 When I debated for Humble State in the early 2000s, I spent way too much time on a debate specific message board called Net Benefits. Back then, video on the web was still a new idea, and things like Skype were temperamental at best. On several occasions, debate friends from other colleges and I attempted to have some online debates between tournaments. This endeavor almost always failed. Even when we were accessing the internet from our fast dorm connections, we couldn't get things to work well enough to hold full debates. We tried the whole posting videos thing, but even when the brand new service YouTube was working, inevitably one of our four folks would miss their upload and we'd never get past that speech. Fast forward to today, and things have changed significantly. The ability to stream video online works far better, and even my 80 year old grandparents have no issues talking my ear off over FaceTime. This change in technology has led more folks to revisit the whole online debate format. Having formal academic style debates online requires a couple of modifications, and hope of keeping things simple, we will be using a format of debate that has grown to be one of the most popular debate formats in the US during the last 10 years. In this short video, I'll talk a little bit about how online debates will work in this class. Go over the IPDA format and give you a brief overview of what you'll want to accomplish in each speech. So first let's talk about how debate works online. Unlike debates that take place in the same physical setting, online debates require a few technical considerations in order for them to run smoothly. First, it's important that all class members are ready to debate when class gets started. Being ready means a couple of things. First, need to be logged in to the class video session using the downloaded and installed Zoom program. This is important as the web-based version lacks the stability and features needed to debate. Second, once you're logged in, you need to make sure that you are set up to debate. This includes finding a front-lit lighting space, ensuring that your microphone is not covered up, and that you have enough flow paper and multi-colored pens ready to participate in that class session's debates. Most class sessions will have two to three debates scheduled. Third, make sure your Zoom name is correct and is followed by your group name. It should look something like this. Remember, you can always click on the Participants button and rename yourself if it is not showing up correctly. It's also a good idea to set up the Zoom app on your phone or tablet as a worst-case scenario backup. That way, if you lose internet connection or your computer crashes, you can rejoin the round before getting forfeit. Here's a layout for a typical class debate session. I'll formally begin class by taking roll and ensuring that everyone is there. I'll release the pairing for the first debate round, naming both the debater on the affirmative and the debater on the negative, along with the names of the three to five judges. I'll then release the topics and we'll do strikes. This begins a countdown clock of about 20 minutes. While each of our debaters prepare, I'll split the non-debating class members into your learning groups. During the next 15 to 20 minutes, you and your group members should have a short discussion about the topic for that round. Using the form I provide each group, you'll want to brainstorm one to two advantages the affirmative could run and one to two off-case positions the negative team could prepare. This process will get you thinking a little bit about the current topic and what you might have prepared out had it been your turn to debate. As the prep time draws to a close, one member of your group needs to submit the form summarizing what your group came up with. While the learning groups are chatting, I'll check in with each debater and answer any pre-round questions they might have. For classes large enough that we need to get through more than two debates in the evening, I may release a topic for the next debate so those debaters can prepare while we watch the first debate. In that situation, the second round debaters will then be excused to go prep and the debate will begin. We'll repeat this process for each debate round scheduled that class session. At the conclusion of the last round, I will then release class. You will want to take a couple of minutes to photograph and submit your flows for the evening. Now that you have an idea of how the online debates will work, let's spend a few minutes discussing the specifics of the IPDA debate format. The good news is that all the rules of online IPDA format are the same as standard IPDA format covered in our class videos and readings. Normally, a round of IPDA debate takes about 30 minutes. In classes like this one, I shorten the times for practicality in order to ease the burden on y'all. Each round of debate consists of five speeches in two periods of cross-examination time. In total, the typical round will be about 20 minutes long. Let's take a quick look at the speech times. The first speech of the debate is the First Affirmative Constructive, or 1AC for short. It is a four-minute speech. Next is a one-minute period of negative cross examination time. This is followed by the First Negative Constructive, or 1 and C, that is five minutes long. Next is another one-minute cross examination for the affirmative team. Then we have the three-minute First Affirmative Rebuttal, also known as the 1AR. That speech is followed by the four-minute First Negative Rebuttal and summary, sometimes called the 1NR. Last, the affirmative gets the final word in a two-minute Second Affirmative Rebuttal and summary, also known as the 2AR. It's important to keep in mind that speech times are