Introduction to WSDC Format.
This document aims to serve as introduction to those interested in learning
about how debates work at the World Schools Debating Championship(WSDC), commonly simply referred to as the World Schools format. Whether
you are interested in simply learning how debating works for the first timeor honing your skills for this format before trialing for the World Schools
team, we hope this document will be a useful introduction to the workingsof this format. For an introduction to the how the tournament at large
works please see the “WSDC - Introduction to the Competition” documenton our website.

Speaking order
In World Schools format a team comprises of three to five people who prepare
together, of which three speak in any given debate (though they can cycle
who is speaking between debates). After the debate has begun only the threeteam members speaking in that debate may communicate with each other.
Each team is allocated to either “proposition” or “opposition” on a motionthat will be given to them (see below for details). They are then required toeither provide reasons for or against the motion according to the side they
have been allocated.

The first three speeches from each team areeight minutes in length and alternate between
proposition and opposition starting with theproposition. At the end of these initialspeeches, each team then delivers a “reply”
speech (see below for details) of four minutesin length. This is delivered by either the firstor second speaker on their team. The “reply”
speeches reverse order and begin with theopposition first.
During the first three main speeches of eachteam, speakers from the opposing team may
offer a “Point of Information” (POIs) between
the first and seventh minute of the speech(these timings will be indicated by an audible
signal from the judging table, normally a softbang on the table or a clap). A POI is a short(up to 15 seconds) interjection in which one of
the three members of the opposing teamspeaking in that debate can ask a question or
make an objection to the person currently
delivering their main speech – it is up to thespeaker to accept or decline a POI that isoffered, but speakers are expected to accept
two in their speech.

World Schools format speaking orderSpeaker Roles
Each speaker in the debate has a different role. These rules are intended tofacilitate as fair a debate as possible, both by ensuring that clarity in thetopic up for debate is established and to ensure that both teams have areasonable chance to engage with the other side’s arguments. The key thing
to remember is that the speaker roles are intended to enrich the debate notto limit what a team can do.

First Speakers
The first speaker of proposition is responsible for:

defining the motion (see below),
outlining the arguments that proposition will bring (their team’s case),
explaining which speakers will present which of those arguments,
presenting part of the case for their side.

Similarly the first speaker of the opposition is responsible for:





challenging the definition and providing a new one (but only if they
think that definition is unfair, see below),
outlining the arguments that proposition will bring (their team’s case),
explaining which speakers will present which of those arguments,
responding to the arguments of first proposition (this is called
rebuttal),presenting part of that case for their side.

Defining the motion is about giving a clear explanation of what the motionmeans to ensure that all speakers and judges are clear on the topic being
debated. If the two teams argue about very different things, then it becomes
hard to pin down what exactly the disagreements between the teams are.

This House would allow corporal punishment in schools
The definition for this motions should include:
Who will deliver the punishment?
Will it be the school nurse, a head of discipline, any given teacher
Who can issue the punishment?
Will it be only senior staff/ all staff?
What is the punishment?
Caning/slapping/ pinching
What can the punishment be given for?
Serious breaches of behavior such as violence/ repeated ignoring of theuniform policy or can it be issued at a teachers’ discretion?

Teams should think about a few things when defining the motion:a) What would a reasonable intelligent person think this debate isabout?
If a motion has an obvious meaning then it should be pursued.

This House would teach Intelligent Design in schools
This motion is about teaching students about the belief that life wasdesigned by an intelligent creator, not a motion about thinking
intelligently about your art projects whilst students are designingthem.

b) The debate should not be place or time set unless that is specified
by the words of the motion.

This House would legalise the sale and consumption ofrecreational drugs
This is a debate about modern day nations. It would not be fair todefine it as 1960’s America prior to the war on drugs regardless ofwhether you believed it would make it easier for your side.
Whilst examples can be useful to give clarity to your definition (e.g.
“we would allow their sale and consumption within private homes andcafés specifically set up for them, similar to the Dutch model forcannabis”) they should not restrict a reasonable discussion of the topic.
c) What do the important words in the motion mean and are thespecifics obvious?

This House believes that the United Nations has failed
In this debate specific criteria for failure should be given.
Do you want the criteria to be preventing war, ignoring human rights
abuses or inefficient decision making procedures?

If as an opposition speaker you believe the definition is unfair (you cannot
reasonably be expected to have interpreted the debate in a similar way) orreduced to a tautology then you are entitled to challenge the definition.
You must explain why it is unfair and provide an alternative definition thatyour side believes reasonable given the above parameters. It should be
noted that this is quite rare and will often lead to a very messy debate
when it does happen, it is often best to simply accept thedefinition in front of you and debate the topic on its merits if at allpossible.

This House would legalise the use of recreational drugs
If the first proposition speaker on the motion defines use of recreational drugs
as only medicine that would be used for treatments then it would bereasonable for the opposition to challenge the definition. Otherwise theproposition gain a significant advantage from setting up a debate that theopposition wasn’t anticipating and that there is no real controversy over theacceptance of.

