NATIONAL SPEECH & DEBATE ASSOCIATION
ARGUMENTATION AND CASE CONSTRUCTION
Teacher’s Name:
Unit Name:
Lincoln-Douglas Debate
Lesson Title
Argumentation & Case Construction
Indicate which:
Beginner
Intermediate
Advanced
Focus Skill:
Time Frame:
Students will learn the elements of an argument
and how to organize an effective, compelling case.
PART 1—ESSENTIAL ELEMENTS
Essential Question
Objective 1
What are the essential elements of argumentation?
How is an effective debate case constructed?
Students will understand the requirements of a compelling argument.
Objective 2
Students will learn how to construct an affirmative and negative case.
Objective 3
Students will have practical experience with argument construction.
Overview of Lesson (General summary of what will be covered):
Most students have had an opportunity to write a five-part expository essay, beginning with the
introduction which features a clear thesis, moving through three solid arguments with topic sentences
and effectively cited evidence and examples, and ending with a conclusion. Writing a constructive
case, whether it is affirming or negating a resolution, is really very similar. There are some
conventions of Lincoln/Douglas which will need to be incorporated. There will be some language
choices that will be dictated by the event. The mastery of case-writing will make the communication
between the debater and the listeners (competitor AND judge) more effective and add clarity to the
debate for all involved.
In this lesson the student will learn to:
 construct an effective argument
 use evidence effectively and honestly
 build a compelling and clear affirmative and negative case
1
NATIONAL SPEECH & DEBATE ASSOCIATION
ARGUMENTATION AND CASE CONSTRUCTION
PART 2—THE LESSON
Detailed Step-by-Step Lesson (be sure to include time allocation information):
Session #
Time
Details of the Lesson
For the teacher –
Much of the material that is presented in this lesson will educate you, as well
Pre-session N/A
as your student debaters. You have a wealth of information available to you
from the National Speech and Debate Association website.
https://www.speechanddebate.org/resources Their textbook, Lincoln Douglas
Debate, is available there, in its entirety. It is rich with activities and you may
want to create handouts using the material that NSDA provides free of charge.
This lesson “boils down” that information and combines it with other sources
listed at the end of the unit. As always, the lesson also reflects the experience
that seasoned coaches have shared. This lesson is intended to help beginners
get started.
1. Have the students establish a small folder in which they will keep their
notes in this unit, their practice case-writing, and their evaluations of the
debates that they will observe in the classroom and online. Assign credit for
the notetaking, as this information is core to their success.
2. Prepare a visible word bank in the classroom. The “vocabulary of debate”
should be part of their cases and their formal assessment.
3. Throughout this lesson, an example resolution is used. You may want to
replace this with whatever the students will debate at their first tournament so
that all of the activities are working to prepare them for that experience.
Lecture notes for the student –
55 minutes
I. Understanding the resolution
WORD BANK: A resolution is the topic of the debate, most often expressed
as a statement of fact, affirmed by the affirmative team and opposed by the
negative team.
Activity #1 – Practice defining the words in a resolution [NOTE: Students
will have done some of these activities if they went through the
Resolutional Analysis Lesson for the current topic. Use your best
judgement about what activities students will need to do to be prepared to
write cases.] – Your first step will be defining the words in the resolution.
Example resolution: Resolved that truth seeking should take
precedence over privileged communication in court.
In our example, terms need to be clarified. In particular, “truth seeking”
“privileged communication,” “take precedence,” and “should.” Notice these
terms are not broken down to single words, nor should they be. Definitions of
key terms must be understood in context.
1. Introduce the students to basic dictionaries and their functions:
Oxford English Dictionary (OED)
Black’s Law Dictionary – Used when you are dealing with legal
terms
Encyclopedia of Philosophy – Especially handy in multi-word
expressions
(These dictionaries are usually available in your school library)
Smart Phone – For this activity, consider allowing the students to
use their smart phones or other electronic devices to access online
dictionaries.
2. Working in pair/share groups, have the students look up the words
in the example resolution. [NOTE: you may want to replace the
2
NATIONAL SPEECH & DEBATE ASSOCIATION
ARGUMENTATION AND CASE CONSTRUCTION
example resolution with the first resolution the students will be
debating at tournaments; you can find the current resolution at
https://www.speechanddebate.org/topics/.
