Whitman Debate Camp

Policy Lecture Notes

 

These notes are a starter for your own lectures.

Reminder—you are expected to email Jim your lecture notes!

 

WNDI Cases and Evidence Cutting (Dean Sweberg)................................................................. 1

WNDI EVIDENCE POLICIES................................................................................................... 2

Prepare an Affirmative Case..................................................................................................... 4

Flowing, Responding Drills........................................................................................................ 7

Prepare a Disadvantage............................................................................................................. 9

Counterplans........................................................................................................................... 11

Advanced Counterplans (Ben Meiches with Jim Hanson)........................................................ 13

Prepare a Kritik....................................................................................................................... 16

Topicality Argumentation........................................................................................................ 17

Advanced Topicality Lecture Outline (Jessica Gates).............................................................. 19

Cross-Examination Game........................................................................................................ 21

Adapting to Judges.................................................................................................................. 22

 

 

 

WNDI Cases and Evidence Cutting (Dean Sweberg)

 

Briefly explain the Institute Cases and arguments

**** have the brief “position explanations” from joe

answer any questions kids have about affs, das, cps, ks  (be ready to refer them to the staff member who cut the position for tough ?s) – also remind them that this is a brief overview and they will have a chance to explore the positions through and through during the entire camp

 

 

Explain how to bracket, tag, cite evidence for the camp

***put a sample up on the screen or board for them to see – both an example of “paper-cut” and “computer-cut” ev

show them the different parts of the page:

margin (at least 1/2”-1”)

page number

brief title

tag

cite (FULL CITE- explain the parts of this)

Tell students that they need to write directly above the evidence the author, author qualifications, full date, publication, page number.
Remind them that they cannot write “Same source as above”
Tell them to use dark pens for photocopying!

card text

 

 

Explain how to do brief titles and indexes

Brief titles are important- who knows why?

How to do this in lab—what I like to do is use scrap paper and fold it over (bring one as an example)

Then go back through and put the cards on paper in order of “debatability (usability)”—these become briefs

When done, you should be ready to write in page numbers and then make an index so you can quickly find the argument you need in a round

--recommend expandos for organization – bring examples of very used files in the nonexpando and expando variety so they can see

 

 

Benefits of electronic files:

Can quickly re-order/underline cards on screen, or make 2AC, etc. blocks from your files

If you lose/destroy cards, just re-print them!!

-- cheat: MS word will make an index (TOC) for you!  (“insert” menu, “index and tables”, “table of contents”)

-- this requires you make the brief titles “headers” in the style menu (usually just says “normal”)

(you will see many files at wndi formatted similarly b/c many lab leaders use MS word to make their files in this way)

 

Explain that files need to be split into aff and neg!

This is important so that you have much less stuff to deal with in a given round

my partner and I ended up separating aff and neg evidence by tub (we had an “aff” tub and several neg tubs)

you can do this with expandos or color schemes of hanging folders or whatever works for you

the files put out at wndi will be separated into aff and neg

 

WNDI EVIDENCE POLICIES

 

SOURCE CITATIONS

Full Name, Qualifications, Full Date—Bold or Underline Last Name and Year

Book/Document/Magazine Name, page number/web address (include when viewed)

 

July Jones, Professor of Political Science, June 24, 2004, Mother Jones, p. 12.

 

Heather Barnett, Staff Writer, July 15, 2004, New York Times, accessed 6/30/2004, www.nytimes.com/story/notreallyastory/1/bush.htm

 

EVIDENCE PAGE LAYOUT

Electronic Documents with text are best—easy to print and small file size!

REGULAR PAPER BRIEFS

·       Please leave at least ˝ inch margins on all sides!

·       Please use DARK, THICK, BLACK OR DARK BLUE INK!  and Print Clearly.

 

NEW EVIDENCE/EVIDENCE STUDENT BROUGHT TO CAMP

May be used BUT . . .

·                  The student must provide real, substantive, evidenced answers to the position(s) advocated by the evidence. These answers must be approved by your lab leader

·                  The student must provide the originals for the evidence.

·                  The student must submit the evidence (the positions and the responses) to our camp assistants for printing.

