Purchase the brief at DebateChamps for the low price of $15!

Hate getting stuck with just one case option? No worries! The files contain multiple plan text options to suit your needs. Each plan text is accompanied by advantage/contention outlines as well as detailed links to outside research, making Nationals preparation quick and easy. On the Negative? We’ve got you covered. The briefs contains both generic and case specific disadvantages and case turns to make prepping on the negative easier. Nationals is stressful. Make prepping simple.

The SpeechGeek Topic Analysis will review each of the 22 possible Supplement Debate resolutions for the 2011 National Tournament. The brief will be delivered via email on Saturday, June 4, 2010.

Supplemental Debate Topic Resolutions

• This House believes that the US is safer after the death of Osama bin Laden
• This House would end oil subsidies in the United States
• This House would lift the debt ceiling
• This House would transition Medicare to private health care plans
• This House would withdraw troops from Afghanistan
• This House would prefer the use of tax credits rather than vouchers to preserve school choice
• This House believes that the parent who pressures least, parents best
• This House believes that the US economy is improving
• This House would use tax increases rather than spending cuts to reign in deficit spending
• This House believes the US should take a more active role in the Arab-Israeli compromise
• This House would ban fraternities and sororities on college campuses
• This House would end government support of the mortgage market
• This House believes that a college education is a good investment
• This House would ban corporal punishment in schools

Spend your time working toward your main event. If that doesn’t pan out, we’re here to help you be as competitive as possible in Supplemental Debate!

The Final round was broadcasted live on Korean National T.V.

Forensics is a global activity.  Our friends at Global Debate prove that the case through their insightful commentary and updates from competitions across the globe.

2010 National Forensics Association college Individual Sweepstakes Champion Dan Glaser is currently teaching in South Korea.  He recently had an opportunity to attend an English-language forensics tournament with a friend.

Dan commented on the format of the tournament and other elements:

In case you’re wondering…. the tournament was conducted 100% in English and most of the kids were impressively fluent. The tournament followed Asian Parliamentary Format (read about it here if you want). There were three preliminary rounds, then Quarters, Semis, and Finals. The winning team took home 1,000,000 won (a thousand bucks)!

On the day of the tourney, I got in a last minute coaching session with my friend’s students and had a funny min-session with a very nervous 12 year-old girl who I had to convince there is no mathematical formula to calculate the amount of eye contact you should be making during a speech.

Do we have any international Speech Geeks reading the blog?  If so, tell us about your tournaments and competitive experiences.

Maybe not. Rolando Valeasquez offers some compelling commentary in the Dallas Morning News‘ editorial section.

Like football players, debaters have to have quick reflexes. When debating and listening to our opponent’s arguments, we have seconds to process the information and develop counter-arguments. A few weeks ago, I debated at the nationally renowned debate hosted by St. Marks School of Texas, going up against some of the best debate teams in the nation. I was thoroughly exhausted, my brain and body drained of energy.

Like football, debate is intensively competitive. Rivalries develop, just like in any other sport. You know which teams you want to beat, yet you develop a begrudging admiration for their tactics and strategies.

Like in other sports, we debaters are scouted out and recruited by some of the most prestigious colleges and universities. Scouts frequently attend the high-profile tournaments to identify debaters. Scholarships are offered to those lucky and gifted debaters.

What do you think?

It’s going to be a hectic 16 minutes.

The event began on Wednesday morning with a record 560 entries. That’s a record across the entire tournament.

The topic for the final round is “This House believes that Barack Obama is succeeding in ensuring the future prosperity of the United States.”

Affirmative: 451 — Erin Morris (Kickapoo HS, MO)

Negative: 741 —  Tejas Perdiv (Regis HS, NJ)

Author’s Note: The following statements represent the claims of the speakers to the best of my ability and should not be read as personal commentary on the round.

Proposition Constructive (2 min)

Education initiatives spur potential for future prosperity.  Key incentives are adding the opportunity for education and innovation through a better workforce.

Financial reform will stabilize the economy as well.  Regulation is needed, and is a key initiative of Obama.  TARP is used as the prime example with banks paying back funds and being held accountable.  Stabilizing one part of the economy has created a positive domino effect through free-market system.

CX of Proposition (1 min)

Q: Is there a difference between ensuring and net progress?
Q: How should we weigh today’s round?
Q: If your contentions are not long lasting, is that a vote for the Neg?

Opposition Constructive (2 min)

Clarification: the resolutions says that “ensuring future prosperity.”  Aff can give

1.  Idea of National Security.  Obama has not ensured this because fails to address corruption in Afghanistan, ethnic conflicts, and Taliban movement into Pakistan.  The risks still exist.  Increasing Anti-American Sentiment. More movement in Middle East means greater risk.

