Yale Invitational 2020

Parliamentary Debate Style Guide1

We generally follow the American Parliamentary Debate Association (APDA) of which the Yale Debate
Association is a member. Their format has evolved over the years, so there are some differences
between a typical APDA tournament today and Parli at the Yale Invitational. However, debaters and
Judges may find the educational material on the APDA website (http://apda.online ) useful.

Note this is titled a “guide” not a rule book. It should be interpreted and applied accordingly. Given
limited space, it cannot cover every contingency or serve as a complete manual. Please contact the Parli
tab staff if you have any questions.

Contents
Basic Format.............................................................................................................................................. 2
Choosing the Motion ................................................................................................................................ 2
Case Preparation ....................................................................................................................................... 3
Research Material ..................................................................................................................................... 3
Use of Evidence ......................................................................................................................................... 3
The Positions and Speeches ...................................................................................................................... 4
Questions .................................................................................................................................................. 5
Important Stylistic Differences ................................................................................................................. 6
Judging ...................................................................................................................................................... 6
Starting the Round ................................................................................................................................ 7
The Ballot .............................................................................................................................................. 7
Script ..................................................................................................................................................... 7
Keeping Time......................................................................................................................................... 8
After the Round .................................................................................................................................... 8
Making the Decision.............................................................................................................................. 8
Speed, Spread, “Technical” Debate, etc. .............................................................................................. 8
Online Debate ........................................................................................................................................... 9

1
This was originally based on the Osterweis Style Guide, which can be found at the Yale Debate Association web
site, www.yaledebate.org . It has been heavily edited over the years. This is a fully revised version, though it does
not differ significantly from previous versions.
Basic Format
Parliamentary debate features a Government team and an Opposition team, each with two debaters.
The Government strives to convince the Judge (formally the Speaker of the House) that the given
motion should be adopted; the Opposition to show the motion should be defeated. Teams should
expect to stand for the both the Government and the Opposition in different rounds on different
motions. During the debate, each team gives three speeches. The Judge will evaluate primarily the
arguments but also the speaking skills of each debater. The team that best supports their side in the
opinion of the Judge wins.

Choosing the Motion

The motion is a short statement that serves as the topic of debate. The motions will concern issues that
should be familiar to the average high school student. Some sample motions:

This house believes that assisted suicide should be legal in the United States.
This house would allow foreign-born citizens to be President of the United States.
This house would use force to spread democracy internationally.
Several common abbreviations may be used at the start of the motion:

• TH: This House

• THBT: This House believes that
• THW: This House would
• THR: This House regrets
• THP: This House prefers
• THS: This House supports

Motions also may include a brief “information statement” that provides background or sets the context
for the debate. When present, the information statement may be relied upon by the debaters.

One to three motions will be provided before each round, either publicly to all teams or directly to the
Judge. A different set of motions will be used for each round (or flight if the round is double-flighted).

The motion is chosen as follows:

1. If the motions have not been made public, the Judge reads the motion(s) to the two teams.
2. The Judge flips a coin, and one team calls it in the air. The winner of the coin flip decides
whether that team would prefer choice of motion or choice of side (if only one motion, toss is
for choice of side).
3. The team that has the right to choose the motion as the result of the coin flip picks a motion.
4. The team that has the right to choose the side then makes its choice of Government or
Opposition.

The two teams may mutually agree on the motion or choice of sides rather than go through this process.
If the two teams are present and have the motions, they may go through the process of choosing
motion and sides before the Judge arrives and begin prep immediately.

Yale Parli Style Guide Page |2

Choices should be made promptly, deciding motion and sides in no more than a few minutes. The Judge
should cut short any long discussion by a team about the merits of the motions or sides. Once the
motion and sides have been set, the teams then have fifteen minutes to prepare their cases.

Case Preparation
After the motion is chosen the teams have fifteen minutes to prepare their cases for the debate. Each
case should consist of several reasons why their side of the motion is correct. Two to four such
arguments are typical, but there is no required number or limit.

