful.Below is a skeleton scenario that you can use as an example template. Replace X with something that could cause something bad to happen, e.g., poverty (impact: severe suffering), and replace Y with a plan that could increase X (poverty), e.g., reduction in federal benefits:DisadvantageAnswerUniqueness – X is decreasing right now.Non-unique – X is not decreasing right now, it’s actually increasing. Link – Y Plan increases XNo link – Y Plan does not increase XImpact – An increase in X really bad outcomeNo Impact – An increase in X does not lead to a really bad outcome, the impact is not truly serious or harmful.Link TurnThe link turn states that when the affirmative plan happens, the problem the disad presents is avoided. This often means that when the affirmative plan happens the exact opposite of the problem happens. Impact TurnThe impact turn states that the problem the disad presents is actually a good thing.DisadvantageAnswerLink – Y Plan increases XLink turn – Y Plan decreases XImpact – An increase in X really bad outcomeImpact Turn – An Increase in X really good outcomeFor Varsity – Straight turnSometimes more advanced debaters, for strategic reasons seem to “drop” arguments on the 2AC flow. Why would they do this? I mean shouldn’t the affirmative never drop anything?Well, when it comes to running turns, imagine you go line-by-line and successfully argue non-unique, X is not decreasing right now, it’s actually increasing; link turn, Y Plan decreases X; and no-impact, an increase in X does not lead to a really bad outcome – wow, you have 3 ways to beat the DA. Now imagine how annoyed you’ll be when the pesky 1NC “kicks out” of their DA by simply conceding no impact. I mean who cares if something is increasing and your plan decreases it if it has no impact? Sure you “won” but now they have more time for strategic arguments; wow what a time skew! Instead, consider running a straight turn. How? Win non-unique and link-turn. Concede the Impact (never double turn, i.e., run link turn and impact turn – the plan decreases X from happening which causes something really good).Why? If X is increasing right now and your plan decreases X, and X causes something really bad then your plan prevents something really bad from happing. Their DA becomes YOUR advantage!Impact AnalysisSimply defending your disadvantage in the 2NC or 1NR (negative block) by answering the affirmative’s responses line-by-line does not truly maximize the power of the disadvantage as an offensive argument. Instead, it is important to use impact analysis to explain how the disadvantage’s impact is more important than the affirmative case’s harms. Impact analysis directly compares the disadvantage and harms using three key criteria: magnitude, risk, and timeframe. You can remember these criteria by using the mnemonic device “Mr. T.”Mr. T: [M]agnitude – How big is the impact? “Millions of people will die from starvation as a result of this plan! Your claim that everyone will be exterminated from a nuclear war caused by economic crisis is overstated—millions may die from a nuclear attack but not everyone.”[R]isk (Probability) – How likely is the impact? “Prefer the risk of our impact; if this plan passes it is 90% likely that millions of people will die versus a 1% chance that anyone will die from a nuclear weapon.” [T]imeframe – How soon will the impact occur? “Prefer our timeframe; people can and do starve to death every day. A nuclear bomb has not killed anyone since 1945.” Intro to Disadvantages Disadvantages (also called “disads” or “DAs”) are negative arguments which prove the effects of the plan would be bad. Thus, the disadvantages are compared to the advantages to decide whether the effects of the plan are more advantageous than disadvantageous. Disadvantages have a specific structure, but before you even begin to get your students familiar with the different parts of the DA, get them thinking about the concept of a disadvantage. You can do this with the following Four Corners activity.Intro to Disadvantages - Four CornersPrior KnowledgeSWBATNoneUnderstand the concept of a disadvantage by discussing the advantages and disadvantages of everyday plans. Claim______________ is a good plan. For example: Doubling the amount of math homework all BPS students get is a good plan.Increasing the number of required classes that all high school students must take in order to graduate is a good plan.Lowering the driving age is a good plan.ActivityFour Corners. See page PAGEREF FourCorners \* MERGEFORMAT 39.ProcedureRead out a __________ is a good plan claim. Students should migrate to the corner that best corresponds to their opinion about whether the plan is good.Have the students discuss their reasons in the corners. Then they should share out one or two reasons per corner.Introduce the “advantage” and “disadvantage” language. For example, if someone says “I strongly disagree. Doubling the amount of math homework is a bad plan because it takes away time from students’ after-school jobs” help them rephrase that to “Diminished after-school job time is a disadvantage of the plan.”Repeat the activity with a new __________ is a good plan claim. This time, have the students discuss their reasons in “advantage” and “disadvantage” language.Time10 minutesMentor/Student Leader(s)During prep-time: Assist students with developing their arguments.During the share-out: Circulate around the room, listening for things you want to reinforce later and things that need to be corrected later.Debriefing: Share 1 overall positive and address 1 overall concern in a teachable manner.MaterialsFour Corners signs. See page PAGEREF FourCornersSigns \* MERGEFORMAT 42. Parts of a Disadvantage Disadvantages have three main parts: uniqueness (uniqueness states that this problem will not happen in the future, or is not happening now. This is referred to as the status quo, or what is going on right now), link (the link states why the affirmative plan causes this problem to happen. The negative usually reads a piece of evidence saying why the affirmative plan causes the way things are now to change), and impact (the impact describes the problem that will happen and why it is bad). This impact is usually something very large and harmful. The negative uses this impact to say that the affirmative plan should not be done because although the plan might cause something good to happen, the problems the plan causes are worse. Remember, a good mnemonic for remembering the parts of a disadvantage is “U.L.I.” which is pronounced “You lie!” After the affirmative delivers their 1AC you should stand up and say “U.L.I.”! For more information about the parts of a disadvantage, refer back to page PAGEREF PartsofaDANarrative \* MERGEFORMAT 151.Parts of a Disadvantage – Three-Person Table DebatePrior KnowledgeSWBATConceptual understanding of disadvantages.Identify the parts of a disadvantage and explain their purposes. ClaimsNote: Make these claims concrete by using an actual disadvantage. Do not have the students debate abstractly; that is, instead of debating whether a link is the most important part of a DA, have them debate whether a specific link is the most important part of a specific DA. For example, read a claim below such as, “______________ is the most difficult part of this disadvantage to defend,” as “Uniqueness: nuclear power is making a comeback – multiple plants are being constructed and it is responsible for a vast amount of the energy produced in the United States.”—is the most difficult part of the Nuclear Power DA to defend.” You can use the shell of any disadvantage as a handout to guide these claims.______________ is the most important part of this disadvantage.______________ is the most difficult part of this disadvantage to defend.______________ is the easiest part of this disadvantage to answer.______________ is the easiest part of this disadvantage to find evidence for.ActivityThree-Person Table DebateProcedureHand out the shell of the disadvantage you are teaching. (This can be found in the Core Files –the Nuclear Power DA is a good DA to start with)Students will participate in a standard Three Person Table Debate. Student A will defend Uniqueness, Student B will defend Link, and Student C will defend Impact.Before you announce each claim, give 2-3 minutes of preparation time so students can familiarize themselves with the cards in the shell of the DA chosen. It is particularly important that students understand the claim and warrants in their part of the DA they are defending. Likewise, students should also familiarize themselves with the claims and warrants of their opponent’s cards to increase clash.Announce the first claim, provide 1 minute of prep time, and begin the debate. Repeat as desired. Be sure to make each claim specific. For example, read “______________ is the most difficult part of this disadvantage to defend,” as “Uniqueness: nuclear power is making a comeback – multiple plants are being constructed and it is responsible for a vast amount of the energy produced in the United States.”—is the most difficult part of the Nuclear Power DA to defend.”As a debrief, ask students to share a strong argument made by their opponent. Time20-25 minutesMentor/Student Leader(s)During prep-time: Assist students with developing their arguments.During the speeches: Circulate around the room, listening for things you want to reinforce later and things that need to be corrected later.Debriefing: Share 1 overall positive and address 1 overall concern in a teachable manner.Materials“Three Person Table Debate” Worksheet. See page PAGEREF ThreePersonClaimsTableDebateWKST \* MERGEFORMAT 63.“Disadvantages” Worksheet. See page PAGEREF PartsofaDANarrative \* MERGEFORMAT 151.Select a DA from the Core File.Practicing with Disadvantages - Evidence Scavenger HuntSWBAT1) Familiarize themselves with the disadvantage files and 2) understand which pieces of text support which part of the disadvantage. ClaimsN/AActivityEvidence Scavenger Hunt. See page PAGEREF EvidenceScavengerDescription \* MERGEFORMAT 46.ProcedureHand out the Find the Evidence! worksheet. See page PAGEREF FTETaxesBadDA \* MERGEFORMAT 161.Have students find the card where quoted text comes from. Then have them identify which part of the DA the quote falls under. (Answer Key provided on page PAGEREF FTEAKTaxesBadDA \* MERGEFORMAT 163)As a whole group, share out your answers and discuss why the debaters chose the answers they did. Some parts have multiple answers, so the discussion will be good to get students engaging with one another and thinking deeply about the DA. Tip: To extend the exploration of the cards in the DA file, consider following up this activity with a 2-person table debate or 4-corners activity about, which uniqueness/Link/Impact card in the file is the most persuasive, has the best warrants, is the easiest to defeat, etc. Time25-30 minutesMentor/Student Leader(s)Assist students with filling out the worksheets. Ask guiding questions to help them determine which part of the DA the quoted case text falls under.MaterialsFind the Evidence! worksheet for Nuclear Power DA. See page PAGEREF FTETaxesBadDA \* MERGEFORMAT 161.Core Files.Find the Evidence!Nuclear Power DADirections: Read the quoted text. First, identify which card the text comes from. Second, decide where it best falls in the disadvantage—does it best support uniqueness, link, or impact? Note that some parts of the disadvantage will have multiple quotes.Text from the Nuclear Power DAIdentify the Card it Comes FromWhat part of the DA? Why?“wind systems ignore the signal and continue to generate electricity to earn the PTC, distorting wholesale electricity markets. Negative pricing by wind operators and low natural gas prices have pushed nuclear plants into operating losses.”“while this sounds good in theory, in practice it translates to interruptions in the electricity supply that cost American consumers an estimated $150 billion per year.”? As another source reports, “The grid is designed to work at least 99.97 percent of the time, but just 0.03 percent still equals an average loss of 2.6 hours of power each year for customers across the U.S.” Furthermore, as CNN has reported,“Experts on the nation’s electricity system point to a frighteningly steep increase in non-disaster-related outages affecting at least 50,000 consumers… During the past two decades, such blackouts have increased 124 percent”Text from the Nuclear Power DAIdentify the Card it Comes FromWhat part of the DA? Why?“Nuclear power may actually be making its greatest comeback yet.? Out of the 31 countries that have commercial nuclear power, the U.S. possesses the most nuclear capacity and generation, and it doesn’t seem to be slowing down.”“nuclear storage remains an important issue for many U.S. environmentalists, few are paying attention to the wind industry’s less efficient and less transparent use of radioactive material via rare earth mineral excavation in China. The U.S. nuclear industry employs numerous safeguards to ensure that spent nuclear fuel is stored safely..”“renewable technologies and help the country reduce its dependence on nuclear energy and fossil fuels”Find the Evidence! – Nuclear Power DA – ANSWER KEYText from the Nuclear Power DAIdentify the Card it Comes FromWhat part of the DA? Why?“wind systems ignore the signal and continue to generate electricity to earn the PTC, distorting wholesale electricity markets. Negative pricing by wind operators and low natural gas prices have pushed nuclear plants into operating losses.”Goreman, 2014, “Giving incentives to offshore wind gives the upper hand to an intermittent energy source, straining the national power grid.”Link – low (negative) pricing of wind pushes Nuclear Plants out“while this sounds good in theory, in practice it translates to interruptions in the electricity supply that cost American consumers an estimated $150 billion per year.”? As another source reports, “The grid is designed to work at least 99.97 percent of the time, but just 0.03 percent still equals an average loss of 2.6 hours of power each year for customers across the U.S.” Furthermore, as CNN has reported,“Experts on the nation’s electricity system point to a frighteningly steep increase in non-disaster-related outages affecting at least 50,000 consumers… During the past two decades, such blackouts have increased 124 percent” Barrett 2012 “unreliable power sources like wind cause widespread power outages”Impact – Causes mass amounts of blackouts which would be bad for any area “Nuclear power may actually be making its greatest comeback yet.? Out of the 31 countries that have commercial nuclear power, the U.S. possesses the most nuclear capacity and generation, and it doesn’t seem to be slowing down.”Battaglia, 2013 “Nuclear power is making a comeback – multiple plants are being constructed and it is responsible for a vast amount of the energy produced in the United States.”Uniqueness – nuclear power is increasing right now.