How Small Programs Achieve National Success

This article was originally published in February 2013 of the Rostrum.

The rigors of “national circuit” Policy Debate seem daunting, but it should not discourage small programs from aspiring to achieve high levels of success. Here are several tips for those wishing to take on the challenge.

First, do what you do well. Far from running from a regional identity, you should embrace it. Even if your local circuit has not allowed a new argument through the gates since the 1990s, almost every judge, no matter the paradigm or predilection, evaluates specific case indicts and disadvantages. Fortunately, this is made easier in an age where the vast majority of top competition at any given national circuit event discloses the affirmative and negative arguments they deploy. You do not need an army of novices to effectively scout your competition. It is possible to divide and conquer via the Internet. Cross-reference recent tournament results to get an idea who you will need to beat and the arguments they commonly use. It is important to understand that debate constantly reinvents itself while also continuing to regurgitate arguments from years past. Countering teams with bigger back files and coaching staffs requires mastering several generic positions. Hence, the files your debaters choose to research the most need to straddle the line between specificity and flexibility. Contextualizing positions requires depth, and there is no substitute for hard work and thorough preparation. Utility trumps preference. You need to know when to pick your battles. If you encounter a non-traditional argument, resist the temptation to use exclusionary violations and find a substantive way to clash, even if it means writing a new position. There is a good chance teams who invite the most generic arguments do so because they are well positioned to defend against them.

This is also applicable to stylistic concerns. If your local region punishes speed, develop specific blocks for national circuit events in case of a time-pressed situation where you need your most important arguments articulated quickly. Consider becoming adept at impact turning arguments to turn the table on teams attempting to exploit this perceived weakness with multiple off-case positions. Though persuasive ethos moments are important in any debate round, efficiency and strategic argument selection is critical to successfully debating fast-speaking teams. Ultimately, adhering ideologically to a certain tactic or style puts you at a competitive disadvantage. Learning to speak quickly on the road does not mean you forget how to speak slowly at home. Understanding the areas where you have to adapt to remain competitive is essential to developing strategies that maximize your strengths and minimize your weaknesses.

Second, while the dream to advance to a national competition can start with two students, it should not end with them. Multiple strong partnerships are necessary to share the work load. This starts with dedicated investment in the novice division of your program and retention of quality students. Encourage varsity members to recruit prospective students and answer questions and concerns. The goal to create continuity and cooperation throughout the team has dual benefits. Insisting varsity members watch novice practice rounds is a great way to make your top students learn the perspective of what a judge evaluates and perceives. Similarly, requiring older students deliver a lecture on an argument or subject can help reinforce concepts. Several years ago, varsity students at the school where I assisted established a middle school debate league. They took the lead teaching debate to the participants and became extremely engaged in their progress, culminating with running and coaching a tournament. Not only did it set the stage for success years later, but it was a change of pace that injected a high level of enthusiasm into the team. The commitment and leadership they demonstrated working with younger debaters noticeably transferred into their own habits.

A poor varsity showing can still be turned around with a quality novice performance if everyone feels ownership over their development. Any success at a national competition should be considered an achievement. This is especially important if your program is just beginning a commitment to national circuit debate. Before summer camps and year-long schedules, even if your students do not have many opportunities to travel outside their local regions, a committed group of novice students can achieve large amounts of success early in their careers against the best competition in the country. National success requires confidence, and neutralizing the fear students experience from their opponents’ high school affiliation is a vital step for a developing team. A small program without institutional support is only as strong as their next group of debaters. Commitment to novice students is central to the maturation of a successful program.

Finally, as dedicated professionals in communication, it should be no surprise effective dialogue is essential to the growth of a team. Access to financial resources is a large determinant in creating a national circuit debate program. In this regard, fundraising and public outreach are necessary if your program lacks a large budget. Even one or two events during the regular season provide awareness to your students about what they are likely to face at national competitions to close the season. Networking with other coaches is an additional important building block. From navigating your local activity rules to coordinating travel and housing, I have found most coaches in the national circuit debate community to be genuinely interested in facilitating participation from schools that do not have a history competing at such events. Once established, you can help foster the development of your own local debate community. Strong communication is vital to overcoming the skepticism some may have at certain practices students are likely to encounter at national circuit events like post-round judge disclosure. Look to introduce some of these community norms at your own tournament to increase exposure and discussion.

Start small and build slowly. There is no substitute for the process. The divide between the tendencies some regional communities prefer and those of the national circuit debate community are largely overblown. Aspiring to achieve national acclaim requires practical argument selection, a solid foundation of varsity and novice students, and an effective support structure to sustain success. With time and dedication, even small programs can field teams able to compete with the best in the country.

Michael Ewald is the Director of Debate at the University of Chicago Laboratory Schools and coach of the University of Chicago’s newly established Policy Debate team. Prior to his current position, he served as an assistant coach at Sioux Falls Lincoln High School helping students win the 2011 NCFL Grand National Championship