PO Box 670564
Dallas, TX 75367
Tel. 972-926-3832
www.dallasurbandebate.org
Dallas UDA Tournament Guidelines and Expectations
Registration ......................................................................................................................................................... 2
Punctuality .......................................................................................................................................................... 2
Tournament Attendance Expectations ................................................................................................................ 2
Divisions ............................................................................................................................................................. 3
Mavericks ............................................................................................................................................................ 3
Hybrids ................................................................................................................................................................ 3
Core File rules ..................................................................................................................................................... 3
Judging ................................................................................................................................................................ 4
Judges Behavior During Debates ........................................................................................................................ 5
Judges Decisions ................................................................................................................................................. 5
Filling out a Ballot .............................................................................................................................................. 5
Verbal Feedback ................................................................................................................................................. 6
Observers ............................................................................................................................................................ 7
Use of Electronic Devices ................................................................................................................................... 7
Debating Paperless Guidelines ........................................................................................................................... 7
Debating with Paper Rules.................................................................................................................................. 9
Unethical Use of Evidence.................................................................................................................................. 9
Closed Out Elimination Rounds ......................................................................................................................... 9
Tag Team Cross Examination ........................................................................................................................... 10
Prompting.......................................................................................................................................................... 10
Cleanliness ........................................................................................................................................................ 10
Speech Limits.................................................................................................................................................... 10
Last printed 7/31/2017 2:55:00 PM
1
PO Box 670564
Dallas, TX 75367
Tel. 972-926-3832
www.dallasurbandebate.org
Registration
The Dallas UDA is using speechwire.com in order to handle registration. As one of leagues chosen to
pilot this program by the National Association of Urban Debate Leagues, coaches will be asked to
provide feedback on this adapting program.
Registration must be completed by the deadline and should be as accurate as possible.
The numbers on the registration deadline are used to arrange rooms, organize judges, order food, and
acquire other necessary supplies. Registration after the deadline may risk your teams being unable to
debate if the tournament is unable to accommodate due to space or personnel. Drops at the last minute
also affect the tournament administration and should be discouraged in the strongest possible way. Any
drop made after the deadline should be noted in the Speechwire registration software, as well as by
email to the Executive Director. The Tab Room Director reserves the right to disallow any team
reconfigurations or adds on the day of the Tournament, though these will generally be allowed (as far
as feasible) up until about 2 hours prior to the start of the first round.
Punctuality
Punctual arrival at the debate tournament by the debate coach and students is essential to running the
tournament according to schedule. Schools should plan on arriving at least 15 minutes before
registration ends in order to finish the registration process in the allotted time.
All rounds must begin within 10 minutes of their scheduled starting time, or a forfeit will be charged
against the team that is unready to begin. Double forfeits are possible. All forfeits will be issued by
the Executive Director or empowered tab room personnel. Judges are encouraged to begin debates as
soon as possible so that the Tournament can adhere to its schedule.
Tournament Attendance Expectations
High school coaches are expected to attend at least 5 of 6 debate tournaments offered during the year.
Middle school coaches are expected to attend at least 2 of 3 debate tournaments offered during the
year. Attendance at a tournament includes arriving and completing the registration process on time and
staying through the duration of the Awards program.
Attendance at all tournaments is strongly encouraged. Tournament attendance by coaches, along with
information on numbers of teams, punctuality, success, etc. will be reported to each school’s principal,
Learning Community Executive Director, and trustee.
Coaches are asked to bring as many students as possible to each tournament and to encourage students
to compete in at least 15 debate rounds per year. National studies demonstrate that 15 debate rounds
are the benchmark for beginning to gain the deep academic benefits of debate participation.
Last printed 7/31/2017 2:55:00 PM
2
PO Box 670564
Dallas, TX 75367
Tel. 972-926-3832
www.dallasurbandebate.org
Schools are also expected to participate in the International Public Policy Forum and other selective
written and public debates. Care will be taken to ensure that these opportunities are only ones that will
prove complementary, and not overwhelm, the current time working on policy debate.