“nuclear storage remains an important issue for many U.S. environmentalists, few are paying attention to the wind industry’s less efficient and less transparent use of radioactive material via rare earth mineral excavation in China. The U.S. nuclear industry employs numerous safeguards to ensure that spent nuclear fuel is stored safely..”Fisher and Fitzsimmons 2013 “Wind energy is comparatively worse for the environment – unlike the wind industry, nuclear power companies are held to strict environmental regulations that control waste”Impact – nuclear energy is good for the environment while wind energy that would replace it is bad for the environment due to the rare earth minerals needed for it to be mined. “offshore wind turbine Monday that energy industry leaders hope will open a new frontier in Japanese renewable technologies and help the country reduce its dependence on nuclear energy and fossil fuels”Williams, 2013 “Wind producers will drive out nuclear power- Japan proves”Link – Japan shows that an increase in wind turbines reduces the amount of nuclear energy used.Parts of a Disadvantage - Four Speech Table DebatePrior KnowledgeSWBATParts of a disadvantage.Identify the parts of a disadvantage and explain their purposes.ClaimsN/AActivityFour Speech Table DebateProcedureInstruct students on the parts of a DA. Use the handout on page 190 and/or the handout on the following page taken with permission from the National Debate Project, courtesy of Joe Bellon and Abi Williams (ignore brink).Choose a DA from the core files. Make sure the students have their evidence in front of them.Students will compete in a standard Four Speech Table Debate based on the disadvantage they are learning. A guided flow worksheet for this activity can be found on PAGEREF PartsofaDAFlow \* MERGEFORMAT 166. Debrief.Note: For students debating on the affirmative during this activity encourage them to either answer each part of the DA analytically or provide them with “Answer to” cards to read. Either way do not worry about whether the affirmative technically knows how to answer disadvantages. Not only will the learn more intuitively and organically this way, but they will be forced to deal with the warrants within the negative cards themselves and to practice use reasoning, rather than rely on jargon that they would not fully grasp.Time20-25 minutesMentor/Student Leader(s)During prep-time: Assist students with developing their arguments.During the speeches: Circulate around the room, listening for things you want to reinforce later and things that need to be corrected later.Debriefing: Share one overall positive and address one overall concern in a teachable manner.MaterialsDAs in Core Files (Nuclear Power DA is a good starter DA to work with)Guided Flow Sheet. See page PAGEREF PartsofaDAFlow \* MERGEFORMAT 166.Parts of a DA – Four Speech Table Debate Flow SheetDirections: Use this worksheet to prepare and flow as you debate about the disadvantage.1NC2AC2NC/1NR1ARUniqueness:Link:Impact: Answer to Uniqueness:Answer to Link:Answer to Impact:Uniqueness (Answer 2AC argument): Link (Answer 2AC argument):Impact (Answer 2AC argument):Answer to Uniqueness (Answer 2NC/1NR): Answer to Link (Answer 2NC/1NR):Answer to Impact (Answer 2NC/1NR):Answering a Disadvantage When the affirmative team responds to a disadvantage, it can attack any or all parts of the argument. For example, the affirmative might argue that the disadvantage is non-unique, that there is no link, that there is no impact, or they might turn the link or impact (never turn both). They should answer the DA in the 2AC and remember to extend their answers in later speeches. Refer back to page PAGEREF AnsweringDANarrative \* MERGEFORMAT 153 for descriptions of the specific strategies for answering a disadvantage. Answering Disadvantages - Four Speech Table DebatePrior KnowledgeSWBATParts of a disadvantage.Discuss and compare different types of affirmative answers to a disadvantage.Claims/WarrantsN/AActivityFour Speech Table Debate. See page PAGEREF FourCornersDescription \* MERGEFORMAT 39.ProcedureNote: The Answering a DA worksheet focuses on made-up Das, not one from the core files. A similar prep sheet for the Nuclear Power DA can be found on page PAGEREF AnsweringTaxesDAWKST \* MERGEFORMAT 172. As always, you should decide if the “Answering a DA” worksheets are necessary for scaffolding your student’s answering of DAs. Review the strategies for answering a disadvantage. You can use page PAGEREF AnsweringDANarrative \* MERGEFORMAT 153 as a handout or the handout on page 204 taken with permission from the National Debate Project, courtesy of Joe Bellon and Abi Williams (note impact take-out = no impact, the phrase we use).In pairs, have students complete the “Answering a DA Table Debate” worksheet (see page PAGEREF AnsweringDAWKST \* MERGEFORMAT 170).Hand out the “Answering a DA Table Debate” prep sheet for the DA they are working on. (Nuclear Power DA see page PAGEREF AnsweringTaxesDAWKST \* MERGEFORMAT 172)Students will compete in a standard Four Speech Table Debate based on one of the DA they are learning. A guided flow worksheet for this activity can be found on page PAGEREF AnsweringFedDAflow \* MERGEFORMAT 173.Debrief.Time40-60 minutesMentor/Student LeadersDuring prep-time: Assist students with developing their arguments.During the speeches: Circulate around the room, listening for things you want to reinforce later and things that need to be corrected later.Debriefing: Share 1 overall positive and address 1 overall concern in a teachable manner.Materials“Answering a DA” worksheet. See page PAGEREF AnsweringDAWKST \* MERGEFORMAT 170.“Answering a DA Table Debate” prep sheet. Nuclear Power DA see page PAGEREF AnsweringTaxesDAWKST \* MERGEFORMAT 172. “Answering a DA Table Debate” guided flow. See page PAGEREF AnsweringFedDAflow \* MERGEFORMAT 173.Answering a DA WorksheetDirections: Create arguments against every part of the following disadvantages. The first one is done for you! PlanDisadvantageArguments against the DisadvantageExampleEvery adult must get a flu shot.[U]niqueness – There are no mandatory requirements for people to get a flu shot; it is done on a voluntary basis.Non-unique – Doctors compel most of the population to get the flu shot.[L]ink – The shot injects the flu virus into the person receiving the vaccine. The plan will cause people who would not otherwise get the flu shot to be exposed to the flu. No link – Without the shot, these people would still be exposed to the flu in all of the public places they frequent during their daily lives.[I]mpact – Your plan will give 10,000 people the flu this year.No impact – Small magnitude in terms of numbers affected and the effect of a controlled flu virus.Case outweighs – Typically millions of people get the flu during the winter. The plan only causes 10,000 people to get the flu.Schools must have up-to-date textbooks.[U]niqueness – Currently schools are moving towards electronic copies of textbooks and are trying to use textbooks for longer because these two options are more eco-friendly. [L]ink – This plan will cause schools to purchase textbooks which will kill trees.[I]mpact – Your plan will destroy the rainforest within 100 years.Build a huge radio dish in order to contact aliens.[U]niqueness – Right now there are small radio dishes that have been ineffective at contacting aliens.[L]ink – A larger radio dish would increase the likelihood that we would receive a message.[I]mpact – Violent aliens will kill us.Answering the Nuclear Power DA Table Debate Prep SheetDirections: Create arguments against every part of the following disadvantages. Use the disadvantage shell in the core files to help you. Plan: The United States Federal Government should offer a long-term extension of tax credits to offshore wind energy projects located in U.S. territorial waters.Disadvantage: currently nuclear power plant development is on the rise, but the government subsidizing offshore wind will shift interest away from nuclear power, causing power outages which will inevitably cause economic shocks.[U]niqueness – nuclear power plants are increasing now. [L]ink – Giving incentives to offshore wind gives the upper hand to an intermittent energy source (i.e., it only works when the wind bellows).[I]mpact – unreliable power sources like wind cause widespread power outages, resulting in economic shocks. Answering a DA – Four Speech Table Debate Flow SheetDirections: Use this worksheet to prepare and flow as you debate about the disadvantage.1NC2AC2NC/1NR1ARUniqueness:Link:Impact: Non-Unique Answer to Link (No Link, Link Turn):Answer to Impact (No Impact, Impact Turn [do not run with Link Turn]):Extend Uniqueness (Answer 2AC argument): Extend Link (Answer 2AC argument):Extend Impact (Answer 2AC argument):Extend Answer to Uniqueness (Answer 2NC/1NR): Extend Answer to Link (Answer 2NC/1NR):Extend Answer to Impact (Answer 2NC/1NR):Defending Your DA in the Neg Block: Impact Analysis and OverviewsImpact analysis is the standard way to help explain and emphasize how the disadvantage’s impact is more important than the affirmative case’s harms. Impact analysis directly compares the disadvantage and harms using three key criteria (MR. T) : [M]agnitude – How big is the impact?; [R]isk (Probability) – How likely is the impact?; [T]imeframe – How soon will the impact occur?Your impact analysis will be included as part of your overview, which is given before you go onto your line-by-line. The Overview is a brief, 3 sentence speech at the top of your DA that includes 2 main parts: 1) A brief, plain-English summary of your case and 2) an impact analysis that includes a comparative analysis of how the DA outweighs the harms of your opponent’s case.Impact Analysis – Three Person Table DebatePrior KnowledgeSWBATUnderstanding of DAs and their structureGain a conceptual understanding of impact analysis.Claims_______________ is the most important part of impact analysis._______________ is the hardest component to defend._______________ is the easiest component to defend.ActivityThree Person Table Debate. See page PAGEREF TableDebateDescription \* MERGEFORMAT 55.ProcedureIntroduce students to Impact Analysis. Page PAGEREF ImpactAnalysis \* MERGEFORMAT 155 can be used as a handout.Have students work individually to complete the Impact Analysis Table Debate prep sheet (See page PAGEREF ImpactAnalysisPrep \* MERGEFORMAT 176.) Encourage them to think about each part in a comparative manner, i.e., for magnitude, how big and how much bigger is your DAs magnitude as compared to the Affirmative’s harms impact? Using the first example plan and disadvantage hold a Three Person Table Debate. The students will debate the statements in the “Claims” box. Person A will defend Magnitude, Person B will defend Risk, and Person C will defend Timeframe. Repeat the activity by switching roles and selecting a new claim. Optional: Using the Nuclear Power DA’s impact card have students do an impact analysis and then proceed with a Three Person Table debate using the claims above, while having each person defend a different part of impact analysis. Time20 minutes (add 10 minutes for the optional activity)Mentor/Student Leader(s)Circulate the room and aid students in completing their worksheets.MaterialsIntro to Impact Analysis worksheet. See page PAGEREF ImpactAnalysis \* MERGEFORMAT 155. Impact Analysis Prep sheet. See page PAGEREF ImpactAnalysisPrep \* MERGEFORMAT 176.Three Person Table Debate worksheet. See page PAGEREF ThreePersonClaimsTableDebateWKST \* MERGEFORMAT 63.Optional: Nuclear Power DA.Impact Analysis Prep SheetDirections: Create magnitude, risk, and timeframe arguments for each DISADVANTAGE. PlanDisadvantage Impact AnalysisSchool uniforms should be worn by all BPS students.Harm it solves: Prevents bullying, which often leads to students dropping out of school.Uniforms cost money and could destroy family budgets.Magnitude (How big is the impact?):Risk (How likely is the impact?):Timeframe (How soon will the impact occur?):The government should charge people a fine for illegal downloads.Harm it solves: the collapse of the music industry, which would hurt our national economy.Our rights to privacy, which is a fundamental human right, will be violated in the search for illegal downloads Magnitude (How big is the impact? How much bigger or smaller than the aff’s impact?):Risk (How likely is the impact? How much more or less likely than the aff’s impact?):Timeframe (How soon will the impact occur? How much slower or faster than the aff’s impact?):Impact Analysis and Overviews - Four Speech Table DebatePrior KnowledgeSWBATStructure of DAs, completion of Impact Analysis Prep activity on page PAGEREF DAIAP \* MERGEFORMAT 174 Give an overview during the negative block that includes an impact analysis.ClaimsN/AActivityFour Speech Table Debate. See page PAGEREF TableDebateDescription \* MERGEFORMAT 55.ProcedureCreate an overview:Part 1) Having already completed the Impact Analysis Prep activity on page PAGEREF DAIAP \* MERGEFORMAT 174 debaters should select a DA to do an impact analysis for, MR. T-style. Write out the impact analysis in the middle of a blank piece of paper with room at the top to write a 1-3 sentences.Part 2) At the top write a 1-3 sentence summary of the DA. Note: For newer debaters it is suggested that you start with the Nuclear Power DA.Hand out the Guided Flow sheet. See page PAGEREF DAGuidedFlow \* MERGEFORMAT 178.Make sure students have the relevant disadvantage files.Proceed with a standard Four Speech Table Debate.Note: Encourage students to compare the impacts in their table debates. For example, instead of saying, “this harm will occur within the next five years” they should say, “this harm will occur within the next five years, which is substantially sooner than the impact of the disadvantage, which will take at least fifty years to happen.” Time40-50 minutesMentor/Student Leader(s)During prep-time: Assist students with preparing their speeches. During the speeches: Circulate around the room, listening for things you want to reinforce later and things that need to be corrected later.Debriefing: Share one overall positive and address one overall concern in a teachable manner.MaterialsFour Speech Table Debate guided flow. See page PAGEREF DAGuidedFlow \* MERGEFORMAT 178.Overview Four Speech Table Debate – Flow SheetDirections: Use this worksheet to prepare and flow as you debate about the disadvantage.1NC 2AC2NC/1NR1AR Uniqueness: Link:Impact:Line-by-line response: Non-UniqueAnswer to Link:Answer to ImpactOverview of DA(include pre-written 1-2 sentence summary of DA here)Impact Analysis:M –R –T -“Now onto the Line-by-line…”Extend Non-Unique(Answer 2AC argument):Extend Link(Answer 2AC argument):Extend Impact(Answer 2AC argument):(No time for an overview – however, you can do a comparative impact analysis at the bottom of the flow if you have time)Line-by-line response:Answer to UniquenessAnswer to LinkAnswer to ImpactOptional: Include a comparative impact analysis, i.e., case v DA.M-R-T-Tab 6: CounterplansIn this Section:Narratives..................................................................................Intro to Counterplans....................................................194Parts of a Counterplan...................................................196Answering Counterplans.................................................197Defending Counterplans.................................................198Practice Plans..............................................................................Intro to CPs – Four Corners............................................199Parts of a CP – Evidence Scavenger Hunt..........................201Answering a CP –Table Debate........................................206Answering a CP –Multi. Perspective Debate.......................209Defending a CP – Four Speech Table Debate.....................210CounterplansA counterplan is an alternative to the affirmative plan that is presented by the negative team. Sometimes the negative will not only argue that the affirmative plan is a bad idea, but it will also present a different way to solve the problems cited by the affirmative team. This can be beneficial because it allows the negative team to agree with the affirmative team’s inherency and harms, while still arguing against the plan itself. Like the affirmative team, the negative team must prove the counterplan is fair and a good idea. To do so, counterplans have to meet three burdens:1. Counterplans should be significantly different from the plan.Counterplans can be very similar to the plan, or they can be completely different from the plan. Most counterplans advocate certain parts of the plan but not all of the plan. For example- they might argue it is a good idea to build high speed rail, but it should be done by private companies or state governments instead of the federal government (i.e. agent counterplan), or they might agree that the federal government should invest in better modes of transportation, but should focus on bike paths instead of high speed rail. The point is that you must be able to explain how the counterplan is not exactly the same as the plan. The counterplan should not be insignificant, e.g., the counterplan should not be the plan, minus one dollar.2. Counterplans must show they are better than the affirmative plan.Proposing a counterplan by itself will not be a winning strategy unless the negative team can show that the counterplan produces a larger net benefit (the additional things the counterplan solves for/avoids which the affirmative plan does not) than the affirmative. In doing this, the negative will typically claim to both better solve for the harms of the affirmative plan AND not link to the disadvantage they presented in a debate round. Example: Let’s say the affirmative proposes that we should solve certain economic and environmental harms by building a national network of high speed railways. In response to this the negative could run a bicycle counterplan that would establish networks of commuter bike paths throughout the country. In running this counterplan the negative would both argue that the bicycle paths would produce greater environmental and economic benefits (think about all the extra things you could buy without car expenses), AND that the affirmative causes a unique disadvantage that the negative avoids, e.g., a spending DA (surely bike baths cost less than high speed rail).3. The Counterplan must be better by itself than a combination of the Affirmative plan and all or part of the