3. Have the students “re-write” the resolution, using the definitions
they find.
4. Reconvene as a class to discuss their findings and have individual
students share how they have re-worded the example resolution in
their own words, using those definitions.
Possible questions for class discussion:
 What do you understand the resolution is saying?
 Why is the subject of the resolution an issue?
Possible questions which specifically relate to the example resolution:
 If priests or doctors don’t need to reveal guilt, how can detectives
and eventually the courts find someone guilty of a crime?
 Will potential suspects be able to escape punishment if confidants are
not expected to come forward?
 Will suspects decline to talk to psychiatrists and get help if they feel
their records will not be protected?
 Are there cases where suspects might lie to priests or psychiatrists?
 Are there other individuals who may not have to tell the truth about a
suspect who confesses to them? (suspect, spouse, significant other,
family, etc.)
5. Allow as much freedom as possible as the students discuss. If
there is information that they need, call on students to check what
they can find on their smart phones or other devices as you move
through this clarifying discussion. Checking the internet is NOT the
only OR best source for information, but our purpose here is to gain
access to the meaning of the resolution and remove potential “road
blocks” in today’s discussion/activity.
6. In order to help students understand the example resolution and
give the teacher/coach a sense of what definitions would be
appropriate, these definitions may help you guide the students in
this lesson if you are using the example resolution:
Truth seeking: taking all the necessary means (i.e., steps) in order to discover
the truth about a legal question.
Take precedence: to allow one goal to be pursued over another when the two
goals conflict.
Privileged communication: allowing a person to refrain from testifying in a
court because of the way in which he discovered certain information – such as
through holy confession, confidential medical consultation, or other protected
contact.
Should: a morally right action – an action should be done if it is morally
right. “Should” means that it would be the best possible course of action,
giving equal consideration to all people.
55 minutes
3
FOR HOMEWORK: Ask other people what they think the resolution means
and what they think the main arguments are on each side. (Coach, parents,
teachers, friends, and other debaters). Come prepared for discussion
tomorrow!
Day 2 - Lecture notes for the student –
Two ways to approach a resolution – REVIEW
1. Imagine realistic situations which might cause two reasonable
people to disagree concerning the issue that the resolution talks
NATIONAL SPEECH & DEBATE ASSOCIATION
ARGUMENTATION AND CASE CONSTRUCTION
about.
2. Ask other people what they think the resolution means and what
they think the main arguments are on each side. (Coach, parents,
teachers, friends, and other debaters).
WORD BANK: An affirmative is the side in the debate which agrees with the
resolution as worded. Although both sides in the debate have the burden to
prove their arguments are true, it is customary that the affirmative has the
“burden of proof” in proving the resolution (as worded) is more viable and a
more prudent way to act when two values come in conflict.
A negative is the side in the debate that does not agree with the
affirmative and; therefore, opposes the premise of the resolution as worded.
Although both sides in the debate have the burden to clash with arguments
developed by their opponent, it is customary that the negative has the “burden
of clash” with all of the ideas presented in the affirmative position.
Activity #2 – Developing Arguments – Today, the teacher/coach will be the
expert in the room. In order to keep the discussion alive, you will have to
come to class with a plethora of potential arguments on each side. Otherwise,
the students will likely get bogged down in hackneyed arguments that
everyone else found as well. You need to keep the process going. Have the
students keep the same notes on the same example resolution: Resolved that
truth seeking should take precedence over privileged communication in court.
[NOTE: Remember, you can also substitute the current topic or the topic the
students will debate.]
1. Have the students set up a T Chart and label affirmative to the
left and negative to the right. Take notes on the board, or project
their ideas/arguments, if you have that technology. Keep the
discussion going with statements like, “Why?” “What good is that?”
“What do you mean?” “Is this a negative argument?” Write down
all of their ideas. Do not let them get mired down in arguing against
one another. The idea is to come up with as many ideas, affirmative
and negative, as you can generate. “Where did you get this idea?”
“What if…?” “Is this the same as xyz’s argument?” “What reason
do you have for that idea?” Keep it going. If they have missed
arguments, suggest them to the students. Seek out students who have
done a bit of research on the topic. Offer your own research to
springboard ideas as well.