·                  The evidence (position and responses) must be printed and distributed before it can be used in debates. This means the evidence usually must be submitted at least a full day before it can be used.

 

1. EVERYONE GETS THIS PRINTED EVIDENCE

·       All general aff evidence against neg positions will be distributed to everyone.

·       ·         Any neg evidence that is critical to answering a negative position. Lab leaders need to inform Jim/the Head Printer of this.

·       ·         Any neg evidence specifically against a camp affirmative.

NOTE—These different printings are why we need you to split your files into “Aff” and “Neg.”

 

2. ONLY THE AFFIRMATIVE GETS THIS PRINTED EVIDENCE

·       ·         Each aff lab gets printouts of all its aff materials (case, backup, answers to das, cps, ks, etc.).

·       ·         If a negative position is critical to answer a position against your affirmative, it will be printed for the members of that affirmative lab. Lab leaders need to inform Jim/camp assistants of this.

 

3. STUDENTS ALSO CHOOSE THIS EVIDENCE

·       ·         Students can choose up to 50% of the negative materials to be printed. They’ll do this on forms that we give them. Lab leaders can and should help students make these choices.

 

4. STUDENTS GET THE CD WITH ALL THE EVIDENCE

·       ·         Students get all the evidence produced at camp while they are here on a CD (policy) or via email (LD).

·       ·         Two week students can pay a small additional fee to receive the third week evidence on CD (policy) or via email (LD).

 

 

EVIDENCE BACKUP

 

Encourage your students to backup daily to the dcamp server!!! They can copy their files into their own folder.

 

Activity

 

WORKING EXAMPLE: Pass out a photocopy of THE SAME article to each student. The article should be on your affirmative case.

1.      Bracket the evidence IN THE ARTICLES
Tell students to bracket 3 to 7 sentences; the evidence should give a strong reason for its main claim.

ACTIVITY: Give them five minutes to find evidence in the article.  Call on students to state which sections of the article they used for evidence.  Critique the evidence.

2.      CUT OUT the evidence

3.      GLUE OR TAPE THE EVIDENCE TO A PIECE OF PAPER

4.      SOURCE CITE THE EVIDENCE
 
ACTIVITY: Have students do this with the evidence from their article.
BE SURE TO WALK AROUND THE ROOM LOOKING AND COMMENTING ON STUDENT WORK.

5.     TAG the evidence to make arguments
Show students how--explain they need to write a complete, 4 to 9 word sentence that accurately and persuasively states the main point of the evidence.
Provide an example of tagging on the overhead or with one of the pieces of evidence in the article.
NOTE: Our tags should use NO symbols or abbreviations; they MUST have verbs too--we want complete sentences!
ACTIVITY: Have students tag their evidence.
Be sure to show them where to write the tag (many will try to write tags after the citation, to the side of the evidence, etc.)

 

IF STUDENTS FINISH, GIVE THEM ADDITIONAL ARTICLES—THEY CAN USE ALL OF THIS EVIDENCE TO CONSTRUCT THEIR AFFIRMATIVE CASE.

 

 Prepare an Affirmative Case

 

WHAT JIM WANTS: Each student will finish this lab time with a completed affirmative case that he/she wrote. You will need to bring cut evidence into the lab to help make this happen as cutting articles up will not give you enough time to finish.

 

NOTE: EACH STUDENT NEEDS TO PREPARE HIS/HER OWN CASE SO THAT EACH STUDENT CAN PRESENT HIS/HER OWN CASE DURING THE NEXT HOUR

So, you need enough copies of the evidence you handout for each student to make his/her own case.

 

Using the evidence that all the students have just cut, cited and tagged (not any articles that only individual students received) and more evidence that you hand out, teach them how to construct an affirmative case.  Have them write a case using their evidence (about a 9 to 12 card 1AC).  Yes there is enough time to write a case if you keep your lecture short and maximize the time that they work on their case.  Try to look at everyone’s work--walk around the room and offer encouraging and helpful comments and answer questions.

NOTE: Students work on their affirmative case individually. Make sure each student knows how to put together an affirmative case.

 

1.  STACK YOUR EVIDENCE

Make a significance, inherency and solvency stack.