The Government has the right to set the terms of the debate and should provide a brief interpretation
of the motion and/or a definition of key terms. Government may interpret the motion more narrowly
than given (e.g., “Court penalties should be determined by Judges, not juries” may be applied only to
civil cases, rather than criminal cases) provided this allows a reasonable debate. The Government
interpretation may be novel but should respect common usage and must leave the Opposition
reasonable grounds to argue against it. The Government interpretation should not rely on specific facts
or information that the Opposition or the Judge are not likely to know.

The Opposition should prepare a case to contest what they expect the Government to present.
However, Opposition will likely have to adapt their case to the specifics of the Government’s
interpretation and the Government’s actual case. If the Government interpretation is reasonable but
unexpected, the Opposition may have to revise their case entirely.

Opposition may contest the Government interpretation if it is not consistent with the wording of the
motion or if it does not allow any grounds for the Opposition to argue against it. If the Opposition
intends to challenge the Government’s interpretation, it should do so at the start of the Leader of the
Opposition constructive speech.

Research Material
Debaters may not use any research materials—the internet, electronic media, printed material,
prepared briefs, etc.—or consult with anyone other than their partner during case preparation.
Debaters may not receive help from outside parties during case preparation or during the debate.

Parliamentary debate is intended to be extemporaneous. Debaters must rely on their own knowledge
of the motion. Statistics, expert quotes, and remote facts are discouraged because they cannot be
readily verified and may be incomplete if presented briefly and out of context. However, debaters are
encouraged to use information that one would expect to be familiar to a well-read person, or that they
explain in detail.

Note that this prohibition does not prevent debaters from using a laptop or tablet to write their case or
take notes during the round. It also does not prevent debaters from communicating with their partner
electronically if debates are held online and debaters are not in the same room.

Use of Evidence
The ban on research materials is not a ban on the use of evidence or facts during the debate. The
evidentiary standard is “what a well-read person should know” or “The New York Times standard,” that
is, what someone who regularly reads a national newspaper should know.

Yale Parli Style Guide Page |3

Debaters may introduce more obscure facts provided they explain them thoroughly, including any
aspects that may weaken their usefulness and benefit their opponents. As this is difficult to enforce, use
of obscure information is discouraged.

As an example, consider a debate about adopting a single-payer health care system. Quoting an expert
on the future costs of such a system is not helpful, because that expert’s opinion is likely based on an
extensive study. Unless the full details of that study are included—and there is limited speech time—
the other side has no way to contest them and the Judge has no way to evaluate them. However, both
sides may reasonably discuss how a single-payer system might impact administrative costs, patient
coverage, providers, competitiveness and innovation in ways that are understandable, persuasive and
which could be contested by their opponents and evaluated by the Judge.

In the absence of detailed research debaters may also present “facts” that their opponents will claim are
false, or that the Judge does not believe are true. We all innocently rely on what we think we know
every day. A Judge may use their discretion in these cases whether and how to consider these facts in
awarding the ballot.

Our suggestion is that debates are won by arguments that are clearly explained, illustrated, and weighed
in terms of importance against those presented by the other side. In our experience, debates rarely
come down to the truth or falsehood of specific data presented by either side. Our preference is that
decisions do not come down to a quotation or obscure fact not well-examined.

The Positions and Speeches

On each team, one debater is the lead speaker and the other is the member. The leader delivers the
opening and closing speeches for their team. The member presents the middle speech. For the
Government, the leader is known as the Prime Minister (PM) and the member is called the Member of
Government (MG). On the Opposition team, the debaters are the Leader of Opposition (LO) and the
Member of Opposition (MO).

The six speeches proceed as follows:

Provides an interpretation of the resolution

Prime Minister Constructive (PMC) 7 minutes
and lays out the Government’s case
Lays out the Opposition case and replies to
Leader of Opposition Constructive (LOC) 8 minutes
the Government case.
Member of Government Constructive
8 minutes Responds to previous arguments, and may
(MGC)
introduce new points while doing so
Member of Opposition Constructive (MOC) 8 minutes
Summarizes the debate from the
Leader of Opposition Rebuttal (LOR) 4 minutes Opposition perspective, while responding to
previous arguments.
Summarizes the debate from the
Prime Minister Rebuttal (PMR) 5 minutes Government perspective, while responding
to previous arguments.

