Writing a "Case" or "Constructive Speech" for Classic Debate

As you already know, your "team" will present a six minute constructive speech during each debate. The purpose of the constructive speech is to make and support your main arguments in favor of the resolution (when you are affirmative) or against the resolution (when you are negative). Your constructive speech should always accomplish the following:

It will present your primary arguments. It will provide support for those arguments in the form of evidence and reasoning. It should be persuasively written. (It should include an introduction, contentions, and a conclusion)

Beyond those basic guidelines, you have the freedom to create a case that makes sense to you and that you believe will persuade the judge. Let's take a closer look at some of the basic requirements.

The Introduction- Getting off to a good start

Your case should always begin with an introduction. The introduction needs to accomplish two things.

It should state the resolution and your position (in favor of it or opposed to it). It should provide a persuasive attention-getter to encourage the audience to listen to your speech. (This could be a quote, a statistic, an example, or simply your own writing.)

Here's a sample introduction:

"Every year in the United States, our government executes dozens of convicted murderers. Their crimes are so terrible that our legal system assigns death as the ultimate punishment. What is truly tragic and hypocritical is that every so often our legal system gets the wrong person. Instead of punishing someone for taking an innocent life, it is our government itself that is taking an innocent life. Because my partner and I believe that this should never happen again, we stand Resolved: that the death penalty should be abolished in the United States. [If you are negative, you would phrase that last line something like this "... my partner and I negate the resoultion: that the death penalty should be abolished in the United States." This simply reminds the judge of the resolution being debated.] First, we'll prove that the death penalty results in miscarriages of justice" [You're now moving into the "contentions" (or observations). These are simply your main arguments.]

The "Contentions"- The core of the speech

Your two or three main arguments are called contentions. They should be labeled as Contentions and "signposted," or numbered. [Traditionally, Roman numerals are used because this follows the conventional outline format.] Your contentions are statements that must be proven or supported with evidence and analysis. Here's a sample for how you could structure a contention. [You may chose to further divide your contentions with "subpoints". Subpoints should be labeled with capital letters (following the outline format). Subpoints provide additional organizational structure to help clarify your argument. They are a great place to insert evidence.]

"The most important reason for abolishing the death penalty is that we sometimes end up killing the wrong people. "Contention I. People Are Wrongly Executed" Clearly, the execution of any innocent victim is a tragedy. Unfortunately, there are a number of innocent people on death row. Subpoint A. "Innocents on death row". Across the country, dozens of people have been proven innocent while awaiting their execution. Proof of this is provided by... Stuart Taylor Jr., columnist for The National Journal, Newsweek, June 11, 2001 "Based on new evidence that either proved their innocence or cast doubt on their guilt, some 95 inmates have been released from death row since 1973. Republican Gov. George Ryan of Illinois declared a moratorium on executions 16 months ago because of what he called his state's "shameful record of convicting innocent people and putting them on death row."
[Notice that the evidence appears word for word here. No altering of the evidence can be done. In addition, there is a complete source citaton provided. Note that the "tag" or "headline" for the evidence card is now the label for the subpoint...]

Tragically, proof of innocence sometimes comes too late, and our government may have again executed an innocent victim. Subpoint B. "Innocents may be killed". Even our highest judges are beginning to publicly acknowledge that the system is flawed. The staff of The Economist explains in the January 5, 2002 issue... "Among the five set free in 2001 was Charles Fain, who had spent 18 years on death row in Idaho before DNA evidence proved that he was not guilty of kidnapping, rape and murder. As Sandra Day O'Connor, a Supreme Court Justice, admitted in July, the statistics imply that "the system may well be allowing some innocent defendants to be executed."

[That is all you need for a contention. Next, you'd provide a transition to your next contention. Think about shifting to a new body paragraph in an essay. It might be something like...]

"In addition to risking innocent lives, the death penalty is applied in an unfair and discriminatory manner. "Contention II. The Death Penalty is Racist" ... continue the process as above...
After you have stated your "Contention", you must provide reasoning and evidence to support it. That can be easily done with the subpoints. The length of the "Contention" is up to you (you only have 6 minutes, so they will be fairly brief). Also, the number of contentions that you have is up to you. Usually, a case will have 2 or 3 main contentions. Remember that I am recommending six pieces of evidence for your speeches.

Conclusion- Tying things together

After you have made and supported all of your contentions, you should end your case with a brief conclusion. In your conclusion, you should restate your main ideas and end with a persuasive appeal to your audience. Here's a sample conclusion:

"In today's debate, the affirmative team has proven that the death penalty results in two major harms to society. First, innocent people are sometimes wrongly executed. Second, the death penalty is discriminatory because it is used more frequently against minorities. Finally, we have additionally shown that the death penalty has no major benefit because it does not reduce crime rates. In light of this evidence, the right thing to do is to abolish this unfair and ineffective punishment. Please vote affirmative."
This is all there is to writing a constructive speech. We'll work on improving and modifying them as we practice. Remember, you have six minutes to use. We'll try and get the speech close to that length, since we want to use all the time we can... [The best way to figure out how close you are to six minutes is simply to read it aloud. Read at a modest pace.]

What makes for a good argument?

[This information might help in structuring strong contentions for your constructive speeches.] A debate is a series of arguments. While these arguments differ in function, structure, and importance, the basic format for delivery remains the same. There are many models of argumentation. The most basic model for argumentation is the "Claim-Support" format. In addition to the argument itself, debate requires organizational structure to hold the arguments together and to help everyone keep track of the arguments. Therefor, a sound debate argument consists of the following three parts.

Sign-posting: A signpost is a verbal map that allows the listener to know where to place the argument in the context of the debate. This tells everyone listening which issue the argument pertains to. This is essential for the debate to remain organized. [Phrases like "Contention I", "subpoint A", and "my opponent's first argument" are all examples of sign-posting.] Claim: This is the statement of the argument. The claim, much like an evidence tag, should be briefly and powerfully stated. Example: "The Death Penalty Decreases Crime Rates." This tells the listener what the argument is. A claim by itself, however, is only an assertion. To become an argument, it requires support. Support: The two most common forms of support for an argument are reasoning and evidence. For many arguments, logical reasoning is sufficient to win the point. The debater may also refer to previously presented evidence as support. At times, new evidence is required. [REMEMBER: Evidence must be presented verbatim (word for word). You cannot change or alter the wording. In addition, you need to present as complete a source citation as possible.]