As a brief recap, Extemp substructure is the internal organization of each point. The structure encompasses multiple claims and warrants woven together to tell a three-sentence story. As Bradley Wascher explains, there isn’t a correct or incorrect strategy to substructure for each question, but adhering to the following guidelines can make it easier to choose your question and prepare your speech.
Descriptive Questions – Status Quo/Change
These questions generally ask for potential changes and impacts over time. As a previous Extemper’s Bible article describes, this type of over-time explanation is “a great way to help the audience know about how we got to the current state of affairs and where we’ll go moving forward”.
“A” subclaim: Status Quo
- Typically characterized as the past or the situation before the question
“B” subclaim: Change
- Typically characterized as the current / future, or how the situation is after the question
Example: Faye Zhang, runner-up in the 2023 USX NSDA Final, courtesy of the NSDA.
How will a robust, organized labor movement impact this country?
Point 1: By better protecting worker rights in America
A: The government once spent billions to better enforce labor standards, but in 2022, the US spent significantly less to find all the worker abuse in the country today
- Analysis: Zhang is establishing the status quo. She compares the past to the present, by first quantifying how much money the US spent decades ago to enforce labor standards, before comparing that number to the starkly lower one in 2022. Therefore, this has caused a lack of compliance amongst large corporations.
B: Labor unions allow us to work with government agencies in a way that better catches when companies abuse worker rights
- Analysis: Zhang is predicting what the future could look like after a robust, organized labor movement. She explains, using sources, what specific labor unions can do in connection with her point.
C: That’s why a stronger labor movement would make our country more equitable
- Analysis: She concludes the point after clearly describing the potential effect of this movement on workers and their rights, such as those at Amazon. While there wasn’t any new information or analysis in this C, the purpose of this section was to link back to the question/point/tag.
Adopting a similar format, you can apply the Past-Present-Future structure. In this case, the “A” subclaim is the past, the “B” subclaim is the present, and the “C” subclaim is the future. This example is adapted from that same article.
Example: Christopher Maximos in the 2019 USX NSDA final, courtesy of the NSDA.
How will the Green New Deal influence future environmental legislation?
Point 1: By forcing bipartisan cooperation on climate change
A: Previously, Republicans denied climate change and had no policy in 2012/2016
- Analysis: Maximos is examining the past. Historically, Republicans didn’t have a clear climate policy. By providing a relevant understanding of the past, especially when juxtaposed with the present/future, you can make your analysis more impressive by establishing a clear beginning to the story.
B: Now, Republicans care more about climate change
- Analysis: Maximos is examining the present: the fact that 64% of Republicans now believe climate change is a “severe threat” demonstrating their changing attitudes over time.
C: Down the line, public concern over GND leads to other forms of clean energy legislation
- Analysis: Maximos is examining the future: he lays out how the GND is symptomatic of growing concern over climate change, but Republicans think the proposal is too extreme. This has forced Republicans to lay out other, more moderate solutions.
Impact: This could lead to solutions like a carbon tax
- Analysis: While this impact isn’t necessarily needed to answer this question, Maximos takes one step further to make his analysis more unique. In this impact, he outlines steps we could see Republicans taking to counteract the Green New Deal while addressing climate change.
Evaluative Questions – Expectation / Verification or Violation
These questions generally ask you to evaluate whether something can or will happen.
“A” subclaim: Expectation
- Condition or benchmark that must be met for the condition to be true
- Claim: “In order for to happen, [condition] must be met”
- Be sure to explain the logic behind that theory (“why” warrant) and give a concrete example or case study for it happening (“how” warrant)
“B” subclaim: Verification / Violation
- Whether that condition will (verification) or will not (violation) happen
- Explain why and how it is/is not meeting that condition
Example: Daniel Kind in the 2022 NSDA IX Final, courtesy of the NSDA.
Will the Russian brain continue while Russia is at war with Ukraine?
Point 1: Yes, because technology services will have a difficult time staying in Russia
A: The key reason for the brain drain is intellectuals and entrepreneurs are a key part of the technological sector
- Analysis: Kind is stating that, in order for a brain drain to continue, it must involve the critical intellectuals and entrepreneurs who are involved in the currently threatened technological sector. The removal of these workers is the root cause of the brain drain.
B: Companies are pulling out of Russia because workers coming in and out of the country can no longer work in this sector
- Analysis: The removal of these technological services impacts domestic workers who can’t work with international companies. This means international workers don’t have a reason to come to Russia to work.
C: The technology sector is so important, and as companies pull out because of Ukraine, people are going to continue leaving
- Analysis: Kind used an effective power line to conclude the point here. This statement summarized the point about the technological sector, and how their leaving from Russia will cause workers to leave as well, leading to a continued brain drain.
Prescriptive Questions – Problem/Solution
These questions will ask for solutions to problems.
“A” subclaim: Problem
- A smaller portion of the problem related to the problem described in the question
“B” subclaim: Solution
- Your recommendation to fix that problem with specific implementation
- Be detailed in the warrants by including at least one proper noun and one statistic at each point. Also, consider turning problems into solutions (for example, if there is a $10 million lack of funding, then say it needs $11 million)
- Occasionally it is good to admit that your solution is not perfect, by stating rhetoric such as “it isn’t a silver bullet”. The Toulmin model, as described by the Purdue OWL, recommends doing this to seem more credible and realistic. Acknowledging that a claim may not be true in all circumstances builds the image of a thoughtful and unbiased thinker.
Example: McKinley Paltzik, 2023 IX NSDA Champion, courtesy of the NSDA.
How should the world prepare for the appearance of new diseases due to climate change?
Point 1: By fighting water scarcity in African nations
A: Nations with high rates of drought have a higher risk of developing new waterborne diseases, happening in countries across Africa
- Analysis: Paltzik is describing the problem: African nations with drought, a form of climate disaster, have a 68% higher risk of disease. This drought is causing a lack of clean water, causing many to resort to contaminated water.
B: A solution is already being implemented by the United Nations, with an $11bn plan to develop new water infrastructure
- Analysis: Paltzik is describing her solution: the UN-funded infrastructure would not only create more clean water but also ensure that climate change doesn’t spell the end of the lives of children already dying from water diseases.
C: Therefore, the world must fight water scarcity to prepare for the appearance of new diseases due to climate change
- Analysis: In this case, Paltzik doesn’t explicitly say this concluding statement. Instead, she describes the additional benefit of this solution by pulling a statistic, removing the need for the cookie-cutter statement, and still finishing the point with a strong and succinct method.
Extemp is truly a form of art, and there isn’t a right or wrong structure to a question. Some questions may have two or more possibilities for substructure, while for others one structure makes the most sense. Hopefully, these suggestions can help you expand your strategies for selecting and prepping questions.
In the next article, we’ll go over more forms of substructure.