--SIGNIFICANCE SHOWS THERE IS A PROBLEM AND THAT IT IS HARMFUL.

--INHERENCY SHOWS THAT THE PRESENT SYSTEM CAUSES OR WILL NOT SOLVE THE PROBLEM.

--SOLVENCY SHOWS A PROPOSAL WILL SOLVE THE PROBLEM.

ACTIVITY: GIVE THEM EXAMPLE ARGUMENTS AND HAVE THEM CATEGORIZE THE ARGUMENT. E.G. "ACADEMIC ACHIEVEMENT IS FAILING" (SIGNIFICANCE)

ACTIVITY: Pass out the affirmative case evidence. Give students time to read it. Then, have them cut up the evidence and "stack" it.

2. CONSTRUCT A PLAN.

Look at your solvency evidence to see what it says are the actions needed to solve problems.

WORKING EXAMPLE: Choose a plan to construct that includes all of the following elements:

PLANKS METHOD:

PLANK ONE: BOARD--include who will oversee the plan

PLANK TWO: MANDATES--include the specific actions you want taken

PLANK THREE: ENFORCEMENT--include how you will enforce the plan mandates

PLANK FOUR: FUNDING--include how you will pay for your plan

PLANK FIVE: INTENT--include intent statement

SECTION METHOD:

SECTION ONE: MANDATES--include the specific actions you want taken

SECTION TWO: LOGISTICS--include how the plan will be enacted, enforced, and funded

3. PREPARE THE ACTUAL CASE

Choose the best evidence that you have

WORKING EXAMPLE: Develop an outlined advantage on the overhead as you discuss the following; NOTE: If you want to use an inherency, plan, advantage; sig, inh, plan, solv. format: that is totally fine.

1. TITLE THE ADVANTAGE.  "Advantage One: The plan achieves an advantage."

2. FOR SUBPOINT A: INCLUDE SIGNIFICANCE ARGUMENTS.  An affirmative significance argument shows a problem and harms.

3. FOR SUBPOINT B: INCLUDE INHERENCY ARGUMENTS.  An affirmative inherency argument shows that the present system causes the problem or cannot solve the problem.

EXPLANATION: Point out that students need to show that the present system is different from the plan, this difference makes the present system fail, and to make sure that the plan will solve this failure.

4. FOR SUBPOINT C: INCLUDE SOLVENCY ARGUMENTS.  An affirmative solvency argument shows that the plan solves the problem.

ACTIVITY: Give students ten minutes to construct an affirmative case with these pieces of evidence.

You should look at everyone’s affirmative case--comment on them and tell them how to improve their case.

4. INCLUDE IMPACTS AND TRANSITIONS BETWEEN POINTS.

1. IMPACT THE ARGUMENTS.  How to impact arguments: "Because of (the label or the reason in the evidence), therefore the argument or resolution is true".

WORKING EXAMPLE: Impact the arguments in your overhead case.

2. INCLUDE TRANSITIONS.

ILLUSTRATION: Get five students to volunteer and come to the front of the class.  Hand out five slips of paper with a word or phrase to the five students.  Tell them to make one sentence connections between their word and the word of the previous person.  For example, a student could link her word "dogs" to the previous student's word "cats" by offering the transition, "they fought like cats and dogs".  When each has offered their transition--note, without attacking any of the student's transitions specifically, how some of the transitions were better than others.

WORKING EXAMPLE: Tell students to make transitions between the arguments in their cases by using the same effective kinds of connections.  Do one or two transitions in the overhead case with student help.

5. MAKE AN INTRODUCTION. 

Have them include a one or two sentence opener before going into the first observation.

6. MAKE A CONCLUSION. 

Tell them to write a one sentence persuasive summary of the case followed by “Please vote affirmative.”

7. WHAT TO DO WITH REMAINING EVIDENCE?

Tell the students we will work together to use the evidence to make backup briefs for their cases.

 

IF YOU HAVE TIME LEFT: OFFER Advanced ideas for cases? Rhetoric of a case; preemption of negative arguments; etc.

