Entry Rule

1. Entry Fee.

There is a $25 entry fee per essay. (Fee waived for teams that registered prior to closure of Early Bird Registration.)

2. Team Regulations.

a. All team members must be full-time high school students (U.S. equivalent of grades 9–12). Teams must consist of at least three and a maximum of six students. Homeschool teams are welcome to participate. Each student may join only one team and each team may submit only one essay.

b. The International Public Policy Forum (IPPF) will allow more than one entry per school. Please register each team. 

c. It is the expectation of the IPPF that each submitted paper will be the original work of the team members. Coaches may offer advice and suggestions but should not create or substantially alter the work (see Honor Pledge in Section III.A. below).

d. No derogatory remarks or harassment of any kind will be tolerated and may result in disqualification.

e. Throughout the course of the competition and in all media, proper conduct will be expected of all teams and their coaches.

f. All quoted material must be properly cited. The use of plagiarized material will result in disqualification. (Please see section IV below.)

g. The program coordinator will interpret and enforce the rules of the contest. The decisions of the program coordinator are final.

 

Outline of Rounds of Competition

​

A. Qualifying Round - Written Submissions (All Registered Teams)
 

1. All team members must contribute in some way to the development of the qualifying round essay.
 

2. Papers must follow the written format guidelines for the contest (applies also to subsequent written rounds):

 

a. The IPPF has adopted the MLA (Modern Language Association) style guide as the standard for all written submissions throughout the competition. The last pages of your paper should contain the works cited, giving properly formatted citations for every source cited in the paper. This is not a bibliography; no need to include merely related (but not cited) research. Please do not use footnotes. For more information about MLA style, consult Purdue University's Online Writing Lab or www.mla.org.
 

b. Papers should be typed in Microsoft Word using 12-point Times New Roman font and double-spaced with one-inch margins. All pages must have a header with consecutive page numbering in the upper right-hand corner.
 

c. All papers must be written in English. To ensure uniformity and anonymity among international competitors, spelling should conform to American conventions.
 

d. To preserve anonymity for the judges, do not include your school name anywhere in your paper outside of your cover page. 
 

e. Each paper must have a title or cover page. This page should include:
 

i.  The name of the contest: "The International Public Policy Forum"

 

ii.  The current round (qualifying round, round of 64, 32, or 16). Note: For essays written in the round of 64, 32, or 16, the cover page should identify the two schools in the debate; the paper sequence (constructive or rebuttal); and the assigned side (affirmative or negative).

 

iii.  School name and address (including ZIP code and country)
 

iv.  The topic statement: "Resolved: The United Nations should prioritize protecting the rights of women and girls over respecting state sovereignty."

 

v.  Names and email addresses for each team member and coach

 

vi.  The following Honor Pledge: "On our honor, we pledge that we have received no unauthorized assistance on this work."

vii.  Word count (not including the cover page or Works Cited page(s))

viii.  Name, email address, and phone number for the team coach
 

3. Qualifying round essays may be written from an affirmative or negative perspective on this year's topic, "Resolved: The United Nations should prioritize protecting the rights of women and girls over respecting state sovereignty."

 

4. Qualifying round essays should be no more than 3,000 words, not including the cover page or Works Cited pages. Any text over 3,000 words will be deleted before papers are sent to the judges, beginning with word 3,001.
 

5. All qualifying round essays will be kept anonymous before the judges. The Essay Review Committee will select the “Top 64” schools. These schools advance into a single-elimination, written debate tournament. The decision of the judges will be final.

​

B. First Two Elimination Rounds - Written Debates (Round of 64 and 32)

​

1. During the top 64 and top 32 rounds, each team will compete against the team it is paired with on the official IPPF bracket. The bracket will be updated after each round and posted at www.ippfdebate.com.  Sides (affirmative or negative) will be assigned by a blind draw.
 

2. The teams selected for these rounds will exchange papers via the IPPF Coordinator.
 

3. Each debate will consist of four papers: Affirmative Constructive, Negative Constructive, Affirmative Rebuttal, Negative Rebuttal.
 