If a school or coach is unable to meet these expectations, the coach should schedule a meeting with the
Executive Director as soon as possible to speak about possible exceptions or accommodations.
Divisions
The Dallas UDA will offer three divisions of high school debate: novice, junior varsity, and varsity.
Novice debaters are debaters who are in their first year of debate. Junior varsity debaters are students
who are in no more than their second year of debate. Varsity debaters are students who are students
who have competed for three or more years of debate. Any student may move up a division if they
would like (students in their first year may debate JV or Varsity; students in their second year may
elect to go varsity instead of JV therefore). In rare circumstances, a debater who has debated one
tournament in a previousyear who is returning for the second year may petition the Executive Director
to be eligible for novice.
If there are limited entries in two divisions, the Dallas UDA may combine the divisions for preliminary
rounds. In elimination rounds and for awards, the divisions will be again separated.
Mavericks
Single-person teams in policy debate are called “Maverick” teams; policy debate is designed for twoperson teams. Maverick entries will only be allowed if a school has an odd number of students
entered. Mavericks’ eligibility for awards will be at the discretion of the Executive Director.
Hybrids
At the discretion of the Executive Director, a school with an odd number of Novice or JV debaters may
arrange to have a single debater compete with an unpartnered debater from another Dallas UDA
school. Hybrid entries are a last resort for schools unable to find a partner for a single Novice or JV
debater, and no school may have more than one student on a hybrid team at the same tournament.
Hybrid entries are not allowed in the Varsity division. Varsity debaters without partners should debate
as mavericks as pursuant to the Mavericks rule.
Core File rules
The Dallas UDA provides the necessary materials for students to use during debate. These files,
otherwise known as core files, are foundational material about the topic and are tailored to the division.
Although from time to time there may be minor changes or amendments to these core files, coaches
should operate on the assumption that there will not be core file changes during the year.
Last printed 7/31/2017 2:55:00 PM
3
PO Box 670564
Dallas, TX 75367
Tel. 972-926-3832
www.dallasurbandebate.org
In the Novice division, students will be limited to reading only files provided by the Dallas UDA that
have the header “novice” in the title. In the Junior Varsity division, students will be limited to reading
only files provided by the Dallas UDA that have either “novice” or “JV”/”junior varsity” in the header.
Although students are encouraged to read further about the topic and incorporate examples or
knowledge they may have learned, no evidence other than that provided by the Dallas UDA as
described above may be used in a debate. Students may change the order of the evidence and may also
change the tab (or argument label) for the evidence.
In the Varsity division, for the first tournament, students are limited to reading only files provided by
the Dallas UDA, but may use files from any division. In subsequent tournaments, they may do original
research. Any argument that diverges from the Dallas UDA file set should be disclosed on the Dallas
UDA wikispace (http://dallasurbandebate.wikispaces.com) within a few days of the tournament in
which they are first read. Exact tags and citations are expected, as well as plan or counterplan texts.
Only coaches will be given discretion to edit the wikispace and thus coaches must be prepared to
comply with the reporting rule in a timely manner before allowing their teams to present original
arguments at a debate tournament.
Coaches may protest violations of argument limits to the Executive Director at any time during the
preliminary rounds, or prior to the beginning of the subsequent elimination round. Only Coaches may
lodge such a protest. Protests of alleged violations of the policies on argument restrictions should not
be made to the judge in the debate round.
Judging
Every coach is expected to judge all of the preliminary debates and at least one additional elimination
round beyond that of in which their team competed. Schools are encouraged to bring as many
volunteer judges as they can. School provided judging not only allows schools to earn points towards
the cumulative sweepstake school award, but also ensures that the tournament can accommodate all
students. Judging is often a limiting factor for tournaments.
