Introduction to English Parliamentary Debate (KHSDC Style)

• The following is a brief introduction of the debate format used at KHSDC and is designed to help students, teachers, and administrators understand the format. The official tournament rules can be found at www.khsdc.com

I. Differences between Korean-style Debate and English Parliamentary Debate

• The kinds of debate that most Koreans are exposed to on shows like 100-Minute Debate are much different from competitive debating formats such as the parliamentary-style used in tournaments like KHSDC. Unlike the discussion-heavy “debate” found on Korean TV, competitive debate involves two teams that use aggressive rhetoric to attempt to convince one or more adjudicators (judges) to support or reject a particular motion (topic).

II. KHSDC Format
A. Teams

• KHSDC uses a 3-on-3 parliamentary debating style, with four speeches delivered by each team. As seen above, Reply Speeches are delivered by the first or second speaker on each team.

B. Speaker Roles

• The chart below gives a summary of the basic roles and time limits for each speaker:

• All of the times limits allow an additional 30 second grace period. In other words, a first, second, or third speaker may speak for 8 minutes and 30 seconds without being penalized. Likewise a reply speaker may speak for 4 minutes and 30 seconds. Speakers who exceed the time limit and grace period, however, will be penalized for going overtime.
• Note also that the Government team gives the first and last speech of the debate: the Opposition Reply speech is given right after the Opposition Whip speech.
• The folowing chart offers greater detail on the role of each speaker:

C. Preparation

• During KHSDC, some rounds require teams to debate prepared topics and some rounds require teams to debate impromptu topics. The topics for prepared rounds are announced several weeks before the tournament, but the topics for impromptu rounds are released one hour before that round begins. In other words, impromptu rounds require debaters to prepare a case and plan speeches in a very short amount of time, without using any research materials other than a dictionary and a single-volume almanac. Impromptu rounds often allow teams to agree on one motion out of a list of three at the beginning of the one hour of preparation time.

D. Points of Information

• During the first six speeches, the team that does not have the floor (the team that is not speaking) may interrupt the speaker with short questions, comments, or rebuttals. These interruptions are called Points of Information (POI). Teams may not offer POIs in the first or last minute of a speech nor may they offer any POIs during the last minute of a speech. POIs must be 15 seconds or less, and a speaker is allowed to cut off a POI at any time if he or she thinks he understands the point being made. When a POI is offered by the other side (by standing up and saying something like, “On that point,” “Sir?” or “Ma’am?”), a speaker can choose whether to accept or deny a POI. Speakers should typically try to accept one or two POIs to demonstrate that they are willing to hear what the other side has to say. Accepting too many POIs may give an adjudicator the impression that a speaker does not have any important things to say.

E. Adjudication (Judging)

• KHSDC typically has 5-8 preliminary rounds, in which every team in the tournament participates, and which are judged by 1 or 3 adjudicators. In elimination rounds, only the winning teams continue to advance in the tournament, and there are at least 3 adjudicators in each debate.

• During a debate, each team attempts to persuade the adjudicators, and the adjudicators must exclude their own knowledge and opinions as much as possible and judge based only on the material that comes out during the debate. Adjudicators consider three categories when they judge each team: content, style, and strategy:

• Although debaters are technically rated on a 100-point scale, the scores that judges give are limited to a much smaller range. It is extremely rare for a debater to earn a score of 80, and most scores per speaker fall in the 68-72 range.

• A team’s win or loss is based on a judge’s assessment of the debate as a whole, but the total points given to each team in a round must also reflect the win and loss for that round. In other words, the judges always assign the higher number of points to the team that won the round, but they base their judgment on the debate as a whole, not merely on the sums of the numbers given to each speaker. This means that in very close debates, a judge must sometimes make slight adjustments to his or her numbers if he or she decides that, for example, the Government side has won but the Opposition has slightly more points.

