This Constitution represents the fundamental set of operating philosophies, principles, and practices for the International Public Debate Association. The primary goals of this association are:
To provide contestants with a forum in which they can enhance their education through the laboratory of productive, “real-world” competitive debate experiences. Public Debate competitions are intended to provide rhetorically sound models of communicative debate which competitors can experience, study, emulate, and internalize. Tournament Directors are encouraged to offer a wide variety of topics and a wide range of judges to encourage participants to become familiar with and think strategically about the relationships among issues, arguments and audiences. In this way, the International Public Debate Association strives to provide contestants with a chance to develop advanced skills in audience sensitivity and analysis and the opportunity to develop a range of speaking and argumentation styles which will be successful in business, legal and professional settings.
To provide instructors with a debate activity to which they can proudly invite colleagues, administrators, and community members as observers. This Association was created to offer an alternative to traditional debate–an alternative which encourages the continued contributions of graduating team members, sparks increased campus and community interest & involvement in forensics, and serves as a bridge to fund-raising activities. Competitions are intended to provide a forum in which classroom principles directly apply and where classroom students can be entered without undue embarrassment or ego-shock. And this Association encourages instructors to become active participants as well as judges so that they might remain sensitive to the students’ experience, keep their own skills sharp, provide models of excellence for students to follow, and to provide additional avenues of instruction through mentoring.
To provide economic and academic benefits to the forensic community. Public Debate is intended to offer a financially superior alternative to traditional debate. Tournament Directors are encouraged to keep Public Debate fees as low as is reasonably possible. The International Public Debate Association also encourages the scholarly and heuristic study of the pragmatics of effective argumentation and debate as it applies to real-world contexts, formats and audiences.
The philosophic foundations of the International Public Debate Association include:
Inclusivity: All interested individuals are encouraged to participate regardless of educational background, prior experience, or any other demographics.
Lay Judging: Tournament directors are encouraged to use as many real-world judges as possible. Training should be minimal and should emphasize fairness and how to properly conduct the round and fill out the ballot.
Multiple Topics: Each round should open with a set of five resolutional choices and the contestants themselves should select the topic they will debate.
Limited Preparation: Debaters should be allowed sufficient preparation time to give serious thought to their upcoming round. The use of extemporaneous preparation files and collaboration with coaches and colleagues is encouraged.
Extemporaneous Delivery: The use of evidence cards and/or verbatim printed materials is prohibited13. Such materials may be studied, memorized and/or paraphrased and handwritten notes made, but printed information may not be physically present in the round.
Rhetorical Delivery: Students should be encouraged to develop winning oratorical styles. The speaking style of the top Public Debaters should be highly effective when transferred into real-world settings.
Ethos: High quality speaking styles and courtesy should be prized, promoted, and rewarded. The use of appropriate humor is encouraged.
The Executive Committee: The Executive committee of the International Public Debate Association will be made up of the three primary officers. Past officers and such additional officers as may be added to the association can serve in an advisory capacity to the Executive Committee but will not vote in Executive Committee matters. The Executive Committee members will in addition to their individual responsibilities share the following duties:
• Uphold the basic principles and further the basic goals of the Association.
• Deliberate over such issues and challenges as are placed before it
• Set policies, rules, procedures and fees associated with their administrative duties.
• Deliberate in the process of selecting the succession of executive committee officers and make appointments or, at their discretion, submit a set of candidates to the membership for election.
• Resolve unforeseen problems and disputes which may arise and/or be beyond the scope of this document.
Self-Perpetuating Board: The three primary officers of the International Public Debate Association are constituted as a self-perpetuating board.
. . .
. . .
. . .
Responsibility to Create and Review Bylaws: These are the general set of objectives and responsibilities for the three primary Association officers. Unless otherwise stated, these officers shall have full authority to set rules and procedures for carrying out the duties within their domain of responsibility. Such rules and procedures which achieve the status of bylaws will be submitted to the Governing Board for comment for a period of at least 30 days, and subsequently to the program membership for comment a minimum of 60 days before implementation. Changes that will alter season long awards must be announced before the first sanctioned tournament of that season. Any member of the International Public Debate Association may propose additions and revisions to the bylaws (and/or suggestions for constitutional amendments). Such proposals must be submitted in writing to the executive secretary and receive the approval of the executive committee before continuing through the aforementioned process.