2. At the end of the process, have each student circle the three best
reasons for supporting each side of the example resolution. At this
point:
Make sure that they understand the arguments
Make sure that they never use the exact case being used by the rest of
their team. Each student on the team should have his/her own original
case to ensure each student understands what he/she is arguing.
Make sure that, even if they have the same arguments as a neighbor,
they should work toward their own examples and analogies
FOR HOMEWORK: Begin to research your three arguments on each side
and bring an article or two that supports your position and the arguments that
you plan to make in the debate. Bring your findings to class, because
tomorrow the work begins!
4
NATIONAL SPEECH & DEBATE ASSOCIATION
ARGUMENTATION AND CASE CONSTRUCTION
- Lecture notes for the student –
55 minutes
Structuring your case
WORD BANK: The case is the speech in which each side introduces their
arguments
Introduction
Definitions
Tagline, tag, signposts – a brief phrase, ideally three words or
less, that you should use to refer to each of your points, as well
as each of your opponent’s points. Tags make it easier for
your judge to “flow” (take notes on) your case.
Observations/clarifications
Conclusion
FOR THE TEACHER/COACH: Now that the students have a general idea
what the resolution means and have selected reasons for their affirmative and
the negative positions, it is time to move into the structure of a case. There are
two primary formats of case construction. One format is the three point case
and the other is the single argument case. As the names imply, the three point
case has three general arguments presented in a 6 minute format. Not much
time for much depth in analysis, examples, or proof. The single argument
case is generally more powerful and convincing if done well, which takes
tournament experience. This format has a particular appeal when writing a
negative speech because the prepared negative speech is shorter, and it takes
less time to make one argument than three. The single argument case is
based upon premise (an assumption of the argument) and uses logic to bring
the case to the conclusion. Because your students are beginners, limit their
organization to the three point case. Judges and opponents are likely to be
familiar with the format even if they are new and the format allows the student
debater a chance to decide which arguments are going to be the strongest as
the debate progresses.
Lecture notes for the student –
Structuring your case
A. The affirmative constructive L-D speech is allotted six minutes and
traditionally includes these sections (in this order):
1. Introduction
2. Definitions, and clarifications or observations
3. Statement of value premise and criterion
4. Body of the speech (the arguments)
5. Conclusion
B. The negative constructive L-D speech is allotted seven minutes and
traditionally includes these sections (in this order):
1. Introduction
2. Contested definitions, and clarifications or observations IF NECESSARY
3. Statement of value premise and criterion
4. Body of the speech (the arguments)
5. Brief conclusion of prepared speech
6. Rebuttals against every point of the affirmative speech
7. Conclusion of the speech
5
NATIONAL SPEECH & DEBATE ASSOCIATION
ARGUMENTATION AND CASE CONSTRUCTION
C. An INTRODUCTION should capture the attention of the judge.
1. Can be a quotation relevant to the resolution
2. Something from literature or history
3. A hypothetical example that lends support to the position
4. An analogy that may not be apparent at the beginning of your speech, but
will revealed at the end
5. Not to exceed 30 seconds for the affirmative and 15 for the negative case
D. DEFINITIONS must be fair!
1. Negative should not contest the definitions in the case, unless the
affirmative has been very unfair.
2. Negative need not offer definitions, if the negative wants to use the
affirmative definitions.
3. Be brief. Be fair (don’t choose a definition that is so specific or obscure
that the other side has no possibility of meeting it). Be relevant to the
resolution.
E. CLARIFICATIONS and OBSERVATIONS provide an opportunity for
both affirmative and negative debaters to make general comments regarding
the interpretation of the resolution. These observations are optional, but they
are important to keep the debate on the right track. Be fair! This is a chance
for the affirmative to point out that they are under no obligation to provide a
plan for implementing an idea, or even deal with financial or attitudinal
barriers to an idea; only to show that an idea should be worthy of
consideration for implementation. This prevents the LD style from being
mired down in, “But how are we going to pay for this?” “Do you really think
the American Congress, as it currently stands, would vote for this?” So, in our
sample case (Resolved that truth seeking should take precedence over
privileged communication in court), the affirmative has no obligation to
develop a system of interrogation, develop a warrant of a psychiatrist’s files to
fish for confessions to capital crimes or convince the Catholic Church to
remove the secrecy of the confessional from the church doctrine. In other
words, the affirmative does not have the burden to develop a policy. They are
only to concentrate on convincing the judge that “truth seeking” is more
important than “privileged communication” in a court of law. We are
debating the idea rather than establishing a policy. That may be a good
OBSERVATION for the affirmative in a debate, particularly if many of the
negative debaters pursue implementation arguments. Clarifications and
observations take time and should be used sparingly.
