World Schools Debate: A Fusion of Forensics
When I tell people about my favorite debate experiences and World Schools (Worlds) inevitably comes up, I’m usually met with various comparisons of it to other styles. For instance, one of my closest coach friends called it a “glorified public forum” when I told her I was applying for team USA. I’ve also heard “oversimplified parliamentary debate” or “a combination of oratory and extemp." The problem with these comparisons isn’t that Worlds isn’t similar to these other events– but rather, that they fail to recognize what gives the event its unique value in terms of education and accessibility lies in the way it draws from the best of other speech and debate events. With this perspective, joining Worlds is clearly worthwhile for any debater seeking to strengthen their own skills, their team, and the debate community as a whole.
Debaters tend to fear that doing Worlds is simply too risky and trades off with their success in other formats. This fear causes many debaters to avoid World Schools altogether, and I understand why. My home, Washington State—like many others—doesn’t have an independently thriving Worlds circuit. Until Worlds is as prominent across the nation as it is in certain regions, competing in Worlds remains a risk. There is a trade-off, an opportunity cost, to competing in Worlds if you believe you will be more successful doing some other event that you’re more accustomed to. Over time, Worlds has slowly grown in my area, but that wasn’t the case when I first began. At the time, I was a freshman who did Policy, Lincoln-Douglas, Extemporaneous speaking, and Impromptu. My greatest fear was that my debate background wouldn’t transfer into World Schools in time for my first National Speech and Debate tournament in 2022. Worse, I worried that Worlds was such a unique format that my time in the event wouldn’t help me the next year. Fortunately, I was proven wrong on both fronts.
Ultimately, my time in Worlds has taught me that the event values communication above all else. It removes the jargon and barriers to entry that other events have, but preserves the purpose of debate. It’s the core values of World Schools debate which make it special; yet, in practice, learning a style of debate that prioritizes communication makes any debater more successful in every form of forensics they chose to try. My team has a simple motto that encapsulates this idea: good debate is good debate, meaning that if you can grasp the foundations of debate (presentation, persuasion, logic, research, etc.) you can use them across our community. There’s several examples that come to mind to illuminate why this motto rings true, particularly when it comes to transferring to and from World Schools:
Learning to repackage policy argumentation: In Worlds, I could run my favorite policy arguments, but I learned how to reconstruct and frame them in a way that was more comprehensible. Disadvantages, counterplans, kritiks, and even theory arguments all find their way in Worlds, but they’re framed as substantive arguments, counter-models, or used as rhetorical tools; the evidence isn’t spread, it’s shown with examples; and these arguments must all focus on addressing issues head-on and holistically. Worlds has argumentation that’s equally in-depth and complex, but presents them in a way that can maximize truly productive debate.
Practical vs. principle thinking: Learning how to analyze motions on different levels in Worlds helped me significantly with argument generation in policy and LD when I returned. For instance, my soft-left policy case on the 2022 policy water resources topic was about new approaches towards protecting rivers by granting them legal personhood. The first contention was the practical- saying this plan would lead to transformational court decisions- and the second was principle– saying that the plan would create a mindset shift away from anthropocentrism.
Impromptu thinking: Every debate event requires that you learn to think on your feet, but Worlds strengthened this skill like no other due to its lack of in-round prep time. This means limited prep speakers can put their skills to the test, and everybody is able to improve.
Persuasion: Unlike my other debate events, Worlds cares about persuasion in a similar way as oratory and extemp do. Learning to connect with an audience is a vital part of debate-- and Worlds showed me how that connection would be valuable in my other events.
These are just a few simple examples but the fact is, Worlds derives its brilliance from how it takes the best of all events. There’s no denying how marvelous each format is on it’s own. Oratorical speakers are powerful, they use examples and storytelling to move an audience. Policy debaters are technically minded and excellent at fast, complex, argumentation. Lincoln-Douglas debaters know the philosophies that underpin different understandings of our world, while extemp speakers have a firm grasp of current international events. Every form of speech and debate has its strengths— but these strengths become weaknesses when communication, education, and the spirit of debate are placed on the back burner. As a result, the community can lose some of the most valuable skills debate can provide. The good news: Worlds takes the best of these events, evaluating debates from a holistic perspective to prioritize the activity’s values.
Independently, this unique emphasis found in Worlds makes the event more accessible to a wide array of communities. For instance, while other forms of debate usually require direct citations and readings of evidence throughout rounds, Worlds is more reliant on the understanding of the arguments. As a result, it matters much less if you can read quickly, but if you’re able to work outside of rounds to learn in a different way that suits you best, you can still succeed. This appeals to teams like mine, who operate at schools with large English language learner populations. Part of this accessibility is connected to the origins of World Schools- as the event that’s done in international competition, its format is especially universalizing. Other unique characteristics about the format also help enhance its accessibility. For instance, the different uses of evidence may appeal to students with learning disabilities, the team structure to students who might be cautious about competing alone or with only one partner for a full season, and the prevalence of impromptu rounds to students who want a taste of debate for it’s real-world skills but have outside commitments.
When I picture the different events in speech and debate, I think of a sound board used by a DJ with different knobs for the volume, the pitch, or an equalizer. World Schools is all about balance— finding the sweet harmony in the middle that preserves the core values of the debate community. This makes it not just a fantastic personal investment, but a worthwhile team endeavor. We all love to say that debate can change the world— and it’s preserving these core values of our community that will allow us all to accomplish that goal.