The Dallas UDA has a pedagogical commitment to maintaining a judge pool that is diverse in
important ways including: academic debate experience, age, demographics, and professional
background. This commitment includes support for the use of judges without extensive policy debate
experience. Dallas UDA debaters must become proficient at understanding and articulating debate
arguments in a way that is understandable to an educated layperson. Debaters have the additional
burden of explaining their arguments at a moderated speed and in terms of general language (rather
than relying on debate jargon), as they may need to do in most “real world” situations. They also
practice the valuable skill of “reading their audience.” At the same time, the Dallas UDA is committed
to including a segment of debate expert practitioners or professionals in its judge pool (university
debaters or coaches, primarily). These persons help advance the debaters’ technical sophistication and
knowledge about debate practices and the topic area.
Current high school students, or Dallas UDA alumni, may judge at tournaments as long as they have
Last printed 7/31/2017 2:55:00 PM
4
PO Box 670564
Dallas, TX 75367
Tel. 972-926-3832
www.dallasurbandebate.org
completed at least one successful year of Dallas UDA debate or are otherwise approved by the
Executive Director. Judges with less experience will be asked to judge Novice or Middle School
debate.
Every judge, regardless of their experience, will be expected to go through one Dallas UDA training in
order to ensure familiarity to our particular rules and governing principles.
Judges Behavior During Debates
Judges should not terminate a debate before the completion of the Second Affirmative Rebuttal (2AR)
speech, even if the decision is certain. Nor should judges interrupt the time schedule of the debate for
any reason except to maintain debating protocol. Judges are expected to remain attentive throughout
the debate round and are asked to refrain from behavior that would imply to students anything other
then full attentiveness to a debate round.
Judges should not provide debater guidance during or between speeches, whether through words or
actions. Judge comments should be limited solely to matters of procedure such as speech sequence,
speech timing, speech clarity, and preparation time. Extraneous comments tend to disrupt debater
concentration.
Judges should not read evidence text during the debate. Debate emphasizes the ability to communicate
effectively through speech. Judges can read evidence after the debate round, though, in order to
arbitrate a dispute about the evidence’s textual content or significance. They can also copy citations
and tag lines from arguments read in the debate.
Judges Decisions
Remember, policy debate is about which team presented a better policy. In order to encourage students
to provide better arguments, it is important that the decision be based on only arguments presented in
the round. Just as a judge in a courtroom cannot fall victim to emotional appeals, speaking styles, or
prior knowledge, you too should try to make decisions based on only the presented arguments. It is
further inappropriate to discuss your decision with another individual, including a more experienced
judge. Just as students may not seek guidance from outside sources once a debate has begun, judges
too must not seek outside guidance until after rendering a decision. Discussing the decision later with
other judges is appropriate as a means to learn about how to improve as a judge for future debates.
Generally panels are used in elimination rounds. Although judges may converse during debates (we
encourage friendliness), it is inappropriate to discuss your decision before you have made your
decision. It is important that if there is a 3-judge panel, that each of the three judges decides
independently of what the other judges think or say. As a result, it is inappropriate to discuss the
arguments in the round that may be relevant to your decision before you have written your decision on
the ballot and turned it in.
Filling out a Ballot
Last printed 7/31/2017 2:55:00 PM
5
PO Box 670564
Dallas, TX 75367
Tel. 972-926-3832
www.dallasurbandebate.org
Speaker Points should be filled out as follows
30 Points Perfect. You have seen many debaters and have never seen anyone as perfect; you could not
think of anything they could do to improve. This point should be given out once in a judging career.
29 Points Well above average. An extremely good speaker. Unusually effective; highly persuasive.
28 Points A good speaker. Slightly above average. Clear room for improvement.
27 Points Average. With strengths, but also with unmistakable flaws.
26 Points Below average. An ineffective speaker, overall, though with some glimmers of skill.
25 Points Needs Improvement. Please be sure to list 1-2 specific things they could do to improve on
the ballot in addition to the positive comment.