1  Each debate round consists of two teams of three students each; one team ('The Proposition') will propose the motion and one team ('The Opposition') will oppose the motion.
2  Debates consist of three Substantive Speeches (8-minutes) and one Reply Speech (4-minutes) from each team delivered in the following order:
2.1  1st Speaker of the Proposition, 8 minutes
2.2  1st Speaker of the Opposition, 8 minutes
2.3  2nd Speaker of the Proposition, 8 minutes
2.4  2nd Speaker of the Opposition, 8 minutes
2.5  3rd Speaker of the Proposition, 8 minutes
2.6  3rd Speaker of the Opposition, 8 minutes
2.7  Opposition Reply Speaker, 4 minutes
2.8  Proposition Reply Speaker, 4 minutes.

3  Reply Speeches MUST be given by the 1st or 2nd Speaker; 3rd Speakers may not give reply speeches.

4  After a speaker's time has elapsed, he or she will have a 30 second grace period in which to finish his or her speech.

5  Debates will be judged by an odd number of Adjudicators.
5.1  Preliminary Rounds will be judged by a single Adjudicator (unless multiple judges are available);
5.2  Elimination Rounds will be judged by a panel of no less than three Adjudicators.

6  A debate shall be timed by a Timekeeper. In the event that none has been nominated in a particular Chamber (room), one of the adjudicators will take over the role of timekeeper. Timekeepers should:
6.1  Accurately record the time of each speech and report that time to the Adjudicator(s).
6.2  Provide audible signals at designated times and demonstrate those signals prior to the start of the debate.

6.3  Time signals given during Substantive Speeches are:
6.3.1 One Rap at the end of the first minute, indicating the end of the first ‘Protected Time’. (NOTE: Points of Information (POI) may be offered by the opposing team after the first rap)
6.3.2 One Rap at the end of the seventh minute, indicating the beginning of the second ‘Protected Time’. (NOTE: POIs may not be offered after the second rap.)
6.3.3 Two Raps at the end of the eighth minute, indicating the ‘End of Speech’ time.
6.3.4 Repeated Rapping at the end of eight-minutes and thirty-seconds, indicating the end of the thirty-second ‘Grace Period’, if a speaker has gone overtime.

6.4  Time signals given during Reply Speeches are:
6.4.1 One Rap at the end of the third minute, indicating a One Minute warning.
6.4.2 Two Raps at the end of the fourth minute, indicating the ‘End of Speech’ time.
6.4.3 Repeated Rapping at the end of four-minutes and thirty-seconds, indicating the end of the thirty-second ‘Grace Period’, if a speaker has gone overtime.

7  Debaters giving speeches at the podium shall be recognised as ‘Holding the Floor’;
7.1 Debaters not holding the Floor shall stand only to offer a Point of Information.
7.2 Debaters behaving in a manner which interferes with the acceptable course of debate will be declared 'Out of Order' by the Adjudicator/Chairperson.

8  The role of the 1st Speaker of the Proposition is to define the topic, establish the issues for the debate, outline the proposition case, announce how that case will be divided between the speakers, and present the first part of the proposition case.

8.1 The proposition may define the topic in any way provided that the Definition –
8.1.1 is reasonably close to the plain, common-sense meaning of the topic,
8.1.2 allows the opposition team reasonable room to debate,
8.1.3 is not tautological or truistic,
8.1.4 is otherwise a reasonable definition.

8.2 Squirrelling, place-setting and time-setting are not permitted
8.2.1 Squirrelling is an attempt to conceal the debate from the Opposition by deliberately defining the Motion in an obscure way that can’t be reasonably anticipated by the Opposition, or
8.2.1.1 is the distortion of the definition to enable a team to argue a pre-prepared argument that it wishes to debate regardless of the motion actually set, or
8.2.2 Place-setting is the setting of a debate of general application in a particular place.
8.2.3 Time-setting is the setting of a debate of general application in a particular time, past or future.