counterplan.This is a rule that exists to prove that the counterplan is fair. Would it be fair for the affirmative to argue we should create a national high speed network, and the negative to run a counterplan to get rid of all nuclear weapons and say vote negative because the advantages to getting rid of nuclear weapons are bigger than investing in high speed rail? If the negative could run any counterplan they wanted, not only would the advantages likely be bigger, but the affirmative could never be prepared to debate against an unlimited number of options. Therefore, it is understood the negative needs to prove doing the counterplan is not only better than the plan, but that it is also better than doing both- also called a permutation. Generally, the way negatives do this is by arguing that the permutation is bad for the same reason the plan is bad- a disadvantage. In the example above where the Affirmative plan is to build a national network of high speed railways and the counterplan is to establish networks of commuter bike paths throughout the country, the CP was better because it solved for the Affirmative’s harms, but did not link to the spending DA. As you can imagine if the affirmative tries to do both the plan and all or part of the counterplan they will spend even more money, which only acts to strengthen the Negative’s DA link. Thus, although there is no logical reason as to why you could not do the plan and all or part of the counterplan, there is a legitimate reason why you SHOULD NOT do the plan and the counterplan, i.e., spending. Some people call this proving mutual exclusivity, which is misleading, as many interpret this to mean that you need to prove that the plan and the counterplan absolutely cannot exist together, whereas it’s really about whether they should/should not both happen.Parts of a CounterplanA counterplan doesn’t have specific parts the way a disadvantage or critique does. However, there is a checklist a debater can use to make sure he or she is running a counterplan well.Example plan: The United States federal government should direct NASA to develop and implement a strategy to send humans to Mars, in order to establish a permanent human presence in space.Counterplan ComponentsExample Counterplan text – Read the text of the counterplan.The United States Federal Government should establish tax incentives for private companies to develop and implement a strategy to send humans to Mars, in order to establish a permanent human presence in space.Difference from affirmative plan – The counterplan might be similar to the plan; it might even support some elements of the plan. However, there should be at least one key difference that will make the judge prefer the counterplan over the plan. Make sure you highlight that difference.The counterplan differs from the plan because it has private companies—rather than NASA, an agency of the federal government—support sending humans to Mars.Solvency – The counterplan should generally solve for the same harms the affirmative’s plan solves. Explain the counterplan’s solvency.Private companies can explore space and set up a permanent presence there more efficiently and effectively than NASA can.The counterplan should not be done at the same time as the affirmative plan – The affirmative might argue that the judge should vote to do both the counterplan and the plan (this is called a permutation). To prepare against this, explain why the counterplan cannot or should not be done in conjunction with the plan. An easy way to do this is to show that the counterplan avoids a disadvantage that the affirmative’s plan will cause (this is called a net benefits argument). To present a net benefits argument, the negative will need to run a disadvantage against the affirmative. Then it will need to show how its counterplan avoids that disadvantage.The counterplan avoids the Spending Disadvantage; under the affirmative’s plan, the federal government would have to spend money on space exploration which would increase the deficit and harm the economy. The counterplan moves space exploration to private companies, so the federal government will not have to spend any money, and any combination, or permutation, the affirmative would offer would still have the federal government act and save money, so the negative would argue using private companies alone would be better. Answering CounterplansCounterplans must meet certain burdens in order to beat the Affirmative plan. Therefore, it is the job of the affirmative to show how the counterplan does not meet these burdens. Affirmative answers should expose the flaws in the counterplan and show why it is a bad idea. Affirmative answers can be found while looking at different parts of the counterplan.1. PermutationThe affirmative might argue that the counterplan is not a true alternative to the affirmative’s plan—instead, both the affirmative plan and counterplan can be done together. This type of argument is called a permutation (or “perm” for short). When the affirmative argues a permutation, it might say that the plan and counterplan should be done at the same time. It might also pick certain parts of the counterplan to do along with the plan.If the affirmative wins the permutation, it should win the counterplan argument. Remember, this is an issue of fairness. If the negative could run any counterplan they wanted, not only would the advantages likely be bigger, but the affirmative could never be prepare to debate against an unlimited number of options. Therefore, it is understood the negative needs to prove doing the counterplan is not only better than the plan, but that it is also better than doing both. If it’s not, the affirmative wins the argument. 2. SolvencyAffirmatives can argue that the counterplan does not solve. The affirmative should look to see if the counterplan solves the affirmative advantage, the advantages of the counterplan, and avoids the disadvantages.3. DisadvantagesCounterplans, like affirmative plans can have disadvantages. The affirmative should argue that if the counterplan is done something bad will happen that wouldn’t otherwise happen if the affirmative plan is done. Just be careful to make sure that the disadvantage does not also apply to the affirmative plan!Defending CounterplansAnswering the PermutationA permutation is one of the answers an affirmative team can make to a counterplan. A permutation basically argues that there is a way to combine the affirmative plan and the counterplan together in order to get the benefits of both. Unless handled properly, this argument can be potentially devastating to a counterplan. As such it is important to make good arguments against the permutation. 1. Perm doesn’t solve the net benefitThe term net benefit refers to the additional things the counterplan solves for which the affirmative plan does not. If the negative can prove that the permutation also does not solve for the net benefit, it would mean that the counterplan alone is still the best option in the round. Example: Take a Privatization Counterplan with a Tax Credit Bad DA as a net benefit against the Offshore Wind Affirmative. If the affirmative were to permute this to say that the federal government should give tax credits to encourage offshore Wind and have the private sector develop more offshore wind programs, the negative team could argue this permutation would still link to the Tax Credit Bad DA. The negative could claim that ANY permutation of the plan would increase federal Tax Credits in a way that could ruin the economy, which means the permutation would have a disadvantage. However, doing the counterplan alone would avoid the Tax Credit Bad DA, which is the net benefit.2. Perm links to the DA more than the affirmative’s plan links aloneThe negative team could not only argue that the perm does not have the net benefit, but they could also argue that the perm links to the DA more than the affirmative’s plan does. Since the negative team is already arguing that the aff plan is a bad policy option, proving that the perm is worse than the aff plan would mean that the affirmative team is presenting two plans which are both inferior to the negative team’s counterplan. Example: Sticking with the Privatization CP example from above, the negative team could argue that the federal government’s enacting of both the plan and the counterplan would result in more Tax credits than if they just did the plan, because more private organizations would invest in offshore wind so more private organizations would receive Tax Credits. Thus, this would be worse than the federal government doing the plan alone. Intro to Counterplans A counterplan (CP) is an alternative to the affirmative plan that is presented by the negative team. Sometimes the negative will not only argue that the affirmative plan is a bad idea, but it will also present its own way of solving the problems cited by the affirmative team. This can be beneficial because it allows the negative team to agree with the affirmative team’s harms, while still arguing against the plan itself. Intro to Counterplans – Four CornersPrior KnowledgeSWBATNoneUnderstand the concept of a counterplan. ClaimsSample plan: The United States Federal Government should ban the sale of soda drinks that come in sizes larger than 8 oz.Harm it solves: Obesity.Sample plan: The United States Federal Government should place a tax on Styrofoam, plastic, and other materials that are harmful to the environment.Harm it solves: Global warming.Sample plan: The United States Federal Government should instate a draft to recruit women to the Armed Forces. Harm it solves: Sexism.ActivityFour Corners (modified). See page PAGEREF FourCorners \* MERGEFORMAT 39.ProcedureRead out a sample plan and the harm it solves. (Reading the harm is important for step two of this activity.) Have the students choose a corner depending on whether they agree/strongly agree/disagree/strongly disagree with the plan.Those in the “strongly disagree” corner must come up with an alternative to the plan. The alternative should solve for the same harm that the sample plan solves for. What would they have the government do instead?Have the students choose corners based on the newly proposed alternative plan. Repeat the cycle (those who strongly disagree with the new proposal must come up with a new alternative, and then the students will choose corners again).If the topic becomes stale or if the students have trouble coming up with alternatives, start the cycle again with a new claim.Time10-15 minutesMentor/Student Leader(s)During the activity: Help students in the “strongly disagree” corner formulate an alternative plan.Debriefing: Share 1 overall positive and address 1 overall concern in a teachable manner.MaterialsFour Corners signs. See page PAGEREF FourCornersSigns \* MERGEFORMAT 42.Parts of a Counterplan A counterplan doesn’t have specific parts the way a disadvantage or critique does. However, there is a checklist a debater can use to make sure he or she is running a counterplan well. This checklist includes: the counterplan text, a difference from the affirmative plan, solvency, and an argument that the counterplan should not be done at the same time as the affirmative plan.Parts of a Counterplan – Evidence Scavenger HuntPrior KnowledgeSWBATConceptual understanding of counterplans.Understand the parts of a counterplan by reading excerpts from a counterplan from the core file and discussing their functions.ClaimsSee WorksheetActivityEvidence Scavenger Hunt. See page PAGEREF EvidenceScavengerDescription \* MERGEFORMAT 46.ProcedureHand out the “Parts of a Counterplan” worksheet (see page PAGEREF PartsofaCPWKST \* MERGEFORMAT 182). This will model what the students should do during the Evidence Scavenger Hunt.Review the parts of a counterplan.Hand out the “Find the Evidence! Parts of a Counterplan” worksheet (see page (An answer key can be found on page PAGEREF FTEAKStatesCP \* MERGEFORMAT 189). This activity can be run competitively if you wish.Share out.Time15-20 minutesMentor/Student Leader(s)During the activity: Assist students with their worksheets.During the share out: Share 1 overall positive and address 1 overall concern in a teachable manner. Materials“Parts of a Counterplan” worksheet. See page PAGEREF PartsofaCPWKST \* MERGEFORMAT 182.“Find the Evidence! Parts of a Counterplan” worksheet. See page PAGEREF FTEStatesCP \* MERGEFORMAT 188.Find the Evidence!Ban Subsidies CPDirections: Read the Quoted Counterplan Evidence. Then decide which part of the counterplan it supports: A) counterplan text, B) an statement about the difference between the plan and counterplan, C) solvency, or D) an argument about why the plan and counterplan should not be done at the same time. Quoted Counterplan EvidencePart of the CounterplanWhy?“Removing the subsidy would free up these resources to be more productive elsewhere in the U.S. economy. In the process, jobs that rely on taxpayer handouts would likely go away. But the newly available resources could then go toward the likely creation of more and better jobs”“The United States federal government should cease to subsidize the wind energy industry, specifically by failing to renew the investment and production tax credits.”"Nuclear plants are aging and beset by mounting losses, driven by negative pricing from subsidized wind systems."“Without subsidies, the wind industry would be forced to take a hard fresh look at its product. Fewer wind farms would be built, eliminating the market-distorting glut. And if there is truly a need for wind energy, entrepreneurs who improve the business's fundamentals will find a way to compete”Find the Evidence! – Ban Subsidies Counterplan – ANSWER KEYDirections: Read the Quoted Counterplan Evidence. Then decide which part of the counterplan it supports: A) counterplan text, B) an statement about the difference between the plan and counterplan, C) solvency, or D) an argument about why the plan and counterplan should not be done at the same time. Quoted Counterplan Evidence/ Analytical ArgumentPart of the CounterplanWhy?“Removing the subsidy would free up these resources to be more productive elsewhere in the U.S. economy. In the process, jobs that rely on taxpayer handouts would likely go away. But the newly available resources could then go toward the likely creation of more and better jobs”Solvency (Ban Subsides Counterplan - Loris, 2011)The counterplan solves the Jobs add-on better than the plan.“The United States federal government should cease to subsidize the wind energy industry, specifically by failing to renew the investment and production tax credits.”Counterplan TextThis is the counterplan text."Nuclear plants are aging and beset by mounting losses, driven by negative pricing from subsidized wind systems."An argument about why the plan and counterplan should not be done at the same time. (Nuclear Power DA – Goreham, 2014)This is a Net Benefit argument. The counterplan avoids the Nuclear Power DA.“Without subsidies, the wind industry would be forced to take a hard fresh look at its product. Fewer wind farms would be built, eliminating the market-distorting glut. And if there is truly a need for wind energy, entrepreneurs who improve the business's fundamentals will find a way to compete”Solvency (Ban Subsides Counterplan - Jenevein, 2013)The counterplan solves the plan banning subsides encourages investorsAnswering a Counterplan Affirmative answers should expose the flaws in the counterplan and show why it is a bad idea. There are three main kinds of arguments the affirmative can use to answer the counterplan: permutations, no solvency, and disadvantages. For more information about answering counterplans, refer back to page PAGEREF AnsweringCPNarrative \* MERGEFORMAT 183. Answering a Counterplan – Table DebatePrior KnowledgeSWBATParts of a counterplan.Understand and utilize the different kinds of answers to counterplans.ClaimsN/AActivityTable DebateProcedureReview Answering Counterplans. See page 198.Choose an affirmative plan. This will be the basis for responding to the counterplan.Hand out the counterplan files (make sure the students have the affirmative answers to the counterplan).Hand out the “Answering a Counterplan Table Debate” prep sheet.Have students use the Ban Subsidies CP files to complete the prep sheet.Proceed with a standard Table Debate. The table debate could be done with any CP.Time30-35 minutesMentor/Student Leader(s)During prep time: Assist students with their worksheets.During the speeches: Circulate the room, listening for things you want to reinforce later and things that need to be corrected later.During the share out: Share 1 overall positive and address 1 overall concern in a teachable manner. Materials“Answering a Counterplan Table Debate” prep sheet. See page PAGEREF AnsweringStatesCPPrepSheet \* MERGEFORMAT 191.