Public forum debate is a popular competitive format that focuses on current events and controversial issues. Teams of two argue for or against a resolution, emphasizing clear, persuasive speaking and audience engagement. The format encourages critical thinking about timely topics.

Rounds consist of structured speeches and crossfire periods, allowing teams to present arguments and question opponents. A coin toss determines sides and speaking order. Judges evaluate the strength of arguments, evidence, and refutation to decide the winner.

Public forum debate overview

• Public forum debate is a popular competitive debate format that focuses on discussing current events and controversial issues in an audience-friendly manner
• Debaters compete in two-person teams, with each team representing either the affirmative (pro) or negative (con) side of a given resolution
• The format emphasizes clear, persuasive speaking and encourages debaters to engage with the audience, making arguments accessible to both debate experts and casual observers

Two-person teams

• Each public forum debate team consists of two debaters who work together to present arguments and evidence supporting their assigned side of the resolution
• Teammates collaborate in preparing cases, conducting research, and developing strategies to effectively counter their opponents' arguments
• During the debate, team members alternate delivering speeches and participating in crossfire questioning periods

Emphasis on current events

• Public forum debate resolutions typically focus on current events, controversial issues, and topics of public interest (immigration policy, healthcare reform)
• Debaters are expected to stay informed about recent developments related to the resolution and incorporate relevant news articles, studies, and expert opinions into their arguments
• The focus on timely issues makes public forum an engaging and dynamic format that encourages debaters to think critically about the world around them

Audience-friendly format

• Public forum debates are designed to be accessible and engaging for a broad audience, including those without extensive debate experience
• Debaters are encouraged to use clear, jargon-free language and present their arguments in a persuasive, easy-to-follow manner
• The format's emphasis on audience engagement and persuasion makes it an excellent choice for debate outreach events and competitions aimed at attracting new participants to the activity

Public forum debate rounds

• A public forum debate round consists of a series of speeches and questioning periods, with each team having four constructive speeches, three crossfire periods, and two summary speeches
• The round is structured to allow both teams equal opportunity to present their arguments, engage in direct questioning, and offer rebuttals to their opponents' points
• The judging criteria in public forum prioritize clear, persuasive argumentation, effective use of evidence, and successful audience engagement

Four speeches per team

• Each team in a public forum debate delivers four constructive speeches: two by the first speaker and two by the second speaker
• These speeches are used to present the team's main arguments, provide supporting evidence, and respond to the opposing team's points
• The four speeches per team ensure that both debaters have ample opportunity to contribute to the round and showcase their individual strengths as speakers and arguers

Three minute crossfires

• Public forum debates feature three crossfire periods, each lasting three minutes, during which debaters from opposing teams directly question and engage with one another
• The first two crossfires occur between the first speakers and second speakers, respectively, immediately following their constructive speeches
• Crossfire periods allow debaters to clarify, challenge, and expose weaknesses in their opponents' arguments, as well as demonstrate their ability to think on their feet and respond to direct questioning

Two minute grand crossfire

• The grand crossfire is a two-minute period that occurs after the second speakers' constructive speeches and before the summary speeches
• During the grand crossfire, all four debaters (two from each team) participate in an open discussion and questioning session
• This unique feature of public forum encourages a more dynamic, free-flowing exchange of ideas and allows debaters to further explore the central issues of the debate

Two minute summary speeches

• Each team delivers a two-minute summary speech at the end of the round, with the first speaker of each team typically taking on this role
• Summary speeches are used to crystallize the main points of the debate, emphasize the most compelling arguments and evidence presented by the team, and refute the key contentions of the opposing side
• Effective summary speeches often play a crucial role in shaping the judge's perception of the round and can be instrumental in securing a victory

Coin toss procedures

• Before the debate begins, a coin toss is conducted to determine which team has the choice of either the side they will argue (pro or con) or the speaking order
• The team that wins the coin toss gets to make the first choice, while the team that loses the toss is granted the remaining option
• The coin toss procedure ensures a fair and impartial method of assigning sides and speaking order, preventing any potential advantages or disadvantages based on pre-determined positions