Yale Parli Style Guide Page |4

Each speaker has a 30 second grace period at the end of their allotted time to finish their speech, after
which they are out of order. There is no preparation time or pause between speeches other than a
reasonable allowance for the current speaker to be seated and the next one to rise.

In the constructive speeches, each team presents its case and responds to their opponent’s case. New
arguments may be introduced into the debate, either as independent points or responses to a previous
argument.

In the rebuttal speeches, each side should summarize the debate, emphasizing the team’s strongest
points and explaining why they should win the debate. New arguments cannot be raised in the rebuttals
unless it is the PM’s first opportunity to respond to a new point made in the MOC. New explanations and
examples to illustrate previous arguments, and connecting and contrasting points already made are
allowed and encouraged.

Questions
There is no cross-examination. The non-speaking team may attempt to interrupt the speaker with three
types of questions:

Point of Clarification (POC): At the beginning of the PMC right after the speaker has presented the
Government interpretation of the motion, the Prime Minister may pause briefly and ask the Opposition
if the interpretation is clear and acceptable, essentially asking if the Opposition wishes to raise a POC.
Alternately, the Opposition may rise and ask for clarification. The Prime Minister must accept these
questions.

The clock stops during a POC while the opposing team briefly asks the speaker for further details about
their case and the Prime Minister answers them.

POC questions should be intended to make the terms of the debate clear. The Opposition may not
introduce arguments or contest the interpretation at this time. The Prime Minister may explain the
details of their interpretation of the motion but may not make arguments in favor of the Government’s
position.

If the Opposition believes the Government interpretation is not consistent with the motion or leaves no
room for an opposing case (a “tight case”) or relies on specific knowledge unavailable to the Opposition,
they should make these arguments at the beginning of the LOC.

Time starts again when the POC has been answered.

Point of Information (POI): During the constructive speeches, a member of the opposing team may
attempt to interrupt the speaker to ask a question. Traditionally, the questioner stands with one hand
on head (to keep their wig in place) and the other arm outstretched. Standing or simply raising a hand is
sufficient.

The speaker may accept the interruption, wave it off, take it after finishing a point or simply ignore it. If
accepted, the questioner asks a short question or makes a short statement intended to undermine the
argument being made. The speaker responds and then continues with their speech. There is no right to
follow up with another question, though the opposing team may continue to stand or signal for another
POI.

Yale Parli Style Guide Page |5

Time does not stop during a POI.

POIs are permitted only during the constructive speeches and are not permitted during the first or last
minute of the speech (“protected time”).

A speaker may refuse or defer a POI, but it is considered poor form not to accept some POIs if offered,
and poor form for opponents not to offer any POIs.

Point of Order: A Point of Order is raised if a team believes the speaker has violated a rule of debate, for
example, exceeding the 30 second grace period at the end of a speech, or presenting a new argument in
rebuttal.

The questioner stands, states “Point of Order,” to the Judge, and briefly explains the issue. If the
questioner calls out a new argument, the speaker my briefly explain why the argument is not new. The
Judge may say “Point well taken” if they agree, “Point not well taken” if they do not agree, or “Point
under consideration,” deferring a decision until after the debate has finished. If the Judge declares the
point well taken, the speaker should stop presenting it and move on.

Time stops during a Point of Order and resumes after the Judge’s decision, when the speaker continues.

Important Stylistic Differences

Parliamentary debate styles vary widely. At the high school level in the US the major differences are
between East Coast (used at the Yale Invitational) and West Coast, and between these and World
Schools.

Differences East Coast with respect to West Coast Parli:

• Case prep is 15 minutes.