“Four Speech Table Debates– Negative” worksheet. See page PAGEREF TableDebateWKST \* MERGEFORMAT 60.See Counterplans in core files.Answering the Ban Subsidies Counterplan Table Debate Prep SheetDirections: Create these different kinds of arguments against the counterplan. Use the counterplan shell in the core files to help you. Kind of Counterplan AnswerArgumentPlan: The United States Federal Government should offer a long-term extension of tax credits to offshore wind energy projects located in U.S. territorial waters.Counterplan: The United States federal government should cease to subsidize the wind energy industry, specifically by failing to renew the investment and production tax credits.Permutation – Argue that both the plan and counterplan can be done together. This can mean that they’re done at the same time or one after the other. This can also mean that you’ll choose to do only specific parts of the counterplan along with the plan.Solvency – Attack the counterplan’s solvency. Argue that it doesn’t solve the harms that the affirmative’s plan solves, or argue that it does not have the same solvency advantages as the affirmative has.Disadvantages – Argue that if the counterplan is done something bad will happen that wouldn’t otherwise happen under the affirmative plan. Just be careful to make sure that the disadvantage does not also apply to the affirmative plan.Answering the ______________________ Counterplan Table Debate Prep SheetDirections: Create these different kinds of arguments against the ___________________ Counterplan. Use the counterplan shell in the core files to help you. Kind of Counterplan AnswerArgumentPlan: _______________________________________________________________________________________________Counterplan: __________________________________________________________________________________________________________________Permutation – Argue that both the plan and counterplan can be done together. This can mean that they’re done at the same time or one after the other. This can also mean that you’ll choose to do only specific parts of the counterplan along with the plan.Solvency – Attack the counterplan’s solvency. Argue that it doesn’t solve the harms that the affirmative’s plan solves, or argue that it does not have the same solvency advantages as the affirmative has.Disadvantages – Argue that if the counterplan is done something bad will happen that wouldn’t otherwise happen under the affirmative plan. Just be careful to make sure that the disadvantage does not also apply to the affirmative plan.Answering a Counterplan – Multiple Perspective DebatePrior KnowledgeSWBATParts of a counterplan.Understand and utilize the different kinds of answers to counterplans.ClaimsMy piece of evidence is the best evidence for answering the ____________ Counterplan.ActivityMultiple PerspectiveProcedureBreak the students into groups.Pick an affirmative and a counterplan to work with.Assign each group a piece of evidence from the corresponding Counterplan Affirmative files. Have each group come up with 3 warrants to support the claim that their piece of evidence is the best evidence for answering the counterplan.Proceed with a standard Multiple Perspective Debate. Each group is responsible for defending the argument that their assigned piece of evidence is the best for answering the Subsidies Bad Counterplan.Debrief.Time30-35 minutesMentor/Student Leader(s)During prep time: Assist students in preparing their speeches.During the speeches: Circulate the room, listening for things you want to reinforce later and things that need to be corrected later.During the share out: Share 1 overall positive and address 1 overall concern in a teachable manner. MaterialsSelect a counterplan from the core files.Multiple Perspective Debate worksheet. See page PAGEREF MultiPerspWKST \* MERGEFORMAT 75.Defending a Counterplan Defending a counterplan in the negative block involves not only extending your net benefit, e.g., a DA that the CP does not link to, and your counterplan’s solvency. It also involves responding to the affirmative’s arguments against your counterplan. Thus, you must be able to convince the judge of three things: 1) That your plan is a legitimate policy alternative and not to similar to the plan, 2) that you cannot or should not do both the counterplan and the plans (the permutation), and 3) that your counterplan alone is more net beneficial than doing the plan/a permutation of the plan and the counterplan. Defending a Counterplan – Four Speech Table DebatePrior KnowledgeSWBAT1) Running counterplans and 2) Conceptual understanding of permutations.Extend and defend a counterplan in the negative block.ClaimsN/AActivityFour Speech Table Debate. See page PAGEREF AAAFourCornersDesc \* MERGEFORMAT 39.ProcedureReview defending counterplans. See page 199.Choose an affirmative plan to run your selected counterplan against.Hand out the “Defending Counterplans Table Debate cheat sheet” and the “Defending a Counterplan – Four Speech Table Debate Flow Sheet.”Have students work in pairs and use the counterplan shell, affirmative answers, and the “Defending Counterplans Table Debate cheat sheet” to preflow the 1NC, 2AC, and 2NC/1NR. This is extremely important to allow prep-time for as the 2AC permutations are not always possible and the net benefit is often hard to discern.Proceed with a standard Four Speech Table Debate. Make sure to allow for prep time.Time30-35 minutesMentor/Student Leader(s)During prep time: Assist students with their worksheets.During the speeches: Circulate the room, listening for things you want to reinforce later and things that need to be corrected later.During the share out: Share 1 overall positive and address 1 overall concern in a teachable manner. MaterialsCounterplans from Core Files.“Defending Counterplans Table Debate cheat sheet.” See page PAGEREF DefendingCPTableDebateCheatSheet \* MERGEFORMAT 196.“Defending Counterplans Table Debate” flow sheet. See page PAGEREF DefendingCPFourSpeechTable \* MERGEFORMAT 197.Defending the _______________ Counterplan Table Debate cheat sheet Directions: Use this worksheet to assist you in pre-flowing the “Defending a Counterplan – Four Speech Table Debate Flow Sheet.” Use the counterplan shell in the core files to help you. 1AC1NC2AC (this speech structures the order)2NC/1NRPlan: __________________________________________________________________________________________________________________Plan Text (must be substantially different from plan)1) Permutation – Argue that both the plan and counterplan can be done together.1) Respond to Permutation - your counterplan should not be done at the same time as the affirmative plan because your CP has a larger net benefit than both the Aff’s plan alone and the permutation (see 2 and 3 below):Solvency – how does the CP solve best?2) Solvency – Attack the counterplan’s solvency. Argue that it doesn’t solve some/all of the harms that the affirmative’s plan solves as well/at all.2) Solvency - CP solves harms better that aff and permRun a DA that CP does not link to - The counterplan should not be done at the same time as the affirmative plan because…3) Respond to DA - 3) DA - CP does not link to DA that the plan and permutation links to3) Run a Disadvantage against the CP (optional) – Argue that if the counterplan is done something bad will happen that wouldn’t otherwise happen under the affirmative plan. 4) Answer the DA run against your CPDefending a Counterplan – Four Speech Table Debate Flow SheetDirections: Use this worksheet to prepare and flow as you debate about the counterplan.1NC2AC2NC/1NR1ARTab 7: KritiksIn this Section:Narratives..................................................................................Intro to Kritiks..............................................................213Parts of a Kritik.............................................................215Answering a Kritik.........................................................216Practice Plans..............................................................................Intro to Ks – Four Corners…………………..............................218Intro to Ks – Matching Activity and Four Corners………….……220Intro to Economic Engagement.......................................223Parts of a K –Three Person Table Debate..........................228Parts of a K – Four Speech Table Debate..........................230Answering a K – Defeating the Argument.........................232Answering a K – Four Speech Table Debate......................233Defending a K – Multi. Perspective Debate........................236Defending a K – Four Speech Table Debate.......................238KritiksThe kritik—a.k.a. the critique or the K—is an argument usually used by the negative to criticize the fundamental assumptions an affirmative makes or the language debaters use to make their arguments. Kritik arguments are modeled on the objections of philosophers, rhetorical critics, and other scholars. When the negative runs a kritik, it focuses on what the other team says in the round, not necessarily what they propose to do outside the round.One example of a kritik might be an argument about how the framing of ideas and language in the affirmative’s cards are racist. For instance, some of the arguments and ideas around impoverishment are often framed in and meant to reinforce and elicit fictitious narratives about people of color who live in poverty (note: not to be confused with “people of color =poor”), which although they may seem benevolent, as they often do garner political and economic support for seemingly progressive policies, prevent true empowerment. Calls to respond to the moral imperative of educating and providing the impoverished with access to nutritious food obfuscates, distracts, and demobilizes the impoverished themselves and their allies of the larger political, economic, and social structures that systematically exploit them into impoverishment and malnutrition. Instead, they covertly reinforce an idea of non-impoverished White’s moral and social superiority (note: there are ~19 million White people living in poverty), even though non-impoverished Whites, more than any other racial-class, benefit from the systematic and disproportionate impoverishment (and malnourishment) of people of color (note: only 9.9% of Whites, as compared to 11.7% of Asians, 25.8% of Blacks, 23.2% of Latinos, and 27% of Native Americans, live below poverty). Further, one may also argue that this racist language, impacts 43 million people, which ironically includes ~19 million Whites. As we all know racism is bad for…everyone.Kritiks are valuable arguments for several reasons.1) Kritiks are highly generic—that is, they can be applied to a large variety of cases. The resolution always makes critical assumptions, such as who should act, how the policy should be implemented, why a particular area is important, etc. The kritik provides a general argument that can be used to attack those critical assumptions.2) Kritiks have multiple consequences—that is, they can minimize the affirmative advantage while also providing an argument to weigh against whatever advantage the affirmative can claim.3) Kritiks integrate many arguments into one position. Because the case arguments frequently stem from the kritik, the negative has a position in the debate that is coherent.4) Kritiks frequently have philosophical and real-world implications. Kritiks often present philosophical arguments that must be resolved first, usually before the substantive issues of the debate are resolved. In the example of state testing, the negative could argue that policies that reinforce racism or sexism are so noxious that they need to be avoided absolutely. If state testing is racist or sexist, it should be rejected regardless of the benefits that might result from increased testing.5) Kritiks frequently avoid uniqueness problems. Kritiks are often found in the writings of those who criticize current policies. Affirmative debaters frequently rely on some element of the current system to implement their plans or to prove why new policies would better achieve the goals of the present system. Kritik writers frequently argue, in effect, that the goals of the present system should be rejected at every opportunity. In addition, many kritik writers argue that the most important place to reject accepted ideas is in individual settings, thus making the kritik unique each time a judge has the opportunity to reject the affirmative.6) Kritiks shift the debate to negative ground. Affirmatives are used to debating on THEIR ground: the case evidence and the implications of the plan. Kritiks offer negatives the opportunity to shift the focus of the debate to an issue they are more familiar with: the intricacies of the kritik. This can give the negative a sort of “home.”Parts of KritikTo run a kritik, the negative must explain how the affirmative’s plan rests on an assumption it is going to critique. Second, the negative must explain the implications of the kritik—it must state why relying on that assumption is a bad thing. Third, the negative must offer an alternative way to think about the issue.Note: The structure of a kritik is very similar to a disadvantage, but there is no uniqueness in a kritik, and a kritik must offer an alternative. Example Plan: High school sports coaches should play their top players for as much of the game as possible.Kritik: Hyper-competitiveness K. Parts of a Kritik – You’re a “LIA(h)” [Liar with Boston accent]ExampleLink - The link shows how the affirmative’s assumption links to the kritik.Playing the top players for as much of the game as possible promotes hyper-competitive high school sports where the focus of playing sports becomes winning and the value of players on a team relates to their ability to win. Impact – The impact describes the implications of accepting the affirmative’s assumption. The impact can be argued in a way that justifies voting against the affirmative altogether in order to reject the assumptions the affirmative makes.A hyper-competitive focus on winning takes away from the lessons learned in sports such as teamwork, leadership, community, hard work, and perseverance and instead promotes a negative culture where winners/leaders are individualistic, entitled, arrogant, and abusive towards “losers,” the majority. This will create a terrible school environment that will hurt learning. Alternative – To win a kritik, the negative offers an alternative that avoids the assumptions the affirmative makes.We should reject the plan and instead high school sports coaches should play everyone, every game to ensure that the whole team learns the lessons of teamwork, leadership, community, hard work, and perseverance; values that will improve the school environment and thus learning.Answering a KritikParts of a KritikAnswersLink - The link shows how the affirmative’s assumption links to the kritik.No link – Argue that the link between the kritik and the affirmative does not exist.Link turn – Instead of arguing that the affirmative links to the bad thing, argue that it will help fight against the bad thing. (For example, if the negative argues that the plan links to racism, show how the plan will fight against racism.)No link – Playing the top players does not promote hyper-competitiveness, rather it promotes hard work. If you want to play, you have to train harder than everyone else.Link turn – Playing the top players will actually prevent the impacts of hyper-competitiveness as hard work breaks feelings of entitlement and arrogance and instead focuses the game back on the value of hard work, which can be cross-applied to increase learning in the classroom. Impact – The impact describes the implications of accepting the affirmative’s assumption. The impact can be argued in a way that justifies voting against the affirmative altogether in order to reject the assumptions the affirmative makes.No impact – Argue that there is no impact to the kritik.Impact turn - Instead of arguing that impact makes the bad thing worse, argue that it will make the bad thing better. (For example, if the negative argues that the impact will make racism worse, show how the impact will help alleviate racism.)No impact – hyper-competitive qualities (learned in sports) that are inappropriate in everyday activities, do not continue in day-to-day life as students realize the difference between the playing field and the classroom and therefore do not hurt learning.Impact turn – A hyper-competitive focus on winning (getting good grades) in school would create a better school environment where students, through increased effort motivated by competition, rise the average level of