Study Guide for 2018 High School English Debate Tournament
Non-policy Debate
(Adapted from BP and Policy Debates)
As a fusion of British Parliamentary Debate (the part about two teams on each of the two opposite sides) and Policy Debate (the part about Q&A), this non-policy Debate consists of two Affirmative and two Negative teams (i.e., Affirmative Team 1, Affirmative Team 2, Negative Team 1, and Negative Team 2), and each team comprises three debaters. Each team has to give a Case Presentation, ask questions of and answer questions from the two opponent teams, and give a Summary for the debate and a Final Pitch for their own case. Please note that this is not a policy debate, meaning that the affirmative teams do not need to construct a detailed plan as it is expected in a policy debate (for that matter if the negative team opts for an alternative plan, it doesn’t need to measure up to the specificity of a counterplan expected in a policy debate). However, like all forms of debate, logic, reasoning, and proof are required for all arguments. Like all good debates, there has to be challenges to and refutation of the opponent’s case, which again is done through examining their logic, reasoning and evidence.
Debate Proposition
The proposition chosen for 2018 Non-policy Debate is:
High schools in Taiwan should outsource restroom cleaning to professional cleaners rather than have students do the job.
This debate proposition derives from an earlier controversy regarding Jienguo Senior High School
outsourcing their restroom cleaning to professional cleaners. While some argue there is a practical need for outsourcing this type of service, others argue how cleaning school restrooms can fulfill educational purposes.
Following are a few links that, though not comprehensive, serve as a good starting point for students to build their case as well as their counter-arguments:
1. Without Janitors, Students Are In Charge Of Keeping School Shipshape
http://www.npr.org/sections/ed/2015/04/04/396621542/without-janitors-students-are-in-charge-of-keeping-s chool-shipshape
2. Kids in Japan Are Doing Something Incredible That the U.S. Should Consider
https://mic.com/articles/118030/look-at-what-students-in-japan-are-doing-that-the-u-s-would-never-consider
#.7T1M1x3Ec
3. Students taught responsibility by cleaning their school bathrooms
http://savannahnow.com/stories/081102/LOCbathroomman.shtml#.WauaSq2B3Vo 4. 學校廁所清掃工作 到底該不該委外？
(from an author who often writes about parenting) https://udn.com/news/story/6887/2645066
5. 南部學校也常外包清潔 家長憂生活技能
(some parents' concern for the current practice of outsourcing cleaning services in schools in southern Taiwan)
https://udn.com/news/story/7314/2642458
6. 洪偉／小孩的教養除了讓大人心情好一點，還能幹嘛？
(a philosophical point of view exploring the effectiveness of regulation and coercion) https://opinion.udn.com/opinion/story/6685/2656697
7. 建中學生為什麼不掃廁所?
http://newsblog.chinatimes.com/sow/archive/62529 8. 建中：晚上變公園 委外打掃廁所有必要
(CK High School's response to the controversy, saying when it's necessary to outsource the service) https://udn.com/news/story/7314/2642455
9. 金錢買到乾淨，買不到掃廁所教育
(A high school teacher's view from the standpoint of civic education) https://opinion.udn.com/opinion/story/8143/2641945
Debate Layout
Case Presentation is where debaters present arguments that support their stance, and provide responses to the opponent’s case (this is true except for Affirmative Team One’s Case Presentation). Q&A is where debaters clarify their opponents’ arguments and expose weaknesses in their opponent’s case. Summary and Final Pitch is where debaters recapitulate the major arguments in the debate, demonstrate how they have cut across different speeches (so flowing is a must), and at the same time prove that their stance and case make better sense than those of the other team from the same side. (Case Presentation 基本上就是各隊的申論，
