Debate is a game in which two sides argue which hypothetical 'world' would be better. A neutral judge picks the winner and loser based on evidence quality and evaluation of whose arguments are better.
The affirmative side says that the United States federal government should enact some policy related to some 'resolution' decided in advance. All the negative side has to do is say 'no' in some form.
Each side has four speeches, and each partner gives two of them. The first four speeches by each side are called 'constructives'. In those speeches, teams can read new arguments supported by evidence that set up their later speeches—these last for eight minutes in high school and five in middle school. After each constructive is the cross-examination period. A debater from the other side asks the speaker questions about their speech, either clarifying what they said or trying to find flaws in their arguments—these last for three minutes in high school and one and a half minutes in middle school. After the first four constructives and their respective cross-examinations are over, the rebuttals start. The rebuttals are an opportunity to expand on the evidence and arguments you made in the constructives, new arguments are not allowed. This is the time for debaters to tie everything together and present one full story to the judge—each rebuttal is five minutes in high school and three and a half minutes in middle school.
Each side also has a set amount of preparation time that can be taken before any speech, but most often before a speech given by your side. This gives debaters time to think about the arguments they want to make and get them in order. It is eight minutes per side in high school and five minutes per side in middle school. You are allowed to prepare while the other team is taking their own allocated preparation time.
The last important part of the debate is flowing. Dozens of arguments are made throughout a debate at many different times and in response to many different arguments. That can make memorizing everything said almost impossible. To get around this, debaters and judges use a method of note-taking called flowing. This is either a piece of paper or a spreadsheet, one per argument, split into multiple columns. Each column is dedicated to one speech and within each one, you write down every argument in a quick shorthand that was made. This puts all the arguments made into one centralized place. Each judge and debater has their own flow, so it is up to the debaters to make their speeches as organized as possible. One piece of paper/spreadsheet should be dedicated to each 'bucket' of argument, which will be explained below.
One person from the affirmative is the 1A and gives both speeches that start with '1A'. This applies to the 2A, 1N, and 2N as well.
The affirmative starts with the 1st Affirmative Constructive (1AC) where they explain what policy they enact (the plan) and why it is good (the case).
The 2N then asks the 1A questions about the speech.
The negative's first speech is the 1st Negative Constructive (1NC) in which they must do two things. First, they provide defensive reasons that the affirmative is not as good as they say. Second, they make offensive arguments that the affirmative is actually bad (a disadvantage), or that the affirmative prevents us from enacting some other policy that is better (a counterplan). Additionally, the negative can also say that the affirmative's plan is not related to the predetermined resolution which is not allowed (topicality). Offensive arguments are called 'off case' positions.
The 1A then asks the 1N questions about the speech.
The affirmative then gives the 2nd Affirmative Constructive (2AC) where they must also do two things. First, they must extend their case and explain why the negative defensive arguments are wrong. They can also say the plan is good for additional reasons (an addon). Then, they must respond to the offensive arguments with their own defense or additional offense. The 2AC should have multiple responses to each off case position to ensure they have multiple ways to beat it.
The 1N then asks the 2A questions about the speech.
The last constructive given is the 2nd Negative Construcive (2NC). This is followed by the 2A asking the 2N questions about the speech and directly after the 1N gives the 1st Negative Rebuttal (1NR). This pair of two negative speeches in a row only interrupted by one cross-examination period is called the negative block. This can be treated as one big speech. The negative block has two things to do. First, it must extend only some of the offense in the 1NC and directly respond to the 2AC arguments against it by reading new offensive or defensive arguments. Second, they must extend and explain in more depth the defensive arguments made against the case that were present in the 1AC.
The next rebuttal, and the first given by the affirmative, is the 1st Affirmative Rebuttal (1AR). This speech is one of the most difficult because there is a very short amount of time to respond to the entire neg block, which is very long. The affirmative must continue the pattern above, and explain why the affirmative is good by responding to both the offensive and defensive arguments made by the negative. New arguments are not allowed, so the 1AR can only extend what was in the 2AC.
The last two speeches are the 2nd Negative Rebuttal (2NR) and the 2nd Affirmative Rebuttal (2AR). The job of these two speeches is to tie the debate together, there are multiple arguments all over the place and these speeches bring them together and explain the big picture to the judge.
After the debate has concluded, the judge analyzes the arguments on the flow and renders a decision based on which 'world' each side provides would be preferable.
The case consists of multiple advantages, all of which have three parts. All three are introduced in the 1AC and extended until the 2AR.
Inherency: Something is wrong in our current world, and it's not going to be fixed until we do the plan.
Harms: The problem in our world is going to get really bad and may even lead to humanity going extinct.
Solvency: This is how the affirmative solves the problem in our world.
A disadvantage is a unique reason the affirmative is bad. There are three parts introduced in the 1NC and extended all the way to the 2NR.
Uniqueness: Our world has something really good happening right now.
Link: In the world of the affirmative, that good thing will become bad.
Impact: We need to keep that good thing in our world, otherwise that may lead to humanity going extinct.
A counterplan is a proposal that would be better than the affirmative but that is also mutually exclusive. There are two parts introduced in the 1NC that need to be extended until the 2NR.
Solvency: The counterplan usually tries to solve the problem the affirmative lists through some other means that is different than the plan.
Net Benefit: The net benefit is a reason the counterplan is preferable to the plan. This can either be because the plan causes a disadvantage, but the counterplan does not; or because the counterplan is uniquely good by itself.