You may further calibrate with .5s – in order words you may give out a 27.5, 28.5, etc. Please do not
give below a 25 unless you have a specific incident that would validate it and have spoken to the
Executive Director about it first.
Ranks - The best student receives a rank of 1, second best a 2, onward to 4. Although you may give
the same number of points to multiple debaters in a round, you may not give the same rank.
Low Point Wins - Because the decision reflects the best policy presented and not the best debating, it is
possible for the better debaters to lose. If the losing team receives more points or ranks than the
winning team, please check the box on the ballot marked as “low point win”
Please write at least one good thing each speaker did. Constructive criticism is helpful to students and
coaches, but please make sure you are also positively reinforcing good habits to students and
encouraging them to continue debating. As a general rule, two positive comments should accompany
every constructive criticism.
Verbal Feedback
The open discussion of a decision is important for debaters to better understand how arguments are
perceived. After filling out your ballot, please tell the debaters who won or lost and why. Remember
that you should base your decision on the arguments, not the speaking style, not their behavior, not
their school affiliation, etc. Please use this discussion time as a chance to help the students better
understand arguments. If they were arguing incorrectly about a law, for example, this would be a
perfect opportunity to explain that, although it did not impact your decision, they are factually wrong
and should be explaining it differently.
Above all, remember that your positive feedback is crucial in keeping the students interested and
willing to debate regardless of whether they win or lose. Losing teams, in particular, often need more
positive encouragement.
After a round, debaters can ask questions of the judge, respectfully, about how the judge resolved
specific issues. Debaters cannot comment or complain to the judge about the decision or any portions
of the explanation. They also should not use a sarcastic, condescending, or insulting tone in their
interactions with judges. Judges have the authority to lower a debater’s speaker points for an
infraction of proper decorum, even after the ballot has already been turned in to the Tab Room.
Last printed 7/31/2017 2:55:00 PM
6
PO Box 670564
Dallas, TX 75367
Tel. 972-926-3832
www.dallasurbandebate.org
Observers
Observers are allowed in debate rounds, which are considered open forums. Observers are not allowed
to communicate in any way with the participants of a round; violators will be asked to leave the debate.
All audience members and observers in a debate must sit at least 15 feet away from the debaters.
Observers cannot under any circumstances argue or speak about a decision in a manner that may
appear to be arguing with judge. Violators will be asked to leave the tournament. At the conclusion of
a debate round, it is essential that the room be quiet until the judges have made their decisions.
Observers, including coaches, must be silent, or they may be asked to leave the room.
Use of Electronic Devices
Laptops are allowed during debates as a means to store or present evidence. No student may connect to
a DISD Ethernet portal during a tournament. If caught doing so, the Executive Director has the
discretion to confiscate the offending device until the end of the tournament or dismiss the student
from the tournament.
Debaters are prohibited from accessing the internet during a debate unless it is to retrieve files for
approved their division. For example, a student may go to the Dallas UDA website to download the
SPS file.
Debaters may not in anyway communicate with any individual about the debate during the debate.
Seeking guidance from a coach, peer, or any individual after a debate has begun and before the final
speech is grounds for a loss and potential dismissal from the tournament. To be clear, this kind of
guidance is perceived as a form of cheating regardless of whether it occurs in person, over text
message, or over the Internet. In order to avoid any potential appearance of cheating, debaters are
strongly encouraged to keep their cell phones put away during a debate and to avoid using the Internet
at all. If a judge suspects that you are cheating, they may ask you to turn over the electronic device and
show its contents to the Executive Director or other empowered tab room official. Only judges in the
particular debate may lodge these rules violations and only the Executive Director will decide the
outcome of these violations. Should an allegation be dismissed as unfounded, the debate should
continue and the decision and speaker points should be decided with no reflection of the incident.
