BY SIERRA MACIOROWSKI

Competitors at the National Parliamentary Debate Invitational this year were asked to respond to a survey about general tournament practices and resolutions. Though not all debaters answered the survey questions, the results shared below offer insight into general consensus on this year’s tournament, and potential improvements to make for next year.

When asked about the dress code for next year, only 12% of respondents preferred formal wear, with the other 88% opting for informal attire.

77% of respondents generally liked the mutually preferred judging system used at NPDI, with only 5% stating that they generally disliked it.

Number of NPDI preliminary rounds which should have topic areas, assuming a different area each round:

     0: 11%

     1: 11%

     2: 40%

     3: 22%

     4: 7%

     5: 0%

     6: 9%

Resolutions were considered by the following percentages “generally liked”:

     Round 1: 82% (The USFG should ratify the Trans-Pacific Partnership.)

     Round 2: 49% (The SCOTUS should abolish the death penalty.)

     Round 3: 66% (Japan should enact a policy to significantly increase immigration.)

     Round 4: 80% (The USFG should substantially increase funding for human space exploration.)

     Round 5: 49% (The US should abolish plea bargaining.)

     Round 6: 86% (The USFG should substantially increase support for the production of nuclear energy.)

In addition to conducting a general survey, we took note of the resolutional side-biases in each preliminary round. Unsurprisingly, the most side-skewed resolution was also the least enjoyed by competitors, as survey results above show.

     Round 1: 42% affirmative : 58% negative

     Round 2: 52% affirmative : 48% negative

     Round 3: 52% affirmative : 48% negative

     Round 4: 52% affirmative : 48% negative

     Round 5: 32% affirmative : 68% negative

     Round 6: 48% affirmative : 52% negative