2.  Engergy Crisis.  While investing in some green tech, he is not making substantial progress to moving away from oil.

3.  Environment. His actions with BP and global warming have been minimal.  Moreover, he has little political capital to pass substantial legislation.

CX of Opposition (1 min)

Q:  What about the recent stimulus package for green energy?
Q:  We should live in an impractical world where we don’t use oil?
Q:  Does it have to happen immediately?
Q:  What is your standard of ensuring prosperity in general?

Mandatory Prep Time (1 min)

Proposition Rebuttal (2 min)

1.  Energy Crisis.  Neg fails to ignore economics stimulus for solar, wind and algae in addition to other green jobs.  We are creating energy independence while creating new and more jobs, underscoring the need for innovation.  Technology is not only becoming better but also creating small biz opportunities.

2.  Foreign Affairs.  Ignores current efforts to combat cocaine and opium trades in Columbia and Afghanistan.

3.  Financial Reform is Key.  Because we have such a connected free-market system, that money will be invested and stabilize other industries.  We help the American people.  We help foreign relations.  We ensure future prosperity.

Opposition Rebuttal (2 min)

Affirmative has to prove solvency.  The Aff has to show it’s actually doing something.

Education. The problem with education funding is that high school dropouts are increasing and we’re dwindling in the international pack.  No politician is going to pass something without good intentions but nothing is happening and no prosperity is ensured.

Financial Reform.  The economy is based on cycles.  You cannot prove causation based on ebb.  Deficit levels are at the highest ever.

All Aff points are speculative.  Until she proves what they are doing and how they are long term.

Moreover, Aff drops international sentiment against US.

Mandatory Prep Time (1 min)

Proposition Rebuttal (2 min)

Obama has been in office for 1.5 years.  That’s not enough time to prove long term is going to work out.  We must look at the prospect not empirical evidence because the future hasn’t happened yet.

Says Neg drops foreign relations and drug trade argument.

Says TARP prop falls but holds to line that Obama was vital in keeping economic recovery on track.

Key voter comes down to innovation and future prospects for improved economic and social prosperity, better jobs, and innovation.  Obama is indicating signs of success and future prosperity.

Opposition Rebuttal (2 min)

Aff drops the need for solvency by saying that Obama is new on the job.  The crux is that it’s not doing anything.  That’s all we can evaluate in the round.

Education was nullified and later dropped by the Prop.

Says our efforts are doing more harm than good because of the substantial risks inherent in what they do.  Everything Obama is doing is having negative effects, devaluting of the dollar and inflation, etc.

The green movement isn’t doing anything yet and he doesn’t have the political capital for a full-on energy use shift.

Pairings for Public Forum Debate Rd 11:   http://flic.kr/p/8aXHtd

United States Extemp: 110, 112, 122, 126, 132, 144, 193, 204, 237, 273, 281, 290, 309, 322

International Extemp: 111, 118, 162, 198, 221, 222, 229, 230, 251, 262, 269, 287, 300, 321

Original Oratory: 105, 133, 134, 138, 139, 156, 191, 199, 249, 256, 275, 281, 306, 309

Dramatic Interpretation: 104, 118, 120, 137, 158, 159, 183, 192, 213, 225, 273, 280, 287, 338

Humorous Interpretation: 109, 110, 121, 131, 142, 192, 203, 215, 226, 235, 274, 289, 307, 320

Duo Interpretation: 122, 129, 141, 159, 162, 193, 197, 211, 220, 235, 238, 317, 318, 336

Download a sample containing the table of contents, event overview, and analysis of one sample resolution!

SpeechGeek’s Supplemental Debate brief  contains essential background knowledge on each topic, providing you with the necessary information fast when you’re Proposition (Aff) or Opposition (Neg). Hate getting stuck with just one case option? No worries! The files contain multiple plan text options to suit your needs. Each plan text is accompanied by advantage/contention outlines as well as detailed links to outside research, making Nationals preparation quick and easy. On the Negative? We’ve got you covered. The briefs contains both generic and case specific disadvantages and case turns to make prepping on the negative easier. Nationals is stressful. Make prepping simple.

The SpeechGeek Topic Analysis will review each of the 22 possible Supplemental Debate resolutions for the 2010 National Tournament.

Once the final eight resolutions are unveiled at Nationals registration, SpeechGeek will prepare additional analysis on the topics that will be used in rounds. This supplemental brief will be delivered via email on the afternoon of Tuesday, June 15, 2010.

Spend your time working toward your main event. If that doesn’t pan out, we’re here to help you be as competitive as possible in Supplemental Debate!

Visit the DebateChamps Forensics Superstore to purchase SpeechGeek’s Supplemental Debate Topic Analysis.

Groups of students milled about Oak Park High School this morning to the point even a casual observer could tell that many of the individuals gathered there for the first day of competition at the 2010 National Forensic League National Tournament were nervous.