The use of computers to introduce evidence in the round is not prohibited, provided that the team
intending to use one or more of these devices provides the opposing team access to the same device(s)
during the opposing team’s speeches and prep time. For further guidance, see the “paperless debating
guidelines” below.
Debating Paperless Guidelines
Some schools may elect to debate paperless – that is to have evidence available on their computer and
not in hardcopy. This means of transporting evidence has many pros and cons and should be discussed
significantly before embarking upon. In order to present all of ones’ speeches in a paperless format,
the team must come prepared with a computer for the other team to see the evidence that as read and/or
Last printed 7/31/2017 2:55:00 PM
7
PO Box 670564
Dallas, TX 75367
Tel. 972-926-3832
www.dallasurbandebate.org
a jumpdrive in order to share evidence read during their paperless speeches with the opposing team. As
an overarching theme to the guidelines, when in doubt, students should try to do everything reasonably
possible to ensure the other team has what they need in order to prepare for their speech.
Paperless teams must have at least one working jumpdrive that is compatible with both mac and PC
computers. This jumpdrive should be located before the 1AC or time to look for it will be considered
prep time.
All planned pieces of evidence must be jumped before the speech. Additional evidence read during the
speech must be jumped at the end of the speech. Only pieces of evidence that the debater reasonably
plans to read in the speech should be jumped (no jumping of entire aff or neg files). This evidence
should be jumped in the order the debater intends to read it.
Paperless debaters should “mark,” or note at what point they stopped reading evidence, cards in the
electronic document as well as verbally during the speech (“I stopped at the word ‘war’”) and
proactively offer to re-jump the marked speech at the end of the speech.
Although all evidence read must be shared with the opposing team, there is no obligation to include
analytical arguments in the speech doc. There is, however, an obligation to share planned
permutations, counterplans or other arguments with texts.
Reasonable time to jump speeches is not part of prep time so long as no debater is preparing for their
speeches. Evident abuse of this rule will be deducted from prep time, as determined by the judge.
At the end of the debate, debaters should not save the speeches jumped to them by their opponents
without explicit permission.
If the viewing computer malfunctions in some way during prep time, the time needed to rectify the
situation should not be counted as prep time so long as neither team prepares for their speeches.
If a paperless debater has a tech failure during their speech, the judge has discretion whether to stop the
speech and give the debater a moment to rectify the situation or deduct prep time.
As debating paperless is a convenience for the team who elects to do so, they are expected to
accommodate the electronic access of the opposing team. As a result, the following guidelines apply as
relevant to the amount of technology the opposing team has available during that debate.
If the opponent has two computers:
The paperless team must proactively offer to jump the speech to both debaters’ computers before each
speech that utilizes evidence.
If the opponent has one computer:
The paperless team should offer one of their laptops to the paper team before the paper team’s
preparation time. The reasonable need to see evidence before their speech precedes the paperless
team’s opportunity to prepare.
Last printed 7/31/2017 2:55:00 PM
8
PO Box 670564
Dallas, TX 75367
Tel. 972-926-3832
www.dallasurbandebate.org
If the opponent has no computers:
The paperless team must arrange for a printed copy of the evidence to be available OR loan/borrow a
computer for the paper team to use.
A violation of these rules is not a reason to vote for one team or another, but rather should be brought
up at the end of the first available speech and be dealt with at the discretion of the judge.
Debating with Paper Rules
Paper debaters should “mark,” or note at what point they stopped reading evidence, cards during the
speech by making a noticeable mark on the piece of evidence. Underlining, highlighting, or final marks
should be presented honestly in all contexts to the opposing team and judge. Violation of this is akin to
an act of academic dishonesty. If students feel there is a violation, they should alert a coach who may
seek to lodge a complaint with the Executive Director. If a judge feels there is a violation, they should
resolve the debate as if no violation occurred and then present their proof of the situation to the
Executive Director. Violating students may lose the individual round, be forfeited from the
tournament, or deemed ineligible for the City Championship tournament depending on the severity and
frequency of the offense.