academic performance in their school.Alternative – To win a kritik, the negative offers an alternative that avoids the assumptions the affirmative makes.Alternative does not solve – Argue that the alternative does not solve the problems in the status quo that the affirmative’s plan solves.Alternative harmful – Argue that the alternative has harms that the alternative’s plan does not have.Alternative does not solve – Letting everyone play, every game regardless of effort, does not improve learning, it diminishes it by giving everyone a reward without having to work for it. It would be like giving out As and Bs to everyone for just showing up to class.Alternate harmful - The alternate would promote a world where people will feel entitled to equal benefits, without equal effort which promotes laziness that will further make our country non-competitive with harder-working countries, leading to our country’s downfall.General argumentPermutation – Accept the kritik and modify the plan so you can both do the plan and avoid the assumption that the negative is critiquing. For example, if your plan uses the word “welfare” and the negative kritiks your classist language, keep the plan but change the “welfare” language to “TANF – Temporary Assistance to Needy Families.”Permutation – We accept that hyper-competitiveness is bad. We will substitute the hierarchical phrase “top players” with “players that best exemplify the values of teamwork, leadership, community, hard work, and perseverance.” Thus, we will directly reward the behaviors that we want reinforced in our schools, which will promote student learning while maintaining and incentive to work hard.General argumentRespond to the kritik – Read evidence from scholars who disagree with the philosophy behind the kritik itself.Respond to the K – “The idea that a “good” school environment impacts learning is wrong. Many of the nation’s top schools exemplify the worst hyper-competitive values. Instead what impacts learning is motivation and engagement. Nothing motivates or engages our nature more than competition.” Intro to Kritiks Kritiks (also called “kritiks” or “Ks”) are negative arguments that criticize the fundamental assumptions an affirmative makes or the language the debaters use to make their arguments. One of the simplest examples of a kritik might be an argument that the affirmative’s plan either uses racist language or promotes a racist system. In the lesson below, students will need to determine the underlying assumption of an example plan and then decide if they agree or disagree with the assumption the plan relies on.Intro to Kritiks – Four CornersSWBATMake an argument using the format argument = claim + warrant.ClaimsPlan: High School sports coaches should play their top players for as much of the game as possible.ActivityFour Corners. See page PAGEREF FourCornersDescription \* MERGEFORMAT 39.ProcedurePut the sample plan on the board.Have students get in pairs to determine what the assumption the plan relies on (e.g. “The goal of high school sports is winning.”)As a group decide what the assumption of the plan is and write the assumption on the board.Read out a sample plan and the assumption. Students should decide if they agree, strongly agree, disagree, or strongly disagree with the assumption. They should go to the appropriate corner. In doing this they should ask themselves:If agree/strongly agree – support the assumptionIf disagree/strongly disagree – reject the assumption, propose an alternative (start with disagree)Have the students discuss their reasons in the corners. Then they should share out one or two reasons per corner. In your feedback, highlight any arguments the students make about definitions.Time10-15 minutesMentors/ Student LeadersDuring the activity: Distribute mentors and student leaders evenly to each corner. They will help facilitate discussion in each corner and ensure that the students in the corner are prepared to deliver a coherent warrant.Debriefing: Share one overall positive and address one overall concern in a teachable manner.MaterialsFour Corners signs. See page PAGEREF FourCornersSigns \* MERGEFORMAT 42.This Intro to Kritiks lesson introduces other kinds of fundamental assumptions that might be critiqued in this year’s evidence.Intro to Kritiks – Matching Activity and Four CornersPrior KnowledgeSWBATNoneUnderstand the concept of a kritik by reading common “assumptions” made in debates and finding evidence that demonstrate those assumptions. ClaimsSee WorksheetActivityFour Corners. See page PAGEREF FourCornersDescription \* MERGEFORMAT 39.ProcedureHand out the “Find the Evidence! Intro to Kritiks” worksheet (see page PAGEREF FTEIntrotoK \* MERGEFORMAT 207).Have students match the provided cards to the common assumptions listed on the worksheet. An Answer Key is provided on page PAGEREF FTEIntrotoKAK \* MERGEFORMAT 208.Debrief using a Four Corners activity. For each claim, have students agree/strongly agree/disagree/strongly disagree with whether they think the card supports the assumption it has been paired with. (The point of this Four Corners debrief is to get the debaters thinking about how they will weigh kritik arguments—how subtle or explicit they think the assumptions are, and later, how important or pressing the kritik’s implications are.)Time15-20 minutesMentor/Student Leader(s)During prep-time: Assist students with their worksheets.During the debrief: Help students in each corner prepare an argument to share out and help them choose a debater to present that argument.Debriefing: Share 1 overall positive and address 1 overall concern in a teachable manner.Materials“Find the Evidence! Intro to Kritiks” worksheet. See page PAGEREF FTEIntrotoK \* MERGEFORMAT 207. Four Corners signs. See page PAGEREF FourCornersSigns \* MERGEFORMAT 42.Find the Evidence! - Intro to KritiksDirections: Read the common assumptions. Then read the quoted case text. Match the case text to the assumption it supports by drawing a line to connect them. AssumptionCase TextWe can continue to consume at our current levels, so long as we do it in a green/more environmentally-friendly way.“Our results suggest that poor American families face stark choices in cold weather. In particular, they increase their home fuel expenditures at the cost of expenditures on food and nutritional well-being.”(Dr. Bhattacharya et al., 2003 – OSW – Heat v. Eat Advantage) The effects of impoverishment are caused by increased costs, not larger structural issues related to the way our economic system is organized.“…unlike the oil and natural gas resources, offshore wind is not finite and, unlike the oil and gas, will not become depleted. However, the estimated lifetime of an offshore wind turbine is about 20 years and a new turbine will eventually need to be installed in order to continue to capture wind energy. Therefore a comparison of costs and benefits over 20 years is an appropriate one. According to MMS, 20 years worth of East Coast offshore oil at $110 per barrel would cost consumers $720 billion, and the natural gas would cost $449 billion.”(Savitz, 2010 – OSW – Solvency Extension)The market can solve - efforts are focused on developing a renewable energy sector that is able to compete with, rather than dismantle the coal and oil industry “Even a small fraction of the United States’ renewable energy resources is enough to power the country several times over, and one of the least expensive and easiest ways to produce clean energy that will decrease carbon emissions and help save the oceans comes from the seas themselves—offshore wind power.”(Savitz, 2010 – OSW – Climate Change Advantage)The ocean is a resource that can be exploited for self-interested gain and economic growth“…if the United States ‘fully pursues [the nation’s] potential for wind energy on land and offshore,’ wind power could create 250,000 jobs by 2030.”(Mausolf, 2013 – OSW – Jobs/Manufacturing Advantage)Find the Evidence! - Intro to Kritiks – ANSWER KEYAssumptionCase Text8394703708400083997237128300We can continue to consume at our current levels, so long as we do it in a green/more environmentally-friendly way. [See Link – Climate Change/ Link – “Green” Technology]“Our results suggest that poor American families face stark choices in cold weather. In particular, they increase their home fuel expenditures at the cost of expenditures on food and nutritional well-being.”(Dr. Bhattacharya et al., 2003 – OSW – Heat v. Eat Advantage) 1041991605879The effects of impoverishment are caused by increased costs, not larger structural issues related to the way our economic system is organized. [See Link – Energy Poverty]“…unlike the oil and natural gas resources, offshore wind is not finite and, unlike the oil and gas, will not become depleted. However, the estimated lifetime of an offshore wind turbine is about 20 years and a new turbine will eventually need to be installed in order to continue to capture wind energy. Therefore a comparison of costs and benefits over 20 years is an appropriate one. According to MMS, 20 years worth of East Coast offshore oil at $110 per barrel would cost consumers $720 billion, and the natural gas would cost $449 billion.”(Savitz, 2010 – OSW – Solvency Extension)The market can solve - efforts are focused on developing a renewable energy sector that is able to compete with, rather than dismantle the coal and oil industry [See Link – Renewable Energy Incentives] “Even a small fraction of the United States’ renewable energy resources is enough to power the country several times over, and one of the least expensive and easiest ways to produce clean energy that will decrease carbon emissions and help save the oceans comes from the seas themselves—offshore wind power.”(Savitz, 2010 – OSW – Climate Change Advantage)182835751054000The ocean is a resource that can be exploited for self-interested gain and economic growth [See Link from 1NC shell]“…if the United States ‘fully pursues [the nation’s] potential for wind energy on land and offshore,’ wind power could create 250,000 jobs by 2030.”(Mausolf, 2013 – OSW – Jobs/Manufacturing Advantage)Intro to the Capitalism K in relation to the Non-military Exploration and/or Development of the Earth’s OceansThis year’s Kritik focuses on how capitalism, in its drive to exploit natural resources for economic gain, will cause ecological collapse and species extinction. Depending on your affirmative case, the negative will be able to link your case to this Kritik through its solvency mechanism (e.g. subsidies will help OSW compete in capital markets with coal) and/or harms (OSW will allow us to supply electricity and demand it at our current levels). In this intro activity students will begin exploring the concept of capitalism as it applies to the affirmative cases in our core files. Although they will only begin exploring fairly complex and nuanced philosophically-oriented arguments about economics, this is meant to wet their appetite for rigorous K debate later. Economic Engagement in the Name of Development – Multiple Perspective DebateSWBATUnderstand and discuss how the various Affirmative cases in the core files exemplify the principals of capitalism, in total or in part.ClaimsThe _____________________ Affirmative Case does the most to reinforce the economic system of capitalism for better or for worse. Note: Each group will be assigned to fill in the blank with one of the affirmative cases from the core files, e.g., Offshore Wind, Aquaculture, etc.ActivityMultiple Perspective Debate. See page PAGEREF MultiPerspDescription \* MERGEFORMAT 72.ProcedurePass out “Introduction to Capitalism for the 2014-2015 National Topic” handout.Divide the class into three groups. Assign each group to an Affirmative Case.Read the claim and have each group fill in the blank in the claim with the Affirmative case assigned to them.Have the students create 3 warrants as to why their case “does the most to reinforce the economic system of capitalism, for better or for worse,” using the “Introduction to Capitalism for the 2014-2015 National Topic.”Participate in a Multiple Perspective Debate based. Each group will defend one of the above claims. Debrief, making sure to reinforce important points and clear up any confusions that were revealed during the activity.Time20-25 minutesMentor/Student Leader(s)During prep-time: Assist students with developing their arguments.During the speeches: Circulate around the room, listening for things you want to reinforce later and things that need to be corrected later.Debriefing: Share 1 overall positive and address 1 overall concern in a teachable manner.MaterialsSee Affirmative Case summaries in the core files.“Introduction to Capitalism for the 2014-2015 National Topic” Handout. See page 226. Introduction to Capitalism for the 2014-2015 National TopicA) What is Capitalism? From the Gale Encyclopedia of U.S. Economic History~ [Bolding is the BDL’s only]“Capitalism is an economic system in which capital, or wealth, is put to use in order to create more capital. The system is characterized by private ownership of land and the means of production and distribution, which are used to make a profit with little or no government control. Capitalism provides the freedom to engage in economic activities based on the supply of resources and the market demand for goods; it promotes ingenuity and entrepreneurship. A capitalistic economy is also distinguished by a high degree of technological innovation due to several factors: competition, wages, and prices are based on market conditions; profit is the key consideration when making economic decisions; banking, insurance and credit systems are well-developed. Because of the element of competition, capitalism also results in the creation of wealth by the most cost-effective method, which lowers costs and prices, increases demand and production, and creates further economic opportunities. Capitalism had its start in Western Europe in the seventeenth century with the discovery of new lands and colonization. Early capitalists were primarily merchants who dramatically increased their wealth through overseas trade. By the eighteenth century capitalism was the dominant economic system in England and the United States. Vast amounts of capital were being invested in machinery for factories, which eventually resulted in the Industrial Revolution. Industrialists replaced merchants as the primary figures in capitalistic societies. One of the greatest advocates of capitalism at the time was British economist Adam Smith (1723–90). In his work, An Inquiry into the Nature and Causes of the Wealth of Nations, Smith reasoned that economies operated best under a "natural law," which was primarily competition, and that they would be disrupted by government intervention. In the last decades of the nineteenth century and through the twentieth century, capitalism has taken another turn with a shift from ownership and management of industry by individuals to corporations.”B) Capitalism and Prior Knowledge Needed to Understand the Implications of the Non-Military Exploration and Development of the Earth’s OceansIn part A, the economic system of capitalism was described in depth. Beyond being a system of arranging how people engage with each other to obtain the things and services they need and/or want, capitalism makes some fundamental assumptions about nature – other animals, plants, and the environment at large. Before we examine this more critically, let’s re-read a selection from the text above: “The system is characterized by private ownership of land … the freedom to engage in economic activities based on the supply of resources and the market demand for goods… profit is the key consideration when making economic decisions…”In the selection above four key concepts were underlined, which we will explore further: private ownership of land, supply of resources, demand for goods, and profit.Private Ownership of LandTo begin there is nothing natural or necessary about the private ownership of land or a person’s ability to “own” land. Societies who do not accept or apply this concept often view the concept of “owning land” as a mischaracterization of the natural world and humans place in it. Rather there is a belief in the inability to separate humans as a species from the environment within which they participate. In fact, if anything they view humans as being a younger (evolutionarily true), more pitiful species (think of a bear claws or lion’s teeth) that finds niches within its environment, which they largely view as nurturing (think mother earth). For cultures that believe in private land ownership there is typically a belief that the environment (a.k.a. the wild - see the popular show “Man v. Wild”) is oppositional and inferior (thus not nurturing