 

Flowing, Responding Drills

 

WHAT JIM WANTS: I want every student to flow (not necessarily on a flowsheet with columns). When students flow, I want them to flow the evidence—THEY SHOULD WRITE DOWN THE SOURCE AND THE REASONS/FACTS THE EVIDENCE PROVIDES. I want you to check their flowing and give them concrete tips for improving. I want every student to engage in “4 step” refutation. Some people like to describe 4 step refutation differently than I do--that’s fine with me. Just get them to respond to arguments.

 

YOU NEED FOR THIS LECTURE: Evidence for an argument and against it.

 

Its as simple as it sounds. Give them the basics in the lecture below. Then, have them flow; followed by having them refute. Try to look at everyone’s work--walk around the room and offer encouraging and helpful comments and answer questions.

 

1. WHAT YOU FLOW

When you flow an argument, write down:

·        the tag

·        the source

·        the main reasons or facts that the evidence offers in support of the label. Make sure you tell them to flow the evidence--that is the most common flowing problem.

DO AN EXAMPLE ON THE BOARD

ACTIVITY: Present two arguments for them to flow.  Have students flow the arguments. Have two or three students reconstruct the arguments out loud by using their flows.  Comment on their flowing skills based on their reconstruction.

2. ABBREVIATION TIPS

SQ, Increase, Decrease, Causes, Sig., Inh., Solv., etc.

Topic specific abbreviations: ed; acad achiev; super ed flex; federalism; clinton; etc.

ACTIVITY: Have students flow two more arguments. REMEMBER--SPEAK SLOWLY!  SUGGESTION--PRESENT ONE ARGUMENT AND THEN ASK IF THEY WANT YOU TO GO SLOWER--ALSO LOOK AT WHAT THEY ARE WRITING AS YOU PRESENT THE CASE.

3. FLOWING RESPONSES

Draw an arrow across from the argument and then write the response.

DO AN EXAMPLE ON THE BOARD

ACTIVITY: Present responses to two of the arguments you presented. Have students flow the responses. AGAIN--SPEAK VERY SLOWLY.  Have two or three students read their flows out loud and comment on their flowing skills based on what they say they flowed.

4. ACTIVITY: PLAY THE I DISAGREE GAME

Have students split into two groups, go to sides of the room, line up single file and face each other.  Start by having the first student in one of the two lines (line A) make an argument.  On the other side (line B), the first student should say, "I disagree because . . .", and should complete the sentence.  The second person in line A should make an argument and the second person in the line B should respond with, "I disagree because . . ." and the process continues until everyone has made an argument.  Then, reverse roles and have line B make arguments and line B make responses.

5. RESPONDING TO ARGUMENTS WHEN YOU DEBATE

1. FLOW.  Flow your opponent's arguments carefully.

WORKING EXAMPLE/ACTIVITY: Present and flow an argument.

2. THINK UP REFUTATION RESPONSES.  As you flow, listen to your opponent's arguments.  What flaws do you see in their arguments?

Prepare to present these flaws you see in their arguments by drawing an arrow across from their argument and writing down the flaw.

3. PULL OUT BRIEFS.  Pull out briefs that attack the argument.  Draw an arrow across from their argument and writing down the response(s) from the briefs you choose.

WORKING EXAMPLE/ACTIVITY: Pass out a brief with responses on it.

4. NOTE: WRITE DOWN RESPONSES WHEN YOU CAN.  Flow your arguments as you flow your opponent's case or when your opponent is finished.

5. USE YOUR FLOWSHEET TO DO YOUR REFUTATION (4 step).

·        On the left, you’ll see your opponent’s argument. STATE THE NUMBER AND TAG.

·        You see the arrow on your flow. PAUSE, SAY “I DISAGREE,” ETC.

·        You see your responses. GIVE YOUR RESPONSES--NUMBER, TAG, REASON/EVIDENCE

·        When you are done with your responses: SUM UP IN ONE SHORT SENTENCE YOUR POINT, AND SAY “GO TO THEIR NEXT ARGUMENT, . . .”

