What a resolution is
A resolution is the sentence a debate is about. It is written as a statement, not a question, so one side can support it and the other can oppose it. Many begin with “Resolved:” (an old habit from legislatures). Parliamentary formats call it a motion and often begin “This House would…” or “This House believes…”.
The affirmative’s job is to show the resolution is true or a good idea. The negative’s job is to show it isn’t, or that the affirmative hasn’t proven it.
Three kinds of resolutions
| Kind | It asks | Example | Formats that use it |
|---|---|---|---|
| Fact | Is something true? | Resolved: Social media use harms teenagers’ mental health. | Some Public Forum and parliamentary topics |
| Value | Is something good, right, or more important than something else? | Resolved: In a democracy, voting ought to be compulsory. | Lincoln-Douglas |
| Policy | Should someone take a specific action? | Resolved: The United States federal government should substantially increase its investment in high-speed rail. | Policy, Public Forum, Congress, parliamentary |
Define the key words
Every resolution has words that could mean more than one thing. Take: Resolved: Public schools in the United States should require students to wear uniforms.
Which schools? (“Public” leaves out private and homeschools.) What counts as a uniform? (Matching shirts and pants? A strict dress code?) “Require” means mandatory, not optional. Each side may offer definitions, ideally from a dictionary, a legal source or an expert in the field, and argue that theirs is fairer if they differ.
Good definitions are fair to both sides. A definition that makes the resolution impossible to oppose (or to support) usually loses the judge’s trust.
- Underline every word in this resolution that needs a definition: Resolved: The benefits of space exploration outweigh the costs.
Burden of proof and presumption
The burden of proof is the duty to prove your claim. In most formats the affirmative has the main burden: it is asking the judge to accept something new, so it has to give good reasons.
Presumption is the side the judge leans toward if neither side proves anything. In policy debate, presumption traditionally goes to the negative, because the present system (the status quo) is already in place and change carries risk. In value debate it’s less clear, and many judges expect each side to prove its own case.
Both sides have a burden of rebuttal: whatever you don’t answer, the judge may treat as true.
Ground: what each side gets to argue
Ground is the set of arguments each side can fairly make. A well-written resolution gives both sides plenty. When you define terms or choose a plan, ask: does this leave the other side reasonable arguments to make? If you define a term so narrowly that the other side has nothing left to say, expect a fight about definitions (in policy debate, a topicality argument).
Five questions to ask of any resolution
- Is it a question of fact, value or policy?
- Who is the actor (for a policy) or the object of the judgment (for a value)?
- Which words need definitions, and what are the fair definitions?
- What does each side have to prove? Who has presumption?
- What are the two or three biggest clashes likely to be?
Practice
- Choose three resolutions from the topics list and label each one fact, value or policy.
- For one resolution, write fair definitions of its two most important words, each with a source.
- Write one sentence saying what the affirmative must prove and one saying what the negative must prove.
Sources
- Topics, National Speech & Debate Association. Accessed 2026-10-25.
- Policy Debate (event page: the year-long NFHS topic), National Speech & Debate Association. Accessed 2026-10-25.
Updated 2026-10-25.