Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Argumentation and Case Construction: Part 1-Essential Elements
Argumentation and Case Construction: Part 1-Essential Elements
Objective 2 Students will learn how to construct an affirmative and negative case.
1
NATIONAL SPEECH & DEBATE ASSOCIATION
ARGUMENTATION AND CASE CONSTRUCTION
2
NATIONAL SPEECH & DEBATE ASSOCIATION
ARGUMENTATION AND CASE CONSTRUCTION
in the example resolution. [NOTE: you may want to replace the
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.
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
55 minutes 1. Imagine realistic situations which might cause two reasonable
3
NATIONAL SPEECH & DEBATE ASSOCIATION
ARGUMENTATION AND CASE CONSTRUCTION
people to disagree concerning the issue that the resolution talks
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.
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
4
NATIONAL SPEECH & DEBATE ASSOCIATION
ARGUMENTATION AND CASE CONSTRUCTION
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.
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.
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
7
NATIONAL SPEECH & DEBATE ASSOCIATION
ARGUMENTATION AND CASE CONSTRUCTION
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.
8
NATIONAL SPEECH & DEBATE ASSOCIATION
ARGUMENTATION AND CASE CONSTRUCTION
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
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”.
9
NATIONAL SPEECH & DEBATE ASSOCIATION
ARGUMENTATION AND CASE CONSTRUCTION
Argumentation – Building the Contentions
55 minutes WORD BANK: A Contention is a claim made in a debate which is presented
as
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 . . . .”
10
NATIONAL SPEECH & DEBATE ASSOCIATION
ARGUMENTATION AND CASE CONSTRUCTION
quotations from philosophers, government officials,
professors, advocates, legislators, victims etc.
3. The use of evidence in L-D
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
. . . .”
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
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.
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!
13
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