• No internet, research materials, or prepared briefs may be used during case prep; motions are
likely to be more broadly based than some at West Coast tournaments, i.e., the “New York
Times” standards applies to the one who sets the motions as well as to the arguments
presented.
• No exchange of written material during the round, i.e. case outlines may not be given to the
Judge or the opposing team.
• Non-speaking debater may not aid partner during partner’s speech, for example, by providing
written notes or verbal comments.

Differences with respect to World Schools format:

• Two debaters per side versus three.

• Two constructive speeches per side versus three.
• No expectation of a new contention in the second constructive speech (though no prohibition,
either).

Judging
The Judge (formally, the Speaker of the House) has three basic duties: see that the debate moves along
expeditiously, rule on certain issues that arise during the debate, and decide the round by returning a
completed ballot.

Yale Parli Style Guide Page |6

Judging debate is inherently subjective. Judges are asked to base their decision primarily on the
arguments presented by each side during the debate, and not on the Judge’s own knowledge or
preferences, or simply on either side’s oratorical ability.

Starting the Round

One to three motions will be given before each round, and a different set of motions will be used for
each round (or flight if the round is double flighted). The process of choosing the motion and sides is
described above.

If debaters have the motion and arrive before the Judge, the debaters may go through the process of
choosing the motion and sides themselves and begin case preparation immediately. For some rounds—
particularly the second flight of double flighted rounds—the debaters may have been given the motion,
made their selections and begun case preparation before arriving at the room. If so, the Judge need
only wait until their prep time is finished (or start immediately if prep time has expired).

The Ballot
The teams choose the side they will support, and each team decides its own speaking order. The
ballot—paper or electronic—will not necessarily reflect these choices. Before the teams begin speaking
the Judge should verify which team is on side Government and which on side Opposition, and also verify
which debater on each team is speaking first and second. This information should be entered on the
ballot before the debaters begin speaking.

Electronic ballots generally have a button that signals Tab the round has started. Judges are asked to so
indicate once the Judge and all debaters are present.

Script
The Judge may follow a script, patterned after English Parliamentary practice, though this is not
required.

• To begin the round: “I call this House to order and call upon the honorable Prime Minister to
deliver the first speech of the round not to exceed seven minutes.”
• Before LOC: “I thank the honorable Prime Minister and call upon the Leader of the Opposition
to deliver a speech not to exceed eight minutes.”
• Before MGC: “I thank the honorable Leader of the Opposition and call upon the Member of
Government to deliver a speech not to exceed eight minutes.”
• Before MOC: “I thank the honorable Member of Government and call upon the Member of
Opposition to close out the constructive portion of the round in a speech not to exceed eight
minutes.”
• Before LOR: “I thank the honorable Member of Opposition and call upon the Leader of
Opposition to deliver the first rebuttal speech of the round not to exceed four minutes,
reminding him/her that while new examples are welcome, new arguments are not.”
• Before PMR: “I thank the honorable Member of Opposition and call upon the Prime Minister to
deliver the final speech of the round not to exceed five minutes, reminding him/her that while
new examples are welcome, new arguments are not.”

There is no prep time between speeches. Speakers should rise in turn with only a reasonable delay to
collect their papers and move to the podium.

Yale Parli Style Guide Page |7

Keeping Time
Debaters will usually time themselves and their opponents, and raise a Point of Order if a speaker
exceeds the grace period. The Judge should also keep time to monitor the round, and note protected
time—the first and last minute of each constructive speech—when POIs are not permitted.

Time stops during a Point of Clarification (POC) or a Point of Order, but not during a Point of Information
(POI). See the discussion above for more information.

After the Round

After the final speech, the Judge may give a brief—no more than 5 minutes—oral critique to the
debaters. The Judge should decide the round and fill out the ballot. The ballot should always include a
clear reason for decision, and a justification for any points awarded below 23 or above 28. If a low point
win is intended, this should also be clearly explained. Ballots should be returned to tab promptly.
However, a Judge hearing both flights of a single round should hold and return both ballots when the
second flight is over.

