MAINCOMPETITION PTMA

APSI PTMA

PSY – DEBATE

1. General Provisions

  • The Mental Health Debate Competition is a category within the MAIN Competition that aims to develop students’ critical thinking skills, scientific communication skills, and sensitivity to mental health and well-being issues.
  • The Competition is held offline and is open to active students who have officially registered through the committee.
  • The debate will be conducted in an academic, orderly, and argumentative manner, while upholding ethics, sportsmanship, and mutual respect.
  • All participants must maintain a proper attitude, language, and behavior throughout the Competition.
  • The debate may be conducted in Bahasa Indonesia or English. The language used by each team must be applied consistently throughout the round. However, all debate motions must be written and announced in English.
  • The decisions of the judges and committee are final and cannot be contested

2. Participants and Team Composition

  • Participants must be active students from universities participating in the MAIN Competition.
  • Each team must consist of three people.
  • Each participant is only allowed to join one team.
  • Participants must show valid identification in accordance with committee regulations.
  • Team member changes are only permitted before the participant verification deadline.

3. Debate System

  • The competition uses the Asian Parliamentary format.
  • In each round, two teams will face each other: the Pro team and the Contra team.
  • The Pro team is tasked with supporting the motion, while the Contra team is tasked with rejecting or refuting the motion.
  • Each team consists of three speakers: the first speaker, the second speaker, and the third speaker.
  • Each speaker has a distinct role to ensure the team’s argument is coherent, from developing the argument, strengthening it, rebutting it, and affirming the team’s position.

4. Explanation of the Asian Parliamentary Format

  • The Asian Parliamentary is a competitive debate format that pits two teams with opposing positions on the same motion.
  • This format emphasizes participants’ ability to construct logical arguments, provide direct rebuttals, defend their team’s position, and demonstrate cooperation between speakers.
  • The Pro team is tasked with explaining why the motion deserves support, while the Con team is tasked with demonstrating why the motion should be rejected, questioned, or reviewed differently.
  • The debate proceeds in rotation according to the order of speakers. The general order in the Asian Parliament is:
  • First Speaker Pro
  • First Speaker Contra
  • Second Speaker Pro
  • Second Speaker Contra
  • Third Speaker Pro
  • Third Speaker Contra
  • The first Pro speaker is tasked with opening the debate by explaining the definition of the motion, the scope of the discussion, the direction of the team’s argument, and the main arguments supporting the motion.
  • The first Contra speaker is tasked with responding to the definition or framework developed by the Pro team, stating the opposing position, and presenting the basis for the rebuttal and the main arguments of the Contra team.
  • The second speaker for the Pro side is tasked with deepening the team’s argument, responding to the Contra side’s rebuttals, and strengthening the Pro side’s position through additional analysis.
  • The second speaker for the Contra side is tasked with responding to the Pro side’s evolving arguments, strengthening the Contra side’s rebuttals, and pointing out the weaknesses of the opposing side’s position.
  • The third speaker for the Pro side is tasked with summarizing the debate from the Pro side, emphasizing why the Pro side’s argument is stronger, and pointing out the Contra side’s weaknesses. The third speaker generally does not introduce major new arguments, but focuses on comparative analysis and affirming the team’s victory.
  • The third speaker for the Contra side is tasked with summarizing the debate from the Con side, emphasizing the strengths of the Contra side’s rebuttals, and explaining why the Con side’s position is more convincing than the Pro side’s.
  • In this format, each team is judged not only on how well each individual speaks, but also on how solidly the team works together in building a consistent line of argument.
  • The Asian Parliamentary Debate also provides space for participants to demonstrate their quick-thinking skills, especially when responding directly to opposing arguments and maintaining a strong team position until the end of the debate.