4. To preserve anonymity for the judges, do not include your school name anywhere in your paper outside of your cover page. Refer to your opponent as "the affirmative" or "the negative." Do not refer to your opponent by school name. 
 

5. All papers must be submitted via email to ippf@brewerfoundation.com. The IPPF team will check papers for adherence to contest rules and guidelines, and then forward to opposing teams.
 

6. Affirmative/Negative Constructive papers should be no more than 3,000 words, not including the cover page or Works Cited pages. Any text over 3,000 words will be deleted, beginning with word 3,001.
 

7. Affirmative Rebuttal papers should be no more than 1,900 words, not counting the cover page or Works Cited pages. Negative Rebuttal papers should be no more than 1,600 words, not counting the cover page or Works Cited pages. Any text over the word limit will be deleted, beginning with word 1,901 or 1,601.
 

8. Teams may not present new arguments in their rebuttals, but may respond to arguments presented by the opposing team and may present new evidence to support those arguments.

​

Judging for Written Debates (Round of 64, 32)

​

1. Each debate will be judged by a panel of judges determined by the administrators of the IPPF.

​

2. Schools are labeled as "Team A" (affirmative) and "Team B" (negative) to remain anonymous before the panel during the entire debate.

​

3. Papers will be judged on 1) clarity of argument; 2) evidentiary support; 3) depth of analysis; 4) refutation; 5) quality of writing; and 6) punctuation and grammar. (See evaluation rubric.)

​

4.  Winners of each round will be determined by a majority vote of the judges. All decisions are final and cannot be appealed.

​

C. Oral Debates (Sweet 16)

​

1. The format for oral arguments will be an interactive exchange between the two teams and between the teams and the judges.
 

2. Three members of each team will participate in the oral arguments. If either team has additional teammates in attendance, they may observe the debate but are not allowed to communicate with their team via online chat or any other form of communication during the debate. 
 

3.  Each team member will give one speech – either the opening presentation, the second speech, or the rebuttal. Second speeches should be used to extend the narrative theme, refute opposition arguments, and clarify positions.
 

4. Each debate will be judged by a panel of judges determined by the administrators of the IPPF.

​

5. Teams are expected to check in one hour prior to the debates. A coin flip to determine sides will be conducted 45 minutes before the debates begin.

​

6. Each debate will be conducted online over Zoom at a time determined by the administrators of the IPPF in coordination with each team.

​

7. Each judge will submit results privately to the moderator.  Results will be announced by an IPPF representative.

 

Format for Sweet 16 Oral Debates

Opening Presentations by Each Team
Affirmative - 5 minutes

Negative - 5 minutes

 

Second Speeches by Each Team
90 second break for teams to confer before affirmative second speech.
Affirmative - 5 minutes

90 second break for teams to confer before negative second speech.
Negative - 5 minutes

​

Cross Examination
Moderator will allow no more than 10 minutes for questions and balance time between the teams.
Each team member must ask and answer one question. Both questions and answers may not be any longer than 1 minute.

 

Question Period for Judges
Questions may be any length. Answers may not be any longer than 1 minute.
The moderator will direct five questions to each side. Once each side has asked and answered five questions, the moderator will allow questioning to continue while
balancing questions between each side. The questioning period for judges should not exceed 20 minutes.

 

Rebuttal Statements
Negative - 5 minutes
Affirmative - 5 minutes

 

Total Length of Debates
Approximately 60 minutes

​

D. Oral Debates in New York (Elite 8)

​

1. The eight schools reaching the finals in New York City will each be provided with round-trip air travel, a stipend, and hotel accommodations for a total of three students and two coaches/chaperones (or four students and one coach/chaperone). Teams selected for the finals may bring additional team members at their own expense. Traveling team members must be on the team roster and must have participated in previous rounds of written work.
 

