Resources · Quick reference

The four types of World Schools motions

Every World Schools motion belongs to one of four families, and each family places a different burden on the teams. Identifying the type is the first job of the prep hour: a team that misreads the motion type spends eight minutes a speech proving the wrong thing.

Each type below comes with ten World Schools practice motions, all debatable on both sides: forty in total, enough for a season of scrimmages, timed prep-hour drills, or solo casebuilding. A good session is one motion, one hour of prep, one judged round. For more World Schools motions, the full motion bank has 12,000+ real tournament motions, including every Worlds motion since 1994.

1

Policy motions

“This House would…” · “This House believes that X should…”

The proposition must defend a specific policy, with a model that defines how the motion would actually be implemented. The opposition can defend the status quo or propose a countermodel: a different policy that solves the same problem their way.

The burden

Prove your policy works better in the real world than the alternative.

Where it's won

Real-world knowledge, feasibility, and the consequences of each side’s policy. Vague models lose; the team with the more concrete picture of implementation usually controls the debate.

10 policy practice motions

Proposition must model the policy; opposition may countermodel. Drill implementation detail and real-world consequences.

  1. 01This House would ban private education.
  2. 02This House believes that the United States should implement a universal basic income.
  3. 03This House would make voting compulsory.
  4. 04This House would ban targeted political advertising on social media.
  5. 05This House would require social media platforms to verify the age of all users.
  6. 06This House would abolish standardized testing in university admissions.
  7. 07This House would impose a carbon tax on imported goods.
  8. 08This House would pay college athletes a salary.
  9. 09This House believes that developing countries should nationalize their natural-resource industries.
  10. 10This House would grant legal personhood to rivers and forests.

Search every policy motion in the motion bank

2

Value motions

“This House believes that…”

There is no policy to defend. Instead, each team argues that its side of a principle, trend, or moral claim is preferable. These are debates about how the world should be understood, not what should be done.

The burden

Prove your side of the value claim is more true or more desirable, on balance.

Where it's won

Analytical depth and moral persuasion. The winning team usually controls the framework: whose measure of “harm” or “good” the judge ends up using.

10 value practice motions

No model to defend: win the framework. Drill metrics, moral weighing, and framing.

  1. 01This House believes that nationalism does more harm than good.
  2. 02This House believes that social media has done more harm than good for democracy.
  3. 03This House believes that developing countries should prioritise environmental protection over economic growth.
  4. 04This House believes that influencer culture has harmed young people.
  5. 05This House believes that charity is a poor substitute for justice.
  6. 06This House believes that the pursuit of prestige does more harm than good in education.
  7. 07This House believes that artificial intelligence will do more good than harm for workers.
  8. 08This House believes that celebrity activism does more good than harm.
  9. 09This House believes that competitive sports do more good than harm for children.
  10. 10This House believes that globalization has done more good than harm for cultural diversity.

Search every value motion in the motion bank

3

Actor motions

“This House, as X, would…” · “This House, as X, believes that…”

Both teams argue from the perspective of a named actor (a country, a movement, an institution). The question is not what is best for the world in general, but what this actor should do given its own interests and values.

The burden

Prove your side is preferable from the actor’s perspective, not from everyone’s.

Where it's won

Characterization. The team that builds the more credible picture of the actor’s incentives, constraints, and priorities gets to decide what “winning” means for that actor.

10 actor practice motions

Argue from the named actor’s perspective. Drill characterization: incentives, constraints, and what “winning” means for the actor.

  1. 01This House, as Ukraine, would pursue a ceasefire with Russia.
  2. 02This House, as the feminist movement, believes that embracing traditional femininity undermines gender equality.
  3. 03This House, as the environmental movement, would embrace nuclear power.
  4. 04This House, as a small island nation, would sell citizenship to fund climate adaptation.
  5. 05This House, as the labor movement, would oppose fully remote work.
  6. 06This House, as the African Union, would adopt a single continental currency.
  7. 07This House, as a parent, would prohibit their child from social media until age 16.
  8. 08This House, as the international art community, would return all colonial-era artifacts to their countries of origin.
  9. 09This House, as a developing country, would prioritize STEM education over the humanities.
  10. 10This House, as the scientific community, would refuse to collaborate with militaries.

Search every actor motion in the motion bank

4

Regret motions

“This House regrets…”

A counterfactual: would the world have been better off if the thing named in the motion had never happened? The proposition regrets it; the opposition defends it. Neither side gets to propose fixing it. The debate is about the alternative history.

The burden

Prove the world without X would have been better (or worse) than the world with it.

Where it's won

Imaginative but disciplined counterfactual analysis. The critical move is defining the most plausible alternative world. Teams that regret something without saying what would have filled the gap lose to teams that do.

10 regret practice motions

Debate the counterfactual world. Drill defining the most plausible alternative history, and holding both teams to it.

  1. 01This House regrets the professionalisation of sports.
  2. 02This House regrets the rise of the gig economy.
  3. 03This House regrets the dominance of the college degree as a hiring signal.
  4. 04This House regrets the commercialization of space exploration.
  5. 05This House regrets the rise of true-crime entertainment.
  6. 06This House regrets the invention of the “like” button.
  7. 07This House regrets the narrative that hard work guarantees success.
  8. 08This House regrets the decline of local newspapers.
  9. 09This House regrets the gamification of education.
  10. 10This House regrets the rise of fast fashion.

Search every regret motion in the motion bank

How to get the most out of a practice motion

  1. 1

    Prep both sides before you pick one. Ten minutes sketching proposition and opposition cases teaches you more about a motion than an hour on one side. It is also what you must do at a tournament before sides are assigned.

  2. 2

    Run real conditions. One hour, no internet, printed materials only. Practicing with your phone open builds habits that fail on tournament day.

  3. 3

    Finish with adjudication. A round without feedback is just talking. Have someone judge on the 40/40/20 criteria and give one action item per speaker.

  4. 4

    Rotate the families. If your team only ever debates policy motions, your first regret motion at a tournament will feel like a different sport. Cycle through all four types.

Common questions

What is a countermodel in World Schools Debate?

+

In a policy debate, the opposition is not required to defend the status quo. A countermodel is an alternative policy the opposition proposes to solve the same problem, which shifts the debate from "policy vs. nothing" to "your policy vs. ours." It is powerful but binding: once you countermodel, you must defend it as thoroughly as proposition defends theirs.

How should prep change based on the motion type?

+

The first ten minutes of prep should identify the type, because it sets the burdens. Policy motions need a model and implementation detail; value motions need a framework and a metric; actor motions need a characterization of the actor; regret motions need a defined counterfactual world. Teams that prep every motion the same way routinely miss their real burden.

Are some motion types easier for proposition or opposition?

+

Each type shifts the ground differently. Regret motions often favor opposition because defending the messy real world is easier than proving a cleaner alternate history. Policy motions place a heavier creative burden on proposition, which must build the model. Good teams train all four types rather than hoping for a favorable draw.

Ready to drill? Pick a motion from any list above, and the prep planner gives you the schedule to run them on.

Train all four families.

Our training cycle rotates motion types deliberately, so no draw at a tournament is a surprise.

Book a Consultation