Second Speakers
The second speakers in the debate are responsible for:

continuing to defend their definition (if required)continuing the argumentation presented by their team. This will
include defending their previous speaker’s points from the rebuttal
the other team has madeoffering rebuttal to the other team’s casemaking new arguments to support your case

The emphasis of these speeches should be on the new material presented,
rather than the responses. As a rough guideline proposition should spend 2-3
minutes responding, whilst opposition should spend 3-4 minutes responding
to the other team with the rest of the speech dedicated to new substantive
material building on the case.

Third Speakers
The third speaker’s role is to respond to the other team. The bulk of thespeech should be dedicated to defeating the arguments brought by theother team in detail, whilst also defending the case that your team-mateshave brought from the attacks that the other team has already made (thinkof this as rebutting their rebuttal!). It is technically permissible todedicate1-2 minutes of time to additional arguments in support of yourcase, however this must be flagged in the first speech and the emphasisshould still be placed on rebuttal.

Reply Speeches
The reply speech must be delivered by either the first or second speaker ofyour team; it cannot be delivered by the same person that delivered thethird speech. It is also worth remembering that the order switches after the
first three speeches of each team, so the opposition reply speaker gives
their speech straight after the opposition third speaker and the proposition
reply speech is the final one of the debate (see “Speaking Order” above).
Both of these speeches are four minutes in length as opposed to the eight ofall other speeches in the debate and no POIs can be offered during them.
The reply speech is intended to explain why their side has already won thedebate. They do this by boiling the debate down to the two or three overarching points of contention (often called the clashes of the debate) andpresenting why their team’s side won those points. They are not expected(and will not have time) to go into detail in explaining why they won eachindividual argument and point made or deal with every example brought up
in the debate. They are instead a high level explanation of why the judges
should vote for their side. It is often helpful to think of these as a biased
adjudication or a biased news reporter giving an account of what happenedin the debate from their side’s perspective.

Motions & Preparation Time
Prepared vs. impromptu (un-prepared)
In Worlds’ Schools’ format you can either receive a prepared or impromptu(un-prepared) motion.
A prepared motion is one in which you have been given the motion and side
you are debating on in advance of the day. These will

typically be released several weeks in advance of the tournament in order
to allow time for competitors to research the topics and prepare their ideason the important issues within the debate. The side of the debate you areon is released after the motion is in order to encourage wider thinking aboutboth sides of the debate.
An impromptu (un-prepared) motion is a motion that you receive prior to
the round at the same time as you are given the side of the debate. In thisinstance you will only have your preparation time to think of arguments andexamples for your side.
In impromptu debates you will have one hour to prepare for the debate
once the motion has been released. Whilst only three speak in each debate,
all five members of the team can contribute in the preparation time withideas and development of argumentation for their team-mates.
Each team is entitled to bring an English Language dictionary, a bilingual
dictionary, and a single-volume encyclopedia or almanac per team – they
are not allowed to bring any other printed materials or electronic devices
with them to prepare.

Policy vs. Truth Debates
Not all debates in Worlds’ Schools are policies proposing a specific policy oraction on the set of people. Some of the motions are statements about theworld of which the truth should be contested. In both instances defining themotion is still necessary to ensure that the words in the debate are clear
and the exact points of contention are understood between teams andjudges.
A Policy debate is when the motion implies that a specific actor should do or
not do a certain policy.

This house would require university students to work in theircountry of origin for a number of years after graduation
The motion suggests that governments should implement this as a policy andwill require explanation of how exactly that works and what the policy will
look like.
A policy motion need not necessarily be just about governments either, it
can advocate that individuals or organisations ought do or not do certain
thing.

THW not consume art created by people who have committed
deeply immoral acts.
In this debate you are still advocating a specific course of action but theactor is implied as individuals rather than governments.

A Truth debate is when you do not need to propose a specific course ofaction but instead merely to argue the truth or falsity of a given statement.

This house regrets the media focus on the personal lives ofpoliticians
In this debate speakers need only argue that the media focus is regrettable
or not regrettable, they are not required to propose a specific method of
reducing the focus or whether that method would be effective orproblematic in practice.
Although in some cases analyzing the practical implications of a world inwhich the statement is untrue will make your case stronger, in order to win,a team should focus on (dis)proving the truth of the motion by analyzing
values associated with either side of the debate. They need not focuse on a
specific mechanism of change.
The distinction between these debates is not always clear cut and it should
not be regarded as set in stone that you don’t have to deal with any“practical” arguments just because this motion sounds like a truth debate.

This house believes that post-revolution states should delegate
trials of former rulers and high-ranking officials to theInternational Criminal Court
This motion sounds like a truth debate as it believes in the statement thatfollows. However in believing that post-revolution states should pursue aparticular policy, clarity in what that policy would look like is important anddefending or attacking the “practical” fall-out of this policy being
implemented could all be legitimate lines of arguments.
The key thing to note is that motion should be read carefully and theimplications of what is up for discussion thought about in detail.

