This paper examines changes that have occurred concerning the nature of inherency, in order to establish a better framework with which to evaluate the nature of the concept. Four changes are examined: the trend toward simular positions taken by affirmative and negative teams; the development of new types of inherency positions; growing differences…

Circular reasoning is often employed in comparative advantage debate cases when only a plan and advantages are articulated without adequate reference to the resolution which inspired the proposal. The advancing of such subtopical analyses as debate cases is deleterious to the long-range interests of educational debate because the practice…

During the past decade, debators have become more flexible in their affirmative analysis of the resolution. One case approach that an affirmative team may adopt is the utilities or no-needs need case in which they argue for the elimination of the status quo because it is unnecessary or restrictive or both. This paper examines: (1) the four…

Beginning with the lyceum founded in 1818 by Justice Woodward, the Michigan movement flourished until 1860, eventually including 35 lyceums. Lewis Cass, Henry Schoolcraft, Douglas Houghton, and others brought the movement to Detroit, whose Young Men's Society later provided strong leadership and other support. There were 14 lyceums along the Grand…

The use of tournament forensics in teaching vital skills to the disadvantaged is discussed. Four case histories illustrate the success of such an approach to providing students with basic communication skills. Some of the difficulties peculiar to working with the underskilled in an academic environment are described. (DB)

Advances a rationale for debating propositions of value in interscholastic contests. Considers implications for burden of proof, presumption, and the location of issues in value propositions, and proposes a preliminary system for the analysis of value propositions. (JMF)

Suggests that inherency is a composite of several distinct factors operating to block the solution of particular policy dysfunctions and offers a rhetorical model as an alternative to the single-definition approach to the concept of inherency. (MH)

Offers arguments in favor of condoning theoretical arguments and answers objections raised by critics of theoretical arguments. Recommends standards for improving the quality of theoretical arguments. (MM)

Identifies the purpose of academic debate (to teach students argumentative skills) and the characteristics that a debate paradigm must have to fulfill that purpose. Takes a functional view of the debate judge as one who judges argumentative practices, not one who decides policy issues as would a real-world decision maker. (PD)

Challenges the arguments raised in the previous article (CS 706 820). Maintains that in broad issues of public policy--usually the center of attention for competitive debaters--it is difficult to prove that further research will improve or alter the outcome of public policy. (PD)

Discusses the use in academic debate of the state-level counterplan which mirrors all aspects of an affirmative plan adopted on the federal level. Gives reasons why this use is unjustified. (PD)

Discusses how paradigms, such as "tabula rasa," reduce the judge's influence as a critic. Suggests alternatives. (PD)

Discusses guidelines for ethics in academic debate. Covers obligations of debaters and examples of unethical conduct. Proposes gaming as a way to study and regulate ethics. (PD)

Contends that, while "tabula rasa" has produced improvements in academic debate, it also has encouraged harmful practices. Proposes limitations and draws implications for a more general dialectical approach to argument evaluation. (PD)

Counters that the best answer to the problems engendered by "tabula rasa" is to strengthen this approach by applying a minimum standard for argument evaluation and by banning argument about certain theoretical issues that could destroy debate. (PD)