5. Speaking Time and Interruptions

  • The debate competition uses the Asian Parliamentary format, with a 5-minute duration for each speaker.
  • The order and duration of the speakers are as follows:
  • First Pro Speaker: 3 minutes
  • First Contra Speaker: 3 minutes
  • Second Pro Speaker: 3 minutes
  • Second Contra Speaker: 3 minutes
  • Third Pro Speaker: 3 minutes
  • Third Contra Speaker: 3 minutes
  • Each speaker must deliver their speech in the established order and may not switch roles once the debate begins.
  • During the first and last minutes, speakers are in protected time, so their opponents are not permitted to submit interruptions or Points of Information (POIs).
  • Interruptions or POIs are only permitted between the 2nd and 6th minutes of a speech.
  • POIs must be presented concisely, politely, and relevant to the argument being discussed.
  • The speaker in question has the right to accept or reject a POI.
  • Speakers are encouraged to accept at least one interruption during their speech to demonstrate their ability to respond directly to their opponents.
  • If a speaker continues speaking after the time limit has expired, the moderator or timekeeper may signal the end, and the judges may consider this in assessing timekeeping.

6. Point of Information (POI) Rules

  1. A Point of Information (POI) is a brief interruption made by a speaker from the opposing team to the speaker currently delivering a speech, aimed at requesting clarification, testing the consistency of arguments, or presenting a short rebuttal.
  2. POIs may only be delivered during substantive speeches, namely by the first and second speakers of each team.
  3. The third speaker neither gives nor accepts POIs.
  4. POIs are only allowed outside protected time. In a 5-minute speech, protected time applies during:
  5. the first minute, and
  6. the last minute.
  7. Thus, POIs may only be raised between the 2nd and 6th minute.
  8. To offer a POI, a speaker from the opposing team must:
  9. stand up from their seat,
  10. raise their hand or give a polite signal,
  11. and say “POI,” “Point,” or a similar expression.
  12. A participant offering a POI must not approach the speaker, interrupt rudely, shout, or continue speaking if the POI has not been accepted.
  13. The speaker delivering the speech has the right to:
  14. accept the POI,
  15. reject the POI, or
  16. delay it briefly before accepting.
  17. If a POI is accepted, the person offering it has a maximum of 15 seconds to deliver the question or rebuttal.
  18. After the POI is delivered, the speaker must immediately provide a brief response and then continue their speech.
  19. A POI must be:
  20. brief,
  21. clear,
  22. relevant to the argument being discussed,
  23. and free from personal attacks, insults, or degrading remarks.
  24. A POI must not take the form of a new speech, lengthy explanation, or a series of excessive questions.
  25. A participant must not repeatedly offer POIs in a way that disrupts the speaker. The moderator or adjudicators may warn participants who interrupt excessively.
  26. Speakers are encouraged to accept at least one (1) POI during their speech. Accepting POIs may indicate openness in debate and responsiveness.
  27. A speaker who rejects all POIs without clear strategic reasons may be considered less optimal in terms of debate interaction, although final judgment depends on overall speech quality.
  28. POIs delivered outside the allowed time, too long, irrelevant, or delivered impolitely may be ignored by the speaker and may be noted by adjudicators.
  29. The moderator or timekeeper may give signals indicating the start and end of protected time so participants understand when POIs may be offered.
  30. In the event of technical disputes regarding POIs during a round, the decision of the moderator and adjudicators at that time is final and must be respected by all participants.

7. Competition Topics

  • Debate topics focus on issues related to mental health and well-being that are relevant to students and society.
  • Motions may be developed from the following themes:
  • student mental health,
  • well-being and quality of life,
  • stigma toward mental disorders,
  • the impact of social media on psychological conditions,
  • access to psychological services,
  • burnout and work-life balance,
  • the role of family, campus, and public policy in supporting mental health.

8. Debate Implementation

  • Motions may be given in the form of prepared motions or impromptu motions.
  • If the motion is impromptu, participants will be given preparation time according to the committee’s regulations.
  • During the preparation time, participants are not allowed to receive assistance from external parties.
  • Participants must attend on time according to the predetermined schedule.
  • Participants are required to wear neat, polite, and appropriate attire in accordance with event regulations.