of) to humans and thus must be explored and developed, as a means to control for purposes that benefit humans. When you view the environment as something you want to control, it is not surprising that you would artificially separate yourself from nature and view yourself as superior to it (think about the process of realizing a friend is really an enemy). In fact you begin to think of nature as an object, something without personality, intelligence, or soulful agency (which, is definitely very different from how you think about yourself).Supply of ResourcesWhen you start to see nature as an object (a.k.a. something without personality, intelligence, or soulful agency) then it is easy to think about cows in terms of “pounds of beef” instead of “members of intergenerational and dynamic communities of cows.” When you start to imagine the entire environment in this light, then you begin counting parts of an ecosystem, like water, in terms of the ways in which you utilize them: fish to be caught, gallons of water to drink. This objectified way of viewing one’s environment (of which you are a part of) enables people to thinking about how much they want rather than how their wants impact their environment. For instance, the quantification of our water supply in terms of gallons for the purpose of pricing and distributing this essential ingredient of all ecosystems ignores the needs of other species and prioritizes our desire for green grass and swimming pools over entire ecosystems. Market Demand for GoodsIn capitalism, the value of different members of an ecosystem are determined not by their power or place within it, but rather in relation to human demand for them. For instance, there are as many green emeralds as sparkling diamonds in the Earth, but since most married couples demand a diamond ring, the value of diamonds is astronomically high. Although ants are better to eat, dirt better to plant crops with, water is better to drink, and wood better to build a house with it is comparatively much more expensive than all of these. Thus, many people would feel justified digging the biggest holes (disrupting the environments of ants), cutting down trees to build mining tunnels, and poisoning tons of water and dirt in mining for diamonds. ProfitThe goal in capitalism is to take in more valued things, as determined by the market demand for goods, than the value of what you give, again defined by the market’s demand for these goods. In fact, in capitalism this defines good decision making. DistributionIn capitalism, the distribution of resources is determined by who can afford the prices set by the market and not based off of needs. For example, those with little capital who may need the fish obtained through fisheries to survive will lose these fish to already well-fed groups that have more capital.How is it that certain groups have more capital than others? There are several general answers: 1) War, 2) pure human ingenuity/creativity/business acumen, 3) environmental exploitation, 4) the exploitation of other people’s labor. Once someone acquires a a superior amount of capital through one of these means they are then able to invest that capital in other businesses that will provide them additional capital through either their ingenuity, exploitation of the land, and/or exploitation of other people. As one can imagine, since capital is used to produces more capital, the rich tend to get richer and the poor, from whose environment and labor capital is derived from, tend to get poorer.Parts of a Kritik Kritiks have three main parts: link (the link shows how the affirmative’s assumption links to the kritik), impact (the impact describes the implications of accepting the affirmative’s assumption. The impact can be argued in a way that justifies voting against the affirmative altogether in order to reject the assumptions the affirmative makes), and alternative (the negative offers an alternative that avoids the assumptions the affirmative makes). Parts of a Kritik – Three Person Table DebatePrior KnowledgeSWBATConceptual understanding of kritiks.Identify the parts of a kritik and explain their purposes. ClaimsNote: Make these claims concrete by using an actual kritik. Do not have the students debate abstractly; that is, instead of debating whether an impact is the most important part of a K, read “B. IMPACT: This drive to exploit natural resources for economic gain underlies a pattern of environmental destruction which will result in ecological collapse and extinction.”You can use the shell of any kritik as a handout that will guide these claims.______________ is the most important part of this kritik.______________ is the most difficult part of this kritik to defend.______________ is the easiest part of this kritik to answer.______________ is the easiest part of this kritik to find evidence for.ActivityThree Person Table Debate. See page PAGEREF TableDebateDescription \* MERGEFORMAT 55.ProcedureHand out the shell of the kritik you are teaching. (This can be found in the Core Files.)Students will participate in a standard Three Person Table Debate. Student A will defend Link, Student B will defend Impact, and Student C will defend Alternative.Before you announce each claim, give 2-3 minutes of preparation time so students can form their arguments. Be sure to make each claim specific. For example, read ______________ is the most difficult part of this kritik to defend” as “IMPACT: This drive to exploit natural resources for economic gain underlies a pattern of environmental destruction which will result in ecological collapse and extinction”—is the most difficult part of the Capitalism Kritik to defend.”As a debrief, ask students to share a strong argument made by their opponent. Time20-25 minutesMentor/Student Leader(s)During prep-time: Assist students with developing their arguments.During the speeches: Circulate around the room, listening for things you want to reinforce later and things that need to be corrected later.Debriefing: Share 1 overall positive and address 1 overall concern in a teachable manner.Materials“Three-Person Table Debate” Worksheet. See page PAGEREF ThreePersonClaimsTableDebateWKST \* MERGEFORMAT 63.Kritik shell (Core Files)Parts of a Kritik hand out. See page PAGEREF PartsofaKritik \* MERGEFORMAT 201.Parts of a Kritik - Table DebatePrior KnowledgeSWBATParts of a kritik.Identify the parts of a kritik and explain their purposes.ClaimsN/AActivityTable Debate. See page PAGEREF TableDebateDescription \* MERGEFORMAT 55.ProcedureChoose an affirmative case. The Capitalism Kritik can be applied to a variety of affirmative cases, but the debaters must know which one they are using for this table debate.Hand out the kritik shell. Students will compete in a standard Four Speech Table Debate based on the kritik and the affirmative you’ve chosen. A guided flow worksheet for this activity can be found on page PAGEREF PartsofaKFlow \* MERGEFORMAT 217.Debrief. Time20-25 minutesMentor/Student Leader(s)During prep-time: Assist students with developing their arguments.During the speeches: Circulate around the room, listening for things you want to reinforce later and things that need to be corrected later.Debriefing: Share one overall positive and address one overall concern in a teachable manner.MaterialsCore Files (Capitalism Kritik)Parts of a Kritik hand out. See page PAGEREF PartsofaKritik \* MERGEFORMAT 201.Guided Flow Sheet. See page PAGEREF PartsofaKFlow \* MERGEFORMAT 217. Parts of a Kritik – Four Speech Table Debate Flow SheetDirections: Use this worksheet to prepare and flow as you debate about the disadvantage.1NC2AC2NC/1NR1ARLink:Impact:Alternative: Answer to Link:Answer to Impact:Answer to Alternative:Link (Answer 2AC argument): Impact (Answer 2AC argument):Alternative (Answer 2AC argument):Answer to Link (Answer 2NC/1NR): Answer to Impact (Answer 2NC/1NR):Answer to Alternative (Answer 2NC/1NR):Answering a Kritik When the affirmative team responds to a kritik, it has a number of ways it can attack the negative’s arguments. It might argue against the kritik directly, attack the link, attack the impact, attack the alternative, or run a permutation. For more information about answering a kritik, see page PAGEREF AnsweringaKNarrative \* MERGEFORMAT 202. Answering Kritiks – Defeating the ArgumentPrior KnowledgeSWBATParts of a kritik.Understand and utilize different types of affirmative answers to a kritik.Claims/WarrantsN/AActivityDefeating the ArgumentProcedureHand out the “Answering a Kritik” sheet (see page PAGEREF AnsweringaKNarrative \* MERGEFORMAT 202).Divide the class into 2-3 groups. Each group will try to defeat the kritik using a different kind of argument, e.g., 1) Permutation, 2) No alternative, 3) Impact TurnProceed with a standard Defeating the Argument activity. Each group will prepare to answer the Capitalism Kritik using the strategy they are defending.Debrief.Time35-40 minutesMentor/Student LeadersDuring prep-time: Assist students with developing their arguments.During the speeches: Circulate around the room, listening for things you want to reinforce later and things that need to be corrected later.Debriefing: Share 1 overall positive and address 1 overall concern in a teachable manner.Materials“Answering a Kritik” hand out. See page PAGEREF AnsweringaKNarrative \* MERGEFORMAT 202. “Defeating the Argument” worksheet. See page PAGEREF AAADefeatingtheArgumentrWKST \* MERGEFORMAT 53.Answering Kritiks - Four Speech Table DebatePrior KnowledgeSWBATParts of a kritik.Understand and utilize different types of affirmative answers to a kritik.Claims/WarrantsN/AActivityFour Speech Table DebateProcedureReview the strategies for answering a kritik. You can use page PAGEREF AnsweringaKNarrative \* MERGEFORMAT 202 as a handout.Hand out the “Answering the Capitalism Kritik” prep sheet (see page 235). Have students complete the sheets in pairs.Students will compete in a standard Four Speech Table Debate based on the kritik they are learning. A guided flow worksheet for this activity can be found on page 236.Debrief.Time20 minutesMentor/Student LeadersDuring prep-time: Assist students with developing their arguments.During the speeches: Circulate around the room, listening for things you want to reinforce later and things that need to be corrected later.Debriefing: Share 1 overall positive and address 1 overall concern in a teachable manner.Materials“Answering a Kritik” hand out. See page PAGEREF AnsweringaKNarrative \* MERGEFORMAT 202. “Answering the Capitalism Kritik” prep sheet. See page PAGEREF AnswerCapKPrepSheet \* MERGEFORMAT 220. “Answering the Capitalism Kritik” guided flow. See page PAGEREF AnsweringKFlow \* MERGEFORMAT 221.Answering the Capitalism Kritik Table Debate Prep SheetDirections: Choose an affirmative case to work with. Using that case, create arguments against every part of the following kritik. Use the kritik shell in the core files to help you. Affirmative Case: Link – The affirmative commodifies the ocean by framing it as a resource that can be exploited for self-interested gain and economic growthImpact – This drive to exploit natural resources for economic gain underlies a pattern of environmental destruction which will result in ecological collapse and extinction.Alternative – Our alternative is to reject the market logic underlying the affirmative.Rejecting market competition is an act of economic imagination that can create real alternatives to capitalism. Answering a Kritik – Four Speech Table Debate Flow SheetDirections: Use this worksheet to prepare and flow as you debate about the kritik.1NC2AC2NC/1NR1ARLink:Impact:Alternative: Answer to Link:Answer to Impact:Answer to Alternative:Link (Answer 2AC argument): Impact (Answer 2AC argument):Alternative (Answer 2AC argument):Answer to Link (Answer 2NC/1NR): Answer to Impact (Answer 2NC/1NR):Answer to Alternative (Answer 2NC/1NR):Defending a Kritik Defending a kritik is much like defending other kinds of arguments. The negative team has two major responsibilities: 1) it must extend its arguments from the 1NC and 2) it must answer the affirmative’s arguments from the 2AC. The following “Multiple Perspective” activity will help debaters see how to respond to each type of affirmative answer to a kritik, while the “Four Speech Table Debate” activity will allow them to practice defending a kritik in a more traditional way.Defending Kritiks – Multiple Perspective DebatePrior KnowledgeSWBATRunning and answering kritiks.Understand and utilize different types of Answers to Affirmative ArgumentsClaims/WarrantsMy piece of evidence is the best evidence for answering ______________ affirmative argument(s) against the Capitalism Kritik.ActivityMultiple Perspective DebateProcedureHave students take out the cards dealing with Answers to Affirmative Arguments from the Capitalism Kritique.Divide the class into groups. Assign each group a piece of evidence from the “Capitalism Kritik - Answers to Affirmative Answers.” (For example, if the affirmative argument you are trying to defeat are permutations then create three groups: 1) “Answers to: Permutation – Mutually Exclusive,” 2) “Answers to: Permutation – Total Rejection Key,” and 3) “Answers to: Permutation – “Green” Capitalism Fails.”)Proceed with a standard Multiple Perspective Debate. Each group is responsible for defending the argument that their assigned piece of evidence is the best for answering the affirmative answers to the Capitalism Kritik.Debrief.Note: If you are short on time then truncated versions of the multiple perspective debate, e.g., Opening Statements, cross examination, and closing arguments are also very effective and engaging.Time35-40 minutesMentor/Student LeadersDuring prep-time: Assist students with developing their arguments.During the speeches: Circulate around the room, listening for things you want to reinforce later and things that need to be corrected later.Debriefing: Share 1 overall positive and address 1 overall concern in a teachable manner.MaterialsCapitalism Kritik, Core Files “Multiple Perspective Debate” worksheet. See page PAGEREF MultiPerspWKST \* MERGEFORMAT 75.Defending Kritiks - Four Speech Table DebatePrior KnowledgeSWBATRunning and answering kritiks.Run, answer, and defend a kritik.Claims/WarrantsN/AActivityFour Speech Table DebateProcedureHand out the Capitalism Kritik files (see Core Files).Review how and why affirmatives perm the K before they start this activity. See page PAGEREF KPermutation \* MERGEFORMAT 203.Students will compete in a standard Four Speech Table Debate based on the kritik they are learning. A guided flow worksheet for this activity can be found on PAGEREF DefendingKFlow \* MERGEFORMAT 225.Debrief.Time30-40 minutesMentor/Student LeadersDuring prep-time: Assist students with developing their arguments.During the speeches: Circulate around the room, listening for things you want to reinforce later and things that need to be corrected later.Debriefing: Share 1 overall positive and address 1 overall concern in a teachable manner.MaterialsCapitalism Kritik files. See Core Files.