F. CONCLUSION
1. Brief review of major points
2. End by saying something like, “For all of these reasons it is clear that you
should affirm/negate today’s resolution.”
3. **NOTES FOR THE NEGATIVE – The negative debater must do two
things in the first speech:
a. Give a prepared speech of three or four minutes
b. Spend the remaining time responding to the affirmative’s speech
- You may rightfully lose the round if you fail to respond to the
affirmative case in the first negative speech
- The final conclusion to the negative’s first speech comes after the
rebuttal part of the speech, as well as a recap of the rebuttals to the
affirmative’s arguments made in the second part of the speech.
6
NATIONAL SPEECH & DEBATE ASSOCIATION
ARGUMENTATION AND CASE CONSTRUCTION
Activity #3 – Making the Case – Prior to the class lecture, the teacher/coach
should collect 3-5 affirmative and negative cases that have 2-3 points each.
These are readily available at the NSDA website, in the appendix portion of
the Lincoln Douglas Debate textbook.
1. Cut off the introductions and conclusions to every one of these
cases and duplicate so that every student has a copy that they can annotate.
2. Try to pre-shuffle the cases so that students are not sitting next to
someone with the same case. This can be a pair/share activity, or you can do
it as a class, or the students can work alone. Even beginners should be able to
do this alone, and it is better that they do.
3. Pass the sample cases out and have the students find the
TAGLINE of each argument and underline the arguments they find.
4. Using the arguments they identify, have them construct a
conclusion for the case. From the information in the case they should be able
to say if the case they have is affirmative or negative and they should be able
to reconstruct the resolution pretty closely to the original. If they cannot, that
should be identified as a “flaw” in the original case.
FOR HOMEWORK TONIGHT: Using the case they have been annotating
today, have the student write a potential introduction for the case. Observe the
time limitations which do not exceed 30 seconds for the affirmative and 15 for
the negative case. Remember that a good introduction can be:
1. A quotation relevant to the resolution
2. Something from literature or history
3. A hypothetical example that lends support to the position
4. An analogy that may not be apparent at the beginning of your speech, but
will be revealed at the end
Lecture notes for the student
55 minutes
The Value Premise and Criterion
WORD BANK: A Value premise is the greatest advantage (value) that
comes from taking a particular action or subscribing to a particular idea.
A Value Criterion connects the value premise with the side of
the resolution.
A Criterion for Judgement provides some standard by which
the judge can compare the values that are presented by each
side in the round.
The Framework is the part of the case including definitions +
observation + Value + Criteria
FOR THE TEACHER/COACH: Today, the students will learn to construct
the body of their case. This can be difficult for some students, so you should
provide as many examples as possible. In the last lesson/activity, the students
annotated the cases and should have seen the words “value” and “criterion”
mentioned. You may want to have them get out those annotated cases and
find those terms. In essence, they have an example in front of them that they
have already studied. Make sure that they have their definitions from the
example debate and their T-charts that reveal their potential arguments for the
sample case (Resolved that truth seeking should take precedence over
privileged communication in court).
7
NATIONAL SPEECH & DEBATE ASSOCIATION
ARGUMENTATION AND CASE CONSTRUCTION
Lecture notes for the student –
The Value Premise and Criterion
A. VALUE PREMISE – The greatest advantage (value) that comes from
taking a particular action or subscribing to a particular idea. I.E. If you argue
that providing a secondary education to everyone is good because it promotes
knowledge, then a value premise could be knowledge.
1. Presented directly after the introduction, definitions, and the observation (if
present).
2. Allows the judge to compare the values and which case supports stronger
values.
3. The affirmative and negative may have the same value. In this case, it is
up to each side to argue that their contentions better uphold that value.
4. The reasoning used to connect a value premise to the claim (contention), is
called a LINK. This must be done for each contention presented and these
arguments are a key criteria used by the judge to decide the debate.
