Jump to content
ellch20

Making an aff

Recommended Posts

Alright, I'm working on cutting a new aff. I'm thinking of something along the lines of, 

Plan: The United States Federal government should create and substantially fund debate programs in primary and secondary schools and substantially fund preexisting debate programs.

Thinking of having advantages like critical thinking promoting democracy and agency, and maybe about how it helps the U.S. stay competitive since people who do debate are way more likely to graduate high school. Would you suggest different advantages? Also, is there any place where I could find inherency evidence? I can't really find any articles about how many people are doing debate, I just know from my personal experience that many programs are way underfunded or don't even exist. This is the first time I've written a case, so any feedback is appreciated. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You could cut cards from

 

High School Policy Debate as an Enduring Pathway

to Political Education: Evaluating Possibilities for Political Learning

Ellen C. Zwarensteyn

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

drop your email and  ican send you some stuff, i made a debate aff with 2ac blocks that you can have

Edited by Jw4167
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

https://hspolicy.debatecoaches.org/University+of+Chicago+Lab/Hellie-Unni+Aff

 

06– Urban Debate Leagues to help start your search

 

Edit*: Although I feel like finding a fed key warrant will be very difficult so you should find that before you cut your advantages to make sure the aff is a viable option

Edited by aprasad202
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

too lazy to make a new doc but here's a k2 demo card

 

 

 

Debate is key to democracy – In an era of fake news and propaganda, effective truth testing is necessary and democracy needs a public that can make informed, logical policy decisions – Debate programs provide those necessary skills

Calum Matheson 1-17 [1-17-2017, "We no longer know the difference between debating and arguing", PennLive, http://www.pennlive.com/opinion/2017/01/we_no_longer_know_the_differen.html, Calum Matheson is the director of the William Pitt Debating Union at the University of Pittsburgh and an assistant professor of public deliberation and civic life.]//NV

Everyone in America should have instruction in the basic tenets of argument. This begins with recognizing the standards of strong factual evidence, prioritizing debate in our educational systems, and forming the tenets of good argument skills in everyday life. The United States is a divided country. As the recent election demonstrated, the traditional oppositions of "left" and "right," Democrat and Republican, conservative and progressive are breaking down. While the theatrical clash between Clinton and Trump most recently grabbed the headlines, the primaries exposed bitter divisions within the two major parties. These disagreements are worrisome because they are largely a matter not of different values, but different facts. The sheer volume of information today makes it hard to separate truth from fiction. Statistics have the ring of truth, but are easily manipulated to support shaky conclusions. We are bombarded with fake news and biased websites--what we used to call "propaganda." For democracy to prevail, we need to learn to learn the hard work of making good conclusions with good information. Instruction in the basics of argument can help us recognize such dangers and should be welcomed by anyone, regardless of their political beliefs. Debate is supposed to allow good arguments to triumph over bad ones; truth to persevere against falsehood. But rigorously filtering out deception and bias is difficult, time-consuming, and sometimes downright boring. Many of us tend to seek out information to confirm what we already believe rather than forming our opinions after balanced investigation. This is a breeding ground for sloppy thinking and outright manipulation. While we may never agree on "what the facts are," we need a basic agreement on what a fact is. Democracy requires an electorate capable of making informed, logical decisions over matters of local, state, and national policy, and that means knowing the difference between assertion and evidence, logic and fallacy. The marketplace of ideas only works when we use a common currency. Practical steps to support a culture of healthy argument include making argument classes options for general education requirements, as they already are at some fine institutions including the University of Pittsburgh. Defending our ideas forces us to recognize the shortcomings in our own beliefs. Encouraging students to play Devil's advocate develops empathy and might even lead them to reevaluate their own positions. Healthy competition can motivate students through active learning across the curriculum. Competitive debate teams provide the most challenging and rewarding intellectual opportunities available in high school and college and let students from different backgrounds and regions exchange ideas. Unfortunately, funding for debate programs has dwindled over the years. Reversing that trend would help strengthen academic achievement while bolstering the essential qualities necessary for good democratic policymaking. For a fraction of the money spent on other competitive activities, we can teach students how to succeed professionally and give them the skills necessary for good citizenship. Good argument skills make for better lives. Almost everything we do requires persuasion. When we write school essays, ask for raises, or fight a parking ticket, we are making arguments. Deliberation requires judgment, allowing us to make reasoned choices about everything from buying a home to picking a restaurant. The capacity to make and judge good argument is a basic currency of social interaction and clear thought. Quite simply, learning how to argue makes us smarter.

 

 

Edited by NickDB8
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

drop your email and  ican send you some stuff, i made a debate aff with 2ac blocks that you can have

 

my email is ronnie.dua@gmail.com. would you mind also sending it tome. I am running a similar aff...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This sounds interesting, but is there a federal key warrant?

See this seems to be the biggest problem. I was thinking of just running generic cards about the federal government solving better from camp files, since I can't find anything specifically about the federal government in relation to debate. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I broke this aff at my state tournament, it's quite strategic if you know what you are doing with it. Unfortunately hit a shit panel in quarters and dropped as neg bc we for some reason ran a K that we were at least 10-0 with all season (bad decision ik) and they were confused the whole time. 

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I broke this aff at my state tournament, it's quite strategic if you know what you are doing with it. Unfortunately hit a shit panel in quarters and dropped as neg bc we for some reason ran a K that we were at least 10-0 with all season (bad decision ik) and they were confused the whole time.

 

Here I was thinking that I had an original idea...

But what evidence did you use for solvency with the federal government?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Not gonna lie, I think the fed key warrant in this is gonna relie on 1. Signaling and 2. Uniformity. I think that you should try and frame your fed key warrant is that the fed is key to a uniform approach, that ensures universal codes and design

There's no reason why 50 state fiat doesn't solve 100% of this, though

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There's no reason why 50 state fiat doesn't solve 100% of this, though

Oof yeah for sure on this aff. Sorry I thought this was the guns aff thread

Edited by TheTrashDebater

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

CP: The United States Federal government should create and substantially fund debate programs in primary and secondary schools and substantially fund preexisting debate programs. Except when those debate programs are a majority Public forum or LD.

  • Downvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×