The 2025-26 national policy debate resolution is:
Resolved: The United States federal government should significantly
increase its exploration and/or development of the Arctic.
This comprehensive twelve-week instructional program is designed to provide structured support for new debaters and coaches, incorporating the Arctic topic into skill development, practice, and competitive experiences. The curriculum is scaffolded to build foundational knowledge and debate technique while emphasizing research, argumentation, and strategic thinking.
The program is fully aligned with NFHS, NSDA, and NDCA debate education standards and is designed to be turnkey for use by schools, districts, and state associations. Coaches without prior debate experience can implement the program using provided instructional materials, while novice students will be fully supported as they learn the essential components of policy debate.
Foundational Training (Weeks 1-6)
In the first six weeks, students and coaches develop essential skills in debate structure, argument construction, research methodology, and case development, while becoming deeply familiar with the Arctic topic.
Competitive Application and Mastery (Weeks 7-12)
The second half of the program transitions into structured competitive experiences designed to build fluency and confidence.
12-Week Program Breakdown (click to expand)
Week 1 – Orientation to Policy Debate and the Arctic Resolution
Students are introduced to the structure of policy debate, including speech formats, partner roles, and the expectations for affirmative and negative sides. The Arctic resolution is introduced with background materials on geopolitical, environmental, and economic issues central to the region. Materials provided include:
- “Policy Debate Introduction” instructional slides.
- The “Glossary of Arctic Terms” to build vocabulary familiarity.
- “Definitions of Terms on the Arctic Topic” to establish precise topic boundaries.
Week 2 – Research Methods and Source Evaluation
Debaters are introduced to internet-based research methodologies appropriate for academic debate. Emphasis is placed on identifying credible sources, correctly citing evidence, and evaluating author qualifications and publication integrity. Students engage with the “Internet Debate Research 2025” guide, practice domain-specific searches, and complete supervised evidence-gathering assignments.
Week 3 – Affirmative Case Development
Students learn to structure affirmative cases by developing arguments that address Harms, Inherency, Solvency, and Plan text. For novice debaters, initial case development is limited to four approved topics:
- Exploration:
- Early Warning Awareness: Deploying sensors, drones, submarines, and/or satellites to improve early warning systems and monitor geopolitical threats in the Arctic.
- Research Cooperation: Restoring scientific cooperation programs with Russia and/or China in the Arctic.
- Development:
- Renewable Energy Infrastructure: Developing wind, solar, and geothermal energy projects in the Arctic to provide sustainable power for Arctic communities.
- Oil and Gas Drilling: Significantly increasing offshore oil and natural gas drilling in the Arctic.
While novice teams begin with these foundational cases, advanced students may explore additional affirmative cases for expansion as skills mature, including:
- Climate research restoration (NOAA)
- Indigenous knowledge incorporation
- Arctic military infrastructure expansion
- Rare earth mineral extraction
- Additional U.S.-Russia or U.S.-China scientific collaboration proposals
Week 4 – Cross-Examination and Refutation Skills
Instruction shifts to cross-examination techniques, flowing skills, and frontline refutation strategies. Students engage in mock cross-examinations and apply argument tracking methods. Topicality debates are introduced using the “Negative Topicality” resource to prepare teams for jurisdictional disputes.
Week 5 – Negative Strategy Construction
Students learn to develop negative positions, including disadvantages, topicality violations, counterplans, and direct case refutation. Using the “Negative Responses” and “Counterplans” instructional slides, teams prepare responses such as:
- Counterplans proposing state or international actors (e.g., State of Alaska, European Union Copernicus satellites).
- Disadvantages covering pandemic risk from permafrost, strategic conflict with China, arms race escalation, climate destabilization, and U.S. hegemonic overreach.
Week 6 – Tournament Simulation Preparation
The first half of the program concludes with full practice debates where teams execute complete affirmative and negative rounds. Students refine speech organization, strategic thinking, and rebuttal efficiency under coach guidance and receive mentor feedback to identify areas for improvement.
Weeks 7-9 – Online Practice Tournament Series
Each week features multiple rounds of online debates, with teams alternating sides. Judges provide structured feedback focusing on:
- Week 7: Case clarity and effective taglines.
- Week 8: Effective rebuttal strategies.
- Week 9: Cross-examination control and question development.
Weekly coaching meetings reinforce lessons learned and provide targeted instruction based on judge evaluations.
Protocol: 2 min speaker self-grade (rubric), 5 min partner feedback, 5 min coach notes, 1 written goal for next round.
Week 10 – Intensive Drill Week
Following the online tournaments, teams engage in high-stakes drills addressing identified areas of improvement. Instruction emphasizes topicality block preparation, disadvantage extension drills, flowing mastery, and strategic decision-making in rebuttals.
Weeks 11-12 – In-Person Capstone Tournament
The program culminates with an in-person tournament. Students engage in multiple preliminary rounds followed by elimination rounds. Competitive recognition includes top individual speakers, tournament champion teams, and “Most Improved Novice” awards recognizing exceptional growth.
Coach Support Framework
Recognizing that many participating coaches may have limited or no prior debate experience, a comprehensive support system is integrated into the program.
(click to expand)
Coach Data Tracker
Pre-Program Coach Workshop
A four-hour training provides an overview of policy debate mechanics, instruction on flowing, judging, and providing constructive feedback, review of legal definitions and topic constraints based on provided NFHS topic materials, and mentorship pairing with experienced debate coaches.
Weekly Coach Materials
Coaches receive weekly lesson packets including complete lesson plans, drill instructions, and editable handouts and assignments.
Digital Resource Center
Coaches and students receive access to a centralized online library containing all instructional presentations, updated evidence files, and direct links to key government resources (e.g., Congress.gov pending legislation, Arctic Council publications).
Ongoing Mentor Access
A dedicated online forum and office hours provide real-time access to expert support for troubleshooting, pedagogy, and strategy development.
Supplementary Materials
All participating teams and coaches will receive:
The Glossary of Arctic Terms
Pending Legislation on Arctic: summaries
Definitions of Terms on the Arctic Topic
Internet Debate Research 2025 Guide
Judge Paradigm (preferences) Sheet
Optional Expansion Modules
The Debate in a Box model includes the option to expand into advanced areas of debate as teams gain proficiency:
- Second semester advanced skills module introducing Kritiks, advanced counterplans, and impact calculus.
- Intensive policy summer camp for accelerated learning.
- Multi-state online debate leagues using the program framework.
Program Summary
The NFHS Debate in a Box: Arctic Edition provides a fully developed, accessible, and scalable instructional model to introduce novice debaters and new coaches to the rigors and educational value of policy debate. With comprehensive resources, structured support, and expert-designed curriculum, this program empowers schools to build sustainable debate programs aligned to national standards while engaging students with the timely and globally relevant Arctic policy resolution.