Our adjudicators have identified several common areas in which teams can improve. These pointers are not intended as a checklist of rigid rules. They are practical ways to make your arguments clearer, stronger and more persuasive.
1. Respond to the strongest arguments
Good rebuttal is not about finding the easiest statement to criticise. It is about responding to the arguments that contribute most strongly to the opposing team’s case.
When preparing rebuttal:
- identify the opposition’s most important arguments;
- consider the strongest reasonable interpretation of each argument;
- explain precisely what is wrong, missing or unconvincing;
- show how your response affects the opposition’s overall case.
Do not avoid a strong opposing argument by responding only to a weaker version of it.
2. Make your rebuttal directly relevant
Your rebuttal must respond to what the opposing team actually argued.
Before presenting a rebuttal, ask yourself:
What exactly did the other team argue, and how does my response weaken that argument?
Prepared rebuttal can help you anticipate what the other team might say. However, it must be adapted to the debate taking place. Do not deliver a prepared response simply because it discusses a similar subject.
A relevant rebuttal clearly identifies the opposing argument, responds to its reasoning and explains the effect of that response.
3. Prioritise important rebuttal
You do not need to respond separately to every minor statement made by the opposing team. Prioritise the arguments that could have the greatest effect on the result.
It is usually better to provide a well-developed response to an important argument than several brief responses to insignificant points.
However, be careful not to leave an important opposing argument unanswered. If an argument could help determine the result, your team should address it.
4. Develop your reasoning and evidence
Strong arguments require more than a claim. You must explain why your claim is true and why it matters to the topic.
For each argument:
- clearly state your main claim;
- explain the reasoning supporting it;
- provide relevant examples or evidence;
- explain how the evidence supports your reasoning;
- connect the argument to the topic and your team’s overall position.
When relying on research, statistics or expert evidence, identify the source and year. Evidence is most useful when it is relevant, reliable and clearly explained.
5. Use your speaking time purposefully
Some speakers spend too much time on introductions, conclusions and summaries. This leaves less time for developing arguments and answering the opposing team.
Keep your introduction brief and functional. There is no need to thank every person in the room or spend a long time announcing what you are about to do.
Your conclusion should remind the audience of the central reason your team should win. It should not repeat the entire speech.
Every part of your speech should help your team persuade the adjudicator.
6. Make your structure easy to follow
The adjudicator should always be able to tell what part of your speech you are delivering.
Use clear signposting to indicate:
- when you are beginning rebuttal;
- which opposing argument you are answering;
- when you are moving to a new argument;
- how an argument supports your team’s position;
- when you are beginning your conclusion.
Linking sentences can help explain how an argument relates to the topic. However, they should communicate something meaningful rather than being included as a memorised formula.
7. Keep the team split clear
The team split explains how your team has divided its arguments between its speakers.
The First Speaker should introduce the team split clearly. The Second Speaker should briefly remind the audience of the split before moving into their contribution.
This reminder should be concise. It should not become a lengthy repetition of the First Speaker’s introduction.
8. Use Third Speaker time effectively
The Third Speaker’s role is not simply to repeat everything said by the first two speakers.
Third Speakers should concentrate on:
- responding to the opposition’s important arguments;
- defending their team’s case from rebuttal;
- comparing the competing arguments;
- identifying the main issues in dispute;
- explaining why their team should win.
A brief summary can help reinforce the team’s central case. However, several minutes spent repeating earlier speeches would usually be better used for rebuttal, comparison and deeper reasoning.
9. Deliver a speech, not a written essay
A debate speech is written to be heard, not silently read.
Some students prepare speeches like written essays and then read them aloud very quickly. This can make even a strong argument difficult to understand.
Remember that the adjudicator must listen to both teams, record the arguments, assess the responses and ultimately decide the debate. If your ideas are delivered too quickly or densely, the adjudicator may not have enough time to understand and record them.
To make your speech easier to follow:
- speak at a measured pace;
- use shorter, natural spoken sentences;
- pause between important ideas;
- clearly identify each argument;
- emphasise your main claims and reasoning;
- restate important ideas when it assists understanding;
- look up from your notes and engage with the room;
- give the adjudicator time to record each point.
This does not mean speaking unnaturally slowly or repeatedly saying the same thing. It means making your most important ideas easy to hear, understand and remember.
The central objective
Debating is ultimately an exercise in persuasion. Your goal is not merely to fit as much material as possible into your speaking time. Your goal is to convince the adjudicator that your team has presented the stronger case.
Clear structure, relevant rebuttal, developed reasoning and effective delivery all help the adjudicator understand why your team should win.