9. Adjudication

  • Adjudication is conducted by the panel of judges based on the quality of argument content, accuracy of analysis, clarity of delivery, and team strategy.
  • Judges also consider participants’ ability to construct arguments, respond to opponents, maintain consistency, and deliver a convincing closing speech.
  • In the Asian Parliamentary format, adjudication includes the strength of each speaker’s role according to their responsibilities within the debate structure.
  • Adjudication is carried out independently, objectively, and professionally.

10. Scoring System

  1. Scoring in the debate competition is based on both individual speaker performance and overall team performance.
  2. Each speaker is assessed based on three main aspects:
  3. Matter, which refers to the quality of arguments, depth of analysis, relevance to the motion, and strength of evidence or examples;
  4. Manner, which refers to delivery style, clarity of speech, intonation, audience engagement, and demeanor during the debate;
  5.  Method, which refers to argument structure, consistency of reasoning, ability to build team strategy, and effectiveness in responding to opponents.
  6. Each speaker is scored within a range of 60 to 80 points.
  7. The general scoring range for each speaker is as follows:
  8. 76–80: very good or excellent;
  9. 71–75: good;
  10. 66–70: fair;
  11. 60–65: poor.
  12. The final team score is obtained from the total score of the three speakers in one team.
  13. Therefore, the total team score ranges from 180 to 240 points.
  14. The team with the higher total score is declared the winner of the round.
  15. In addition to determining the winner, judges may also note the margin of victory based on the difference in performance quality between the two teams in the same round.
  16. In cases where the score difference is very close, judges must still determine one team as the winner based on the strength of arguments, responses to opponents, team consistency, and the strength of the closing speech.
  17. Scores are not only based on speaking fluency, but also on content accuracy, quality of rebuttals, interaction during the debate, and adherence to each speaker’s role.
  18. The first speaker is assessed based on their ability to establish the foundation of arguments and clearly define the motion.
  19. The second speaker is assessed based on their ability to reinforce the team line, rebut opposing arguments, and maintain strategic consistency.
  20. The third speaker is assessed based on their ability to weigh issues, summarize the debate, clarify key clashes, and emphasize why their team is superior.
  21. In the Asian Parliamentary format, the third speaker is not allowed to introduce new substantive arguments; doing so may negatively affect their evaluation.
  22. The acceptance and handling of POIs may also be considered in scoring, particularly in evaluating a participant’s ability to respond directly to opponents.
  23. In the case of very close results, the final decision rests with the adjudication panel and is final.

11. Preliminary to Final Round Format

  • The debate competition is conducted using a knockout system, where teams that lose a round cannot advance to the next stage.
  • Each round features two teams: the Pro team and the Contra team.
  • The winner of each round is determined based on the judges’ evaluation of the debate performance in that round.
  • The winning team advances to the next round, while the losing team is eliminated.
  • The competition stages may consist of:
  • preliminary round or first knockout round,
  • quarterfinals,
  • semifinals,
  • and finals,
  • depending on the number of registered participants.
  • If the number of participants is large, the committee may begin with preliminary rounds to filter teams for the next stages.
  • If the number of participants already fits the tournament bracket, the competition may start directly from the round of 32, round of 16, quarterfinals, semifinals, or finals, as determined by the committee.
  • In the semifinals, winning teams advance to the final round.
  • In the final round, the two best teams compete to determine the first and second place winners.
  • Teams that lose in the semifinals may be awarded joint third place or compete in a third-place playoff, depending on the committee’s decision.
  • The position as Pro or Contra in each round may be determined through a draw, committee scheduling, or a fair bracket system.
  • Motions for each round are prepared by the committee and may vary in complexity depending on the stage.
  • In the knockout system, each round’s result is determined solely by the judges’ decision for that match and does not rely on cumulative wins from previous rounds.
  • The committee reserves the right to adjust the number of rounds, tournament bracket structure, and technical implementation based on the number of participants, schedule, and competition needs.

