Watch the Public Forum Tutorial Videos!
The official ICCFS resolution: Released 11/12/11
Resolved:That for the United States the benefits of increasing the use of nuclear energy outweigh the risks.
Past Resolutions
Resolved:
Catastrophic cyber attacks against a government should be considered an act of war justifying military action
That federal disaster relief is more effective than localized relief in the United States.
That political and social protest is the most effective means of making positive change in government.
That there should be a ban on off shore drilling.
That rehabilitation for Haiti is best achieved through external governmental aid.
That English should be the official language of the United States.
That social networking has had a beneficial impact on communication in our culture.
That the food industry has a detrimental effect on the integrity of our food supply.
Framework of Debate
What is Public Forum Debate?
This style of debate is a team event that advocates or rejects a statement of fact or value posed by the resolution. The focus of the debate is a persuasive clash of ideas that can be understood by a lay judge or any “man-on-the-street.” Debaters should uphold their case and refute that of their opponents through sound reasoning using logic and analysis. While there are no burdens on either side, the debaters must support all of their arguments. One should present enough evidence, examples, quotes, and support to defend your arguments but not so much evidence and jargon as to destroy good communication with a lay person. Debaters should communicate ideas effectively with clarity, organization, eloquence, and professional decorum by utilizing the fundamentals of good speaking.
What is the order and time limits of the debate?
If Pro speaks first:
First Pro Constructive: 4 minutes
First Con Constructive: 4 minutes
First Crossfire: 3 minutes.
Second Pro Constructive: 4 minutes
Second Con Constructive: 4 minutes
Second Crossfire: 3 minutes.
First Pro Summary: 2 minutes
First Con Summary: 2 minutes
Grand Crossfire: 3 minutes.
Second Pro Final Focus: 1 minute
Second Con Final Focus: 1 minute
Notes: Each team gets 2 minutes of Prep Time to be used between speeches. During each crossfire, the Pro will ask the first question. Thereafter, either debater may ask or answer questions.
If Con speaks first:
First Con Constructive: 4 minutes
First Pro Constructive: 4 minutes
First Crossfire: 3 minutes.
Second Con Constructive: 4 minutes
Second Pro Constructive: 4 minutes
Second Crossfire: 3 minutes.
First Con Summary: 2 minutes
First Pro Summary: 2 minutes
Grand Crossfire: 3 minutes.
Second Con Final Focus: 1 minute
Second Pro Final Focus: 1 minute
Notes: Each team gets 2 minutes of Prep Time to be used between speeches. During each crossfire, the Con will ask the first question. Thereafter, either debater may ask or answer questions.
What should an argument look like? Arguments must be supported, whether by evidence, statistics, personal illustrations, historical examples, philosophy, quotes, etc. in order to be believable. This provides believable reasons why the claim is true. To close the argument, you should explain why the argument matters, how it affects your audience, and how it links to your side of the resolution.
What should the First Constructives look like? Begin by considering which words in the resolution need to be defined. If there is a particular word, phrase, or concept that you think should be defined in order to bring clarity in the debate, do so near the beginning of your speech. If there is background on the resolution that will help the judge understand the issues, you should present that as well. Your goal is to convince the judge and your audience, so you should try to find around three arguments that can establish a reason to believe your team’s position. These arguments can be abstract, concrete, or a mixture of both. Each issue should be an independent reason to vote for the resolution. A logical progression would be: personal story to provide context for the issue, an example from the news to show timeliness and support analysis, a general or theoretical issue to give the argument broader scope and importance, and supporting analysis from pragmatic, philosophical, historical, and/or economic areas. Close the speech by summarizing the issues and explaining why they matter.
What should the Second Constructives look like? Each speaker should analyze the opposing team’s position and explain flaws in the ideas presented by the other team. The two sides should have a clash of argumentation—direct responses to opposing arguments—but should also reinforce and extend their own team’s points from the first constructive. Remember to explain how your refutation of your opponents’ analysis impacts the topic.
What is a Crossfire? Both debaters stand and "hold the floor" during Crossfires for a two-way flow of questions and answers. Debaters should maintain professional, respectful communication regardless of whether they are asking or answering questions, and both debaters should make an effort to share the time reasonably. During the Grand Crossfire, all four debaters have the floor to interact with questions and answers. This tests teamwork as well as questioning and reasoning skills. Debaters should stand for the first two Crossfires but remain seated for Grand Crossfire.
What is a Summary? In the summary speeches, each team should review the round and narrow it down to a few key issues from the debate, showing why the resolution should be accepted or rejected based on their arguments. This may require both additional support for earlier arguments and refutation of the other team’s arguments, but no new arguments should be raised in these speeches.
What is a Final Focus? The Final Focus speech is your team’s chance to hone in persuasively on a final reason for the judge to come to your side. Speakers should choose one argument from the round that they want to leave in the judge’s mind as the round ends, whether it is a strong argument for their side or a final rebuttal of one of the other team’s arguments. This argument should be chosen strategically to target a key issue from the round and win the judge to your side, but should not be a new argument. This speech trains students to harness their time effectively and strategically identify which arguments are most persuasive to a judge.
Who starts the debate? Public Forum debates may begin Pro or Con. Postings will designate whether your team is Pro or Con and whether you begin or respond. Some rounds begin with a coin toss. In these instances, the team that wins the coin toss may choose either the side of the topic they wish to defend (Pro or Con) and whether they wish to be the first team to present their constructive speech in the round or whether they wish to respond.
Benefits of Public Forum
Why Public Forum? Every aspect of public forum debate is carefully designed to replicate what an actual debate in the real world would look like. The resolution changes every month or two, forcing debaters to put emphasis on research, but also allowing them to jump-in midseason because they aren’t required to amass inordinate amounts of information about a particular narrow subject. The focus on effective communication and persuasion in the round encourages argumentation that is understandable by any audience and brings the debate to the level of any man on the street. The inquiry period or “crossfire” allows both debaters to ask questions of each other, simulating the way questions would take place in a conversation. Furthermore, the “grand crossfire” where all four debaters can ask questions and discuss issues, creates a situation that develops teamwork and group communication skills.
Why would my competitive policy or value debater need Public Forum? Public Forum debate is a great supplement for students who are already involved with other styles of competitive debate because it bridges the skills refined in those styles and makes the connection to real-world argumentation. We want to augment skills that are developed in policy and value debate by making those skills even more applicable to actual conversations!
Why would my non-interested student need Public Forum? Students who might not necessarily consider themselves “the debater type” can still enjoy and benefit from Public Forum debate. Being able to talk about current issues and to present ideas persuasively is a skill that everyone should cultivate. Public Forum is a good way for students who are not interested in debate to begin developing these skills in a format that is easy and realistic. Remember that Public Forum argumentation is directed toward the average layman rather than the academic and therefore should be able to be understood by anyone.
Why would my busy student need Public Forum? If your student is already very busy, Public Forum can be incorporated into their academic schedule with relative ease. The student can prepare for a competitive event by researching the topic for only a few hours, since the goal is broad knowledge on a general topic. Additionally, ICCFS tournaments are time conscious and are designed to take place within a day and a half.