C. CROSS EXAMINATION STYLE: PROCEDURE AND TIMES The short list

1st Affirmative speech
1st Negative cross ex

1st Negative speech
2nd Affirmative cross ex

2nd Affirmative speech
2nd Negative cross ex

2nd Negative speech
1st Affirmative cross ex
1st Negative rebuttal and summary 1st Affirmative rebuttal and summary

4 minutes 2 minutes 5 minutes 2 minutes 6 minutes 2 minutes 6 minutes 2 minutes 1 minute 2 minutes

The detailed list

  1. 1st Affirmative constructive speech (4 minutes)

    • opens by stating the resolution

    • defines the resolution and any of the terms

    • outlines what the major points of the Affirmative case (1st and 2nd speakers)

    • discusses each point in detail, providing evidence and examples for each

    • reviews and summarizes

    • ends by stating “therefore, M. Moderator, the resolution must stand. I now stand open

      for cross-examination”

  2. 1st Negative cross examines 1st Affirmative (2 minutes)

  3. 1st Negative rebuttal and constructive speech (5 minutes)

    • opens by stating that the resolution must not pass

    • rebuts everything the 1st Affirmative has just said (both in 1st Affirmative speech and

      in answers in cross-ex)

    • outlines the major points of the Negative case

    • discusses each point in detail, giving evidence and examples for each

    • reviews and summarizes

    • ends by stating “therefore, M. Moderator, the resolution must fall. I now stand open

      for cross-examination

  4. 2nd Affirmative cross-examines 1st Negative (2 minutes)

  5. 2nd Affirmative rebuttal and constructive speech (6 minutes)

    • opens by stating that the resolution must pass

    • rebuts everything the 1st Negative has said (both in 1st Negative constructive speech

      and in answers to cross-ex)

    • discusses the rest of the Affirmative points – providing evidence and examples for

      each

    • reviews and summarizes

    • ends by stating “therefore, M. Moderator, the resolution must stand. I now stand open

      for cross-examination”

  6. 2nd Negative cross-examines 2nd Affirmative (2 minutes)==========

===========================

Impromptu debate (to complete within one class) – Cross Examination style

  1. Put the resolution on the board.

  2. Divide students into teams of two.

  3. Decide which team(s) will be affirmative/negative.

  4. Give teams 5-10 minutes to brainstorm their points and write their speeches.

  5. Choose a timekeeper, (and moderator), everyone else will be a judge.

  6. During the time when debaters are preparing, review something like “constructive

    criticism.” Make sure each judge has a sheet upon which to write a compliment for each

    debater (and piece of constructive criticism if you feel up to it).

  7. Run the debate (as a cross-ex or a discussion-style – see below).

  8. Facilitate a round of compliments (and optional constructive criticism).

The Basics of Cross Examination Debate

1. 1st Affirmative constructive speech (4 minutes)

  • opens by stating the resolution

  • defines the resolution and any of the terms st nd

  • outlines the major points of the Affirmative case (1 and 2

  • discusses each point in detail, providing evidence and examples for each

  • reviews and summarizes

  • ends by stating “therefore, M. Moderator, the resolution must stand. I now stand open for

    cross-examination”.

  1. 1st Negative cross examines 1st Affirmative (2 minutes)

  2. 1st Negative rebuttal and constructive speech (5 minutes)

    • begins with a rebuttal of comments made by the 1st Affirmative (1-2 minutes)

    • opens constructive speech by stating that the resolution must not pass

    • outlines the major points of the Negative case

    • discusses each point in detail, giving evidence and examples for each point

    • reviews and summarizes

    • ends by stating “therefore, M. Moderator, the resolution must fall. I now stand open for

      cross-examination”.

  3. 2nd Affirmative cross-examines 1st Negative (2 minutes)

  4. 2nd Affirmative rebuttal and constructive speech (6 minutes)

    • begins with a rebuttal of comments made by the 1st Negative (1-2 minutes)

    • opens constructive speech by stating that the resolution must pass

    • discusses the rest of the Affirmative points – providing evidence and examples for each

    • reviews and summarizes

    • ends by stating “therefore, M. Moderator, the resolution must stand. I now stand open for

      cross-examination”

  5. 2nd Negative cross examines 2nd Affirmative (2 minutes)

  6. 2nd Negative rebuttal and constructive speech (6 minutes)

    • begins with a rebuttal of comments made by the 2nd Affirmative (1-2 minutes)

    • opens constructive speech by stating that the resolution must not pass

    • outlines the major points of the Negative case

    • discusses each point in detail, giving evidence and examples for each

    • reviews and summarizes

    • ends by stating “therefore, M. Moderator, the resolution must fall. I now stand open for

      cross-examination”

  7. 1st Affirmative cross examines 2nd Negative (2 minutes)

  8. 1st Negative conclusion (1 minute)

    • rebuts all Affirmative points

    • briefly summarizes key points in the Negative case

    • ends by stating “therefore, M. Moderator, this resolution must fall.”

