Policy Debate
Overview:
Policy Debate, sometimes referred to as cross-examination or CX debate, is a two-person team event that asks students to debate a single resolution for the entire school year. Each team is assigned before the round to either affirm or negate the resolution. On the affirmative, students will prove the resolution true by proposing a policy to implement and presenting its advantages. On the negative, students will respond by pointing out the disadvantages of the affirmative team's policy proposal. Perhaps the most evidence-intensive event, debates will focus on the intricacies of policy details and the research presented. Judges are asked to completely set aside their biases and focus on the issues presented in the debate round exclusively. In order for the affirmative to win, the judge must conclude that the policy presented is a good idea that would improve the status quo. In order for the negative to win, the judge must conclude that the policy presented would not improve the status quo. As judge, you will choose a winner and assign speaker points.
Foundational Resources:
- Outline of a Policy Debate Round *times may vary by state
- Policy Debate Glossary of Terms
- Student Perspectives: Policy Debate
- Sample Ballot
- Speaker Points Guide - Please keep most speaker points in the range of 26-30. Giving 25 points indicates that that individual debater was rude or made insulting comments. Please explain, in writing on the ballot, what merited the low points.
Foundational Concepts:
A note about Fiat
Because policy debate asks students to think about the effects of implementing a policy, this event uses a tool called fiat. Loosely, you can understand fiat to mean "let it be." This means, when evaluating the affirmative team's policy proposal, suspend disbelief as to whether or not the policy would pass, and imagine that the policy will pass and become law. When making your decision, you should consider the effects of the plan, not whether or not it is likely to occur.
For example, say the affirmative team presents a plan to implement a single payer healthcare system, something that that is currently unlikely to pass via legislation. Since the affirmative has "fiat," you must imagine that the plan does pass, even if it is unlikely in the real world.
What is your Paradigm?
A paradigm, in debate, is a statement about your beliefs and predispositions regarding how you will judge the debate round. Students will often ask about your paradigm before the debate begins so that they can adapt to your preferences during the round. If you are new to judging, it is preferred that you share this with debaters either in an oral comment before the round, or by creating a paradigm on Tabroom. If you are new to judging, let the debaters know. A few helpful comments might include:
- "This is the first time that I've judged this event."
- "I'm a volunteer and I've read over some information about this topic and watched a demo video, but I'm new to judging."
- "Please keep your delivery slow and clear. I appreciate clear analysis of why you should win in the final rebuttals."
How to Judge Policy Debate
Instructions from the National Speech & Debate Association
Introduction to Debate 101
A Helpful series of videos for beginner students or judges without prior debate experience.
Demo Debate
Demonstration from the Atlanta Urban Debate Association
Current Topic:
The topic for Policy Debate changes yearly. Check the National Speech & Debate Association Current Topics page to confirm the exact wording you will see debated.
Key Skill: Flowing
Tutorial on how to take notes in a debate round. This is essential for a fair decision because a policy debate win is determined by exactly what is said by each team, not what beliefs are held by the judge regarding the arguments made. Your focus as a judge should be to accurately record each point made by each team, so that you make a decision based on content and evidence read in the round.