Making the Decision

Experienced Judges will have their own approach. If you are unsure, we suggest the following.

First decide which side won. Make your decision based on which team carried the more important
issues in the round. The teams should tell you which issues they think are most important during
rebuttals, why they believe that they won those issues, and why they are more important than issues
they may have lost. If they fail to do so explicitly, then you must use your discretion. In a tie—you
believe the teams argued to a standstill—the decision should go to the Opposition.

Second, rank the speakers from best to worst. A speaker’s rank should consider that speaker’s
contributions to the round. While not recorded, ranking the speakers will help you in the next step.

Third, assign each debater points from 23 (generally weak debater), 25 (average debater, average
round) to 28 (excellent debater), with half points permitted. Debaters may tie in speaker points. Points
above 28 or below 23 should be justified on the ballot and may be questioned by the tab director. They
should be rare.

If you are giving a low-point win, i.e. the winning team has fewer total speaker points than the losing
team, you should check the indicator on the ballot and include a brief explanation of your reason. Low-
point wins are exceptions and should be rare.

The ballot should always have a clear, written reason for the decision. Additional feedback may be
provided at the Judge’s discretion.

Again, we emphasize the need for Judges to balance their desire to provide detailed feedback with the
need to keep the tournament running on time.

Speed, Spread, “Technical” Debate, etc.

Debaters may speak at any pace they like, and use any and as many arguments that they believe are
relevant and can be presented in the time allowed. However, parliamentary debate is persuasion using
the spoken word. We ask debaters and Judges to consider the following.

Yale Parli Style Guide Page |8

It is the role of the debater to persuade the Judge, not the obligation of the Judge to be persuaded. We
expect the Judge to make an honest effort to hear, understand, note, and appreciate what the debaters
have to say, and decide the round fairly from that. However, if the Judge cannot hear, follow or
understand what a debater is saying, that is primarily the fault of the debater, not the Judge.

If a debater is speaking too fast for the Judge to follow, the Judge may—but is not obliged to—ask the
debater to slow down. If a debater makes an argument that is unclear, the Judge must use their
discretion whether to consider that argument’s impact on the debate. If a debater overwhelms the
Judge with more information than the Judge can record, the Judge will be unable to apply what falls
away.

We know that Judges differ in skill and experience, as do debaters, and that this will affect the tenor of a
round. Our preference is for debates that could be presented to and appreciated by a broader rather
than a narrow audience.

Online Debate
Recent events have moved debate online, and best practices are only now being developed. Some
suggestions:

• Test your equipment at least one day before the tournament. Check not only that it works and the
sound and video are adequate, but also consider how you look in picture, and whether you are
comfortable speaking for 8 minutes or more. Speaking is more difficult that simply breathing;
speaking while sitting is more difficult than speaking while standing; giving a speech while sitting can
be less effective than speaking while standing . Consider putting your laptop on a box or use a
standup desk so you can speak as you would at a regular tournament.
• Re-boot your laptop or tablet the morning of the tournament. The longer the time since a restart,
the more likely your computer is to slow down or have other problems. Do not open any
applications you do not need for the debate or to communicate with your partner, coach or other
teammates.
• When the debate is about to start, the Judge should conduct a brief sound and visual check with all
the participants to make sure all can be heard and seen. It is preferred that all the debaters and the
Judge be visible during the round, with video turned off only if the connection will not support it.
• Debater and the Judge should agree on a procedure for POIs. While a raised hand (or a “raised
hand” icon) may be used, speakers tend not to see them. An alternative is for a debater to say
“POI” so all can hear, but not loudly enough to drown out the speaker. Other options are possible
so long as debaters and Judge all agree.
• Unless you have a headset with a microphone, your laptop microphone will pick up the sound of
typing on your keyboard (as well as ambient noise in your environment). If you plan to take notes
on your laptop and do not have a headset microphone, you will probably have to mute yourself
while the other team is speaking.

Yale Parli Style Guide Page |9