Editing Public forum debate

{{Short description|A type of high school debate}}

'''Public forum debate''' is a form of competitive [[debate]] where debaters use their evidence and impacts to outweigh the benefits and harms of the opposing side. The topics for public forum have to do with current-day events relating to public policy. Debaters work in pairs of two, and speakers alternate for every speech. It is primarily competed by middle and high school students, but college teams exist as well. Invented in the United States, public forum is one of the most prominent American debate events, alongside [[policy debate]] and [[Lincoln–Douglas debate format|Lincoln–Douglas debate]]; it is also practiced in China and India, and has been recently introduced to Romania.<ref>{{Cite web|url=http://www.ispeechanddebate.com/public-forum-debate.html|title=Public Forum Debate|website=Institute for Speech and Debate}}</ref><ref>{{cite web| url=https://www.speechanddebate.org/wp-content/uploads/Middle-School-Unified-Manual-2018-2019.pdf |title=Middle School Unified Manual |website=National Speech and Debate Association}}</ref><ref>{{cite web|url=https://asiandebateleague.com/adl-history/ |title=Asian Debate League History |website=Asian Debate League}}</ref><ref>{{cite web|url=https://www.nsda.cn/webfront/webpage/MemberIntroen |title=About NSDA Membership |website=National Speech and Debate Association China}}</ref><ref>{{cite web|url=https://www.speechdebateindia.com/events-debate-speech-drama |title=Speech, Drama, and Debate Events in India |website=Speech and Debate India}}</ref><ref>{{cite web|url=https://debate.prezly.com/nycudl-students-bring-debate-to-romania |title=NYCUDL Students bring Debate to Romania |website=New York City Urban Debate League |date=October 28, 2019}}</ref><ref>{{cite news |author=Simona Anghel |url=https://m.ziuaconstanta.ro/stiri/invatamant/gazda-colegiul-national-mircea-cel-batran-din-constanta-prima-dezbatere-public-forum-organizata-de-urban-debate-league-din-new-york-galerie-696723.html |title=Prima dezbatere „public forum“ organizată de Urban Debate League din New York (galerie foto) |website=Ziua de Constanta |date=July 27, 2019}}</ref> Individuals give short (2–4-minute) speeches that are interspersed with 3-minute "Crossfire" sections, questions and answers between opposed debaters. The winner is determined by a judge who also serves as a referee (timing sections, penalizing incivility, etc).<ref name="vermont">"Guide to Public Forum Debates." University of Vermont. University of Vermont, n.d. Web. 6 October 2014. <https://debate.uvm.edu/dcpdf/PFNFL.pdf</ref> The debate centers on affirming or rejecting a position, "resolve", or "resolution", which is usually a proposal of a potential solution to a current events issue.<ref name="vermont"/> Public forum is designed to be accessible to the average citizen.<ref name=":1">{{cite web |title=High School Competition Events Guide |url=https://www.speechanddebate.org/wp-content/uploads/High-School-Competition-Events-Guide.pdf |website=National Speech & Debate Association |publisher=National Forensics League |access-date=20 January 2019}}</ref>

== History ==
Public forum debate was invented in 2002. It was initially called "Ted Turner debate" for [[CNN]] founder [[Ted Turner]]. The "crossfire" period of PF is modeled after ''[[Crossfire (American TV program)|Crossfire]]'', a political debate show on CNN.<ref>{{Cite book|title=Debate, Student Edition|last=Fedrizzi|first=Mariann|publisher=Cengage Learning|year=2010|isbn=9780538449663|pages=24}}</ref>

=== Comparisons to other debate forms ===
Public forum debate is often described as more accessible than policy debate. Unlike policy, which has one topic per year, PF debate topics switch every month or every two months and are based on current events. In policy debate, participants tend to "[[Spreading (debate)|spread]]", or speak very fast, something that is less common in PF, making PF more understandable to the average "lay", or non-debating person.<ref name="snfi.stanford.edu">{{Cite web|title=Choose the right debate program & format : Stanford National Forensic Institute|url=https://snfi.stanford.edu/select-the-right-program|access-date=2020-09-16|website=snfi.stanford.edu}}</ref>

Lincoln-Douglas debate tends to focus on philosophical questions, in contrast to PF.<ref name="snfi.stanford.edu"/>

Parliamentary debate is much less structured than PF, and participants are not made aware of their topics until 15–20 minutes before their round, giving them little time to research, gather evidence, and prepare their arguments.<ref name="snfi.stanford.edu"/> In Public forum, topics are decided prior the month starting, giving debaters plenty of time to research and prepare.