Teams are required to “share” – i.e., provide a copy of any evidence that they read into the debate with
their opponents upon request. Debaters can hold any evidence that an opponent reads into the debate
during their own speech and prep time, but must return the evidence to their opponent when it is their
opponent’s speech and prep time. Analytical arguments are not expected to be provided in written
format from one team to the next, but may be done so at the discretion of each debater.
Unethical Use of Evidence
Evidence read into the debate that has intentionally missing or added text that significantly distorts the
meaning of the author, or evidence that is intentionally inauthentic or fictitiously cited, places the
offending debater in violation of the activity’s basic academic integrity. As such, unethical use of
evidence shall result in a forfeit and disqualification from the Tournament at which the violation
occurs and disqualification from the City Championship is a possibility.
Guidelines published by the National Forensic League for the ethical use of evidence will be followed,
but enforced by the Dallas UDA administration only. Judges are not authorized to enforce the
guidelines, and should judge a debate in which the issue is raised as if no violation has occurred. If a
team believes that an opponent has used evidence unethically in a round, that team should see its
Coach after the round; the Coach should then contact the Executive Director who will investigate and
issue a ruling. If a judge observes what he or she believes to be such conduct, he or she should contact
the Executive Director before making a decision on the ballot.
Closed Out Elimination Rounds
Elimination round brackets will not be broken in the event that two teams from the same school are
scheduled to debate each other (i.e., a round that is “closed out”). In a “close out,” the higher seed will
Last printed 7/31/2017 2:55:00 PM
9
PO Box 670564
Dallas, TX 75367
Tel. 972-926-3832
www.dallasurbandebate.org
presumptively advance to the next round, unless the school’s coach notifies the tab room that the
otherwise. In the event of these “close outs,” the Dallas UDA may ask the teams to debate and judges
to render comments without rendering or even hinting at a decision.
Tag Team Cross Examination
“Tag Team” cross examination refers to the practice of opening each cross examination period to
questions and answers from any of the four debaters, rather than the prescribed two. The Dallas UDA
allows “Tag Team” questions and also allows a debater to receive assistance in answering questions,
though the judge can consider an inability to ask/answer questions (or inappropriate assistance offered
to a partner not in need of it) when assigning speaker points at the end of the round.
Prompting
“Prompting” occurs when a speaker is helped by the speaker’s partner, through oral or written
suggestions, during a speech. The Dallas UDA allows “prompting,” though judges may consider
prompting as having marred the stylistic impact of a speech (and therefore as having a negative
influence on the assignment of speaker points).
Cleanliness
Debaters are expected to clean up each room after they have debated there. When the final debater
leaves the room, it should appear as if a debate had never occurred. When in more common spaces,
such as the cafeteria or an auditorium, debaters should take special care to clean up after themselves
and their peers if necessary.
Speech Limits
For High School
For Middle School
CONSTRUCTIVES
1AC—8 minutes
CX by 2N—3 minutes
1NC—8 minutes
CX by 1A—3 minutes
2AC—8 minutes
CX by 1N—3 minutes
2NC—8 minutes
CX by 2A—3 minutes
CONSTRUCTIVES
1AC—4 minutes
CX by 2N—2 minutes
1NC—4 minutes
CX by 1A—2 minutes
2AC—4 minutes
CX by 1N—2 minutes
2NC—4 minutes
CX by 2A—2 minutes
REBUTTALS
1NR—5 minutes
1AR—5 minutes
2NR—5 minutes
2AR—5 minutes
REBUTTALS
1NR—2 minutes
1AR—2 minutes
2NR—2 minutes
2AR—2 minutes
Prep time for each team—8 minutes
Prep time for each team —4 minutes
Last printed 7/31/2017 2:55:00 PM
10
PO Box 670564
Dallas, TX 75367
Tel. 972-926-3832
www.dallasurbandebate.org
Last printed 7/31/2017 2:55:00 PM
11