Flow Sheet for: THB The Lights Out Policy Should be enforced.

Motion: THB: The Lights Out Policy should be enforced. (WINNER - OPP)
Date:	March.6	GOVERNMENT		OPPOSITION
Introduction	Pts	Hweegu		Rachel
Delivery	7.4 /10	Pretty good standard intro, but in the future try a preamble. Good defining motion etc. But getting repetive towards end of arguments.  Need more listing – first second third argument before you dive in.  You do this after but do it during and before your speech.  Need more signposting. Focus on getting angry.	9.3 /10	Nice intro and organization. Good development and clear direction.  Good hook.Energy and volume and flow all excellent. But maybe slowing down at times would help for emphasis.   Arguments good except for this melatonin thing.
Arguments	8.9 /10	Definition of policy – KMLA Kim Daeki wants lights out after midnight.  We support i1 because: 1. Happy and healthy state.  We are young and need more than 6 hours of sleep.  Stats say 7-8 are better. IN Korea, 75% of students have less than 6.  Therefore, students will go to bed earlier.  2.  Students can’t sleep if a light is on.  REM is prevented. Studies show this. 3. Saves electricity.  The environment will profit.  2 hours of lights off in 100 rooms will save a lot.  The math – we can save 288,000 per month.  It’s like a movement.  It makes the world better. In case of emergency, lights can stay on.  But as it stands this voluntary movement saves the environment, energy.  Also this rural area can suffer from blackouts.  We have seen this before and our students are too blame.	9.0 /10	Good intro.  Kim just comes in and tells us “this is how it is” without consulting or discussion.  Good layout of plan of speech. 1. Process of decision. 2. Effective use of time. 3. ? Too fast for me to keep up. Rebutts – plentiful sleep?  We would love to have 6 hours of sleep. It’s not because of the lights. We have work to do.  Turning lights out won’t change that.  Lights are on? Turn them off when you actually sleep. Working the dark is pointless.  Save energy? Voluntary policies don’t work that way.  Contradictory.  Prevent blackouts?  Prove that.  (I agree, but I’d say that late at night blackouts don’t occur because most people are sleeping.  The school has blackouts during the day). Arg 1 – Kim just forced the policy without consulting.  Our opinions weren’t considered.  It sends the message that dorm parents can do whatever they want. Arg 2 – Hinders effective use of time.  Life here is hard.  SAT. AP. Common App.  Can we do this during self study time? No. IR interrupts that.  It all adds up to to little time. The time for us to complete work is beyond 12. BUT this policy messes with that.  The rule is impractical and unrealistic.  A hormone called melatonin responds to light.  Turning lights off will hinder our effective use of time and put us to sleep.
Notes	Tot 16.3 /20	5:34	Tot 18.3 /20	6:10
Rebuttal One		Joowan		Celine
Delivery	8.9 /10	Need to organize and sign post more.  I got lost on some points and wasn’t sure where things were coming from or where they were going.	9.1 /10	Solid work. Good start, and nice attitude and zip. Only issue was rebuttals and arguments lost some structure towards the end. Unclear path and sign posting.
Arguments	8.9 /10	The policy – Mr. Kim’s rule only?  No. We are students and this is beneficial, and it’s not his idea only. The current trend in this world is to save energy. You say students don’t sleep if lights are off – but there are students WHO DON’T work late at night. They facebook and play games.  Turning off the light will encourage them to go to bed. Involuntary – you misunderstand this – we say it should be maintained.  (I’m lost here) Our school has a small generator.  Limit too what we can use. We can prevent overuse. Melatonin arguments does not stand – lights from monitor can prevent it.  (I’m lost). Alternatives are worse – getting penalty points. If promoting does not work, and voluntary fails, penalty points result.  Dorm parents might create penalty points for this.  Mr. Kim will make a timer to turn it off regardless.  So, we should try our best to adhere.  What happens if someone gets hurt and lights can’t go on?	9.0 /10	1st rebuttal – you say we are still students and it’s not just the dorm parents idea. World wide trend etc.  However, you just accept this from the adult world.  Is this right? (nice work on this one).  Our school is following this environmental trend?  I don’t think so.  The cost of this idea is too high. Rebutt 2 – You say students are wasting time with FB and games etc., but we also need free time.  It gets rid of stress. Rebutt 3 – Penalty points – Doesn’t work. (I’m not following this one) Rebutt 4 – Blackouts and save energy – it isn’t going to effect it.  Weak argument. (True) 1st Argument (?) – Students need to use time after 12.  Seniors have more time, but Freshman have less opportunity. (good) Argument – We don’t want the lights off, and we won’t listen if it is voluntary or not.  2 am is the best compromise.
Notes	Tot 17.8 /20	5:34	Tot 18.1 /20	5:57
Rebuttal Two		Ryan		Young Uk
Delivery	9.2 /10	Very good. Nice emotion and organization.	9.1 /10	Very good. Clear path. Calm approach.
Arguments	9.2 /10	Why we win: Reason 1 – they keep asking us how this policy is effective and not need to be forced. This is how.  The dorm parent came and threatened us because the lights were on.  So we feel this is a good way.  A bit of give and take and flexibility – a rule that is made to be broken sometimes.  It can be effective in improving sleep and the cost efficiency. Reason 2 – The other team was inconsistent.  They say they will by drowsy etc. They also say other things. So which is it?  (I agree a bit). Reason 3 – Not sure about this one.  Inconsistent about inconsistent. Our third argument – they totally misread.  The government wants us to reduce and the school is falling in line. We should compromise to make our lives better. We should listen to the schools logic so we don’t need to be forced.	9.1 /10	Two reasons why we win: 1st clash – the policy was created illegitimately. The dorm parent just came and said it.  On one hand he says it is recommended, on the other he comes and threatens things.  The kind of policy has a big impact and should be handled by the student council.  We have to implement  it carefully.  The 2 am policy works and follows the minimum amount of sleep.  12 am is impractical.  It’s the dorm parents act solely. 2nd Clash – Impractical – We have a lot of work.  (Getting a bit lost on this one with POI distraction). 3 – Blackout – doesn’t make sense.  2 am policy never had a problem with blackouts.  We have to get a bigger generator if that’s the case, but it isn’t.
Notes	Tot 18.4 /20	5:55	Tot 18.2 /20	5:47