=== Debate structure ===
A public forum debate consists of eight speeches and three crossfires, each with a time limit.<ref>{{Cite web |title=Competition Events |url=https://www.speechanddebate.org/competition-events/ |access-date=2024-01-23 |website=National Speech & Debate Association |language=en-US}}</ref>
{| class="wikitable"
!Speech name
!Time limit
!Speaker(s)
!Team(s)
|-
|Constructive
|4 min
|Aff 1
|Aff
|-
|Constructive
|4 min
|Neg 1
|Neg
|-
|1st Cross-ex
|3 min
|Both first speakers
|Aff & Neg
|-
|Rebuttal
|4 min
|Aff 2
|Aff
|-
|Rebuttal
|4 min
|Neg 2
|Neg
|-
|2nd Cross-ex
|3 min
|Both second speakers
|Aff & Neg
|-
|Summary
|3 min
|Aff 1
|Aff
|-
|Summary
|3 min
|Neg 1
|Neg
|-
|Grand Cross-ex
|3 min
|All speakers
|Aff & Neg
|-
|Final Focus
|2 min
|Aff 2
|Aff
|-
|Final Focus
|2 min
|Neg 2
|Neg
|}

==== Constructive speeches (4 minutes) ====
The first speech, also known as a case, is pre-written and presents the team's "contentions," arguments either supporting or opposing the resolution. These contentions are backed up by warrants, evidence in the form of quotes, or citations from sources.<ref>{{Cite web|title=Home|url=http://pfdebate.info/|access-date=2020-08-09|website=PF Debate Info|language=en-US}}</ref>

The two speakers from each team who presented cases then participate in a 3-minute crossfire. The first speaker asks the first question in the crossfire, and the rest of the crossfire consists of each speaker asking their opponent questions.

==== Rebuttal speeches (4 minutes) ====
The first rebuttal speaker refutes the constructive speech for the opposite side (that is, the second constructive speech). Parts of this case are sometimes pre-written and are known as "answers to" (A/2s or ATs) or "blocks".

The second refutation speaker refutes the first constructive speaker, but must also defend the arguments of the second constructive speaker, which have just been refuted by the first refutation speaker.

The two speakers then engage in crossfire.

==== Summary speeches (3 minutes) ====
The summary speech, given by the two first speakers, is given to both reinforce arguments and to refute their opponents, as well as to try and tell the judge which points the debate should be judged on. The summary is often referred to as the most important speech. Competitors "weigh" their points in comparison to their opponents to explain why it is more important through the framework of scope, magnitude, prerequisite, etc.)

The summary speeches are followed by the grand crossfire, a crossfire between all speakers.

==== Final foci/focuses (2 minutes) ====
The final focus, given by the second speakers, is 2 minutes and is used to explain to the judge why the speaker's team should win the debate. Debaters are not allowed to bring up new material in final focus.

=== Preparation time ===
"Prep" time differs from tournament to tournament. The most common amount of prep in a debate are 3 minutes. This prep time can be taken in between speeches or at other times, but some tournaments or leagues may have rules about when prep time is allowed to be taken. Each team may use the other team's prep time for their preparation, however, the time is only taken from the team that decided to take prep time. Strategically, most teams do prep when the other team is prepping to maximize their own prep time.<ref>{{Cite web |title=Guide to Public Forum Debate |url=https://debate.uvm.edu/dcpdf/PFNFL.pdf |url-status=dead |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20230325214856/https://debate.uvm.edu/dcpdf/PFNFL.pdf |archive-date=25 March 2023 |access-date=27 January 2019 |website=University of Vermont}}</ref> Though it is not common practice, some national tournaments give teams additional prep time. For example, the Yale Invitational Debate Tournament provides both teams with 4 minutes of prep time.<ref>{{cite web|url=https://s3.amazonaws.com/tabroom-files/tourns/10180/HSTInvite815.pdf|title=Yale Debate Association Twenty-Sixth Annual Invitational Tournament|last1=Baxi|first1=Shruti|last2=Boyt|first2=Dalton|website=Tabroom|publisher=Yale Debate Association|access-date=24 January 2019}}</ref>

== Topics ==
Topics are presented as resolutions, meaning they advocate for solving a problem by the means of a certain position. Resolution options and official topics are released by the National Speech and Debate Association (NSDA) on their website.<ref>{{cite web |title=Topics |url=https://www.speechanddebate.org/topics/|website=National Speech and Debate Association|access-date=22 January 2019}}</ref> Competitors are encouraged to focus on the "main issues" of the topic rather than search for obscure arguments.<ref>{{cite web |title=Guide to Public Forum Debate |url=https://debate.uvm.edu/dcpdf/PFNFL.pdf |website=Debate Central |publisher=National Forensic League |access-date=20 January 2019}}</ref> The resolution changes frequently and focuses on current events. Some topics spread the length of two months, while others rotate monthly.<ref>{{cite web |title=High School Competition Events Guide |url=https://www.speechanddebate.org/wp-content/uploads/High-School-Competition-Events-Guide.pdf |website=National Speech & Debate Association |publisher=National Forensics League |access-date=20 January 2019}}</ref>

