Public Forum PF
NSDA U.S. high school format. Resolution rotates monthly. Evidence-driven, two-on-two, four-minute speeches.
Public Forum is the NSDA's flagship high-school format and the most widely competed event in U.S. high-school debate. The resolution rotates roughly monthly during the season; teams debate the same topic for a few weeks before it changes. Two teams of two debaters, four constructive speeches followed by crossfire, summary, and final-focus speeches.
PF is evidence-heavy. Cards (cited evidence from named sources) are mandatory in constructive speeches and across rebuttals. The format rewards clean evidence comparison — which study has a larger sample, which is more recent, which controls for confounds.
Crossfire periods between speeches are where strategy lives. The format is fast but not Policy-fast; clarity matters more than speed. Final focus is purely weighing — no new arguments, just a closing brief on why your impact outweighs.
Speech structure
| Speech | Time | Side |
|---|---|---|
| 1AC First Pro Constructive | 4 min | Pro |
| 1NC First Con Constructive | 4 min | Con |
| CF1 Crossfire (Speakers 1) | 3 min | Both |
| 2AC Second Pro Constructive | 4 min | Pro |
| 2NC Second Con Constructive | 4 min | Con |
| CF2 Crossfire (Speakers 2) | 3 min | Both |
| PS Pro Summary | 3 min | Pro |
| CS Con Summary | 3 min | Con |
| GCX Grand Crossfire | 3 min | Both |
| PF Pro Final Focus | 2 min | Pro |
| CF Con Final Focus | 2 min | Con |
How judges score it
- Evidence quality (recency, source, methodology) is decisive.
- Crossfire performance is judged — not just speech delivery.
- Summary and final-focus speeches must weigh, not re-argue.
- Lay judges are common — clarity beats jargon.
- Dropped arguments in summary are usually treated as conceded.
What wins this format
- Two strong cards beat five mediocre ones.
- Crossfire questions that lock the opponent into a position they then have to defend.
- Summary that collapses to two impacts and weighs them.
- Final focus that gives the judge a one-sentence ballot story.
What loses this format
- Card spam without analysis — judges discount cards you do not explain.
- Aggressive crossfire (yelling, talking over). Penalized.
- New arguments in final focus.
- Reading evidence faster than the judge can flow.
Sample motions
- Resolved: The United States federal government should substantially restrict the export of advanced semiconductor manufacturing equipment to the People's Republic of China.
- Resolved: The United States federal government should substantially increase its military presence in the Arctic.
- Resolved: On balance, the rise of generative artificial intelligence has been beneficial to the United States economy.
- Resolved: The United States federal government should prioritize reducing economic inequality over reducing the federal deficit.
Try a PF round against the AI.
The AI knows the structure, the judging criteria, and the moves that win this format specifically. Pick a side, give a speech, get a judge ballot.
Start a PF round →