Style
2on2 <North American style>
The 7th T.I.Tech Cup Rules
- The debate will consist of 2 teams of 2 debaters and an adjudicator or panel of adjudicators.
- One team, called the Government, argues in favor of the motion. The other team, called the Opposition, argues against the motion.
- It is the duty of the adjudicator to time speeches.
- A different motion will be announced for each round 20 minutes prior to the beginning of the debate.
- Debaters shall speak in the following order.
8 minutes- Prime Minister Constructive
- Leader of the Opposition Constructive
- Member of the Government Constructive
- Member of the Opposition Constructive
4 minutes- Leader of the Opposition Rebuttal
- Prime Minister Rebuttal
Debaters should not exceed this time period by more than 30 seconds- Debaters may introduce new arguments during all constructive speeches. However, debaters must not introduce new arguments in rebuttal speeches except the Prime Minister Rebuttal. The Prime Minister may introduce new arguments in his or her rebuttal only to refute arguments that were first raised in the Member of the Opposition Constructive. New examples, analogies, etc. which support previously introduced arguments are welcomed in both rebuttal speeches.
- A debater on the opposite team can request Points of Information (POI) at any time after the first minute and before the last minute of any constructive speech. This period should be signaled by one strike of the gavel at the end of first minute and one strike at the end of seventh minute by the adjudicator. To ask a Point of Information, a member should stand, place one hand on his or her head and extend the other towards the debater speaking. Then the member may announce that they would like to ask a "Point of information" or use other words. The debater holding the floor has the right to accept or refuse the Point of Information. If it is accepted, the member must request the Point of Information within 15 seconds. The speaking time of the debater with the floor continues during Points of Information. Each debater should accept at least two Points of Information during their constructive speeches.
- Only the Prime Minister can define the motion.
- The case may be challenged if it is not debatable. Only the Leader of the Opposition may challenge the definition, and if s/he does not do so, all debaters must accept it.
- Points of Order can be addressed to the adjudicator if at any time during the debate; a debater believes that his or her opponent has violated one of these Rules. And the speaking time of the debater with the floor stops during Points of Order.
- During the speech, the partner of the debater holding the floor is not allowed to tell about contents of the speech nor show cheating sheets to the debater.
The 7th T.I.Tech Cup Evaluation
In T.I.Tech Cup, each adjudicator may mark the individual debaters at their discretion according to the following items; "Argumentation", "Refutation", "Structure", and "Delivery". "Argumentation" and "Refutation" evaluate "Matter", which reflects contents of the speech. "Structure" and "Delivery" evaluate "Manner", which reflects style of each speech.
Matter
Matter is the content of the speech. Each debater must present a logical speech that is consistent with and relevant to the topic. It must provide contents which support his or her stance and persuade the audience. Matter also includes refutation to the opponent's arguments. The next two items will be evaluated in Matter.
- Argumentation
The speech should be logical. A logical speech means a speech that clearly and plausibly states (with signposting), explains and illustrates argument. It also should be consistent within their speech and their team. The conclusion of all arguments should support their own case. Adjudicators will evaluate the following details.- Relevancy
- Logic of each argument
- Consistency
- Relevancy
Relevancy is established by tying arguments to the topic concerning the motion or the case. Here, Adjudicators will evaluate whether or not s/he understands the spirit of the motion and adequately analyzes it. It is necessary to distinguish whether the argument is strong or weak referring the motion's spirit for an average reasonable person. Especially as to the Prime Minister, adjudicators will evaluate whether or not s/he defines the motion reasonably.
* Definition-The definition must:- have a clear and logical link to the motion which an average reasonable person would accept without difficulty.
- not be self-proving - a definition is self-proving when it is impossible to rebut it reasonably. "Truism" and "Tautology" are typical examples of the self-proving definition.
- not be time set unfairly - this means that the definition cannot set the debate in the past or the future.
- not be place set unfairly - this means that the definition cannot restrict the debate so narrowly to a particular geographical or political location.
- Logic of each argument
Here adjudicators will evaluate quality of the logic in his or her argument. Debaters need to be intelligent in his or her analysis of the matter presented. Use of examples and references to experts may be an important aspect of logical argumentation. However, examples and references should be used with clear and feasible explanation that they support the argument. An average reasonable adjudicator should disregard any specialist's knowledge that s/he may have.- Consistency
Here adjudicators will evaluate whether or not s/he has been contradictory within the speech or the team.
- Refutation
Refutation means to attack the opponent argument. Here adjudicators will evaluate how s/he discredits the opponent argument. Use of Points of Information (POI) is one of the ways to attack the opponent argument. Adjudicators will evaluate how s/he deals with contents of Points of Information effectively.
Manner
Manner is style of the speech. Adjudicators will evaluate each speech how effectively debaters propose their case and persuade the audience. The next two items will be evaluated in Manner.
- Structure
Structure includes the organization of each speech and the structure of the speech as a team. Here adjudicators will evaluate;
- how the individual speech is well-structured according to the following features;
- an attractive opening
- a firm conclusion
- a clear statement of what s/he is going to prove in his or her speech and what method s/he will use to do so
- a clear explanation of the conflict between the two teams
- a proportional time management of a speech as a whole; and
- how the team's overall approach is well-structured to maximize the effectiveness of arguments according to the following features;
- a reasonable allocation of arguments to each member
- an introduction of positive matter from both members of the team
- Delivery
Delivery means the technique of a public speech here. Good delivery will enhance the quality of argument whereas bad delivery will distract the audience from the argument. Here adjudicators will evaluate the following items.- Vocal style
- Use of language
- Eye contact
- Gesture
- Impression of sincerity
- Humor
- Use of Point of Information
- Vocal style
Volume should be audible; enunciation should be clear and accurate; pace should be neither too slow nor too fast; the speech should have appropriate pauses for relaxation and emphasis and be reasonably fluent, confident and authoritative.- Use of language
Debaters are supposed to speak in front of the audience in the parliament. They should beware of the use of slang or technical terms that could be unfamiliar to an average reasonable person. They also should speak grammatically correct English.- Eye contact
Debaters should attempt to make eye contact with the audience.- Gesture
Gestures will assist a debater to emphasize important arguments. However, excessive gestures may distract and reduce attention of the audience to the arguments.- Impression of sincerity
A sincere attitude will enhance the credibility and effectiveness of a speech. Slanderous speech or any violation of Rules will suffer the penalty in manner.- Humor
Humor may be used even at a crucial moment in a serious debate. However, it should be appropriate.- Use of Point of information (POI)
An active and sincere attitude toward Points of Information makes a round attractive and exciting.
How to mark?
In T.I.Tech Cup, debaters will be marked based on the conditions above.
Each adjudicator will score the four items ("Argumentation", "Refutation", "Structure", and "Delivery") using the following scales.
silent: 0, terrible: 1, bad: 2 poor: 3, not good: 4, average: 5
not bad: 6, good: 7, excellent: 8, nearly perfect: 9, perfect: 10.
