AI is the largest threat the Speech & Debate community has ever faced, and there is nothing in the official handbook to stop it.

This year, one of our novice debate teams was told that their opponents could use AI as much as they want during a debate round because the National Speech & Debate Association has nothing in the rulebook prohibiting the use of AI to formulate responses and arguments mid-round. The only time AI is even referenced is a statement that no evidence can be cited as AI, so idea generation, rhetoric, and critical analysis are all "fair game". The policy hasn't been updated since 2023, and AI has become much more widely available and much more intelligent since then.

The NSDA's Vision Statement asserts that Speech & Debate is meant to "foster each student’s communication, collaboration, critical thinking, and creative skills." AI inhibits every one of these values. 

• The ability to communicate is lost when AI is writing a speech down to the phrasing. AI-assisted debaters don't learn how to express ideas in their own words, which weakens a student's public speaking and articulation. They also don't discover their authentic voice, which is essential for communication in a world reliant on persuasion and rhetoric.
• Collaboration is at risk in partner events when the essential process of quickly brainstorming and decision-making as a partnership is done entirely by AI. Even in individual events, when a debater relies more on AI than their coach or teammates the work and effort that mentors put in is devalued.
• Critical thinking, one of the most unique skills acquired by Speech & Debate, becomes obsolete when AI can instantly generate logical arguments and even direct you to the sources it found it from so that it seems more like your own work. Students skip the process of evaluating evidence, identifying fallacies, and forming their own reasoning. If AI provides answers instantly, students never get to practice developing arguments independently under pressure.
• Creativity is devalued when quicker, easier artificial speeches and adovcations take precedence over genuine originality. AI draws from existing data, so its arguments and phrasing can inherently never be as creative as the human mind.

The NSDA's rules set the framework for nation-wide regulation. Even if a few states have their own regulations, most follow the NSDA's and, even more significantly, every state’s National Qualifier Tournaments must follow NSDA rules. Because of this, if a competitor chooses to use AI during the qualifying tournament they will have a substantial advantage and be able to take spots from debaters who genuinely put the work in to succeed.

Also, some of the largest tournaments every season are hosted by collegiate programs. Colleges love Speech & Debate because it prepares high schoolers with the drive and dedication to commit to an activity that’s mentally taxing. If AI becomes normalized, the activity won’t be as necessary for fostering skills and preparing you for a career, and it’s likely that many colleges could stop hosting tournaments because they no longer see the value.

Please help us advocate for a rule change. Sign the petition, and follow our organization on Instagram and TikTok at @debatersforequitableai for suggestions on how you can help preserve original thinking in Speech & Debate.