12. General Scheme Examples

  • If there are 16 teams, the competition scheme may be arranged as follows:
  • round of 16,
  • quarterfinals,
  • semifinals,
  • finals.
  • If there are 8 teams, the competition scheme may be arranged as follows:
  • quarterfinals,
  • semifinals,
  • finals.
  • If there are 4 teams, the competition scheme may be arranged as follows:
  • semifinals,
  • finals.
  • If the committee organizes a third-place playoff, the two teams that lose in the semifinals will compete in an additional round.
  • If the number of participants does not match a full bracket, the committee may make technical adjustments, including directly placing some teams into certain rounds, based on considerations of fairness and efficiency.

13. Additional Provisions

  • Each team is required to follow the entire match schedule determined by the committee.
  • A team that is absent when a round begins without an acceptable reason may be declared to have lost by default and be eliminated from the competition.
  • In the event of technical issues, delays, or other circumstances affecting the conduct of a round, the committee reserves the right to adjust the schedule and format as long as the principle of fairness is maintained.
  • Decisions made by the committee and the panel of judges regarding the results of each round are final.

14. Inclusivity and Accessibility

  • The MAIN Competition is committed to providing an inclusive and disability-friendly event.
  • Participants with disabilities have equal rights to take part in all stages of the competition in a safe, comfortable, and dignified manner.
  • The committee will make reasonable accommodations based on participants’ needs, provided that such needs are communicated prior to the competition.
  • All participants, organizers, and judges are required to maintain an environment that respects diversity in physical, sensory, and neurodiverse conditions.
  • Any form of discriminatory behavior, speech, or treatment is strictly prohibited during the competition.

15. Violations and Sanctions

  • All participants must comply with all competition rules, uphold sportsmanship, and respect the committee, judges, moderators, opposing teams, and all parties involved in the competition.
  • Violations in the competition include administrative violations, technical violations, ethical violations, and acts of cheating.
  • Administrative violations include late attendance, mismatch of participant identity, inconsistency between team members and registration data, or failure to comply with competition requirements set by the committee.
  • Technical violations include not following the designated debate order, switching speaker roles without committee permission, violating speaking time rules, raising interruptions outside the allowed rules, or disrupting the debate technically.
  • Ethical violations include the use of insulting, degrading, discriminatory language, verbal abuse, personal attacks, or inappropriate behavior during the competition.
  • Acts of cheating include receiving external assistance during preparation or the debate, using unauthorized communication tools or information sources, providing false identity, manipulating documents, or any other form of dishonesty that violates the integrity of the competition.
  • Participants are also considered in violation if they disrupt the flow of the competition, refuse to follow official instructions from the committee, or create conditions that disadvantage other participants.
  • For any violations, the committee and panel of judges have the authority to impose sanctions according to the severity of the violation.
  • Sanctions may include:
  • verbal warning,
  • written warning,
  • score deduction,
  • loss of a specific round,
  • technical defeat,
  • or disqualification from the competition.
  • A verbal warning is given for minor violations that can be immediately corrected and do not significantly affect the outcome of the match.
  • A written warning may be issued if a participant repeats minor violations or commits actions that begin to disrupt the order of the competition.
  • Score deduction may be applied for technical or ethical violations that affect the quality of the debate but are not considered major violations.
  • Loss of a round or technical defeat may be imposed if a team is absent according to schedule, unprepared without acceptable reason, or commits a violation that directly compromises fairness in that round.
  • Disqualification may be imposed on participants or teams proven to have committed cheating, falsification of data, serious insults, discriminatory acts, intimidation, or other serious violations contrary to the values of the competition.
  • If a violation is committed by an individual participant, the committee has the right to determine whether the sanction applies to the individual or the entire team, based on its impact on the competition.
  • For violations occurring within the debate room, the moderator and judges may provide direct notes to the committee as the basis for sanctions.
  • For violations occurring outside the debate room but still related to the competition, the committee has the authority to investigate and determine the most appropriate decision.
  • Participants or teams receiving sanctions must accept the decision of the committee and judges. If they wish to object, any protest must follow the established protest mechanism.
  • Decisions made by the committee and panel of judges regarding violations and sanctions are final and binding.