Winner chooses side or speaking order

• If the team that wins the coin toss chooses the side they want to argue (pro or con), the team that loses the toss will automatically be assigned the opposite side
• Alternatively, if the winning team decides to select the speaking order (either first or second), the losing team will be allowed to choose which side of the resolution they prefer to defend
• This choice can be strategic, as some teams may have a preference for arguing a particular side or speaking in a specific order based on their preparation, strengths, or the nature of the resolution

Loser of toss gets remaining choice

• The team that loses the coin toss is granted the choice that the winning team did not select
• For example, if the winning team chose to argue the pro side, the losing team would then have the option to decide the speaking order
• This ensures that both teams have some level of control over the debate conditions and prevents any single team from having an unfair advantage by selecting both the side and the speaking order

Pro vs con sides

• In a public forum debate, each team is assigned either the affirmative (pro) or negative (con) side of the resolution
• The pro team argues in favor of the resolution, presenting arguments and evidence that support its adoption or implementation
• The con team opposes the resolution, offering arguments and evidence that highlight its drawbacks, impracticality, or potential negative consequences

Pro defends resolution

• The primary objective of the pro team is to defend the resolution by presenting a convincing case for its adoption
• Pro debaters typically focus on the benefits, necessity, or desirability of the proposed policy or idea, using evidence and reasoning to demonstrate why it should be implemented
• A successful pro team will anticipate and preempt potential counterarguments, while also effectively refuting the con team's attacks on the resolution

Con negates resolution

• The con team's goal is to negate the resolution by presenting compelling arguments against its adoption or implementation
• Con debaters often emphasize the risks, drawbacks, or unintended consequences associated with the proposed policy or idea, using evidence to support their position
• An effective con team will identify and exploit weaknesses in the pro team's case, while also defending their own arguments against pro's attempts at refutation

Speech times and order

• A public forum debate round follows a specific order of speeches, with prescribed time limits for each speech and crossfire period
• The speech order alternates between the two teams, ensuring that both sides have equal opportunity to present their arguments and engage with their opponents
• Adherence to the speech times and order is crucial for maintaining a fair and structured debate, allowing each team to fully develop their case within the allotted time

Team A first speaker - 4 minutes

• The first speaker from Team A (the team that speaks first) delivers a 4-minute constructive speech
• This speech introduces Team A's main arguments in support of or against the resolution, presents relevant evidence, and lays the foundation for their case
• The first speaker's role is to clearly establish their team's position and provide a compelling opening statement to engage the audience and the judge

Team B first speaker - 4 minutes

• The first speaker from Team B delivers a 4-minute constructive speech immediately following Team A's first speaker
• This speech serves to introduce Team B's main arguments, present evidence supporting their position, and begin to refute the key points made by Team A
• Team B's first speaker should aim to establish a strong case for their side while also casting doubt on the opposing team's arguments

Crossfire between first speakers - 3 minutes

• Following the constructive speeches by both teams' first speakers, a 3-minute crossfire period takes place
• During this time, the first speakers from both teams engage in direct questioning and discussion, seeking to clarify, challenge, and expose weaknesses in each other's arguments
• The crossfire allows debaters to demonstrate their ability to think critically, respond to questions, and defend their positions under pressure

Team A second speaker - 4 minutes

• The second speaker from Team A delivers a 4-minute constructive speech following the crossfire between the first speakers
• This speech serves to further develop Team A's arguments, address and refute the points made by Team B's first speaker, and introduce new evidence or analysis as needed
• Team A's second speaker should aim to solidify their team's position and begin to preempt potential counterarguments from the opposing side

Team B second speaker - 4 minutes

• The second speaker from Team B delivers a 4-minute constructive speech immediately after Team A's second speaker
• This speech continues to develop Team B's case, responds to the arguments made by both of Team A's speakers, and introduces additional evidence or analysis as necessary
• Team B's second speaker should focus on strengthening their team's position while also identifying and exploiting any weaknesses in Team A's case

Crossfire between second speakers - 3 minutes

• A second 3-minute crossfire period occurs between the second speakers from both teams, following their constructive speeches
• This crossfire allows the second speakers to directly question and engage with each other, seeking to clarify points, challenge arguments, and expose flaws in the opposing team's case
• The crossfire between second speakers is an opportunity for debaters to demonstrate their mastery of the topic and ability to think on their feet