8.3 The definition should NOT be:
8.3.1 Place Set (setting an unnaturally restrictive geographical or spatial location as its major parameter).
8.3.2 Time Set (setting an unnaturally restrictive chronological duration as its main parameter).
8.3.3 Wholly unreasonable (would denote equating any term with a definition that is not to be found in a dictionary or would run in direct opposition to the spirit of the motion).
8.3.3.1 Against the spirit of the motion (Example: For a resolution on green house gasses, defining the phrase as only “those gasses emanating from greenhouses” would be unreasonable and against the spirit of the motion.)
8.3.3.2 Or is a Squirrel.

9  A good definition allows the competing teams to clash actively and debate the issues most relevant to a given motion. Good debaters know that they cannot skew a definition just because the original motion seems to put their side at a disadvantage. Good debaters know that they cannot win debate rounds by using sneaky, non-intuitive definitions they hope their opponents will not expect. When a motion has no obvious meaning, the Proposition must choose a reasonable definition that allows the Opposition room for debate.

10  The role of the 1st Speaker of the Opposition side is to challenge the definition if necessary, present an alternative definition if the definition is challenged, respond to the proposition case, outline the opposition case, announce how that case will be divided between the speakers, and present the first part of the opposition case.
10.1 The 1st Opposition Speaker may challenge the definition only if it does not conform to the standards outlined in Rule 9. If challenging the definition, the 1st Opposition Speaker must do so in the first minute of his/her speech and must propose a new definition that conforms to the standards outlined in Rule 9.
10.2 If challenging a definition, the 1st Opposition speaker should make clear on what grounds the definition or part of the definition is being challenged (time set, place set, tautological, or wholly unreasonable).
10.3 If the 1st Opposition Speaker does not challenge the definition, the opposition is assumed to have accepted the definition and the opposition may not challenge the definition in any other speech unless the Proposition speakers significantly alter the definition in their subsequent speeches.

11 In responding to the proposition case, the Opposition team may produce a positive choice of its own, or merely attack the case presented by the Proposition. (NOTE: Generally, Opposition teams find it advantageous to present their own substantive case instead of merely attacking the proposition case.)

12 The role of the 2nd Speaker of the Proposition is to deal with the definition if it has been challenged, respond to the opposition case, and continue with the proposition case as outlined by the first speaker.
12.1 If the 2nd Proposition Speaker does not challenge a re-definition made by the 1st opposition speaker, the proposition side is assumed to have accepted the opposition's re-definition and no further challenges to the definition may be made.

13 The role of the 2nd Speaker of the Opposition is to deal with the definition if it is still an issue, respond to the proposition case, and continue with the opposition case as outlined by the first speaker.

14 The role of both 3rd Speakers is to deal with the definition if it is still an issue, and respond to the other team's case.
14.1 The 3rd Speaker’s primary role is to respond to what has gone before in the debate.
14.2 They focus on the major issue(s) in the debate and the ways in which both teams approached the major 'Clash(es)' of a debate.
14.3 The 3rd Opposition Speaker may NOT offer any new constructive content in his/her speech.
14.4 If the 3rd Proposition Speaker is to present a part of the team's case, this must be announced in the case division by the first speaker.

15  The role of the Reply Speeches is to sum up the debate from the team's viewpoint, including a response to the other team's overall case and a summary of the speaker's own team's case.
15.1 Reply speakers may NOT introduce any new constructive content related to their team's case.
15.2 Reply speakers may respond to an existing argument by raising a new example that illustrates that argument, but may not otherwise introduce a new argument.

16 The Proposition team does not have to prove its case beyond reasonable doubt, but merely that its case is true in the majority of cases or as a general proposition.

17 The Opposition team must prove more than a reasonable doubt about the proposition case.

18 Where the topic is expressed as an absolute, the Proposition must prove the topic true in the significant majority of cases, but not in every single conceivable instance.

19 Where the topic is expressed as an absolute, the Opposition must do more than present a single instance where the topic is not true and prove that it is not true for at least a significant minority of cases.

20 Points of Information are an important part of the clash between the teams, enabling debaters to remain a part of the debate even when they are not making a speech. Hence a debater should offer points of information both before and after that debater has given his or her substantive speech.