B. VALUE CRITERION – connects the value premise with the side of the
resolution. If the value premise is societal good, the value criterion might be
justice, which means that the case will show that the side (affirmative or
negative) supports the value of societal good by showing that it best supports
justice (which is presumed to lead to societal good).
1. Must maintain the criterion is the right criterion and it is the best way to
achieve the value, especially when both sides have the same value.
2. Essentially the first step in establishing a link between the value premise
and the resolution.
3. Functions “under” the value premise as a means of establishing it and not
as a means of evaluating the value’s importance.
Refer to the two pdf attachments listed below as well as information in the
Lincoln Douglas Textbook for further information. You may wish to
duplicate parts of these for the students.
USING VALUES AND CRITERIA TO WIN LD DEBATES
Leah Castella
Pi Kappa Delta National Lincoln-Douglas Champion, Fifth Place Winner and
Third Speaker at the CEDA National
Championship
UNDERSTANDING THE VALUE-CRITERION, Debate Central
David Weeks
Swarthmore College, 2nd Place, Tournament of Champions (TOC), 2006
C. CRITERION FOR JUDGEMENT – provides a standard for comparing
competing values presented in the round.
1. Jeffrey Weise in his book, Lincoln-Douglas Debate: Values in Conflict,
suggests using one of four theories as the criterion, one of which he calls
“cost-benefit analysis”. We would evaluate values based on the costs and
benefits accrued from maintaining them or losing them. FOR THE
TEACHER: Highly recommended reading for your benefit! May be too
advanced for novice debaters.
2. Essentially, the criterion for judgement should help to explain why your
value premise is more valuable than your opponent’s value premise. Don’t go
8
NATIONAL SPEECH & DEBATE ASSOCIATION
ARGUMENTATION AND CASE CONSTRUCTION
on about it too much, because it rarely plays an important role in a round so
it’s not worth the time.
D. Suggestions for the value premise, value criterion and the criterion for
judgement.
1. They all occupy a separate function in the debate case, although they do
sound alike.
2. The most important concept is the value premise.
3. Ask your teacher/coach about how important the value criterion and the
criterion for judgement will be in your region.
4. You should have a definition of your value premise and criteria available
during round. Consider adding this definition to your debate cases if you have
time. “My value in today’s debate is Justice, which I define as . . .”
4. Example: if the resolution is about affirmative action:
VALUE PREMISE: “Justice”
VALUE CRITERION: By achieving “equality of opportunity” I
achieve justice
CRITERION FOR JUDGEMENT: My side achieves the most
“Justice” because the goal of my side is to maximize “equality of
opportunity”.
E. FRAMEWORK – The part of the case which includes definitions
+observations (if presented) + Value + All Criteria is referred to the
framework of the debate. When you say, “When we refer to my framework,
you see that . . . .“, you are referring to your definitions, your value and your
criteria. This saves time!
Activity #4 – Values/Criteria practice
1. Get out your previously annotated cases from yesterday.
2. With a highlighter (or just boxed in with a pen/pencil) find the
portion of the case where the author has dealt with the framework
debate.
3. In the margin, identify the VALUE PREMISE, the VALUE
CRITERION, and the CRITERION FOR JUDGEMENT (if it is
offered).
4. Answer these question:
 “Do you think the writer has identified the best standard?”
 “Can you think of a competing standard that could be offered by the
opposite side?”
 “Does the writer offer an observation?” “Why or why not?”
 “Does the writer explain how the judge might weigh the round?”
FOR HOMEWORK TONIGHT: Look back on our example debate and
begin to construct a framework that might work for the aff and the neg on that
case.
55 minutes
9
FOR THE TEACHER/COACH: As you add experience to your career, you
will begin to build a bank of value/criteria options for your students. A teamroom display of those options is a good idea, next to your Word Bank. Just
remember to cover it if you host a tournament at your school!
Lecture for the student
Argumentation – Building the Contentions
WORD BANK: A Contention is a claim made in a debate which is presented
as
NATIONAL SPEECH & DEBATE ASSOCIATION
ARGUMENTATION AND CASE CONSTRUCTION
a major point. A contention contains a claim, a piece of
evidence, an explanation of how the evidence supports/proves
the claim (a warrant), and the impact this contention has on
proving the affirmative or negative as the more compelling
argument in the debate round.