“Defending Kritiks Four Speech Table Debate” guided flow. See page PAGEREF DefendingKFlow \* MERGEFORMAT 225.Defending a Kritik – Four Speech Table Debate Flow SheetDirections: Use this worksheet to prepare and flow as you debate about the kritik.1NC2AC2NC/1NR1ARLink:Impact:Alternative: Perm:Answer to Link:Answer to Impact:Answer to Alternative:Answer to Perm:Link (Answer 2AC argument): Impact (Answer 2AC argument):Alternative (Answer 2AC argument):Perm (Answer to 2NC/1NR):Answer to Link (Answer 2NC/1NR): Answer to Impact (Answer 2NC/1NR):Answer to Alternative (Answer 2NC/1NR):Tab 8: TopicalityIn this Section:Narratives..................................................................................Intro to Topicality ........................................................241Parts of a T. Argument..................................................242Answering Topicality.....................................................243Practice Plans..............................................................................Intro to T (What is T?) – Four Corners.............................244Intro to T (Why is T Important?) Four Corners..................246Parts of T – Evidence Scavenger Hunt..............................248Parts of T – Three Person Table Debate............................253Answering T – Four Speech Table Debate.........................255Defending T – Four Speech Table Debate.........................264TopicalityTopicality (“T”) is an argument by which the negative claims that the Affirmative should lose the debate round because they presented a plan that is not an example of the resolution. This argument gets at the heart of why there is a year-long resolution in debate: fairness and education. What if the affirmative plan is a good idea, but it doesn’t support the resolution? For example, the affirmative might argue that every hungry child in America should be fed. This may seem like a good idea, but what if the resolution says we ought to make schools better? The plan is fine, but it doesn’t support the resolution. The negative would argue that the affirmative plan is “NOT TOPICAL.” It’s not FAIR for the affirmative to run an untopical case, because how can a negative team prepare against it? If there’s no limit on what kinds of cases the affirmative can run, the negative will always be at a disadvantage in the debate since the Affirmative, relatively-speaking, has infinite prep time. If the debate starts to feel UNFAIR then people will quit and that would be bad for debate.Further, one may argue that this plan is BAD for EDUCATION. First, if this plan is not voted down then everyone will want to run a non-topical plan that the negative will be less likely be prepared for. If the negative is not prepared then the quality of clash and thus education in the round will be greatly diminished. Second, debaters will be incentivized to spend their time learning a little about a lot, instead of a lot about a little. Although the former seems like a reasonable goal, learning a little about a lot does not require in-depth research skills or the development of nuanced positions; sound-bites from political pundits will do.Most affirmative plans seem fairly topical at first. However, if you research different definitions for the words in the resolution, it is easy to find definitions that contradict what the affirmative plan does. For example, what if the resolution says we should increase aid to “developing” nations? Beyond being a politically charged resolution with racist connotations, the affirmative might offer a plan to increase aid to Mexico. Is Mexico a “developing” nation? The International Monetary Fund says “yes” based on its income and lack of export diversification. However, the Human Development Index would say “no,” Mexico is highly developed as their life expectancy, education levels, and income levels are relatively high. There is no universally accepted definition for this highly controversial word, but it is possible to make arguments about which definition is better, even if they are both troubling (maybe a “unilinear model of progress” K?).Topicality is a very powerful argument because the affirmative can lose the debate on topicality even if they are winning every other argument in the debate! After all, if the plan is not an example of the resolution, then who cares what a great idea it is? It is unfair to the negative team and could hurt education in the long run. The judge would throw out all the affirmative arguments, just like a judge in a courtroom can throw out a case if it is irrelevant. Parts of a Topicality ArgumentIn general “T” arguments have the following format:Resolution: The United States Federal Government should substantially improve the treatment of pet animals in the United States. Affirmative’s Plan: The United States Federal Government should create feeding and shelter areas for squirrels in all major cities.Parts of a Topicality ArgumentExampleInterpretation (a.k.a. Definition) - Evidence that defines one or more important words in the resolution. defines “pet” as “any domesticated or tamed animal that is kept as a companion and cared for affectionately.”Violation - An explanation of why the affirmative plan is not an example of the kind of action described by the resolution. Answers the question “why does the plan violate the negative definition(s)?”Squirrels who live in cities are not domesticated, tamed, or cared for affectionately, so they are not pets. The affirmative’s plan does not fall under the resolution because it does not improve the treatment of pet animals.Standards - Arguments about why the negative definition is better for debate than other definitions of the word(s) being contested. Common standards:Limits - the definition should limit the number of cases in a way that’s fair for both the affirmative (not over-limiting; not being too strict that the affirmative can only run a few cases) and negative (not under-limiting; not being so broad that the negative can never adequately prepare for the round)Ground – enough literature should exist about the case so the negative is able to prepare off-case arguments like disadvantages and counterplansLimits - Allowing the affirmative to use this definition makes it difficult for the negative to compete. The affirmative’s interpretation of “pet” under-limits the resolution. Their definition opens up a wide range of cases that could include wild animals, zoo animals, and more. We cannot adequately prepare to argue against such a broad variety of cases.Ground – There is no literature for our off case arguments because no one has written against creating feeding and shelter areas for squirrels, because this is something that hasn’t been tried yet. There is no way we can research the topic and be well prepared.Voting Issue – Arguments to remind the judge that topicality is an issue that should affect their vote. The negative often argues that topicality is a voting issue because it promotes fairness and keeps the debate educational (if both sides can find good evidence and prepare complex arguments, both sides can learn from the debate.)Topicality is a voting issue—without it, we won’t have fair and educational debates, which is the point of the activity.To win a topicality argument, the negative must prove:That the negative definition is better.That the affirmative definition does not meet the negative definition.That the judge should care about topicality as a voting issue.One way to remember the parts and order of a Topicality Argument is by creating a mnemonic device such as: Ivy League students are smart, so “IVyS Vote” = Interpretation, Violation, Standards, and Vot(e)ing Issue. Feel free to create your own!Answering TopicalityNegative’s T ArgumentAffirmative’s AnswerExampleDefinitionCounter definition – The affirmative reads a different definition of the same word that makes the plan sound topical. Once the aff reads a counter-definition, they must make additional arguments about why their definition is better than the negative definition.The Oxford American Dictionary says a pet is a “thing one denotes special attention to or feels particularly strongly about.” The North American Squirrel Association, National Flying Squirrel Association, & Squirrels subsection of the Human Society prove squirrels are given special attention in the U.S.Our definition is better because our definition does not over-limit the topic. The negative’s definition is too narrow.Violation We meet – The affirmative argues that there is no violation because they meet the definition that the negative has offered. In other words, the affirmative offers reasons why the negative’s definition actually describes the plan, instead of excluding it.We meet the negative’s definition because some squirrels are tamed and cared for affectionately. There is no violation.StandardsLimitsGroundOver-limits – The affirmative argues that the negative’s definition over-limits the topic (makes the topic too narrow by restricting what can be read). This is bad for education because limiting the topic limits the amount of things both teams can learn in the round.Enough ground – The affirmative argues that there is enough ground for the negative. It often names arguments (especially off-case arguments) that the negative can still run against the affirmative’s plan.The negative’s definition over-limits the topic. It restricts the kinds of cases we can run in a way that is bad for education. How can we learn from the debate if we can only use a very narrow definition of the word “pet”?There is enough ground. You can still read your Pets Bad DA, your Spending DA, and your ASPCA counterplan. Intro to Topicality What is Topicality?Topicality (also called “T”) is a negative argument that says that the affirmative’s plan does not fall under the resolution, and therefore should not be allowed. It defines a certain word in the resolution and then demonstrates how the affirmative plan does not fit that definition. Topicality arguments have a specific structure, but before you even begin to get your students familiar with the different parts of the T, get them thinking about the concept of topicality. You can do this with the following Four Corners activity.Intro to Topicality (What is Topicality?) - Four CornersPrior KnowledgeSWBATNoneUnderstand the concept of topicality by considering whether sample plans fall under sample resolutions. ClaimResolution: Boston Public Schools should educate their students about healthy eating habits.Plan: Boston Public Schools should ban the consumption of unhealthy snacks, foods, and drinks by removing them from schools and confiscating them from students.Plan: Boston Public Schools should place posters of the food triangle in all its cafeterias.Plan: Boston Public Schools should make daily physical education classes mandatory for all students.Plan: Boston Public Schools should offer free fruits and vegetables to students at all meal and snack times.Plan: Boston Public Schools should offer nutrition classes as an elective in its high schools.ActivityFour Corners. See page PAGEREF FourCornersDescription \* MERGEFORMAT 39.ProcedurePut the sample resolution on the board.Have students get in pairs to come up with 2 definitions of the word “educate.”Read out a sample plan. Students should decide if they agree, strongly agree, disagree, or strongly disagree that the plan falls under the resolution. They should go to the appropriate corner. In doing this they should ask themselves:If agree/strongly agree – why does your definition of education make this plan an example of the topicIf disagree/strongly disagree – why does your definition of education make this plan not an example of the topicHave the students discuss their reasons in the corners. Then they should share out one or two reasons per corner. In your feedback, highlight any arguments the students make about definitions.Repeat for the following sample plans. Time10 minutesMentor/Student Leader(s)During prep-time: Assist students with developing their arguments.During the share-out: Circulate around the room, helping students decide which arguments they should share out from their corners.Debriefing: Share 1 overall positive and address 1 overall concern in a teachable manner.MaterialsFour Corners signs. See page PAGEREF FourCornersSigns \* MERGEFORMAT 42.Intro to Topicality Why is Topicality Important?Topicality is important because it limits what the affirmative may talk about so the negative can have a reasonable chance to argue against the case. If the affirmative could talk about anything, how could the negative prepare for the debate? When we talk about fairness and limits, we use two key words: under-limits and over-limits. A definition that under-limits the resolution makes it too broad (which is unfair to the negative). A definition that over-limits the resolution makes it too narrow (which is unfair to the affirmative). Intro to Topicality (Why is Topicality Important?) - Four CornersPrior KnowledgeSWBATConceptual understanding of topicality.Understand why topicality is important by deciding whether certain definitions are fair. ClaimResolution: The United States Federal Government should provide aid and resources to the poor.Poor = a person who has little money or propertyPoor = a person who is deficient or lacking in somethingPoor = a person who makes less than $10,000 a yearPoor = a person who is dependent on charity and public supportActivityFour CornersProcedurePut the sample resolution on the board.Read out a definition of the word “poor.” Students should go to their corners depending on if they think it 1) over-limits, 2) strongly over-limits, 3) under-limits, or 4) strongly under-limits the resolution. Have the students discuss their reasons in the corners. Then they should share out one or two reasons per corner. Repeat for the following definitions. Time10 minutesMentor/Student Leader(s)During prep-time: Assist students with developing their arguments.During the share-out: Circulate around the room, helping students decide which arguments they should share out from their corners.Debriefing: Share 1 overall positive and address 1 overall concern in a teachable manner.MaterialsModified Four Corners signs. Make four signs with the words “Over-Limits,” “Strongly Over-Limits,” “Under-Limits,” “Strongly Under-Limits” on them. Parts of a Topicality Argument Topicality arguments have four main parts: definition (evidence that defines one or more important words in the resolution), violation (an explanation of why the affirmative plan violates the negative’s definition), standards (arguments about why the negative’s definition is better for the debate), and voting issue (arguments that reminds the judge that topicality is a voting issue. Refer back to page PAGEREF PartsofTNarrative \* MERGEFORMAT 228 for more information about the parts of a topicality argument. Parts of a Topicality Argument – Evidence Scavenger HuntPrior KnowledgeSWBATConceptual understanding of topicality.Identify the parts of a topicality argument by reading excerpts from a topicality shell. ClaimsN/AActivityEvidence Scavenger Hunt. See page PAGEREF EvidenceScavengerDescription \* MERGEFORMAT 46.ProcedureRefer back to page 265 and review the parts of a Topicality Argument. It is often helpful to use a mnemonic device to remember the parts of a debate argument. One way to remember the parts and order of a Topicality Argument is by creating a mnemonic device such as: Ivy League students are smart, so “IVyS Vote” = Interpretation, Violation, Standards, and Vot(e)ing Issue. Feel free to create your own!Hand out the “Find the Evidence! Identifying Parts of a Topicality Argument” worksheet (see page PAGEREF FTETopicality \* MERGEFORMAT 236).Students will consider each quoted excerpt of evidence and decide what part of a topicality argument it falls under. An answer key can be found on page PAGEREF FTETopicalityAK \* MERGEFORMAT 238.Share out using a Four Corners activity. For each question, have students go to a corner to symbolize which answer they chose. Have one or two students explain why they chose the answer. This will get students moving, and (depending on whether the students go to different corners) allow you to see if there is any confusion about the topic.Time20-25 minutesMentor/Student Leader(s)During the activity: Assist students with completing their worksheets.Materials“Parts of a Topicality Argument” Worksheet. See page PAGEREF PartsofTNarrative \* MERGEFORMAT 228.