College Policy Debate Forums
November 23, 2017, 07:57:00 PM *
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?

Login with username, password and session length
News: IF YOU EXPERIENCE PROBLEMS WITH THE SITE, INCLUDING LOGGING IN, PLEASE LET ME KNOW IMMEDIATELY.  EMAIL ME DIRECTLY OR USE THE CONTACT US LINK AT THE TOP.
 
   Home   Help Search Login Register CEDA caselist Debate Results Council of Tournament Directors Edebate Archive  
Pages: [1]
  Print  
Author Topic: 2016-17 Topic Committee work is underway  (Read 2303 times)
Hester
Full Member
***
Posts: 153


« on: April 13, 2016, 07:23:10 AM »

Hey folks, hope everyone has recuperated from the nationals tournaments and the end of the 2015-16 season. The 2016-17 Topic Committee has begun our work and i will be regularly posting to this page with updates on the process. One does not need to be a voting member of the Topic Committee to make a substantial contribution to the process. Your opinions, ideas, and efforts are welcomed and greatly appreciated!
Logged
Hester
Full Member
***
Posts: 153


« Reply #1 on: April 19, 2016, 07:29:06 PM »

With the deadline for submitting topic papers one week away, i wanted to provide helpful advice to all those currently working on a paper:

1) This is not an essay contest, but coherent arguments tend to be the more persuasive arguments.
The Topic Committee is not determining which papers would make the best grade in an English Composition course, so it's okay if your paper is a bit  rough around the edges. Having said that, spellcheck is your friend and ally.
More importantly, make sure to proof read your paper not so much for grammar errors but rather as a double check that it makes a complete argument. Can someone who has not done all the research you have read your paper and understand why debating this topic is a good idea and what it would mean to debate this topic for an entire season in terms of the key affirmative and negative positions.

2) Don't waste space on defining terms unless you are doing so with field-contextual literature. Including random house definitions of "united states federal government" or black's law dictionary definitions of "substantially" in the context of library shelves are not helpful. Focus any lexicographical work on the key terms that make your topic a "topic." If the field literature does define terms that are common in previous resolutions (like the ones referenced above), that is great and you should include them.

3) Solvency advocates (for plans and counterplans) are much more important than terminal impact evidence. The Topic Committee will not be spending much (if any) time discussing whether the Affirmative and Negative teams will be able to claim extinction-level impacts. But we will be discussing whether the proposed topic can sustain an entire year's worth of debates that allow Affirmative and Negative teams to advocate evidenced solutions to the problems they identify. The topic papers that focus on addressing this concern will be most appreciated.
Logged
Pages: [1]
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.19 | SMF © 2013, Simple Machines
SMF customization services by 2by2host.com
Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!