  9. 1st Affirmative rebuttal and conclusion (2 minutes)

    • rebuts all negative points (in entire debate)

    • briefly summarizes key points in the Affirmative case

    • ends by stating “therefore, M. Moderator, this resolution must stand.”

speakers)

===============

  1. 2nd Negative rebuttal and constructive speech (6 minutes)

    • opens by stating that the resolution must not pass

    • rebuts everything the 2nd Affirmative has just said (both in 2nd Affirmative speech and

      in answers in cross-ex)

    • outlines the major points of the Negative case

    • discusses each point in detail, giving evidence and examples for each

    • reviews and summarizes

    • ends by stating “therefore, M. Moderator, the resolution must fall. I now stand open

      for cross-examination”

  2. 1st Affirmative cross examines 2nd Negative (2 minutes)

  3. 1st Negative conclusion (1 minute)

    • rebuts all Affirmative points

    • briefly summarizes key points in the Negative case

    • ends by stating “therefore, M. Moderator, this resolution must fall.”

      10. 1st Affirmative rebuttal and conclusion (2 minutes)

    • rebuts all negative points (in entire debate)

    • briefly summarizes key points in the Affirmative case

    • ends by stating “therefore, M. Moderator, this resolution must stand.”

  4. Cross-Examinaton Event Rules

  5. There are two, two-person teams, designated respectively “Affirmative” and “Negative.”

  6. The Chairman will open the debate and call upon each speaker in turn. The Chairman may be addressed as Mr. or

  7. Madame Chairman in an opening salutation, but need not be addressed otherwise. No salutation is required, but it is customary for each speaker to begin with some polite form of address such as “Mr. Speaker, honourable judges, worthy opponents, ladies and gentlemen...” etc.

  8. Speeches are addressed to an audience consisting of the judges and all other persons in the room. Other debaters are customarily referred to in the third person during speeches, in the second person during cross-examinations.

  9. Each speaker delivers a constructive speech, cross examines one member of the opposing team, and delivers a

  10. rebuttal.

  11. Following a constructive speech, a speaker must submit (“I now stand open for cross-examination.”) to a cross-

  12. examination by the member of the opposing team who is NOT speaking next.

  13. All speakers are allotted equal times for their constructive, cross-examinations, and rebuttals. (See #13)

  14. Constructive Speeches

  15. -  Each team must present its main lines of argument (its “case”) and the principal evidence supporting the

  16. case in the course of its two constructive speeches.

  17. -  The members of each team may divide between them the labour of presenting the case in any way they see

  18. fit.

  19. -  Any constructive speech (except the first affirmative) may also include explicit attacks upon the case of the

  20. opposing team and explicit replies to attacks made by their opponents.

  21. Cross-Examination

  22. -  The purpose of cross-examination is to allow each team the opportunity to elicit damaging admissions from

  23. its opponents regarding their case. The admissions may then be used against them in subsequent

  24. speeches.

  25. -  Each speaker seeks to elicit these admissions by asking questions of the opposing speaker whom he/she is

  26. assigned to cross-examine. The respondent is required to respond to these questions in some way. Both questioner and respondent should avoid speech-making. Questions may be based on statements made earlier in the debate, on arguments, which the questioner expects his/her partner to present, or on any topic, which the questioner thinks, may bring his/her side advantage, regardless of its apparent relevance to the debate. Questions, however, may NOT be personal (e.g., “Do you do drugs?)

  27. -  The questioner may not demand simple “yes/no” answers. The subject has the right to explain any answer briefly, but is forbidden to stall or filibuster. If the respondent is answering at inordinate length, the questioner may interrupt (as courteously as possible) in order to continue the line of questioning.

  28. Rebuttal

  29. -  The purpose of rebuttal speeches is to give both teams the opportunity to summarize their case, defend

  30. them from attacks by opponents, and press attacks upon their opponents.

  31. -  New lines of argument may not be introduced in rebuttals. Exception: in the first affirmative rebuttal, which

  32. follows two negative speeches, the speaker may deal with new issues raised in either of these negative

  33. speeches, even if this requires a new line of argument.

  34. -  In general, the introduction of substantial items of new evidence should be avoided in rebuttals. Exception:

  35. If the second negative constructive or the first negative rebuttal speaker has demanded additional evidence on any point in the affirmative case, the first affirmative rebuttal speaker may respond accordingly.

  36. Evidence

  37. -  Both teams are expected to support the lines of argument with sufficient evidence to make them logically

  38. persuasive.

  39. -  Evidence may consist of facts, statistics and/or authoritative opinions drawn from published or publicly

  40. accessible sources (NOT private conversations, personal letters, or similar sources.) Debaters may assert that some facts are “general knowledge,” but judges must decide for themselves what value, if any, to attribute to such assertions.

