Debate Outline
Position (1, 2, AC, NC): 2AC
Debate Outline – 2nd position
If you hold the 2AC or 2NC position, your job is to expose flaws in the opposition’s arguments. Your three main points should focus on what the opposition said, and explain why those arguments are flawed or invalid. Based on that, the language you use in your outline will be a little different. Read the below ‘base’ outline for assistance in writing your own outline. The outline below is written as if it were the 2AC position trying to expose flaws in the 1NC’s arguments. If you would like to see an outline of the 1NC arguments, please refer to the Sample Debate Outline provided on My.wartburg.
5 Minute Constructive:
Statement of position/resolution: We the affirmative strongly believe that the United States federal government should establish minimum educational standards for post-secondary schools in the United States.
Preview of main arguments: Although the negative tried to convince you that the federal government does not have the right to regulate post-secondary schools, that standardized tests do not encourage a higher level of learning, and that American colleges and universities are functioning well independently, we will provide clear evidence as to why their arguments are flawed.
Transition to 1st argument: Let’s begin by examining their first flaw. The negative told you that it is not within the federal government’s jurisdiction to regulate colleges and universities.
I. Argument: Despite what they told you, our evidence suggests that the federal government has every right to be involved in higher education. A. 1. 2.
B.
1. 2.
Transition to 2nd argument: Moving on, the negative stated that standardized tests do not enforce quality learning, however, our findings indicate quality learning on many different levels.
II. Argument: Standardized tests do enforce quality learning.
A.
1.
2.
B. 1. 2.
Transition to 3rd argument: Lastly,
Debate Outline – 2nd position
If you hold the 2AC or 2NC position, your job is to expose flaws in the opposition’s arguments. Your three main points should focus on what the opposition said, and explain why those arguments are flawed or invalid. Based on that, the language you use in your outline will be a little different. Read the below ‘base’ outline for assistance in writing your own outline. The outline below is written as if it were the 2AC position trying to expose flaws in the 1NC’s arguments. If you would like to see an outline of the 1NC arguments, please refer to the Sample Debate Outline provided on My.wartburg.
5 Minute Constructive:
Statement of position/resolution: We the affirmative strongly believe that the United States federal government should establish minimum educational standards for post-secondary schools in the United States.
Preview of main arguments: Although the negative tried to convince you that the federal government does not have the right to regulate post-secondary schools, that standardized tests do not encourage a higher level of learning, and that American colleges and universities are functioning well independently, we will provide clear evidence as to why their arguments are flawed.
Transition to 1st argument: Let’s begin by examining their first flaw. The negative told you that it is not within the federal government’s jurisdiction to regulate colleges and universities.
I. Argument: Despite what they told you, our evidence suggests that the federal government has every right to be involved in higher education. A. 1. 2.
B.
1. 2.
Transition to 2nd argument: Moving on, the negative stated that standardized tests do not enforce quality learning, however, our findings indicate quality learning on many different levels.
II. Argument: Standardized tests do enforce quality learning.
A.
1.
2.
B. 1. 2.
Transition to 3rd argument: Lastly,
Citations: