Bring Back the Illinois State Tournament: Inequities in State Circuits

I was first introduced to debate during my freshman year of high school. It was the most enjoyable activity I’d ever been a part of, and has remained the pinnacle of the podium ever since. From my first tournament in September to the final local circuit event of the year in January, I only won one trophy (3rd place in what was essentially a JV chamber), but it was my commitment that helped me stand out and get me selected to my school’s state team.

That dedication all paid off at the Illinois High School Association (IHSA) State Debate tournament. I made it to the semifinals! It was an amazing experience, and I’ve never turned back since. That summer, I applied to Equality in Forensics for the contributor role, using my placement at IHSA as a large part of my application.

Two years later, that same influential tournament no longer exists. The same IHSA State tournament that was so important to my debate journey is not taking place in 2024.

The reason for its cancellation was a lack of participation. The IHSA requires that 8% of Illinois High Schools, 58 to be precise, participate in any IHSA activity for it to run in a given year. Last year, there were 55 schools at the IHSA State Debate Tournament... just 3 below the minimum requirement. The lack of just 3 schools at the State tournament took away the opportunity that sparked my continued commitment to debate for the remaining 55. The removal of such a pivotal state tournament has stripped hundreds of seniors of the opportunity to be a State Champion or Finalist in what for many of them is their final year of competitive debate.

I understand the difficulties in running something like this. State Tournaments are expensive, and cost large quantities of time and resources in order to be run effectively. Having a requirement for schools that attend is entirely justified. But the fact that Illinois could not reach that minimum only highlights the inequities within the state’s debate circuits.

Since the speech and debate circuits in the state are separate, many schools only choose to have one or the other. When speech tournaments hold over a dozen different events, compared to a debate tournament’s mere two or three (or in the case of the independent Illinois Congressional Debate Association, only congress), it’s no surprise that low-income schools are far more likely to opt for the speech alternative and skip a debate program entirely.

This duality isn’t uncommon; the IHSA continues to hold their annual speech tournament that has Regionals, Sections, and State with substantially higher involvement than its debate counterpart. Debate has historically only gone straight to State, hovering just above the minimum school requirement. Over a dozen Illinois High Schools have well-established speech teams, but not even a single competitor competing in PF, LD, CX, or Congress. It’s this inaccessibility of debate that has caused the problems highlighted by IHSA’s cancellation of its State Debate Tournament.

Debate should become more accessible in Illinois, plain and simple. Resources and curriculum should exist to help schools just starting a new debate program. Administrators should be open to students who wish to create said teams — if you have a Model UN or Speech Team, that shouldn’t restrict or prevent the formation of a Debate Team.

The captains of the ICDA are already working on creating real solutions to these problems, many of which have very good chances of making positive changes to the circuit. After complicated PO regulations were instituted at the onset of this year, a guideline sheet is actively in the works to make presiding easier. The team captains are leading recruitment efforts, expanding debate further through social media and directed promotion to schools who don’t have debate programs. Student-run nonprofits in Illinois (including Equality in Forensics) have successfully created curriculum that teams can utilize when needed.

At the moment, these goals are only being planned out, with no substantive action currently being taken. That should change as soon as possible. As much as these goals have potential for success, that only happens when they are acted on. The captains that are progressing through these variety of initiatives should work to make them a reality sooner rather than later, for their benefits are needed right now.

And beyond the actions taken by the captains of the ICDA, much of that work is limited to the scope of that specific debate league, whose name itself explains its limitations exclusively in the event of Congressional Debate. Other debate events don’t have the large networks of captains and coaches willing to make expansion of equitability a top priority, or put in the work to make that objective a successful endeavor. Similar efforts need to be made in PF,

LD, and CX to make those events equally as equitable (or at least make attempts at such equality). Be it resources, funding, or expansion, similar initiatives need to be started in order for Illinois debate to be successful for all schools long-term. But most of all, IHSA should reinstate its State Tournament. While there’s a temporary tournament held at the same location aimed at replicating what the IHSA was able to give debaters, the solution isn’t permanent. And even if it was, nothing can replace the authentic experience the IHSA provides.

The debate circuit in Illinois is fraught with inequities, but nowhere is that more obvious than the cancellation of the IHSA State Tournament. It’s time the tournament is reinstated.