Watch it in action!
One of the best ways to understand the World Schools format is to watch andactual debate. There are lots of great debates online however here are a few
to get you started
South Africa vs. EnglandThis house believes that the police should use racial profiling when fighting
crime http://bit.ly/2dUIXyY
Indonesia vs Wales
This house believes that voters should pass a general knowledge test
http://bit.ly/2dlBTfY
England vs Scotland
This house supports free immigration http://bit.ly/2d91Gme
Wales vs Peru
This house would ban religious primary and secondary schools
http://bit.ly/2dn0oXw

Judging
At the end of the debate, the judges will total the scores allocated to eachspeaker without conferring and decide whether they believe the Propositionor the Opposition team has won. The winning team is the team that wins amajority of the judges (usually 3 judges). In the rare event that there is aneven number of judges voting for each side, the chair judge will have a casting
vote and decide the winner of the debate. Teams will then receive both theresult and an explanation of why the team in question won the debate.
Each substantive speaker (speaker’s 1-3 for each team) can theoretically beawarded a maximum of 100 points. 40 points for content, 40 for style and 20for strategy. The reply speech is worth a maximum of 50 points, 20 forcontent, 20 for style and 10 for strategy. However the actual World Schools
speaker scale runs from 60 – 80 as depicted in the table below.

Taken from Judging Guidelines of the WSDC
Rules (see also Further Reading)Content is the strength of the argumentation presented. This also covers thequality of the rebuttal and ability to defeat opposing arguments. It marks theextent to which the strength of the arguments compel you to support or
oppose the motion. It is intended to be thought of divorced from the stylewith which the argument is delivered.
A speaker with a high content mark will present arguments that are highly
relevant, with clear explanations and logic, and be succinct in flagging theimpacts of their arguments. They will be consistent and thorough in theirexplanation of why their set of beliefs are the strongest arguments in thedebate.
Style is the ability to deliver your arguments persuasively. There is no one
particular style that will be appropriate for all speakers and all debates justas there is no one set of arguments that will win all debates. It does however
encompass a number of general elements that improve the impact of aspeech. These including how a speaker uses their voice, their use of gestures,
their use of rhetorical techniques and their engagement with the audience.
What is being considered is the extent to which these things are used toaugment or hinder the persuasiveness of the speaker.
Strategy encompasses two things. The first is their structure and timing, thesecond is their understanding of the issues of the debate.
Structure and timing means a speaker who fills their time and does not underor over speak. It also means having a clear progression of points within thespeech which shows a clear sense of priorities in their argumentation.
Understanding the issues of the debate follows on from this clear sense ofunderstanding what the key issues in any given debate are. They will be able
to understand which arguments and parts of an argument they must respondto in their speeches (even if their responses are not strong);they will understand what the important things to prove within theirarguments are (even if this is not always successful).
Thus if a speaker is clearly attempting to do the correct things in terms ofargumentation but not proving the things they set out, they may receive ahigh strategy mark and a lower content mark.

Finals - The Break
Near the end of a tournament, after the rounds in which all teams compete(in-rounds) have been finished, the top teams proceed to knock-out rounds(out-rounds) to declare a winner. The teams that make it to the knock-out
rounds are referred to as “The Break”.
The exact size of the break depends on the size of the tournament (forinstance WSDC typically breaks to octo-finals and 16 teams) but the top teams
are normally calculated by the number of debates each team has won. In theevent that two teams are tied for this then the number of judges that voted
for them across the tournament acts as a tie-break, if again equal then thetotal of all the individual scores each team got will decide which team ranks
higher.
Once through to the knock-out rounds each debate won will allow you toprogress to the next regardless of your original position in the break, a lostdebate means elimination. The winner of the tournament is the team thatwins the final and all prior knock-out rounds as applicable.

Further Reading
The following material was used to compile this guide to the format ofWorlds’ Schools. Much of it will give a more in depth look at some of theintricacies of the format and the ESU would like to give thanks to theauthors.
WSDC Website - http://schoolsdebate.com/
WSDC Debate Rules 2015 http://mkf2v40tlr04cjqkt2dtlqbr.wpengine.netdna-cdn.com/wpcontent/uploads/2014/05/WSDC-Debate-Rules-U-2015.pdf
WSDC Judging Guidelines - Compiled by Christopher Erskine with Rosemary
Dixon and Andrew Stockley, Elizabeth Virgo and David Pritchard
http://mkf2v40tlr04cjqkt2dtlqbr.wpengine.netdna-cdn.com/wpcontent/uploads/2014/05/notes_adjudicators.pdf
WSDC motions – produced by Irene McGrath http://wsdc.wpengine.com/wpcontent/uploads/2015/01/wsdc.motions.pdf
WSDC motions – Debate-Motions.info - http://www.debatemotions.info/wsdc-motions
ESU website - http://www.esu.org/our-work/world-schools-debating
The Heart of the Matter – Debating with Team Singapore – Ming, Jia Mak,Benjamin (2015)