  41. -  Debaters should always be prepared to document the source of any evidence. It is customary, but not mandatory, to cite the source of most evidence when it is introduced in a speech.

  42. -  Evidence may never be fabricated or deliberately misrepresented. A debater who is shown to have done so may be disqualified from further competition.

  43. Definitions

  44. -  It is the duty and privilege of the affirmative team to make clear at the beginning of the debate as precisely

  45. as possible how it construes the resolution. This may be done by defining each key term individually, by paraphrasing the resolution as a whole, and/or by presenting the plan, which the affirmative proposes to implement the resolution.

  46. -  In prepared cross-examination debates, definitions should embody the standard meanings of the terms of the resolution in contemporary public discourse. Creative, novel, or whimsical definitions are not

  47. appropriate. The affirmative must construe the resolution in such a way as to make it debatable. They may

  48. not construe it as a tautology or a truism.

  49. -  The negative may challenge the definitions offered by the affirmative only at the beginning of the first

  50. negative speech and only on the grounds that the definition does not meet the requirements set out in the previous rule. The judges must decide at the end of the debate whether such a challenge is warranted. Meanwhile the negative may either attempt under protest to make its case under the definitions offered by the affirmative, or make its case under the challenged and revised definitions. However, a prolonged wrangle over definitions is not advisable, as it leads to avoiding the intent of the debate. The negative is better advised to challenge, if need be, but to proceed with an attempt to argue under the original definitions. The affirmative should make every effort to define in a manner that will be acceptable by both sides.

  51. -  A non-challenge by the negative in the first negative speech is deemed explicit acceptance of the affirmative’s definitions.

  52. 12. Other Duties and Privileges of the Affirmative and Negative

  53. -  Affirmative. The affirmative has the burden of proof and the compensating privileges of presenting the

  54. opening and closing speeches. The affirmative is not required to offer a plan, but, since it is required to show that the resolution is feasible and does not entail significant disadvantages, the affirmative usually chooses to offer a plan – a reasonably detailed description of the way in which the resolution should be implemented – as the most efficient and persuasive way to accomplish these tasks.

  55. -  Negative. The negative enjoys the benefit of presumption. Therefore, debates in which the speaker scores produce a tie are awarded to the negative. Strictly speaking, the negative is not required to “make a case” in order to win, but may confine itself merely to attacks upon the affirmative case. In theory, the negative wins if it mounts a completely successful attack on one major element of the affirmative case. In practice, completely successful attacks are extremely rare. The negative may introduce a counterplan, an alternative proposal. A counterplan must solve the same problem, attain the same goals, or bring about the same advantages as the affirmative claims will be done by its solution, but by means entirely different from those stated or implied in the resolution. If a counterplan is introduced, it MUST be in the first negative speech. If the negative introduces a counterplan, it assumes the burden of proof comparable to that borne by the affirmative.

  56. 13. Speaking times

  57. -  Constructive Speeches. 6 minutes each. Each constructive speaker is granted a 30 second grace period

  58. to finish his/her speech after the allotted time has expired. Judges will disregard anything said after the

  59. expiration of the grace period.

  60. -  Cross-examinations. 3 minutes each. The cross-examiner must stop speaking as soon as the time

  61. expires. If a question has been asked, but the time allotted expires before the respondent is able to answer it, or to complete an answer, the respondent may choose whether to answer it. If an answer is attempted, it may continue briefly beyond the time.

  62. -  Rebuttals. 3 minutes each. These speeches must end when times expires. There is no grace period. Judges will disregard anything said after time expires.

  63. -  Order of speaking:

  64. In most cross-examination debates, each debater speaks for 6 minutes (though this can be much shorter in class debates)

  65. Cross-examination

  66. The point of cross-examination is to ask questions which demonstrate flaws in the opponent’s case

  67. Points are awarded for questions and for answers Rebuttal

  68. The best debating is all about “clash”. That is to say, it is a direct attack of specific arguments. If one side gets up and says all the reasons they like orange, and the other side states all the reasons they like blue – there has been no clash. Debaters need to directly attack and respond to each other’s comments.

  69. After a speaker has cross examined the other speaker, and before they begin their own speech, they rebut, comments made by their opponent. This gives them a chance to show they understand and can challenge specific points. Sometimes this is done in a specific rebuttal but the best debaters do the rebuttal throughout.

  70. Cross-examination = after speaking, each debater is questioned by a member of the opposite team

  71. Rebuttal = direct attach of the opponents comments (made during the constructive speech)

Toronto Debating Society

 

A non-profit community organization interested in the power of persuasion, critical thinking, and a good debate.

 

torontodebating.ca © 2019

  • Facebook Social Icon
  • YouTube Social  Icon
  • Twitter Social Icon