ACTIVITY: Present another argument.  Tell students to prepare responses to the argument.  Give students ten minutes to prepare to respond to the argument using four step refutation.  Each student will go to the front of the class and do four step refutation.  Inevitably, they do not do it correctly.  Critique their refutation and make them do it again until they get it right.  Encourage students to use accurate, clear, and concise labels, clear four step refutation, and the use of both refutation and counterargumentation.  Be sure to point out what students do well in addition to what they need to improve upon.

 

ACTIVITY: Continue 4 step refutation practice.

 

 

Prepare a Disadvantage

 

WHAT JIM WANTS: Every student will write their own disad shell using evidence pre-cut by you.

 

NOTE: PHOTOCOPY TIPS

Make sure the evidence/tags are at least ˝ inch away from the margin.

Make sure writing is in dark pen (at least medium point). Otherwise, it may not photocopy properly.

 

NOTE: BRING EVIDENCE PRE-CUT TO MAKE THE DISADVANTAGE SHELL. YOU SHOULD ENOUGH COPIES FOR ONE SET OF THE SAME EVIDENCE FOR EACH STUDENT.

 

Teach students how to construct a disadvantage.  Hand out evidence to students and have them construct a disadvantage (about a 2 to 3 card Disad).  There is time to do this if you keep your lecture short.  If there is time left--talk to them about backup briefs and/or affirmative answers to disadvantages.

 

PREPARE DISADVANTAGES

 

I. HOW TO CONSTRUCT A DISADVANTAGE

A. STACK YOUR EVIDENCE into the following piles

--BRINKS SHOW WE ARE ON THE VERGE OF A PROBLEM

--UNIQUENESS SHOWS THE STATUS QUO WILL NOT CAUSE THE PROBLEM/ONLY THE PLAN WILL

--LINKS SHOW THE PLAN WILL CAUSE A PROBLEM

--INTERNAL LINKS SHOW THE PROBLEM WILL LEAD TO ANOTHER PROBLEM

--IMPACTS SHOW THE PROBLEM WILL BE HARMFUL

1. TEST THE STUDENTS. GIVE THEM EXAMPLE ARGUMENTS IN A DISADVANTAGE AND SEE IF THEY CAN TELL IF THEY ARE LINKS, BRINKS, UNIQUENESS, OR IMPATCS

2. HANDOUT THE DISADVANTAGE EVIDENCE

B. PUT THE DISADVANTAGE TOGETHER

Get a story in mind of how the plan causes the problem and what the harms of this problem are. Then prepare away!

1. TITLE THE DISADVANTAGE.

Give the disadvantage a two to four word title like “Chinese Nationalism Disadvantage”

2. GIVE A THESIS FOR THE DISADVANTAGE

The plan will cause the problem

3. INCLUDE SUBPOINTS FOR EACH KEY PART OF THE DISADVANTAGE

--INCLUDE THE BRINK. 

Showsthat "We are on the verge of a crisis."

--INCLUDE UNIQUENESS. 

The status quo will not cause the disadvantage to occur.

----INCLUDE THE LINKS.

Show that "The Plan will cause or increase a problem."

----INCLUDE INTERNAL LINKS

Show the problem will lead to another problem.

--INCLUDE THE IMPACTS.

Subpoint B of the disadvantage shows that "Causing or Increasing the problem will be harmful."

ACTIVITY: Have students construct a disadvantage using the evidence.  GO OUT AND HELP STUDENTS PREPARE THEIR DISADVANTAGE. Note: Many students get confused and just can't tell the difference between a link and an impact. Keep trying to explain. Call on two or three students to present their disadvantages to the class.

 

 

Counterplans

 

WHAT JIM WANTS: Student will prepare an outline for a counterplan and respond to the counterplan without evidence.

 

LECTURE:

I. ARGUING COUNTERPLANS

WORKING EXAMPLE: Choose a counterplan and make example arguments for each of the items below to illustrate how to prepare a counterplan.

A. NEGATIVES ADVOCATE A COUNTERPLAN AS AN ALTERNATIVE TO THE AFFIRMATIVE PLAN

B. WHEN NEGATIVES PRESENT A COUNTERPLAN, THEY NEED TO DO THE FOLLOWING:

1. PRESENT A COUNTERPLAN

You use planks or sections just like you do for a plan.

