Public Forum Debate

The NSDA Competition Event page states (7/14/2024, here): As a team event, students who compete in Public Forum need to be able to work well with a partner. Balanced teams, both in terms of preparation before debates and contributions within a debate, helps provide a competitive advantage during tournaments. PF looks at current event topics. Students who do Public Forum must be prepared to debate in front of judges without any formal debate training. Being able to persuade a range of judges is a central component to this event. Additionally, PF is focused upon debating varying resolutions that change frequently, which exposes students to a variety of topics during a singular competitive season.

The MSDL adds the following points.  First, Public Forum Debate does not permit advocacy based on a counterplan to the resolution.  That is, the CON may not argue that the judge should vote against the resolution because an alternative policy would be superior.  The CON may argue, however, that the judge should vote against the resolution because its adoption would prevent adoption of a superior, alternative policy that would otherwise likely be adopted.  

Second, debaters may read new evidence in the Summary speech to address responses made by their opponents in rebuttal, but the judge should disregard new arguments made in the Summary speech.  Debaters should not introduce either new evidence or new arguments in the Final Focus speech.  What constitutes a new argument, in contrast to a new point necessitated by an opponent’s arguments in the preceding speech, is at the judge’s discretion.

Speech times and other details appear on pages 30-31 in the 2023-24 NSDA Unified Manual (here).