Debate
  Team Policy Debate
  Lincoln Douglas Debate 
  Evidence Standards
  Tournament Rules
  Tabulation
  Orientations
  Timing
  Judge Event Cards
  Proposed Debate Topics
  Resolution Selection Process
  Past Resolutions

Debater

Debate

NCFCA has established a program of formal debate with the ultimate goal of training young people to be able to think critically and communicate effectively about all issues in a manner that pleases God.

Two styles of debate are offered in the NCFCA: Team Policy Debate and Lincoln Douglas Value Debate. Team Policy (TP) Debate advocates a change in policy while Lincoln Douglas (LD) Value Debate centers on a proposition of values. There are unique elements to each, such as the fact that Team Policy debate teams are made up of two students and LD debates are one-on-one, but both offer similar benefits with regard to skill-building. All NCFCA debaters learn research skills, respectful argumentation, refutation, organization and most importantly, good communication and speaking skills.

In a debate tournament, each team will take turns advocating and opposing the resolution in a series of different rounds so that competitors thoroughly learn all the issues involved in the debate topic as well as the skills to both advocate for and oppose a proposition without compromising their own beliefs.

NCFCA debate encourages a conversational style of debate and utilizes judges from the community as well as debate coaches and teachers in order to ensure that competitors learn how to communicate to a general audience. To find out more about NCFCA’s philosophy on judging, please click here

Debate resolutions change each year. Read more about how NCFCA debate topics are chosen here.

2013-2014 Debate Topics

(Final wording)

Team Policy Debate

Resolved: That federal election law should be significantly reformed in the United States.

Lincoln Douglas Debate

Resolved: National security ought to be valued above freedom of the press.



Send a message to the Debate Committee here

 
Debaters
 

"Discussion for elucidating truth; strife in argument or reasoning, between persons of different opinions, each endeavoring to prove his own opinion right, and that of his opposer wrong; to discuss or examine different arguments in the mind."

 Webster's 1828 Dictionary