21 Points of Information may be offered during Substantive Speeches;
21.1 Points of Information may not be offered during the Protected Time(s),
21.2 Points of Information may not be offered during the Reply Speech(es).

22 A 'Point of Information' must be offered by a member of an opposing team:
22.1 By rising from his/her seat,
22.1.1  while gesturing appropriately toward the Debater ‘Holding the Floor’ (currently at the podium),
22.1.2  drawing attention to the offer by saying "on that point”, or “before you continue” or similar,
22.1.3  then waiting for a response from the Debater holding the Floor.
22.2 More than one member of the opposing team may rise simultaneously.

23 A Debater holding the Floor must respond to opposing member(s) offering Points of Information, in one of the following ways:
23.1 a clear gesture or hand signal rejecting the offer,
23.2 a verbal rejection of the offer,
23.3 a verbal acceptance of the offer,
23.4 a delayed acceptance of the offer (by saying "just a moment," or similar).

24 If a Point of Information is accepted, the point should be phrased as a question, clarification, or comment,
24.1 POIs lasting longer than 15 seconds will be ‘Called to Order’ by the adjudicator.

25 The debater holding the Floor has complete control of Points of Information,
25.1 when and how to accept them,
25.2 whether to accept them,
25.3 how long they should go on for. Once the debater holding the Floor understands the point being offered,
25.3.1  he or she can then tell the offering debater to sit down and, answer the Point of Information accordingly.
25.3.2  A debater holding the Floor performing this dismissal may not be penalised for doing so unless such has been conducted in a rude style.

26 The following rules pertain to offering Points of Information:
26.1 As a general rule each team member should offer between 2 and 4 points of information per speech.
26.2 Debaters may not barrack the other team. Barracking is the continuous offering Points of Information amounting to excessively interrupting the debater holding the floor.
26.2.1  Debaters may not offer Points of Information if a previous offer was rejected a few seconds before and/or,
26.2.2  while a debater holding the floor is clearly in the early stages of answering a Point of Information just accepted.
26.2.3  Adjudicators will determine when the offering of Points of Information begins to infringe on the right and/or ability of the debater holding the floor to address the audience.

27  The following rules pertain to accepting Points of Information:
27.1 The speaker has the right to refuse or to accept a point of information, or to accept it only at the end of the next sentence.
27.2 If a Point of Information is accepted, the speaker accepting it must frame an answer or response to it within the context of his/her speech.
27.3 A speaker is obliged to accept some points of information, provided that they have been offered at reasonable times in the speaker's speech.
27.4 As a general rule a speaker should accept at least 2 points of information in his or her speech.
27.5 But a speaker who accepts a significantly greater number of points of information risks losing control of his or her speech.

NOTE: The following section is for the benefit of both Debaters and Adjudicators.

28 Discrimination on the basis of religion, sex, race, nationality, sexual preference, age, social status, accent or any disability is strictly forbidden at KHSDC.
28.1 Discriminatory biases will not affect an adjudicator's assessment (objective) or evaluation (subjective) of a debate (see also: Tournament Etiquette).

29 Adjudicators will arrive at their decisions on an individual basis and
29.1 fill in the necessary ballots and pass their completed forms and ballots to the runner/tournament representative for recording in the Tabulations Room.

30 Marking for Substantive Speeches will be based on three categories:
30.1 Content (40%), Style (40%) and Strategy (20%).
30.1.1  Reply Speeches are worth half as much as Substantive Speeches, so the marks are halved:
30.1.2  Content 20%, Style 20%, Strategy 10%.
30.2 There is no global mark for teamwork. (see also: Marking the Debate).

31 'Style' refers to the presentation and delivery style of a speaker.

32 The following list represents some of the elements which are, or may be, included under 'Style'. The list is intended as a guide, rather than as an enumeration of marking categories. It is the combination of these elements in various proportions that contributes to an individual speaker's style. Adjudicators should ask themselves, 'Is the speaker's style EFFECTIVE in advancing the case?'
32.1 Vocal Style: volume, clarity, pronunciation, pace, intonation, fluency, confidence, authority.
32.2 Language: mature, conversational.
32.3 Humour: effective, relevant.
32.4 Use of notes: should not distract, should not be read.
32.5 Eye Contact: with audience.
32.6 Gesture: natural, appropriate.
32.7 Stance: natural, appropriate.
32.8 Sincerity: believability.