The Governing Board: The International Public Debate Association shall establish a Governing Board, in accordance with the bylaws, to serve in an advisory capacity to the
Executive Committee.
The Championship Tournament will be the culminating event of the International Public Debate
Association competitive season. All cumulative awards will be presented at the Awards
Assembly of this event. The Championship Tournament will also be associated with an annual
Convention and Business Meeting of the Association members.
The Managing Director will organize and coordinate the various activities required for hosting
the Championship Tournament and Convention.
A. Guidelines:
The International Public Debate Association is open to everyone, regardless of race, gender, age,
religion, political affiliation, or demographic discriminator. As a membership, we are committed
to equal opportunity and the maximization of personal growth for all of our members. Respect
must be extended to all.
B. Grievances & Challenges:
Any member with a grievance or belief that there has been some violation of the rules or
philosophy of this Association has the right to register that complaint with the Association. The
procedure regarding such complaints is as follows:
1. First, it is expected that a reasonable, good-faith effort will be made to discuss and remedy
problems at the lowest possible level. For an issue with an individual round, whenever possible
a grievance or challenge should be made to the tournament director prior to the decision of the
round being known. Tournament directors are encouraged to resolve tournament disputes on site
if at all possible.
2. The member with the grievance has the option of making informal contact with one or more of
the association officers who may, at their discretion, offer advice and/or attempt to mediate a
resolution of the dispute.
3. If the informal problem-solving process has failed, the grievance may be written up and
submitted to the executive secretary. No 'official' action will be taken until such a written
complaint is received. Association members should, consistent with making every effort to
resolve the problem at lower levels, try to file their complaint in as timely a manner as possible.
4. The Executive Committee will attempt to investigate, discuss, and resolve complaints as
quickly as possible. The Executive Committee may, at its sole discretion formally mediate the
dispute, issue a summary judgment, or set up some other adjudication process. As a condition of
membership, all members of the association agree to accept the decisions of the Executive
Committee as final and binding.
C. Sanctions:
The Executive Committee will make every effort to settle disputes without resorting to sanctions.
If sanctions are in order, the Committee will try to avoid making them unnecessarily harsh.
However, here again, all members of the association agree to abide by the rules and decisions of
the Executive Committee as a condition of membership.
Proposals for amendments to this constitution may be generated by the Executive Committee, the
Governing Board, or by any of the voting Association members. Such proposals must be
submitted to the Executive Secretary in writing and approved by a majority vote of the Executive
Committee, followed by a majority vote of the Governing Board, before being submitted for
ratification to the general voting membership. A 3/4 vote of at least 3/4 of the voting members is
required to ratify a change to this Constitution.
A. Eligibility: Individual competitors must be at least 18 years of age or be a currently enrolled
college student representing the collegiate institution where they are currently enrolled.
Otherwise, there are no restrictions on competitors within the organization.
B. Judges: Individual judges must be at least 18 years of age or be a currently enrolled college
student representing the collegiate institution where they are currently enrolled. It is actively
recommended that judging pools be made up of as wide a range of backgrounds, abilities, and
perspectives as possible. Tournament directors are encouraged to use class or volunteer
undergraduate students as judges.
. . .
D. Seating: Contestants should seat themselves such that, from the audience's point of view, the
Affirmative is on the left and the Negative on the right.
E. Topic Areas and Resolutions: The topic areas and specific resolutions for Public Debate are left
to the discretion of Tournament Directors. Topics should be fair to all parties attending Public
Debate tournaments. Tournament Directors should avoid local issues which are inaccessible to
visiting competitors. Resolutions should be as balanced as possible giving equal ground to both
the Affirmative and Negative. Tournament directors are encouraged to include a variety of fact,
value and policy resolutions.
F. Topic Draw: All division contestants will meet in a central location for an extemporaneous
topic draw before the scheduled start of the debate. The official recommended draw time is 30
minutes but the exact time is up to the Tournament Director. Contestants will be offered five (5)
topics. Each pair of opponents will independently select the topic they wish to debate. Starting
with the Negative speaker, each contestant will alternatively strike one of the five until only one
remains. That will be the debate resolution for the round. Contestants must complete the topic
selection process independently and without outside assistance. Tournament Directors may set
their own policies concerning the specific issues that come up during the draw including what to
do about competitors who show up late and topic draw protests.
