APDA sponsors over 50 tournaments a year, all in a parliamentary format, as well as a national championship in late April.
APDA members stage weekly debating tournaments, each at a different university and occurring throughout the academic year.
Starting with the 2007–2008 season, qualification was earned through year-long performance, gauged by how far debaters advance at tournaments of varying sizes.
[6] In addition, APDA sponsors a novice tournament at the beginning of the season, a pro-am tournament once per semester, and the North American Debating Championships, which are held every other year in the United States and include top teams from the United States and Canada.
At the end of the debate season, APDA gives awards to the top ten teams, speakers, and novices of the year.
Some teams do have professional coaches, but these are usually recently retired debaters who wish to stay involved with the circuit.
Traditionally when standing on a point of information some debaters extend one hand palm up, holding the back of the head with the other.
This pose originated in old British Parliamentary etiquette: an MP would adopt the position to secure his wig and show that he was not carrying a weapon.
Since the Opposition team arrives at the round with no prior knowledge of the case, some kinds of resolutions are not permitted to ensure a fair debate.
They include common public policy debates (school vouchers, term limits, euthanasia, capital punishment, race-based affirmative action) as well as more unconventional ideas (mandatory organ donation, proxy voting for children, private criminal prosecution, and innumerable others).
Cases involving the policies of particular organizations are popular as well, such as debates surrounding university speech codes.
Cases about the relative benefits of the Rawlsian “veil of ignorance” versus the Hobbesian “state of nature”, for instance, are commonplace.
Various aspects of policy related to Iraq, Israel, North Korea, and Cuba are frequent debate topics.
Hypothetical moral dilemmas are popular topics for debate, given that they can be discussed with a minimum of specific knowledge and a maximum of argumentation.
They can range from completely fantastical situations (“If you had definitive proof that one particular religion was the true religion, should you reveal it to society?”) to unlikely occurrences (“Should you kill one person to save five other people?”) to dilemmas we face every day (“You see a homeless person on the street, should you give him money you have in your pocket?”) The infinite number of hypothetical situations that can give rise to moral dilemmas make many moral hypothetical cases unique.
Although somewhat less common than tangible moral hypotheticals, all aspects of philosophy make their way into debate rounds.
While parliamentary debate had been popular in America for some time, there was no proper organization that existed to schedule tournaments, officiate a national championship or resolve disputes.
This award is given to rising fourth-year debaters who, in the opinion of its prior recipient(s), best represent(s) Bo Missonis.
This symbolizes a zest for debate for its own sake accompanied by a certain individuality or style, and in promoting a kind environment for the league.
Created in 2007, the Jeff Williams award is presented to the fourth-year debater who, in the course of their APDA career, has earned the most finishes in the top ten of any OTY category.
These contributions may be of any nature, but must be characterized by devotion to APDA and/or its ideals above and beyond that expected of an individual in the position of the honoree.