33 Speakers will be judged as if they were native English speakers, but they will not be penalized for having an accent.

34 The use of notes and legitimate prepared materials should not affect a Speaker's score, but Speakers should refer to these only from time to time and should not be reading speeches from a script.

35 'Content' relates to the argument presented by a speaker, divorced from the speaking style. Content includes the case being presented and the material used to substantiate argumentation.
35.1 The issues under debate should be correctly prioritized (by teams) and ordered (by individuals), dealing with the most important/pertinent first. (NOTE: Debaters who fail to organize their speeches properly will be penalized in the Strategy category.)
35.2 'Content' should be logical and well-reasoned.
35.3 'Content' should be relevant, both to the issue in contention and the cases being advanced. (NOTE: Debaters who fail to demonstrate an understanding of the key issues of a debate will be penalized in the Strategy category.)
35.4 'Content' should be persuasive.
35.5 'Content' will be assessed from the viewpoint of 'the average reasonable person'. Adjudicators must disregard any specialized knowledge they have, even if pertinent to the issues under debate.
35.5.1 Adjudicators are to assess the strength of an argument regardless of whether the other team is able to knock it down.
35.6 'Content' will also include an assessment of the weight of rebuttal or clash.

36 Responses to an opponent's Point of Information will be assessed in the Content category. (NOTE: A Debater who fails to offer adequate Points of Information during a debate will be penalized in the Strategy category.)
36.1 Whenever possible, a Debater should accept at least two Points of Information during his/her Substantive Speech. (Debaters who fail to do this will not be penalized if an Adjudicator determines that the opposing team failed to offer a reasonable amount of Points for the speaker to respond to.)

37 No 'new matter' may be offered during 3rd Substantive Speeches, unless the 1st Speaker announces that this will happen in his or her case division. Third Opposition Speakers cannot offer new matter in their speeches, because the Proposition team will not have a proper opportunity to respond.

38 No 'new matter' may be introduced during Reply Speeches.
38.1 The Reply Speech should also give an 'optimistic overview' of the general approach to the debate by both sides and focus on the relative merits of the case by the side Replying, and the relative weaknesses in the case of the opposing team.
38.2 Reply Speeches should neither continue rebuttal arguments nor advance old arguments into significantly new 'territory'.

39 ‘Strategy' covers three concepts:
39.1 whether a Speaker understands the main issues of a debate,
39.2 a speaker's response to the dynamics of the debate (offering enough relevant POIs, currency and relevance of rebuttals)
39.3 the structure and organization of an individual speech, which includes
39.3.1   how well a Speaker fulfils his or her individual role
39.3.2   the order in which a Speaker presents ideas and moves through the phases of a speech (opening remarks, rebuttal, own points, summary, etc.),
39.3.3   the amount of time given to each issue/phase of a speech,
39.3.4   the fluidity with which a Speaker moves from one point to another in a clearly logical sequence.
39.3.4.1 A speaker may 'signpost' his or her transitions from one phase to another.

40 'Strategy' also pertains to good time management.
40.1 Overtime speeches: Once the double knock of the gavel has sounded, speakers have a 30-second 'Grace Period', during which they should conclude remarks already under contention. Speakers continuing after this 'grace period' will be penalized in the Method category.
40.2 Under-time Speeches: If the speaker concludes his/her speech before 8-minutes he or she will not be penalized for an under-time speech (see also: Finer Points of Adjudication).

41 A Speaker who understands the issues of a debate but gives weak responses should receive low Content marks but may receive high Strategy marks.