Empirical evidence is evidence that states facts and figures
about the world. – facts, figures, studies, reports etc.
Authoritative evidence is evidence that is primarily quotes
from famous people that make claims about issues relevant to
the topic – quotes from philosophers, government officials,
professors, advocates, legislators, victims, etc.
A warrant explains how the evidence proves the contention to
be true. This must be done for each contention, and these
arguments are a key criteria used by the judge to decide the
debate.
An Impact establishes the importance, significance, or weight
of an argument; it is the “So What?” Why is the argument
important? Even if it is correct, why should we care? It’s the
debaters’ job to explain to the judge what the impact of the
argument is. When the impact is delivered in the debate, the
debater actually says, “The impact of this argument is . . . .”
FOR THE TEACHER/COACH: Your students will need a ton of practice
on the material that you will present to them today. Unfortunately, weak
warrants, no links and missing impacts will net them the bulk of their career
losses over the years. This class activity should occur in a computer lab or
library, so that students can do research, as you guide them through the
process. Come to class with 20 claims for the practice session. Keep them
specific! They would be phrased like these four:
 Increasing public spending will stimulate the economy.
 The TSA protects public safety.
 Farm workers from Mexico are necessary in US agriculture.
 Body cameras have become an effective means of monitoring police
behavior.
Lecture for the student –
Argumentation – Building the Contentions
A. A CONTENTION (CLAIM) is constructed as a major point that you are
trying to make regarding the topic.
1. Cannot stand alone without support. You must add evidence to
prove your claim.
2. There are two types of evidence used in L-D that vary in
importance depending on the part of the country in which you
debate and the type of resolution that has been selected.
a. EMPIRICAL EVIDENCE states facts and figures about
the world now or what will happen in the future. – facts,
figures, studies, reports etc.
b. AUTHORITATIVE EVIDENCE quotes famous people
who make claims about issues relevant to the topics. –
quotations from philosophers, government officials,
professors, advocates, legislators, victims etc.
3. The use of evidence in L-D
10
NATIONAL SPEECH & DEBATE ASSOCIATION
ARGUMENTATION AND CASE CONSTRUCTION
a. Avoid too much evidence in your constructive.
b. State the author of the quotation and their credentials, if
they are not well known. Be sure to include all
required citation information.
c. Constructives are adequately supported by a single quote
for each contention.
d. Empirical evidence should typically be saved for
rebuttals.
e. Come to the tournament with more evidence available to
stem off rebuttal challenges.
4. A WARRANT shows how the empirical or authoritative evidence
proves the claim that is being made.
This is necessary for every contention/claim that you make.
5. An IMPACT is the final step as the debater uses the contention,
the evidence with its warrant, and then explains how that
contention (claim) upholds the framework, and, therefore, how it
upholds or reject the resolution. It basically answers the
question, “Why do we care?” When the impact is delivered in the
debate, the debater actually says, “The impact of this argument is
. . . .”
Activity #5 – Making the Case
1. Have the students get out their notes.
2. The first part of the lesson will build on case writing information
and put a few more words up on the WORD BANK.
3. After today’s short lecture, pass out a copy of the Worksheet –
Argument Building. Fill in a sample resolution, select their value
and value criterion and expect them to do the rest. This can be a
pair/share activity, or a class activity, working together as a team.
Every time they approach the process, it will become easier for
them.
4. The rest of the class period will be used to practice.
FOR HOMEWORK: Using the same format that you have practiced today,
go back to the example resolution (Resolved that truth seeking should take
precedence over privileged communication in court) or the topic they will be
debating first. Create three contentions for affirmative and three for negative,
with all of their required research and analysis and connection. Bring them
tomorrow to be shared in our discussion.
11
NATIONAL SPEECH & DEBATE ASSOCIATION
ARGUMENTATION AND CASE CONSTRUCTION
PART 3—ASSESSMENT EVIDENCE
Performance Task, Product, or Other Key Evidence of Learning (How will students demonstrate a
level of proficiency for this skill?)



Student product in Homework sections should have become an entire affirmative and negative
case on the resolution “Resolved that truth seeking should take precedence over privileged
communication in court” OR on the first resolution they will be debating.
