•This session will include:•Different styles of summary – pros and cons•How to go about summarising.

•No new constructive arguments•Only Prop Summary does rebuttal•Should be biased in favour of your side•Should be more biased in favour of you and your partner.

•Summary by Speaker•Summary by Side•Summary by Theme•Defensive versus Aggressive.

•Pros:•Easiest way to structure a summary speech•Often helps in a confused debate•Makes a side seem stupid if their arguments constantly contradict each other

This approach looks at the debate in chronological order, describing where each speaker was right or wrong.

•Cons:• Doesn’t really provide a ‘big picture’ of the debate•Inevitably involves repetition.•Overemphasises 1st half•Mentions arguments that get dropped in the debate

•Pros:•More room for sophisticated analysis•Less chance of repeating yourself•Easy enough to structure your speech.

This looks at the two sides separately. Show why the other side has failed, and then show why yours has succeeded

•Cons:•Risk of ignoring the clash – so that each side’s arguments seem to exist in a vacuum.

•Pros:•Provides the big picture of the debate.•Enables you to prioritise the most important points without repetition.

This is a more holistic version of a summary. It sees the debate as an series of clashes in various areas i.e. Where the sides disagree and why yours is right

•Cons:•Is difficult to work out how to structure

•Explaining why your points are good = Defensive summation.•Explaining why their points are bad = Aggressive summation.•Aggressive is better, but defensive is easier.•Often you can do a mix of defensive and aggressive – shoot them down and then shore your side up.

•Themes should broadly include your material, mainly from your partner but with a touch of first half.•As you go you should be identifying where your arguments are clashing with the other side’s.

•References their themes back to your team’s argumentation – or it looks like new material.•Must understand how your material attacks their case•Find tensions in the opposing side’s cases

•Talk to Gareth and other good summarisers – there are probably equally good/better ways•Draw the famous ‘grid’ – 2 columns, 3 rows, write down what each speaker says.•As you do this, identify themes where there is clash•Write your themes on a separate sheet(s) with the points that fit under each theme•Try to make sure your partner’s material has relevance in at least 1, preferably 2 of these themes, so you can emphasise them.

Point 1Analysis (how to rebut this)Point 2Analysis

Example Opp SumPoint 1

Point 2Analysis

Woo awesome extension I’m going to use this

Speech Sheet (s)Theme 1Prop say this... ButWe win this point because...

Theme 2Prop are wrong about this because my partner’s analysis shows...

Theme 3This was my partner winning the debate. Here are the prop responses. They are bad.

Draw arrows to show what engages with what. Have a separate sheet or three so it doesn’t get messy.

Point 1 – LOL I’ll make fun of this.Point 2

Useful rebuttalBad points, won’t use these.

Nice extension – needs rebutting. I’d best feed my partner...

Analysis to beat their extension

•Help out your extension by:•Feeding them points•Feeding them rebuttal, or at least making sure they know what they’re rebutting. •Don’t POI your extension’s material if 1st half still have a chance to steal it. This doesn’t mean you shouldn’t POI 1st half at all, you can still challenge the assumptions they predicate their case on.

•You can’t deal with everything in the debate. Drop the marginalia, focus on the big clash.•Don’t rush to write your speech, this will lead to 2nd half being dropped, which is important because•A) It’s where your partner is.•B) It’s who you most need to engage with.•Be organised – get your points in an order that makes sense and work out what your debate is about.