42 At the end of every debate, each Adjudicator must complete their Adjudication Ballot.

43 There are no draws in competitive debating!

44 There are no 'Low-Point' wins.

45 Substantive Speeches (Out of 100):
45.1 Half points are permitted but quarter points are NOT.



46 Reply Speeches (Out of 50): Half points are permitted but quarter points are NOT.

47 The Korea High School Debating Championship (KHSDC) is an annual tournament designed to encourage English language debate in South Korea and to provide a competitive, educational event for young debaters. The first KHSDC was held in 2006, and the tournament was formerly used as a selection event to choose Korea’s representative team for the World Schools Debating Championship. As of 2007, KHSDC became a national parliamentary debate tournament. Currently, there are no plans to offer other competitive debate formats at KHSDC other than 3-on-3 parliamentary debate.

48 KHSDC will be divided into two main phases of competitive debating: six 'Preliminary Rounds' and four single-elimination 'Elimination Rounds'.

49 Preliminary Rounds will be power matched based on the results of the debates up to that point. Some of the factors that the tournament tabulations program may employ, but not entirely exclusive to, governing power matching are:
49.1 Win versus Loss record
49.2 High/Low Points (Highest/Lowest points of each team are dropped)
49.3 Points differential (all win/loss margins added together)
49.4 Total Team Points
49.5 Opposition Wins
49.6 Coin Flip (computer assigned random number).

50 The Break is when teams advance from Preliminary 6 into the Elimination Rounds.
50.1 Only the Top-Sixteen ranked teams will advance at KHSDC;
50.2 Ranking of those teams will be determined according to the criteria described in the previous section.
50.3 Teams that make The Break will be notified prior to the first Elimination Round.

51 Elimination Rounds are single-elimination; only winning teams advance to the next round.
51.1 The Elimination Rounds at KHSDC will follow the sequence:
51.1.1  Octo-Finals (sixteen teams)
51.1.2  Quarter-Finals (eight teams)
51.1.3  Semi-Finals (four teams)
51.1.4  Grand Finals (two teams).

52 Debaters:
52.1 KHSDC is open to all debaters, regardless of nationality, who are enrolled as full-time students at any high school in South Korea.
52.2 Students who wish to compete in KHSDC must register through their schools and must meet the registration procedures and deadlines set forth by the tournament Convenor.

53 Adjudicators:
53.1 KHSDC is open to all adults of legal voting age with an advanced proficiency in English and an interest in judging competitive debate.
53.2 All adjudicator applicants must know and understand the 3-On-3 Parliamentary Debate Guidelines and the KHSDC procedures contained in this document.
53.3 All adjudicator applicants must attend Adjudicator Training and take the Judge’s Test prior to Preliminary Round 1.
53.3.1  The Convenor reserves the right to enact a ‘Length of Service’ requirement (see also: Adjudicator Selection).
53.3.2  The Convenor reserves the right to use ‘Mutual-Preference Judging’ (see also: Adjudicator Selection).

54 The Convenor reserves the right to establish an Adjudicator-Team registration ratio and to disqualify from the tournament teams that fail to meet the required ratio.

55 Any debater or adjudicator who is unsure of his or her eligibility should contact the Convenor or have their faculty Liaison do the same.

56 Electronic Devices:
56.1 Any use of electronic devices, except single-function digital stopwatches, is strictly prohibited during all preparation times and all debate rounds.
56.1.1   This includes: electronic dictionaries, mobile phones, computers, mp3 players, handheld PCs, and any other data-storing or communications or Internet accessing device(s).
56.2 Any violations of this rule, in whole or in part, are cheating (see also: Special Rules and Disciplinary Infractions).

57 Prepared Rounds:
57.1 Motions for Prepared Debates will be announced eight weeks before the start of the tournament, and debaters are expected to prepare with their teams before the tournament begins.
57.2 There will be NO preparation time allowed immediately prior to the debate.
57.3 During Prepared Rounds, debaters shall bring into the Chamber:
57.3.1  pens/pencils/highlighters, NEW paper-pads/Post-Its/study-cards, speech notes, prepped materials, one bound dictionary (single or bi-lingual) and one almanac PER TEAM.

58 Impromptu Rounds: