One of the newest forms of academic debate, Public Forum Debate was designed to enable debaters to discuss current events in an accessible, conversational format.
Public Forum rounds feature polished delivery, exciting clash, and fast-paced refutations. The format also allows debaters to work together as partners. For these reasons, Public Forum Debate often comes closest to what many beginning debaters imagine debate will look like.
Public Forum Debate features four high school students on teams of two debating a timely issue in highly structured speech times. The teams compete for the vote of a judge or panel of judges, who will decide the round based on which team debated better. Debate in Public Forum should be conducive to adjudication by citizen judges and should not require special knowledge or training to judge. The debaters will use their common knowledge, reasoning, and evidence from third-party experts to support and substantiate their arguments.
The Resolution
The central component of Public Forum Debate is the resolution , which is the topic that the students debate. Resolutions are generated by the National Speech and
Debate Association and are published in the NSDA’s monthly journal, Rostrum, and on its website, www.NSDAonline.org. They are chosen each month by a vote of
NSDA member schools; tournaments, though, may use whichever month’s resolution that they deem best. For example, if a tournament is held early in the month, thus leaving students too little time to adequately prepare that month’s resolution, the tournament may use the previous month’s resolution. The NSDA also chooses a Nationals topic that is used at the NSDA National Tournament.
Resolutions are intended to be “ripped from the head- lines” and to reflect prevailing issues about which most well-read individuals would be informed.
Previous resolutions have covered a wide array of topics such as 9/11 security measures, cyberbullying, and civil disobedience. Two resolutions have been:
Resolved: The costs of a college education outweigh the benefits.
Resolved: The United States federal government should permit the use of financial incentives to encourage organ donation.
The word “Resolved” appears at the beginning of each resolution, which sets up the basic clash of every Public Forum round: the pro team, also called the affirmative or
"aff" team.
“aff” team, attempts to prove the resolution true, while the con team, also called the negative or “neg” team, attempts to prove it false.
Public Forum Debate does not have pre-established burdens of proof for either side of the debate. In other words, neither the pro or con team is obligated to debate in a certain way to uphold certain arguments; instead, the resolution itself will generate those burdens of proof. Each resolution dictates the substance of debating for both

sides.
EXAMPLE: The first resolution posits a fact that the costs of a college education outweigh the benefits. For this resolution, the debaters must prove or disprove this fact to win the debate.
EXAMPLE: The second resolution posits an action that the federal government should take, namely allowing financial incentives to encourage organ donation. For this resolution, the debaters must prove the desirability (or lack thereof) of this action.
Sides
In most other forms of debate, the debaters are assigned sides before the round begins. In Public Forum Debate, this is determined with a coin toss. The team that wins the toss may choose which side of the resolution they would like to defend
OR whether they would like to speak first or second. Depending on which choice the winning team makes, the team that has lost the coin toss makes the remaining choice. For example, if the winning team selects which side it wants to defend, then the losing team chooses to speak either first or second.
Because debaters cannot always control the side of the resolution they must defend, they must be prepared to debate both sides of every resolution.
Speeches
The debate itself is broken down into a series of speeches based on the speaking order selected during the coin toss . This makes Public Forum Debate unique among debate events in that the con, or negative, team may begin the debate .
Both teams and speakers alternate speeches until the conclusion of the debate.
Public Forum Debate includes four types of speeches: the constructive, the rebuttal, the summary, and the final focus.
It also includes three questioning periods, called crossfire . Note that each debater speaks twice, delivering both a four-minute speech and a two-minute speech. The order of speakers and teams is consistent throughout the round; if Team A gives the first constructive speech, then Team A will give the first rebuttal, summary, and final focus speeches. Also, the debater who delivers the constructive speech will deliver the summary; the student who delivers the rebuttal will deliver the final focus.
CONSTRUCTIVE SPEECHES (4 minutes)
The constructive speeches are the teams’ first opportunity to deliver and establish their prepared arguments, also called a “case.” These speeches are typically fully scripted.
The first speaker from each team will read their case, which will include evidence in support of or in opposition to the resolution depending on the side of the team in any given debate. Once the first speaker has finished, the first speaker from the second team will stand and deliver their case. Typically, no direct clash between ideas occurs at this point in the debate.

(725-750 words)
1.
introduction – quote, anecdote
2.
state resolution and your position
3.
Define any confusing or ambiguous words
4.
Establish Framework
5.
(2 o3) Contentions
– introduced by short ‘tag-lines’
-- reasons why resolution is true or false
Elements of Contentions: a.
claim (aka: “this is what we say”) b.
warrant / research (aka: “this is why we say it”) c.
impact (aka: “this is why what we say is important”)
CROSSFIRE (3 minutes)
Following the two constructive speeches, the first speakers from each team engage in a crossfire, a three-minute period during which either speaker may ask or answer questions. The speaker from the team that speaks first has the right to ask the first question. Following the first question, the flow of questions is left up to the debaters. After answering a question, a speaker will usually interrupt her opponent’s questions to indicate that she would now like to ask a question. Both debaters participating in the crossfire stand and address each other as well as the judge during the crossfire periods.
REBUTTAL SPEECHES (4 minutes)
After the first crossfire, the second speakers on each team deliver the rebuttal speeches; this is the first opportunity for each team to refute, or answer, the arguments made by their opponents . In this four-minute speech , the speakers are charged with disproving their opponent’s cases with their own analysis or with evidence from third-party sources. The first speaking team’s rebuttal will focus on refuting their opponent’s case; the second speaking team’s rebuttal must both refute their opponent’s case and also respond to attacks made against their own case.
Speakers stand and address the judge during the rebuttal speeches and speak extemporaneously from notes. After the rebuttal speeches, the second speakers from each team participate in the second crossfire period, which follows the form and style of the first.
SUMMARY SPEECHES (2 minutes)
Following the second crossfire, the first speakers on each team deliver their summary speeches. These speakers will attempt to summarize the main issues in the debate and continue to persuasively advocate for their position. The speakers stand and address the judge during their summary speeches.

GRAND CROSSFIRE (3 minutes)
Following the summary speeches, debaters participate in the grand crossfire. The grand crossfire is very similar to the other crossfires, except that all four debaters participate. The debaters address one another and the judge but generally remain seated. The grand crossfire is notorious for escalating tension, so all participants need to be mindful of decorum.
FINAL FOCUS (2 minutes)
The last speech of the debate is the final focus, which is delivered by the second speaker. No new arguments may be made in the final focus; instead, the speaker concentrates on analyzing the arguments that have been made already and detailing for the judge why, on the merit of those arguments, her team should win the debate.
Preparation Time
In addition to the eight speeches and three crossfire periods, each team has two minutes of preparation time, usually just called “prep.” Debaters may choose to use prep time at any point of the debate, but only between speeches or crossfires; debaters may not take prep time in the middle of a speech. During prep time, partners may consult with each other over potential arguments to make or questions to raise during upcoming speeches or crossfires. The two minutes of prep time is cumulative for the debate, so participants must manage this time wisely.
Determining the Winner
At the conclusion of the debate, the judge will decide who has won the round based on the merits of the debate. She will fill out a ballot that is distributed by the tournament, indicating a winner and assigning points for each debater. Judges are asked to decide the round based on the merits of the debate rather than their personal biases about the topic. Judges typically decide the winner based on the arguments presented and decide speaker points based upon the style and speaking skill of the speakers. Each tournament has its own rules concerning speaker points, but typically they are given on a scale of 1 to 30.
Prep time: 2 minutes (may be taken at any time and in increments)