“Find the Evidence! Identifying Parts of a Topicality Argument” Worksheet. See page PAGEREF FTETopicality \* MERGEFORMAT 236. Find the Evidence!Identifying Parts of a Topicality ArgumentDirections: Read the quoted Negative Topicality Arguments. Then write in what part of a topicality argument it is (A. Definition, B. Violation, C. Standards, or D. Voting Issue). If it is a standards argument, write in the third column whether the standard is education, fairness, limits, or ground.Quoted Negative Topicality Arguments Part of the Topicality ArgumentStandards (Fairness, Limits, Education or Ground)The affirmative merely changes the process by which we regulate aquaculture – this doesn’t mandate an increase in development.The best negative literature indicts government-led development – they kill core ground like the privatization counterplan, forcing negative teams to read development bad every debate.All affirmatives still have to have the US act and maintain ownership of development projects – this precludes affirmatives that remove barriers to private companies developing oceans.Affirmative teams must defend an increase in ocean development by the United States federal government. The word “its” in the resolution means the increase must be done by the United States federal government.:MacMillan Dictionary, 2014()“belonging or relating to a thing, idea, place, animal, etc. when it has already been mentioned or when it is obvious which one you are referring to”T is a voter for fairness and education, it is critical to preserve the integrity of debate.Find the Evidence! – Answer KeyIdentifying Parts of a Topicality Argument (From Offshore Wind T Violation)Case TextPart of the Topicality ArgumentIf Standards - Fairness, Limits, Education, or Ground?The affirmative merely changes the process by which we regulate aquaculture – this doesn’t mandate an increase in development.Violation – Says that the affirmative violates the negative’s definition.The best negative literature indicts government-led development – they kill core ground like the privatization counterplan, forcing negative teams to read development bad every debate.Standards Ground – Like all grounds arguments this states that the negative’s definition should be preferred because it focuses the debate on concepts connected with higher-quality, educational literature.All affirmatives still have to have the US act and maintain ownership of development projects – this precludes affirmatives that remove barriers to private companies developing oceans.Standards Limits - Like all limits arguments this states that their definition should be preferred because it strikes the balance between the negative having to face limitless affirmative cases and really stale debate.Affirmative teams must defend an increase in ocean development by the United States federal government. The word “its” in the resolution means the increase must be done by the United States federal government.:MacMillan Dictionary, 2014()“belonging or relating to a thing, idea, place, animal, etc. when it has already been mentioned or when it is obvious which one you are referring to”Interpretation – Offers an interpretation (definition) of the phrase “its” in relation to who should be acting to develop and explore the Earth’s oceans for non-military purposes.T is a voter for fairness and education, it is critical to preserve the integrity of debate.Voting Issue – States why topicality should be a voting issue for the judge. Parts of a Topicality Argument – Three Person Table DebatePrior KnowledgeSWBATParts of a topicality argument.Identify the parts of a topicality argument and explain their purposes. ClaimsNote: Make these claims concrete by using an actual topicality shell. Do not have the students debate abstractly; that is, instead of debating whether a Interpretation is the most important part of a topicality argument, read the claim “INTERPRETATION – affirmative teams must defend an increase in ocean development by the United States federal government. The word “its” in the resolution means the increase must be done by the United States federal government” is the easiest part of this T argument to answer.______________ is the most important part of this T argument.______________ is the most difficult part of this T argument to defend.______________ is the easiest part of this T argument to answer.______________ is the easiest part of this T argument to find evidence for.ActivityThree Person Table DebateProcedureHandout the shell of the topicality argument you are teaching. (This can be found in the Core Files.)Students will participate in a standard Three Person Table Debate. Assign each student a part of the T argument to defend. (For example, Student A might defend Interpretation, Student B might defend Limits, and Student C might defend Ground.) Note: there are more parts than students. You can modify the groups to contain more than three students, or you can pick the three most controversial parts of the T argument for them to debate.Before you announce each claim, give 2-3 minutes of preparation time so students can form their arguments. Be sure to make each claim specific. For example, read ______________ is the most difficult part of this T argument to defend as “INTERPRETATION – affirmative teams must defend an increase in ocean development by the United States federal government. The word “its” in the resolution means the increase must be done by the United States federal government” is the most difficult part of this T argument to defend.”As a debrief, ask students to share a strong argument made by their opponent. Time20-25 minutesMentor/Student Leader(s)During prep-time: Assist students with developing their arguments.During the speeches: Circulate around the room, listening for things you want to reinforce later and things that need to be corrected later.Debriefing: Share 1 overall positive and address 1 overall concern in a teachable manner.Materials“Three Person Table Debate” Worksheet. See page PAGEREF ThreePersonClaimsTableDebateWKST \* MERGEFORMAT 63.“Parts of a Topicality Argument” Worksheet. See page PAGEREF PartsofTNarrative \* MERGEFORMAT icality Shell of your choosing. See Core Files.Answering Topicality Topicality arguments have four main parts: definition, violation, standards, and voting issue. When an affirmative team is answering a topicality argument, they will respond to each part of the T, often offering counter-definitions and counter-standards. Other common answers are “we meet” the negative’s definition and “no violation.” Refer back to page PAGEREF AnsweringTopicalityNarrative \* MERGEFORMAT 229 for more information about answering a topicality argument. Answering Topicality - Four Speech Table DebatePrior KnowledgeSWBATHow to run a topicality argument.Answer a topicality argument.Claims/WarrantsN/AActivityFour Speech Table DebateProcedureReview the strategies for answering topicality. You can use page PAGEREF AnsweringTopicalityNarrative \* MERGEFORMAT 229 as a handout.Hand out the “Answering Topicality – Model” worksheet (see page PAGEREF AnsweringTModel \* MERGEFORMAT 243). This will serve as an example of how the debaters will complete their prep sheets.Hand out the “Answering Topicality” prep sheet for the T they are working (See pages PAGEREF AnsweringTIncreaseDoesnt \* MERGEFORMAT 245 and PAGEREF AnsweringTInThroughout \* MERGEFORMAT 247). Have the students complete this in pairs without looking at the Example 2AC responses in the core files, e.g., Answers to “Topicality – Incentives.” Students will compete in a standard Four Speech Table Debate based on one of the T arguments they are learning. A guided flow worksheet for this activity can be found on page PAGEREF AnsweringTFourSpeechFlow \* MERGEFORMAT 249.Pick a new t-file, switch sides, repeat.Debrief briefly and allow students time to compare their responses to the example 2AC responses in the core files, e.g., Answers to “Topicality – Incentives.” Have them edit the Example 2AC to reflect key learnings and improvements.Time30-35 minutesMentor/Student LeadersDuring prep-time: Assist students with developing their arguments.During the speeches: Circulate around the room, listening for things you want to reinforce later and things that need to be corrected later.Debriefing: Share 1 overall positive and address 1 overall concern in a teachable manner.Materials“Answering Topicality” handout. See page PAGEREF AnsweringTopicalityNarrative \* MERGEFORMAT 229.“Answering Topicality - Model” worksheet. See page PAGEREF AnsweringTModel \* MERGEFORMAT 243.Answering the Answering the “Topicality – Incentives (Example 1NC vs. Offshore Wind)” T argument” Worksheet. See page 260.“Answering the “Topicality – Increase (Example 1NC vs. Aquaculture)” T Argument Worksheet. See page 262. “Answering a T Table Debate” guided flow. See page PAGEREF AnsweringTFourSpeechFlow \* MERGEFORMAT 249.Answering Topicality – Model Prep SheetDirections: This is a model prep sheet for answering a topicality argument. When you complete your own prep sheet, try to follow this example.PlanTopicalityArguments against TopicalityExampleResolution: The United States Federal Government should substantially improve the treatment of pet animals in the United States.Affirmative’s Plan: The United States Federal Government should create feeding and shelter areas for squirrels in all major cities.Definition – defines “pet” as “any domesticated or tamed animal that is kept as a companion and cared for affectionately.”Counter-definition – The Oxford American Dictionary says pet = “thing one denotes special attention to or feels particularly strongly about.” North American Squirrel Association, National Flying Squirrel Association, & Squirrels subsection of the Human Society proves squirrels are given special attention in the U.S.Our definition is better because our definition does not over-limit the topic. The negative’s definition is too narrow.Violation – Squirrels who live in cities are not domesticated, tamed, or cared for affectionately, so they are not pets. The affirmative’s plan does not fall under the resolution because it does not improve the treatment of pet animals.We meet – We meet the negative’s definition because some squirrels are tamed and cared for affectionately. There is no violation.Standards – Limits - Allowing the affirmative to use this definition makes it difficult for the negative to compete. The affirmative’s interpretation of “pet” under-limits the resolution. Their definition opens up a wide range of cases that could include wild animals, zoo animals, and more. We cannot adequately prepare to argue against such a broad variety of cases.Ground – There is no literature for our off case arguments because no one has written against creating feeding and shelter areas for squirrels, because this is something that hasn’t been tried yet. There is no way we can research the topic and be well prepared.Counter-standards – Over-limits - The negative’s definition over-limits the topic. It restricts the kinds of cases we can run in a way that is bad for education. How can we learn from the debate if we can only use a very narrow definition of the word “pet”?Enough ground - There is enough ground. You can still read your Pets Bad DA, your Spending DA, and your ASPCA counterplan. Answering the “Topicality – Incentives (Example 1NC vs. Offshore Wind)” T argumentOffshore Wind T Violations Prep SheetDirections: Create arguments against every part of the following T argument. Use the topicality shell in the core files to help you. PlanTopicalityArguments against Topicality (remember the 2AC sets the numbering and structure in the T debate)Resolution: The United States federal government should substantially increase its non-military exploration and/or development of the Earth’s oceans.Plan: The United States Federal Government should offer a long-term extension of tax credits to offshore wind energy projects located in U.S. territorial waters.A.INTERPRETATION – “its” in the resolution means the increase must be done by the United States federal government.MacMillan Dictionary, 2014 ()belonging or relating to a thing, idea, place, animal, etc. when it has already been mentioned or when it is obvious which one you are referring toWe Meet (No Violation argument - show how your case still is topical based on their definition) –Counter-Interpretation (Provide an alternate definition that makes your case topical) –B. Violation – the plan offers incentives to companies to develop offshore wind turbines – it doesn’t mandate federal development or exploration – these are contextually distinct.Standard– LIMITS— affirmatives that aren’t grounded in federal government action can use dozens of different actors to develop the earth’s oceans – AND there are dozens of ways to incentivize non-government actors to invest in development.GROUND - the best negative literature indicts government-led development – they kill core ground like the privatization counterplan, forcing negative teams to read development bad every debate.Counter-Standards (explain why your counter-interpretation is better using ground, limits, education, or fairness) –Voting Issue - T is a vote for fairness and education; it is critical to preserve the integrity of debate.Not a Voter (judge should accept the affirmative's case if it meets a reasonable interpretation of the resolution) – Answering the “Topicality – Increase (Example 1NC vs. Aquaculture)” T Argument Aquaculture T Violation Prep SheetDirections: Create arguments against every part of the following T argument. Use the topicality shell in the core files to help you. PlanTopicalityArguments against TopicalityResolution: The United States federal government should substantially increase its non-military exploration and/or development of the Earth’s oceans.Plan: The United States federal government should create a streamlined national framework for offshore aquaculture that consolidates regulatory and permitting authority to the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration.Interpretation –affirmative teams must defend a DIRECT increase in ocean development and or exploration. The word “increase” in the resolution means to a greater degree. Collins, 2003 (Collins English Dictionary, Unabridged, Online: )increasevb [?n?kri?s] to make or become greater in size, degree, frequency, etc.; …We Meet (No Violation argument - show how your case still is topical based on their definition) –Counter-Interpretation (Provide an alternate definition that makes your case topical) –Violation – – the affirmative merely changes the process by which we regulate aquaculture – this doesn’t mandate an increase in development.Standards – LIMITS - there are hundreds of barriers to exploration - the affirmative justifies signing treaties, giving property rights, removing export controls, and more – this makes it impossible for negative teams to prepare effectively. GROUND – core generic ground on the topic stems from “increase” – we lose spending disadvantages, free market counterplans, tradeoff arguments – that means negative teams have to spend an unfair amount of time preparing specific arguments for each affirmative. Counter-Standards (explain why your counter-interpretation is better using ground, limits, education, or fairness) –Voting Issue - T is a vote for fairness and education; it is critical to preserve the integrity of debate.Not a Voter (judge should accept the affirmative's case if it meets a reasonable interpretation of the resolution) – Answering Topicality – Four Speech Table Debate Flow SheetDirections: Use this worksheet to prepare and flow as you debate about the disadvantage.1NC2AC2NC/1NR1ARInterpretation:Violation:Standards:Voting Issue – must preserve education and fairness.We Meet:Counter-Interpretation:Counter-Standards (propose different standards that prove why your definition better):T is not a Voter – reasonability (Respond line-by-line)(Respond line-by-line)Defending TopicalityTo defend topicality, the negative must extend its arguments from the 1NC and answer the affirmative’s arguments from the 2AC. The three most important factors in defending topicality are: 1) proving that the negative’s definition is better, 2) proving that the affirmative’s definition does not meet the negative’s definition, and 3) proving that topicality is a voting issue. It is also important to compare the negative’s standards with the affirmative’s counter-standards. Defending Topicality – Four Speech Table DebatePrior KnowledgeSWBATHow to both run and answer a topicality argument.Defend a topicality argument in the negative block (2NC/1NR).Claims/WarrantsN/AActivityFour Speech Table DebateProcedureChoose an affirmative case. This will be the case that the debaters are running topicality against.Hand out the topicality cards from the Core Files.Hand out the guided flow sheet, which scaffolds and details how they should defend their T violation.Have debaters create an overview that covers:1) Why the negative’s definition is better, 2) Why the affirmative’s definition does not meet the negative’s definition, and 3) Why topicality is a voting issue in this roundProceed with a standard Four Speech Table Debate.Pick a new t-file, switch sides, repeat.Debrief.Time35-40 minutesMentor/Student LeadersDuring prep-time: Assist students with developing their arguments.During the speeches: Circulate around the room, listening for things you want to reinforce later and things that need to be corrected later.Debriefing: Share 1 overall positive and address 1 overall concern in a teachable manner.MaterialsTopicality evidence of your choosing. See Core Files.Four Speech Table Debate guided flow. See page PAGEREF DefendingTFourSpeechFlow \* MERGEFORMAT 251.Defending Topicality – Four Speech Table Debate Flow SheetDirections: Use this worksheet to prepare and flow as you debate about the disadvantage.1NC2AC2NC/1NR1ARInterpretation:Violation:Standards:Voting Issue – must preserve education and fairness.We Meet:Counter-Interpretation:Counter-Standards (propose different standards that prove why your definition better):T is not a Voter – reasonability Insert OverviewAnswer to: We Meet (see 1NC violation – why do they still violate) Answer to: Counter-Interpretation(reject this definition):Standards(why is your definition better – compare standards):Voting Issue (why is there’s not reasonable and thus abusive):[No time for overview ]Extend We MeetExtend Counter-Interpretation:Extend Counter-Standards (why is your definition better):T is not a Voter – our counter-interpretation is reasonable and not abusive. ................
................

In order to avoid copyright disputes, this page is only a partial summary.

Google Online Preview   Download