Grand crossfire - 2 minutes

• The grand crossfire is a unique 2-minute period in the public forum debate format, involving all four debaters (two from each team) in an open discussion
• This crossfire occurs after the second speakers' constructive speeches and before the summary speeches
• The grand crossfire allows for a more dynamic and free-flowing exchange of ideas, as debaters from both teams can question and respond to each other, further exploring the central issues of the debate

Team A summary - 2 minutes

• The first speaker from Team A delivers a 2-minute summary speech following the grand crossfire
• The summary speech is an opportunity to crystallize the main points of the debate, emphasize the most compelling arguments and evidence presented by Team A, and refute the key contentions of Team B
• Team A's summary should aim to provide a clear and persuasive overview of their case, leaving a strong impression on the judge and audience

Team B summary - 2 minutes

• The first speaker from Team B delivers a 2-minute summary speech immediately after Team A's summary
• Like Team A's summary, this speech serves to highlight the strongest arguments and evidence presented by Team B, while also addressing and refuting the main points made by Team A
• Team B's summary should strive to present a compelling case for their side and leave the judge and audience with a clear understanding of why their position is superior

Team A final focus - 2 minutes

• The second speaker from Team A delivers a 2-minute final focus speech, which serves as the team's closing argument
• The final focus should emphasize the most important reasons to support Team A's position, while also identifying and addressing any remaining weaknesses in Team B's case
• This speech is the last opportunity for Team A to persuade the judge and audience, so it should be clear, concise, and compelling

Team B final focus - 2 minutes

• The second speaker from Team B delivers the final speech of the round, a 2-minute final focus
• Like Team A's final focus, this speech should highlight the key reasons to support Team B's position and refute any lingering arguments made by Team A
• As the last speech of the debate, Team B's final focus should leave a strong, persuasive impression on the judge and audience, making a clear case for why their side should win the round

Preparation time

• In a public forum debate, each team is allotted a certain amount of preparation time, typically 2 minutes per team
• Preparation time, also known as "prep time," can be used by the debaters to organize their thoughts, review their notes, and strategize with their teammate before delivering a speech
• Teams can choose to use their preparation time before any of their speeches, allowing for flexibility and strategic decision-making throughout the round

Two minutes per team

• The standard allocation of preparation time in a public forum debate is 2 minutes per team
• This means that each team has a total of 2 minutes to use throughout the entire round, which they can divide and use as they see fit before any of their speeches
• Teams must keep track of their own preparation time and ensure they do not exceed the allotted 2 minutes

Used before any speech

• Preparation time can be used before any speech in the round, providing teams with the opportunity to adapt their strategies and arguments as the debate progresses
• For example, a team may choose to use some of their preparation time before their second speaker's constructive speech to discuss how to best address the arguments made by the opposing team's first speaker
• The flexibility to use preparation time before any speech allows teams to be responsive to the dynamic nature of the debate and make adjustments as needed

Winning a public forum round

• To win a public forum debate round, a team must present a more compelling and persuasive case than their opponents, as determined by the judge
• The judge's decision is based on the strength of the arguments and evidence presented by both teams, as well as their ability to effectively refute their opponents' points and engage with the audience
• Winning a round requires a combination of thorough preparation, strategic argumentation, and strong public speaking skills

Judge decides winner

• In a public forum debate, the winner of the round is decided by a single judge or a panel of judges
• The judge(s) carefully consider the arguments and evidence presented by both teams, evaluating their relevance, credibility, and persuasiveness
• After the round concludes, the judge(s) deliberate and determine which team presented the stronger case and better fulfilled the judging criteria

Based on arguments and evidence presented

• The judge's decision is primarily based on the quality and strength of the arguments and evidence presented by each team throughout the round
• Teams should strive to present clear, logical arguments supported by credible evidence from reputable sources
• Debaters must also demonstrate the ability to effectively refute their opponents' arguments and expose weaknesses in their evidence or reasoning
• Ultimately, the team that makes the most compelling case, supported by strong arguments and evidence, is likely to be declared the winner of the round