How to look like you know what you’re doing when you don’t and how to avoid looking like you don’t when you do.

SPEECH STRUCTURE
The four-point structure
1.
Frame the debate – introduce the basic moral of practical stance your side stands behind.
2.
Introduction – what are you points, what are you going to say
3.
Say your points – clearly mark them out each time you move to a new one
4.
Give a quick summary of what you said ~15 secs

GIVING THE SPEECH
• How many points do you have – number them distinctly during prep
• Give rebuttal – keep this separate from your main points unless you’re sure you can flag it up during your speech.
• Tell the judge if you’re doing rebuttal or substansive
• Clearly mark when you move from one point to the next

STRUCTURING POINTS - SPEEL
• S-tatus quo (or opposition’s view of events)
• P-oint
• E-xplanation
• E-xample
• L-ink

STATUS QUO
• Debating is a comparative game, you win points relative to other people
• The Status quo just means if you’re on prop make sure you outline the problem you’re solving and why it’s bad
• If on Opp, highlight the problem they create and why that’s bad
• Without comparing the world with/without the motion it’s very hard to win

POINT
• A short title of what you’re trying to prove.
• You do it so that the judge knows where you’re going from the start
• If possible write it during prep otherwise it’s easy to get confused when you stand up
• Even if you do nothing else, if the judge knows what you were trying to do they can give you better feedback on this point

EXPLANATION
• This is where you detail why the point you have is true
AND why it’s important
• Very often both sides of the debate will give too visions of the world – both of what will happen and what things we ought to prioritise
• When a judge comes to look at you they will decide whose world is more compelling
• When preparing always ask the “why” test of everything you’re about to say

EXAMPLE
• A fact, statistic, story, even an anecdote
• Don’t worry you don’t have to know anything – a thought experiment “imagine a person in this scenario…” can work just as well
• Also a place to set precedents about what we already do – if you’re banning extreme sports, explain why we ban certain activities already
• Helps keep you relevant and helps people relate what you’re saying to the real world

LINK
• Why does your point affect the pass or failure of the motion?
• Just because you’re talking about animal testing doing something bad – doesn’t mean you’re explaining why it should be banned – See James and my exchange in
BARD
• If you do this it guarantees your argument is relevant and gives another chance to explain importance

THW GIVE ALL PRISONERS THE UNCONDITIONAL
RIGHT TO VOTE IN ELECTIONS– GIVE ME IDEAS