---note that people now frequently skip 2 and 3

2. ARGUE THAT THE COUNTERPLAN IS NOT TOPICAL

This shows that the counterplan rejects the topic--supporting the negative side of the topic

3. ARGUE THAT THE COUNTERPLAN IS COMPETITIVE

To do this, you need to show that the counterplan should not be adopted with the plan.  To do this, you can argue:

a. THE COUNTERPLAN IS MUTUALLY EXCLUSIVE

This means the counterplan and plan cannot exist at the same time

b. THE COUNTERPLAN IS NET BENEFITS COMPETITIVE

This means the counterplan alone is superior to the plan and counterplan

4. ARGUE THAT THE COUNTERPLAN IS ADVANTAGEOUS

Show that the counterplan has advantages that the affirmative plan cannot achieve

ACTIVITY: Have students work on the Prepbook counterplan.

 

LECTURE:

I. RESPONDING TO COUNTERPLANS

WORKING EXAMPLE: Choose a counterplan and make example arguments for each of the items below to illustrate how to attack a counterplan.

A. ARGUE THAT THE COUNTERPLAN IS TOPICAL

B. ARGUE THAT THE COUNTERPLAN IS NOT COMPETITIVE

1. SHOW THAT THE COUNTERPLAN AND PLAN CAN CO-EXIST

2. SHOW THAT THE COUNTERPLAN AND PLAN TOGETHER WOULD BE BETTER THAN THE COUNTERPLAN ALONE

3. REJECT BOGUS COUNTERPLAN COMPETITION STANDARDS INCLUDING:

a. REDUNDANCY

Redundancy shows the counterplan is similar to the plan.  Argue against this by showing the two are not redundant and by arguing that even if they are, the counterplan is not a reason against the affirmative plan.

b. PHILOSOPHICAL COMPETITION

Philosophical competition shows the counterplan has different objectives than the plan.  Argue against this by saying they share objectives and two policies can be supported even if they have different objectives.

c. ARTIFICIAL COMPETITION

Artificial competition shows the counterplan cannot exist or should not exist with a part of the plan that is not germane to discussing the resolution.  For example, the counterplan may use the affirmative funding mechanism and then the negative claims the two cannot both use the same funding.  Argue against this by saying it is illegitimate, irrelevant and would make any counterplan competitive.

C. ARGUE THAT THE COUNTERPLAN WILL NOT ACHIEVE ITS CLAIMED ADVANTAGES

D. ARGUE THAT THE COUNTERPLAN WILL BE DISADVANTAGEOUS

E. ARGUE THAT THE COUNTERPLAN WILL NOT ACHIEVE THE AFFIRMATIVE ADVANTAGES

 

 

Advanced Counterplans (Ben Meiches with Jim Hanson)

 

  1. Basic Structure of a Counterplan:
    1. A text
    2. Topicality/Non-Topicality
    3. Competition/Non-Competition
    4. Solvency
  2. What is a Counterplan?-question addressed to student body- How does a counterplan work?  What does it let you do?
    1. Discussion of Solvency for counterplan-solving the case, solving the case better, examples: US counterplan for Afghanistan affirmative-US peacekeepers effective at eradicating terrorists and solve advantage 1, but won’t improve relations so they don’t solve advantage 2, and solving additional components such as da’s
    2. Discussion of Mutual Exclusivity/Net Benefits- Questions: What does it mean to be Mutually Exclusive? Explain how Counterplans cannot exist simultaneously- What does it mean to Net Beneficial?  Example: Consult NATO counterplan-appeases NATO and solves cohesion-something that US support of the UN cannot do alone
    3. Net Benefits can be Disadvantages and critiques-the debate becomes focused on what the plan does versus the counterplan
  3. Competition/Text: 
    1. Must be careful about the text of counterplans: “The United States federal government should increase the number of peacekeepers in Afghanistan by 100%” vs. “The United States federal government should the number of peacekeepers in Afghanistan by 100%” – flaws inherent in misspelling/miswriting articles of the counterplan. 
    2. Competition: Functional-When it is literally impossible for the 2 counterplans to function in the same world…  can anyone think of an example?  Textual: when the two texts exist in competition with one another: can anyone think of an example?
  4. Topicality:
    1. Non-topical counterplan: example one that does not require UN support-reasons they are good 1) allows the negative to negate the resolution 2) clearly divides ground-Brite Line
    2. Topical Counterplans-ask students for example?-exist within the grounds of the resolution 1) increase neg ground 2) create plan focus
  5. Condition of your counterplan
    1. Unconditional-advocating until the end
    2. Conditionality-can be kicked at any time
    3. Dispositionality-1) traditional- neg can kick at any time, but the aff can straight turn  2)  reciprocal-aff gets a permutation also dispositional
  6. Permutations
    1. Can anyone tell me what a permutation is? Explanation: A combination of action
    2. Illegit permutations- timeframe e.g. have US peacekeepers now and then UN peacekeepers, severence-permutations that remove part of the plan, intrinsic-add external elements- ie US peacekeepers, UN peacekeepers supported by the US and diplomats

