12. Case building

Objectives

‍

Creating the basic setup of a debate team’s framework of their case

Timeline

‍

15 mins –Present the significance of case building – Use the model motion and general steps for practising case building with students

10 mins – Hand out snippets of practice motions to let students choose, label and order arguments, come up with a general statement of what the main idea and goal is 

20 mins – Students read out their opening statements and present their ideas of arguments

‍

What you need to know about case building:

The case constitutes the general match plan of a debate team. Apart from the quality of the arguments, judges will also evaluate their coherence and logical order. The overall team effort is best proven if one side can present arguments in a pre-determined logical framework, inside which they operate in, and also stick to it.

‍

Practical exercises

‍

Provide a motion, for example THBT smoking should be banned in public areas

Students should tick off the following checklist when piecing together a case:

1. What do we want to achieve (PROP) / defend (OPP) through/against this motion?
2. What do we know about the subject to defend our debate side (prop/opp)?
3. Which information do we need to do research on?
4. Which arguments should we create for which goal?
5. In which order should these arguments be presented?
6. How should we label these arguments?
7. What should an opening statement look like?

As a rule of thumb, teams should allocate two arguments to the first, one argument to the second speaker, where the third speaker only delivers a rebuttal speech without new arguments.

Solution suggestions for THBT smoking should be banned in public areas:

1. To PROP, this is essentially a public health issue, as well as a call to governments to protect non-smokers, where they are most vulnerable. PROP will have the burden of proof to deliver reasons why there is a significant harm, and how this motion will resolve and remove it.
   
   To OPP, the motion should fall because it infringes the people‘s liberty to choose smoking cigarettes, a product that is not banned, wherever they want. Depending on the definition of "public areas‘, smokers may be restricted to just smoking at home, a much too drastic infringement of their liberties and, most importantly, their freedom of choice.
2. This part is entirely at the team‘s discretion to pursue at whichever scale. Note, that judges mark you stricter in prepared motions when it comes to conducted research, or the lack thereof.
3. This part is entirely at the team‘s discretion to pursue at whichever scale. Note, that judges mark you stricter in prepared motions when it comes to conducted research, or the lack thereof.
4. General discussion about the topic will most likely center around these areas: 
   
   1. public health
   2. cost of health initiatives
   3. the benefits of longevity
   4. the individual‘s choices in society
   5. how individuals are harmed by others‘ choices and the consequential limitations of choice
   6. the general nature of public spaces (tragedy of the commons)
   7. environment (contamination through cigarette butts)

5. Always place the most relevant argument first. Like this, the opposite team will get the chance to rebut it most thoroughly. This is a bit counter-intuitive for many students, since they learn in essay writing that the most important argument should come last.  A typical minor argument here would be to address collateral environmental damage, but it‘s very likely not the first conflict potential people see in this issue, although not irrelevant.
6. Find tags to label your arguments with, so you can use them in signposting (e.g. freedom of choice, public health, environment…).
7. First speakers of both teams should give a first taste of what to expect and, most importantly, for which reason. Be short in presenting the audience and judges with a problem that side proposition will fix through their case. To side opposition, side proposition is the problem. The opening statement reveals a general match plan, whereas the arguments deal with the specifics.

Example for side PROP:
“In many countries, smoking is broadly accepted in society – but is it, though? Is it the case that all non-smokers should stand idly by as smokers in their vicinity coerce strangers into smelling and inhaling their fumes and risking their health? Is it acceptable that people eating and working many hours in restaurants, waiting at bus stops and train stations should all be exposed to this significant health hazard? No! Side proposition will prove to you today that it is perfectly within reason to limit smokers’ behaviors and ban this activity in public areas, and that governments have the moral obligation to protect working and tax-paying citizens that put their health first.”    

Goals achieved: you have hinted at the general need for change, created an emotional connection with the audience and have singled out the agent who will do it.

Opening statements shouldn’t be longer than 30 seconds to a minute. 

‍

Assessment

‍

Your feedback should be, as always, positive and constructive. Point out things that the student ‘did well’ and things the student ‘can improve on’. Avoid negative criticism.

As the (adult) tutor in the room, it will be your responsibility to assess the quality of case building based on these conditions 

As far as you can tell: 

• Did the students come up with valid and relevant arguments?
• Did they label them with “flashy” key terms?
• Did they put the most important argument first?
• Can the arguments be coherently linked?
• Did they convey a general idea on which they base their case that also matches the arguments' intentions?
• Is this general idea kernelled into an opening statement that sufficiently covers the main approach?

‍

Ultimately, the validity of case building is proven only in combination with defining the motion and constructing arguments. Refer to other sources for definitions and argument building.

Motion snippets

‍

CASE BUILDING FORM

The motion reads:________________________________________________________

The motion is relevant because:_____________________________________________

_______________________________________________________________________

Intended goal(s): _________________________________________________________

_______________________________________________________________________

Groups affected / Agents for implementation:___________________________________

_______________________________________________________________________

Arguments (choose from SPERM model: Social, Political, Economic/Ethical/Environmental, Religious and Moral):___________________________

_______________________________________________________________________

_______________________________________________________________________

Argument I: _____________________________________________________________

Argument II:_____________________________________________________________

Argument III:____________________________________________________________

Important aspects in opening statement: ______________________________________

_______________________________________________________________________

_______________________________________________________________________

_______________________________________________________________________

‍

Beginners

• THBT public transport should be free
• THBT there is too much advertising in sports
• THBT all pupils should wear school uniforms
  
  

‍

Juniors

• THBT advertising should not aim at children
• THW not eat meat
• THW make teacher evaluation mandatory
• THB in patchwork families
• THW ban same-sex marriages
• THBT comprehensive schools are the solution
• THW ban private health insurance
• THBT the EU is a model for the world
• THW ban carnival
• THB in patriotism
• THW limit immigration
• THW lower the voting age

‍

Seniors

• THBT gay couples should be allowed to adopt children
• TH disapproves of cloning
• THW legalise prostitution
• THBT cultural treasures belong at home
• THBT the welfare state should be scrapped
• THW negotiate with terrorists
• THW punish sports teams whose fans misbehave
• TH supports the international trading of pollution quotas
• THW limit media reporting of terrorist atrocities
• THBT doctors should report evidence of marital abuse to the police
• THW stop sending humans into space
• THBT public services are best run by private companies
• THW ban strikes by those working in essential state services
• THW expand the permanent membership of the UN Security Council
• THBT governments should never bail out big companies
• TH supports missile defence
• THBT professionalism has ruined the Olympic Games
• TH supports quotas for women in national parliaments

‍