2. The eight schools selected for this round will be paired according to the current bracket.
 

3. In New York, all eight teams will engage in a quarterfinal debate against one other team before a panel of three judges.
 

4. As in previous rounds, sides will be assigned by a blind draw. The blind draw will occur prior to the oral debates.
 

5. Teams advancing to the semifinal rounds will have at least 30 minutes to prepare before the live oral debates begin. The two teams advancing to the final round will have at least two and a half hours to prepare before the start of the final debate.
 

6. A live panel of judges will determine the winner of each quarterfinal, semifinal, and final debate. The majority decision of the judges will be final. The winner of the final debate will be announced during the awards ceremony.

Format for Oral Debates (Final 8 Teams Only)

​

1. The format for oral arguments will be an interactive exchange between the two teams and between the teams and the judges.
 

2. Three members of each team will participate in the oral arguments. If either team has additional teammates in attendance, they may observe the debate but are not allowed to communicate with their team via online chat or any other form of communication during the debate. 
 

3. There will be a moderator for all oral arguments. The moderator's rulings are final.
 

4.  Each team member will give one speech – either the opening presentation, the second speech, or the rebuttal. Second speeches should be used to extend the narrative theme, refute opposition arguments, and clarify positions.

The format is as follows:

Opening Presentations by Each Team
Affirmative - 5 minutes (quarterfinals), 8 minutes (semifinals and finals)

Negative - 5 minutes (quarterfinals), 8 minutes (semifinals and finals)

 

Second Speeches by Each Team
90 second break for teams to confer before affirmative second speech.
Affirmative - 5 minutes (all debates)

90 second break for teams to confer before negative second speech.
Negative - 5 minutes (all debates)

 

Cross Examination
Moderator will balance time between the teams. Each team member must ask and answer one question. Both questions and answers may not be any longer than one (1) minute.

 

Question Period for Judges
Questions may be any length. Answers may not be any longer than 1 minute. The moderator will direct five questions to each side. Once each side has asked and answered five questions, the moderator will allow questioning to continue while balancing questions between each side. The questioning period for judges should not exceed 20 minutes for the quarterfinals and 30 minutes for the semifinals and finals.

 

Rebuttal Statements
Negative - 5 minutes (all debates)
Affirmative - 5 minutes (all debates)

 

Total Length of Debates
Quarterfinals - approximately 60 minutes
Semifinals - approximately 80 minutes
Finals - approximately 80 minutes

 

Academic Integrity

Plagiarism: The IPPF strives to uphold the highest level of academic integrity. To remain in compliance with this principle, advisers and student writers should follow the MLA Handbook (9th Ed., 2021) for citation, quotation, and paraphrasing guidance. Upholding academic honesty means recognizing that "Plagiarism is presenting another person's ideas, words, or entire work as your own” (96), without giving proper credit whether intentionally or unintentionally. 

 

"Proper credit" requires, but is not limited to:

• using quotation marks appropriately to indicate direct quotations,

• paraphrasing text properly by changing wording and sentence structure,

• referencing sources in the sentence or using in-text citations to indicate where others’ ideas are present, 

• listing necessary information in an MLA-formatted Works Cited page.  
   

While each paper requires students to synthesize several scholarly and popular works, it should be the writers’ unique voices analyzing the particular insights of the experts they have chosen. The judges and the IPPF Program Coordinator should be able to distinguish an expert’s unique wording and ideas from student analysis through the proper use of quotation marks and citations.

 

Reporting and Adjudication Process for Plagiarism Violations: Suspected violations of the above Academic Honesty Policies must be submitted in writing to ippf@brewerfoundation.com within 72 hours of receiving the essay in which such violations are alleged. 
 
Once a violation is reported, the accused team will be notified immediately and will have an opportunity to answer the allegations.
 
The IPPF Program Coordinator will arbitrate the dispute with the goal of reaching a decision within the time allocated for the debate. If the Program Coordinator concludes that a serious violation of the IPPF’s Academic Honesty policy has occurred, then the accused team will be disqualified. If the Program Coordinator concludes there was no violation of the Academic Honesty policy and that the allegations against the opposing team were frivolous, then the team making the accusation may be disqualified. The Program Coordinator's decision is final.
 