Very nervous.

As the moments wound down before the first draw of Extemp and rounds in Original Oratory, coaches pulled students aside to whisper final words of encouragement.  For individuals who spend several weekends out of the year at high school speech and debate tournaments, the scene was fairly ordinary: a typical high school, students dressed in suits and brightly-colored schematics already showing signs of wear.

Among the crowd was Michael Curry, a coach from Salem, Ore.  Like other coaches, though, Curry knew all-too-well that this was no ordinary weekend tournament.  However, the advice he offered to his students was quite basic: though these young adults are competing in the world’s largest academic contest, they shouldn’t let that fact overwhelm them.

“I try and get in the mindset of that it’s going to look and feel like other tournaments,” Curry said.

The landscape came as no surprise to Curry.  The scene of a regular tournament was exactly what he wanted his students to see as well.

“The first thing I want and try to get to the students is that even though it’s Nationals, it’s not foreign,” Curry said.  “It’s not something to be intimidated by either.  You’re going to see students from all walks of life and various levels of ability.  It’s going to operate like any other tournament. The difference is going to be we fly there.”

For Todd Mincks, an assistant coach from Nixon, Mo., it wasn’t the tournament or its scope that mattered when offering encouragement.  Instead, he encouraged the members of his squad to simply do what they’ve been doing all season.

“They’ve already proven themselves to be one of the best at what they do.,” Mincks said. “They should go in, relax and do their best and not stress overly about it.”

Renee Botterbush, a coach from Sayre, Penn., noted there was little new advice to be offered.  Alternatively, she opted for simple encouragement and taking pride in the fact her students were ready to compete after months of hard work.

Botterbush said they should “do their best and they’ve got this.  They’ve been practicing for the whole year so they’re prepared.”

Pam Carnes, a parent from Woodstock, GA, felt her daughter was ready to compete based on her experiences in a variety of regular season tournaments.  Participating in a combination of small, local tournaments and national events such as competitions at Emory and Harvard provided her with confidence and comfort as the first round of Nationals began.

“Even though being in a high school cafeteria seems like we’re at home,” Carnes noted, “the numbers here equate to tournaments she’s accustomed to at the larger tournaments.  A tournament at home could be a dozen to two dozen students where at Harvard this year there was about 300 in OO (Original Oratory).”

Carnes also views this year’s national tournament as a learning opportunity for her daughter, who will enter her junior year of high school this year.  While other students will compete at their final forensics tournament this week, the younger Carnes can apply what she learns toward future seasons.

“She has two more years to do this, so she just needs to go in and give it her best shot and just know that she worked hard to get here and she’s already accomplished more than many students her age,” Carnes added.

Though students will learn from their competition experience, Curry added students should have fun and realize that the honor to compete at Nationals is something special.

“This is an opportunity that not everyone gets in an event that thousands upon thousands upon thousands of student do,” Curry noted. “You gotta have fun.  If you spent all the time and work and came here and didn’t have a good time then you don’t walk away with good memories.  That’s probably the most important thing.  As an educator, my job is to help prepare students for the next step.  So I want each thing I do with them to be rewarding on multiple levels.  Make connections.  Meet friends.”

Coaches like Mincks also appreciate that the experiences gained from participation in forensics will serve students long after the final trophy is handed out at the awards ceremony on Friday evening.

“We all know in this business that this is one of the most applicable activities to the real world that a kid can get involved,” Mincks added.  “I hope they can continue to learn what they’ve already been exposed to throughout the years.  Public speaking can be a great tool in life.”

That’s certainly advice worth sharing.

Download a sample containing the table of contents, event overview, and analysis of one sample resolution!

SpeechGeek’s Supplemental Debate brief  contains essential background knowledge on each topic, providing you with the necessary information fast when you’re Proposition (Aff) or Opposition (Neg). Hate getting stuck with just one case option? No worries! The files contain multiple plan text options to suit your needs. Each plan text is accompanied by advantage/contention outlines as well as detailed links to outside research, making Nationals preparation quick and easy. On the Negative? We’ve got you covered. The briefs contains both generic and case specific disadvantages and case turns to make prepping on the negative easier. Nationals is stressful. Make prepping simple.

The SpeechGeek Topic Analysis will review each of the 22 possible Supplemental Debate resolutions for the 2010 National Tournament.

Once the final eight resolutions are unveiled at Nationals registration, SpeechGeek will prepare additional analysis on the topics that will be used in rounds. This supplemental brief will be delivered via email on the afternoon of Tuesday, June 15, 2010.

Spend your time working toward your main event. If that doesn’t pan out, we’re here to help you be as competitive as possible in Supplemental Debate!

Visit the DebateChamps Forensics Superstore to purchase SpeechGeek’s Supplemental Debate Topic Analysis.