G. Preperation:Debaters are permitted to use reference materials during their preparation time
before debating. They may utilize extemporaneous speaking type files, dictionaries, reference
books, libraries, or anything else for that matter. They may also consult with teammates and/or
coaches for ideas and advice.
. . .
The IPDA recommends that
speakers be prepared to speak immediately following each other; competitors may be allowed up
to 10 seconds. This is a matter of the Tournament Director's discretion and it is recommended
that the policy be included in the tournament invitation. In the absence of an announced rule,
special prep time beyond the aforementioned reasonable time between speeches is not allowed.
Judges should be made aware of prep time rules and count off for abuses.
. . .
I. Use of Evidence During Debates: Contestants may not bring printed reference materials into
the round with them. No “reading” of evidence will be permitted. They may only bring and
reference handwritten case outlines and limited notes which they have worked up during the
round’s preparation time. Evidence must be memorized or paraphrased for use during debates.
This is another case where judges should be made aware of this rule and instructed to count off
for abuses. Serious violations of this rule should cause the judge to automatically award the
decision to the opponent.
J. Fairness: Debaters will, as much as possible, be left to their own devices. Affirmative's are
allowed to define resolutions; however, Affirmative interpretations and definitions must fit
within the resolution and leave Negatives fair ground for the debate. If an Affirmative's case is
too lopsided and/or tautological (used to define itself as winning by definition), this opens the
door for the Negative to provide an alternate set of definitions. But the Negative can only
redefine terms if the Affirmative has abused its prerogative. If the Affirmative can demonstrate
they have met the aforementioned burdens when challenged, then Affirmative definitions will
have presumption. The judge is the final arbiter of definitional squabbles.
K. Nomenclature & Procedure: The two sides in a Public Debate will be known as the
Affirmative and Negative. There will be no "rising" to points of order, standing with one hand on
your head, or heckling during speeches. If debaters have questions or problems they should ask
about them during cross-examination and/or raise them as points during their next speech.
L. Style: The goal of the International Public Debate Association is to promote a highly
rhetorical and oratorical style of public speaking. For this reason, it is recommended that judges
be instructed to award the decision in a close round to the superior speaking style rather than to
the negative.
M. Etiquette: Public Debaters are expected to maintain a highly polite, civil, and professional
demeanor during rounds. Judges should be instructed to reward appropriate ethos and count off
for abusiveness.
. . .
O. Electronic Devices: Debaters are encouraged to bring a timer/stopwatch for use during
rounds. However, no electronic devices capable of receiving and/or retrieving data (cellular
phones, laptop computers, etc.) may be used during a debate; exceptions to this rule will be
granted based solely upon A.D.A. compliance.
. . .
R. For an issue with an individual round, whenever possible a grievance or challenge should be
made to the tournament director prior to the decision of the round being known.
. . .
3. The number of qualifying outrounds will be determined by the size of the field in the
division. If a tournament qualifies for sanctioning based on its total field, each of the
divisions will automatically qualify for points. Sanctioned outround points for each
division will be based on the following:
Field Size
Qualifying Outrounds
below 4
0
4-6
1
7-14
2
15-30
3
31-62
4
63-126
5
127+
6
The International Public Debate Association will establish a 7-member Governing Board.
A. The Governing Board will be charged with deliberating over policies, rules, and procedures
which affect the Association. Items for consideration may originate with the Governing Board;
they may be suggested by the Executive Committee; or they might originate with any other
individual, program, or group within the Association. Items intended for Governing Board
consideration may be submitted directly to that body, or it may be submitted indirectly by way of
any IPDA officer. But submission of an item does not guarantee deliberation. The governing
board itself will decide which items to consider and on what basis and on what schedule.
B. Recommendations for change which come from the Governing Board will be referred to the
Executive Committee. With Executive Committee approval and depending on the nature of the
change, these recommendations will either be presented to the membership for a vote (consistent
with the provisions of the Constitution), or implemented by the Executive Committee (if they fall
within the scope of that body's discretionary powers to set policies, rules, procedures and fees).