one of the few hard rules of a debate. It is important to always have your timer handy when you get ready to speak. When the timer starts to go off, you'll have to stop. So make sure you get through what you plan to before you run out of time. Now that we've discussed the time limits for IPDA, let's talk generally about what you want to accomplish in each of these speeches. The 1AC, First Affirmative Constructive, is the very first speech of the debate. In many ways, it is the most important speech because it is where the foundation of the entire debate is presented. In a typical policy debate round, you can expect to evaluate the resolution, provide background, propose a plan text, and argue that the hypothetical implementation of the plan would result in one or more advantages that improve the status quo. The first period of cross examination is owned by the negative. During this period, the negative team can ask questions of the affirmative team. This can be a useful way to clarify parts of their case and even poke holes in it. The 1NC, First Negative Constructive, is the first opportunity for the negative team to introduce arguments into the round. Generally speaking, the goal of the 1NC is to prove that the affirmative does not improve the status quo. This can be accomplished in a few basic ways. Typically, the 1NC starts by presenting one to two disadvantages against the plan. If they win these off-case arguments, they can use them to argue the affirmative has made the status quo worse. Next, then the negative debater will go on-case and directly refute the arguments of the 1AC. This is especially important because any argument that the 1NC does not respond to is then considered conceited and can't be argued later. The best technique here is to follow the line by line of the previous speaker's flow. Quickly summarize what each of the affirmative's arguments wore and then provide some type of counter argument. In more advanced debate rounds, the 1NC may also consider running procedural arguments or counter plans in this speech. The second period of cross-examination is owned by the affirmative. In this time period, the affirmative is given the opportunity to ask questions about the negative case. Like the first cross-examination period, this can be a useful chance to clarify arguments, question the validity of sources, and poke holes in the argumentation of your opponent. In the first affirmative rebuttal, the AF must attempt to defend the case they presented in the 1AC while also attacking the new arguments presented in the 1NC. Like the previous speech, any arguments not responded to in this speech are considered conceited and should not be brought up later. As a result, it is especially important that the affirmative responds to any disadvantages, procedurals, or counter plans that were read, while also allocating some time to extend the arguments of the 1AC. At the end of the day, the affirmative can only win if they are winning the 1AC case. Like in the 1NC, a great strategy in this speech is to work the line-by-line of the previous debaters' flow. The negative rebuttal and summary is the final speech the negative gives in the debate, and represents their final chance to convince us the affirmative is losing the debate. The main goal of the 1NR is to advance the best strategy to either prove the affirmative does not improve the status quo, or, and sometimes and, that the affirmative does something that makes the status quo worse. Typically, this means that the negative will kick arguments that are not working. For example, if the affirmative effectively took out the negative's disadvantage, they may then choose to abandon arguing it in order to save time to focus on where they can win. Perhaps their answers they made against the affirmative advantage. After refuting the arguments of the 1AR, the debater will then attempt to explain why the negative won, typically while giving the reasons that the aft was not net beneficial. The best negative rebuttal will include some sort of impact calculus at the bottom, where they use the lenses of timeframe, magnitude, and or probability of impacts to argue why they won the debate. The 1AR is the last speech of the debate, and is the affirmative's last chance to explain why they won. This is typically accomplished by explaining the reasons the affirmative is net beneficial. The typical structure here is to start with an overview sentence claiming why the affirmative is winning. This is typically followed by moving back through the debate flow, proving this is the case. The best 1ARs will also include some impact calculus at the bottom, where they use the lenses of timeframe, magnitude, and or probability of impacts to argue why they won. That folks is IPDA in a nutshell. Today we discussed how the online debates will work in this course. We looked at the format of those debates before finally working through the general goals of each speech in the debate. Debating online can be a little cumbersome in the abstract, but it starts to make a lot more sense once you get a chance to try it out. I find watching online rounds of IPDA or partly LD debates is one of the best ways that you can make sense of it, other than just doing it. I encourage you to hop on YouTube and watch a few before our next class session. Digital debate has come a long way in the last 20 years. I wish you all luck and hope that you have some great rounds in this class. As always, thanks for watching. This video series is written and produced by me, Ryan Guy, with the help of a wide variety of scholarly research and open educational resources. For more information on the references and materials used, see the description page on YouTube. This video is published under a Creative Commons license. Please feel free to share, use, and remix its content.