在正方第一隊以後的申論還須包含針對另一方申論的回應或駁斥。Q&A 就是以問問題方式澄清對方 論點內容或是暴露對方邏輯或證據上的缺失。Summary & Final Pitch 就是將該場辯論中的主要論點及 其在整場辯論中的發展做摘要整理[故聽力訓練和記筆記能力是關鍵]，最後再總結為何己方論點與表 現應該勝出。)
1. Affirmative Team 1 Case Presentation 3 min/正方第一隊論點陳述三分鐘 2. Prep Time 2 min/準備時間兩分鐘
3. Q&A 4 min/問與答四分鐘
Negative Team 1 Ask Affirmative Team 1 Questions 2 min/反方第一隊發問兩分鐘 Negative Team 2 Ask Affirmative Team 1 Questions 2 min/反方第二隊發問兩分鐘 4. Prep Time 2 min/準備時間兩分鐘
5. Negative Team 1 Case Presentation 3 min/反方第一隊論點陳述三分鐘 6. Prep Time 2 min/準備時間兩分鐘
7. Q&A 4 min/問與答四分鐘
Affirmative Team 2 Ask Negative Team 1 Questions 2 min/正方第二隊發問兩分鐘 Affirmative Team 1 Ask Negative Team 1 Questions 2 min/正方第一隊發問兩分鐘 8. Prep Time 2 min/準備時間兩分鐘
9. Affirmative Team 2 Case Presentation 3 min/正方第二隊論點陳述三分鐘 10. Prep Time 2 min/準備時間兩分鐘
11. Q&A 4 min/問與答四分鐘
Negative Team 2 Ask Affirmative Team 2 Questions 2 min/反方第二隊發問兩分鐘 Negative Team 1 Ask Affirmative Team 2 Questions 2 min/反方第一隊發問兩分鐘 12. Prep Time 2 min/準備時間兩分鐘
13. Negative Team 2 Case Presentation 3 min/反方第二次論點陳述三分鐘 14. Prep Time 2 min/準備時間兩分鐘
15. Q&A 4 min/問與答四分鐘 (
Affirmative Team 1 Ask Negative Team 2 Questions 2 min/正方第一隊發問兩分鐘 Affirmative Team 2 Ask Negative Team 2 Questions 2 min/正方第二隊發問兩分鐘 16. Prep Time 5 min/準備時間五分鐘
17. Negative Team 2 Summary and Final Pitch/反方第二隊摘要與最後陳述三分鐘 18. Affirmative Team 2 Summary and Final Pitch/正方第二隊摘要與最後陳述三分鐘 19. Negative Team 1 Summary and Final Pitch/反方第一隊摘要與最後陳述三分鐘 20. Affirmative Team 1 Summary and Final Pitch/正方第一隊摘要與最後陳述三分鐘
If the debater finishes his/her speech or questions before time is up, the unused time is simply lost, and the debate will directly move on to the next segment. (若辯士時間未到即結束其論述或問題，未用之時間等 同放棄，辯論將直接接續至下一段落。)
Debater Responsibility
Each team can assign its debaters for Case Presentation, Q&A, and Summary& Final Pitch in whatever arrangement they see fit. For each debate speech or section of Q&A, multiple debaters can be put in charge so long as the arrangement does not make the speech sound choppy or create significant discrepancy in the speaking time among the debaters on the same team. As this debate format puts great emphasis on teamwork, if any debater is in trouble while the debate unfolds, his/her teammates are allowed to assist . (每隊可自行 指派每位辯士之任務，“論點陳述”、“問與答”和“摘要與最後陳述”等部分可各由一位或多位辯 士負責完成，辯論進行中，若見隊友遭遇亂流，同隊辯士亦可機動支援。辯士任務安排以不影響辯論 過程之流暢與一致性為原則，同隊每位辯士亦皆須上場發言，且發言時間長短不可差別過大。)
Debate Preparation
Like the BP debate, the two affirmative (negative) teams, being on the same side and thus sharing the same stance, are not supposed to contradict or backstab each other during the debate. Yet, they have to prove to the judges that their case and their responses to the opponents’ cases make them a stronger team than the other team on the same side. No teams are allowed to discuss their case with the school that they are paired up with on the same side before the competition; violation of this rule is considered cheating and will
automatically lead to disqualification). (在本辯論型式中，正、反方各有兩隊，屬於同一方的兩隊在賽 前為「兄弟爬山各自努力」，也就是各自準備論點，不可與立場相同的另一隊有任何討論或商議，違 反規定者將被取消參賽資格；在比賽進行中則須彼此合作[即不能批判立場相同之另一方]但卻又相互 較勁[即證明我隊論點仍較具說服力、我隊表現仍技高一籌]。)
Each team has to prepare more arguments and evidence than needed, so if the other team from the same side covers some arguments or evidence, there is still plenty left for one’s own case. Each team also needs to prepare questions and responses to the arguments possibly brought up by the two teams on the other side and know how to quickly adapt if their questions have been asked by the other team or how to capitalize on the questions or responses from the other team on the same side. It is important that each team knows how to play the order of speaking to their advantage and optimize their chances to win. (每隊賽前應準備至少雙倍 論點與證據，並需設想如果立場相同的另一隊提出某些論點，我方該如何因應。同時，亦須針對立場 不同方隊伍所可能提出的論點，事先設想問題與回應。若相關問題已被同一立場的另一隊提出，該如 何處理；若同一立場的另一隊有不錯的問題或回應，該如何利用。妥善運用發言順序，擬訂適當策略 是備賽重點之一。)