Topics include:<ref>{{cite web |title=Topics |url=https://www.speechanddebate.org/topics/ |website=National Speech & Debate Association |publisher=National Forensics League |access-date=20 January 2019}}</ref>
* March 2010 – [[Affirmative action in the United States|Affirmative action]] to promote equal opportunity in the United States is justified.
* September 2011 – The benefits of post-[[September 11 attacks|9/11]] security measures outweigh the harms to personal freedom.
* December 2015 – On balance, [[standardized test]]ing is beneficial to [[K-12 education in the United States]].
* February 2016 – The United States federal government should adopt a [[carbon tax]].
* April 2017 – The United States ought to replace the [[United States Electoral College|Electoral College]] with a direct national popular vote.
* January 2018 – [[Spain]] should [[Catalan independence|grant Catalonia its independence]].
* February 2018 – the United States should abolish the [[Capital gains tax in the United States|capital gains tax]].
* November/December 2018 – the United States federal government should impose [[price controls]] on the pharmaceutical industry.
* January 2020 – the United States should end its [[Economic sanctions on Venezuela|economic sanctions against Venezuela]].
* February 2020 – the United States should replace means-tested welfare programs with a [[universal basic income]]. 
* April 2020 – Resolved: The United States should remove nearly all of its military presence in the [[Arab states of the Persian Gulf]].
* Nationals 2020 – On balance, [[Charter schools in the United States|charter schools]] are beneficial to the quality of education in the United States.
* September/October 2020 – Resolved: The U.S. federal government should enact the [[Medicare for All Act]] of 2019.
* November/December 2020 – Resolved: The United States should adopt a declaratory nuclear policy of [[no first use]].
*January 2021 – Resolved: The [[Mass surveillance in the United States|NSA should end its surveillance of U.S. citizens and lawful permanent residents]].
*February 2021 – Resolved: On balance, the benefits of [[Urbanization in Africa|urbanization]] in West Africa outweigh the harms.
*March 2021 – Resolved: On balance, the benefits of creating the [[United States Space Force]] outweigh the harms.
*April 2021 – Resolved: The benefits of the [[International Monetary Fund]] outweigh the harms.
*September/October 2021 – Resolved: The [[NATO|North Atlantic Treaty Organization]] should substantially increase its defense commitments to the [[Baltic states]].
*November/December 2021 – Resolved: Increased United States federal regulation of [[cryptocurrency]] transactions and/or assets will produce more benefits than harms.
*January 2022 – Resolved: The United States federal government should legalize all illicit drugs.
*February 2022 – Resolved: On balance, [[Turkey]]'s membership is beneficial to the [[North Atlantic Treaty Organization]].
*March 2022 –  Resolved: In the United States, the benefits of increasing [[organic agriculture]] outweigh the harms.
*April 2022 – Resolved: Japan should revise [[Article 9 of the Japanese Constitution|Article 9]] of its [[Constitution of Japan|Constitution]] to develop offensive military capabilities.
* Nationals 2022 – Resolved: The United States should establish a comprehensive [[bilateral trade agreement]] with [[Taiwan]].
* September/October 2022 – Resolved: The United States Federal Government should substantially increase its investment in [[high-speed rail]].
* November/December 2022 – Resolved: The United States’ strategy of Great Power Competition produces more benefits than harms.
* January 2023 – Resolved: The United States Federal Government should increase its diplomatic efforts to peacefully resolve internal armed conflicts in West Asia.
*February 2023 – Resolved: In the United States, [[right-to-work law]]s do more harm than good.
*March 2023 – Resolved: The Republic of India should sign the [[Artemis Accords]].
*April 2023 – Resolved: The United States Federal Government should ban the collection of personal data through biometric recognition technology.
* September/October 2023 – Resolved: The United States Federal Government should substantially increase its military presence in the arctic.
* November/December 2023 – Resolved: The United States federal government should forgive all federal student loans.
* January 2024 – Resolved: The United States federal government should repeal [[Section 230]] of the Communications Decency Act.
* February 2024 – Resolved: The United States federal government should ban single-use plastics.
* March 2024 — Resolved: In the United States, collegiate student-athletes should be classified as employees of their educational institution.
*April 2024 — Resolved: The United Nations should abolish permanent membership on its Security Council.
*Nationals 2024 – Resolved: The United States should establish a comprehensive bilateral trade agreement with the European Union.
* September/October 2024 – Resolved: The United States federal government should substantially expand its surveillance infrastructure along its southern border.
* November/December 2024 – Resolved: The United States should substantially reduce its military support of Taiwan.
* January 2025 – Resolved: The African Union should grant diplomatic recognition to the Republic of Somaliland as an independent state.
* February 2025 – Resolved: The United States should accede to the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court.
* March 2025 – Resolved: In the United States, the benefits of the use of generative artificial intelligence in education outweigh the harms.
* April 2025 – Resolved: The United States federal government should substantially increase its investment in domestic nuclear energy. 
* Nationals 2025 – Resolved: On balance, in the United States, the benefits of presidential executive orders outweigh the harms.

== References ==
{{reflist}}

[[Category:Debate types]]
[[Category:Debating competitions]]