homeschool debate | Forums Wiki

HomeSchoolDebate

Speech and Debate Resources and Community
Forums      Wiki
It is currently Thu Mar 23, 2017 1:21 am
Not a member? Guests can only see part of the forums. To see the whole thing (and add your voice!), just register a free account by following these steps.

All times are UTC+01:00




Post new topic  Reply to topic  [ 5 posts ] 
Author Message
PostPosted: Mon Jul 08, 2013 2:25 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Apr 15, 2013 10:50 pm
Posts: 389
Home Schooled: Yes
Location: Falling at a 60° angle, defying physics
I hear all this great stuff about how Shell and Extend will make you win several more Neg rounds, and I would like to try it out. But I have a couple questions about it.

1. I still am trying to figure out what "Laying the framework for every argument in the round" means. All the people who say S&E works great (and I believe them) have never really shown a specific argument, instead just talking about the big picture. I still don't know what to do because I have no idea how.

2. What happens if the Aff sees your strategy, and tries to address in the 2AC the arguments you're about to make in the 2NC and 1NR? Does this ever happen?

If these sound confusing, you may ask me any questions.

_________________
Andrew

Barndt/Barndt | TACT, R10 | 2012-13
Barndt/Barndt | TACT, R10 | 2013-14
Barndt/Barndt | TACT, R10 | 2014-15
Barndt/Blacklock | Arete, R10 | 2015-16
Barndt/Cuddeback | 2016-17

JohnMarkPorter1 wrote:
I'm inclined to think like Andrew does.


Top
   
PostPosted: Mon Jul 08, 2013 4:49 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed May 09, 2012 3:24 am
Posts: 769
Home Schooled: Yes
Location: Alabama
The Pumaman wrote:
I hear all this great stuff about how Shell and Extend will make you win several more Neg rounds, and I would like to try it out. But I have a couple questions about it.

1. I still am trying to figure out what "Laying the framework for every argument in the round" means. All the people who say S&E works great (and I believe them) have never really shown a specific argument, instead just talking about the big picture. I still don't know what to do because I have no idea how.

2. What happens if the Aff sees your strategy, and tries to address in the 2AC the arguments you're about to make in the 2NC and 1NR? Does this ever happen?

If these sound confusing, you may ask me any questions.


1. S&E does not mean you just talk about the big picture, it means that you lay down the framework for every argument you will have in the 1NC, instead of splitting them up between the 2 constructives. "Laying the framework" usually just means you explain the argument in it's simplest form -- Link, brink, and impact, although you want to focus on the first two in the 1NC, because you will have plenty of time to really flesh out a bunch of impacts later in the 2NC and 1NR. This will mean using a much smaller amount of arguments than Splitting the Neg, but it provides more depth, which is the point of S&E.

2. Seeing as though you lay out all (or most of, in some cases) arguments in the 1NC, they will be able to respond to all the arguments in the 2AC unless you add a few in the 2NC. Here is a really helpful article and S&E. :)

_________________
- Brennan Herring (Team Policy Coach, Catalyst Speech and Debate)

Ethos is also pretty cool, you should check it out.


Top
   
PostPosted: Mon Jul 29, 2013 2:07 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Apr 15, 2013 10:50 pm
Posts: 389
Home Schooled: Yes
Location: Falling at a 60° angle, defying physics
First of all, sorry for taking so long.
_TakenUsername_ wrote:
1. S&E does not mean you just talk about the big picture, it means that you lay down the framework for every argument you will have in the 1NC, instead of splitting them up between the 2 constructives. "Laying the framework" usually just means you explain the argument in it's simplest form -- Link, brink, and impact, although you want to focus on the first two in the 1NC, because you will have plenty of time to really flesh out a bunch of impacts later in the 2NC and 1NR.

What I meant by big picture is that a lot of articles and people describing the 1NC in S&E just say, "1NC: Lays the framework for every major argument in the round" The big picture was that they just say what they do, not how. The second sentence was what I was looking for. Thanks! This whole question was about the details of S&E.
_TakenUsername_ wrote:
2. Seeing as though you lay out all (or most of, in some cases) arguments in the 1NC, they will be able to respond to all the arguments in the 2AC unless you add a few in the 2NC. Here is a really helpful article and S&E. :)

What I meant here is if the 2A gets up and responds to the argument, then says, "Now the Negative is probably going to say later that..."

I read that article in another thread, so I'm familiar with it.

_________________
Andrew

Barndt/Barndt | TACT, R10 | 2012-13
Barndt/Barndt | TACT, R10 | 2013-14
Barndt/Barndt | TACT, R10 | 2014-15
Barndt/Blacklock | Arete, R10 | 2015-16
Barndt/Cuddeback | 2016-17

JohnMarkPorter1 wrote:
I'm inclined to think like Andrew does.


Top
   
PostPosted: Mon Jul 29, 2013 5:19 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed May 09, 2012 3:24 am
Posts: 769
Home Schooled: Yes
Location: Alabama
The Pumaman wrote:
_TakenUsername_ wrote:
2. Seeing as though you lay out all (or most of, in some cases) arguments in the 1NC, they will be able to respond to all the arguments in the 2AC unless you add a few in the 2NC. Here is a really helpful article and S&E. :)

What I meant here is if the 2A gets up and responds to the argument, then says, "Now the Negative is probably going to say later that..."

I read that article in another thread, so I'm familiar with it.


Sure, that is a possibility, but it's not unique to S&E.

_________________
- Brennan Herring (Team Policy Coach, Catalyst Speech and Debate)

Ethos is also pretty cool, you should check it out.


Top
   
PostPosted: Mon Aug 19, 2013 1:04 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Apr 15, 2013 10:50 pm
Posts: 389
Home Schooled: Yes
Location: Falling at a 60° angle, defying physics
Update: I've been away at an Ethos debate camp (met Drew, one of the instructors) and finally learned how to format the 1NC so the shell is still an argument in and of itself but can still be extended (and how to extend it, but that wasn't my main concern). In that article posted by _TakenUsername_ earlier, there was a comment that was asking what I'm asking, and there was no response. :| Personally, I think that there could be more discussion on this. I'm willing to help anyone who also is asking the question of how to pull off a S&E.

Thank you, Mrs. McPeak. :)

_________________
Andrew

Barndt/Barndt | TACT, R10 | 2012-13
Barndt/Barndt | TACT, R10 | 2013-14
Barndt/Barndt | TACT, R10 | 2014-15
Barndt/Blacklock | Arete, R10 | 2015-16
Barndt/Cuddeback | 2016-17

JohnMarkPorter1 wrote:
I'm inclined to think like Andrew does.


Top
   
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic  Reply to topic  [ 5 posts ] 

All times are UTC+01:00


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Limited