Students should be able to recognize and build a glossary of language that will be part of every
case they construct. The glossary should be ongoing and become a permanent part of their
classroom folder.
Students should be able to explain how a case and argument are constructed, how all of the
parts work together, and be able to challenge cases they compete against using the specific
language of debate.
Key criteria to measure Performance Task(s) or Key Evidence:
Examples: Rubric, Checklist, etc.







Lecture notes – Defining Terms
Lecture notes – Resolutional Analysis
Lecture notes – Structuring the case – The Framework
Lecture notes – Value Premise and Criterion
Lecture notes – Building the Contentions
WORD BANK up to date
HOMEWORK – Definitions, value premise, criterion, contentions for sample resolution
Assessment Strategies (Identify Informal/Formal Strategies):
Informal – Teacher observation of participation and effort in discussion and in-class practice
Teacher observation of pair/share and small group work (if used)
Formal –Collection and rubric evaluation of Affirmative and Negative case/frameworks on sample
resolution.
Worksheet – Argument Building (in-class)
Worksheet – Argument Building (as homework)
Possible practical debates
12
NATIONAL SPEECH & DEBATE ASSOCIATION
ARGUMENTATION AND CASE CONSTRUCTION
Plans for after this lesson/competency is complete (How will you extend, enrich?):
Enrich and extend the lesson ideas:





Attached to this lesson, find APPENDIX C – Case Writing Exercise. It is an excellent exercise available
at www.speechanddebate.org and is part of their free digital textbook Lincoln-Douglas Debate. This
could be used as a take-home test, a practice debate or even a model for the teacher/coach who has
students who have trouble with research.
Students should be prepared to debate the sample resolution, when cases are complete.
Use the “Worksheet” model until students can construct cases without “looking”
Advanced students may be ready to preempt common negative arguments in the initial speech. Debaters
lose absolutely nothing by making these kinds of arguments in the first constructive. They become part
of the overall story that the case is trying to tell and present arguments that eat away the time advantage
of the negative.
If the resolution relies on political decisions or international relations that change every day, make sure
that students are reading new articles every other day or so. If they can read evidence (cards) written an
hour before the round, it can catch the opponent off guard, and it skyrockets credibility!
Key Resources Used: Websites, books, film clips, etc.
Names of Resource(s):
Access to Resource(s) if available:
Barnes, R. Eric. Philosophy in Practice –
(Topeka, KS, Clark Publishing Company, 2000)
New publisher: Perfection Learning
Understanding Value Debate
1000 North Second Avenue
P.O. Box 500
Logan, IA 51546-0500
Black’s Law Dictionary
Encyclopedia of Philosophy
Lincoln-Douglas Debate (textbook)
Oxford English Dictionary (OED)
Roberts, Josh. “Affirmative Casing: The Most
Undervalued Tool”
Roberts, Josh. “Lincoln-Douglas Debate: An
Introduction to Argumentation”
Wiese, Jeffery and Stan Lewis. Lincoln-Douglas
Debate – Values in Conflict, second edition
www.speechanddebate.org
www.speechanddebate.org
www.speechanddebate.org
(Topeka, KS, Clark Publishing Company, 2000)
New publisher: Perfection Learning
1000 North Second Avenue
P.O. Box 500
Logan, IA 51546-0500
Key Resources for Exploration: Websites, books, film clips, etc.
Names of Resource(s):
Access to Resource(s) if available:
www.wcdebate.com
Castella, Leah. Using Values and Criteria To
Win LD Debates
NSDA sample cases
www.speechanddebate.org
Weeks, David. Understanding the ValueCriterion
13
http://debate-central.ncpa.org/
NATIONAL SPEECH & DEBATE ASSOCIATION
ARGUMENTATION AND CASE CONSTRUCTION
Reflections/Review for Future:
Writing the case and making the connections is difficult at first, but successful debaters learn to modify where
judges get bogged down. Success comes from looking at the case as a work in progress. After each tournament
the strongest debaters will be searching ballots to find a way to “make a better mousetrap.” Debaters who want to
improve watch elimination rounds at the tournaments they attend. This helps them get a better idea of what a
good case is like and how to improve. Feedback and practice rounds are commonalities among the most elite
Lincoln Douglas debaters.
14