Works Cited 
MLA Handbook. 9th ed., Modern Language Association of America, 2021.

 

Artificial Intelligence: Students may use AI tools for brainstorming and research purposes only. AI may not be used to draft, write, or edit any portion of a submitted essay. Students are not required to disclose or cite AI use for permitted purposes.

​

The IPPF reserves the right to review any submitted essay for compliance with this policy at any stage of the competition. If it is determined that an essay violates this policy, the essay will not advance further in the competition, and the opposing team will advance via forfeiture.

​

Reporting and Adjudication Process for AI Violations: Suspected violations of this AI policy must be submitted in writing to ippf@brewerfoundation.com within 72 hours of receiving the essay in which such violations are alleged.

​

Once a violation is reported, the essay will be evaluated using three AI-detection tools. The AI-detection tools to be used each round will be disclosed to the IPPF Advisory Board and judges before the round’s commencement. The IPPF may use any commercially available model for AI Detection.

​

If the Program Coordinator concludes that a violation of this AI policy has occurred, the accused team will be disqualified. The Program Coordinator's decision is final. There is no appeal process for AI-use determinations.

 

Misconstrued Evidence: Material quoted or referenced in a contest paper that significantly misrepresents the intention of the author or significantly distorts the meaning of the original text may constitute grounds for losing a debate. Deliberate distortion is a violation of accepted academic ethics and is grounds for losing a debate. Claims concerning evidence distortion in IPPF debates must be made as arguments within response papers and within the word allocation for each paper.

Well-intentioned scholars may legitimately disagree about the proper interpretation of source material. In academia, many lively and ethically sound debates center on alternative interpretations of source material.

The IPPF will allow claims of evidence distortion to be argued by the debaters and resolved by the judges assigned to the debate as part of the ordinary process of submitting contest papers. The burden of proof is on the team making the accusation to prove, within the allotted word count of the essay, how the source material is distorted and how such distortions should affect the decision in the debate. Teams should submit copies of source material as appendices for reference, which will not be included as part of the word count. At the top of each appendix, there should be a direct quote from the paper in which the claimed distortion is identified, along with the original material. No additional argumentation should be added to the appendix. The decision of the judges is final.

 

Academic Honesty Checklist: To avoid violations of the IPPF Academic Honesty Policy, all students should answer the following questions BEFORE they submit their papers for competition to the IPPF Program Coordinator:  

 

1. Does each direct quote have a corresponding in-text citation or reference to the source embedded in the sentence?  If not, then make sure to add such references to show where research was used in the paper.
    

2. Does each paraphrase have a corresponding in-text citation or reference to the source embedded in the sentence? If not, then make sure to add such references to show where research was used in the paper.
    

3. Are there any sections of the essay where the exact wording of the source text is used, but there are no quotation marks to indicate where the source author’s words begin and end? If so, add quotation marks to show where the direct quotes begin and end or edit this writing to properly paraphrase the source author’s arguments. To properly paraphrase, make sure that words and sentence structure are altered to avoid hewing too closely to the original text.  
    

4. Are there any research references in the paper, whether embedded in sentences or indicated in in-text citations, that do NOT have a corresponding citation in the Works Cited page? If so, add citations to the Works Cited page to ensure that judges and opponents can find these sources as needed.
    

5. Are there any citations in the Works Cited page that are not referenced in the paper? If so, delete those citations from the Works Cited page OR add appropriate in-text citations or embedded references to show where that research was used in the paper.
    

6. Did any student writer use AI for drafting or writing any portion of the paper? If yes, that content must be removed or rewritten in the student's own words before submission. AI use for brainstorming or research does not need to be flagged.
    

7. Do the source authors agree with the conclusion that the student paper is making? If not, then students should consider using alternative sources to avoid misconstruing the author's arguments.