C.     XXXXXXXX THE BELOW ON FUNC/TEXTUAL NEEDS BETTER EXPLANATION; QUESTIONS TOO HARD TO DISCERN WHAT ANSWER IS XXXXXX

C.D.                   Permutations operate in terms of functional and textual competition (see above), does anyone have an idea how you might frame debates in terms of textual and functional competition?

D.E.                   Permutations can sometimes be advocated at the end of the round instead of the plan e.g. both us peacekeepers and un supported peacekeepers as opposed to the plan action, is this legitimate?  Can you think of some reasons?

  1. Answering Counterplans
    1. Focusing answers on the distinction between counterplan and plan/ break it down into components, what is the mechanism of counterplan vs. plan, what does it do?  What are the net benefits?
    2. Focusing answers on the plan vs. squo, what is the comparative advantage-how much better can the plan make it.  Pretend the counterplan is the status quo for answering it-what does the plan do better? What worse? 
    3. Solvency deficits-what is a solvency deficit?  E.G. Consult NATO v. put peacekeepers in Iraq, 1 is certain, 1 is uncertain, you can leverage this how?  Use case advantages to outweigh or answer the counterplan can anyone think of a situation with a solvency deficit?
    4. If a DA/Critique is a net benefit-turn the net benefit so that the counterplan has a da against it
    5. Read Add-Ons.  Extra advantages that the counterplan cannot answer-like net benefits to the plan- can anyone think of  a situation where they might read an add-on?
  2. If your running a counterplan and all goes wrong you can still win in any number of ways
    1. keep your options open-locking yourself into needing to go for the counterplan can be disastors
    2. Even if your critique/da links to the counterplan it may “link less” to the plan, can anyone think of a situation where this might be the case?  E.G. Congress vs. Supreme Court CP w/ politics net benefit
  3. Advanced Counterpaln Theory
    1. Neg Fiat-Yes/NO
    2. Plan Inclusive Counterplans-examples
    3. Consult Counterplans-examples
    4. Conditionality Debates-examples
    5. Delay CP’s
    6. Pros and Cons of running an illegitimate counterplan
  4. The Institute Counterplans

BE READY WITH A LIST OF THESE

 

 

 

WHAT KIND OF PERMUTATIONS ARE LEGITIMATE

1. PERMUTATIONS ARE A COMBINATION OF THE PLAN AND COUNTERPLAN TO DEMONSTRATE THAT THE TWO CAN CO-EXIST

2. DEPENDS ON THE JUDGE AND HOW YOU ARGUE IT.

3. PURE MIX—ALL OF PLAN AND COUNTERPLAN

4. PLAN AMENDMENT PERM—PART OF PLAN IS ALTERED PLUS THE COUNTERPLAN

5. COUNTERPLAN AMENDMENT PERM—PART OF THE COUNTERPLAN IS ALTERED PLUS THE PLAN

6. TIME PERMUTATIONS

This is where the affirmative does the counterplan earlier or later  than the plan.

Questionable strategy because any two actions can be done at separate times and because doing one later or earlier may not gain the same advantages.

7. CAPTURE PERMUTATIONS

This is where the affirmative adds the counterplan to its plan and begins to advocate it.

Questionable strategy because it shifts advocacy but if the added part of the counterplan is topical there is some legitimacy to it.