In academic debate the affirmative plan is the basis of argument; for debate to be competitive, therefore, the importance of the counterplan cannot be overstated. This article proposes a new criterion for assessing whether counterplans are competitive. (PD)

Discusses the counter-resolutional counterplan: its advantages and strategic use by the negative debate team. (PD)

Critiques Samuel Bacharach and Edward Lawler's theory of argument in bargaining. Concludes that although their theory does not sufficiently account for argument as process or as point of view, their ideas represent a viable starting point for understanding and investigating the nature of argument in dispute resolution. (MM)

Comparison of a newly developed debate approach with the standard need-plan'' case

Argues that rhetorical and argumentation theorists should theorize ideology as a complex rhetorical totality and that the subject of validity and legitimacy must be addressed in order to warrant ideological critique. Offers a model which outlines a rhetorical theory of ideology totality. (MM)

Asserts that impromptu speaking should be viewed as an event which develops students' organizational ability, creative thinking, audience analysis, and delivery skills. Presents various techniques to aid students and coaches in pre-tournament preparation for impromptu speaking. (MM)

Argues that presumption represents a multidimensional concept, not a monolithic one. Claims that in reaching a decision on a nonpolicy debate, the decision rule "one who asserts must prove" ought to be given primacy over the predispositions of a given audience or of society at large. (JD)

Documents the educational benefits of academic debate. (PD)

Responds to the issues raised in the previous article on the nature of the debate resolution (CS 706 818). Deals particularly with comments on counter-warrants. (PD)

Discusses a routine to use for identifying and classifying the values present in a particular policy system in academic debate. (PD)

Reflects on Daniel Rohrer's legacy: a view of debate as a comparison of policy systems. Advocates greater emphasis on value-oriented debate as a complementary outgrowth of policy deliberation and suggests experimentation in wording resolutions and in the use of computers. (PD)

Argues that substantive rules of debate, instituted by the National Debate Tournament Committee, are both ineffective and counterproductive. Critiques the rule restricting evidence reading after a debate and the rule requiring judges to compare definitions when evaluating topicality arguments. Concludes that substantive rules should be rescinded…

Reaffirms the primacy of the policy-making paradigm in academic debate. (PD)

Contends that the split between NDT and CEDA threatens the educational function of debate because it limits the forms of debate open to students. Points out the value of both forms and suggests that rapprochement between the two organizations might be facilitated by joint topic selection. (PD)

Replies that advocating a rapprochement between NDT and CEDA overstates the difficulties that separation has created. Points out the benefits generated by competition between these forensic organizations. (PD)