Rural speech and debate has always had its ups and downs. Whether it’s a lack of centralization, resources, or geography, there’s no lack of obstacles for rural forensics. Despite these issues, there’s one component of rural speech and debate that often goes unnoticed: representation. 

In forensics, rural states tend to be smaller than their urban counterparts. They’re geographically vast, and they lack competitive opportunities, including resources and tournaments. Let’s take West Virginia, for example. This past year, West Virginia hosted its first district tournament in several years. Only one event was held: Lincoln-Douglas Debate. In total, only seven competitors from four different schools participated. 

As a competitor at this tournament, I was pretty confident I would at least make it to the semi-finals. After hours of debating, I was shocked to learn that not only did I break to semis, but I also finaled, though I wouldn’t end up winning. Following that tournament, the person who won our tournament would’ve gone to the NSDA tournament, but that didn’t happen. It turns out, that competitor was unable to go. In most other cases, the bid would’ve trickled down to the runner-up — except, according to the NSDA High School Unified Manual, West Virginia’s tournament was too small for that to happen.

While this wouldn’t be as huge of a deal if we were considering one district in a state, this is an entire state with only one district. Because one competitor was unable to go the national tournament, no one from West Virginia could go. Sure, the Last Chance Qualifier is an option — but how is that fair to the competitors who couldn’t even compete at our district tournament in their chosen event because there simply weren’t enough entries? At our tournament, several events were cancelled because of the lack of schools or entries (NSDA rules state that there must be at least four competitors per event, with at least two different schools present). 

Beyond our district qualifier, competitors from rural areas are featured at other national tournaments. In the past three years, my state has only had three finalists at these tournaments: one finalist in declamation at NCFL in 2023, one NCFL finalist in congress in 2024, and one TOC finalist in OI in 2025. In the past several years, no competitor from West Virginia has attended the NIETOC. 

Similar to the issue with our district tournament, competitors from rural states like West Virginia are hardly seen at these tournaments because we don’t even have a way to qualify to them in the first place. In the past year, there were only two TOC-qualifying tournaments in our state, and one NIETOC-qualifying tournament. To get to any other bid tournament, you would have to travel hours out of state, something most schools in West Virginia simply can’t afford. On the issue of NCFL, we typically can only send three competitors per event. Although this is arguably better than the situation we’re in with the National Speech and Debate Tournament, it’s hardly an improvement. 

Overall, this highlights how isolated rural forensics is and how underrepresented it is at the national level. This leads to several issues of its own: 

1.  Rural competitors receive significantly fewer competitive opportunities than their urban counterparts. Simply put, there are fewer qualifiers for these tournaments that are available to us. Fewer qualifiers mean fewer competitors will be at these national tournaments. 

2. Fewer competitors at national tournaments leads to a decrease in rural representation. Rural states, like West Virginia, are full of diverse perspectives. Although WV News claims that West Virginia is the least diverse state, this couldn’t be farther from the truth. While certain areas may lack racial or economic diversity, no two people in the state have the same experiences or background. West Virginia is a state with a rich history, and the stories of competitors from there are hardly heard. 

3. Because fewer competitors from states like ours compete at national tournaments, our voices frequently go unrecognized. A competitor from an urban state, like California or New York, isn’t going to have the same perspective or awareness to various social issues that a competitor from West Virginia would have. 

Diversity is inherently a large part of what makes forensics impactful. If we all researched, wrote, and memorized the same speeches, things would get boring pretty fast. The whole point of forensics is to listen and inspire change; but who is listening to the rural competitor from the Middle of Nowhere, West Virginia? 

Rural competitors obviously can’t solve this issue on their own. Rather, this issue requires the attention it rightfully deserves in order to truly advocate for change. As more people are aware of how rural forensics is struggling, there’s hope that larger organizations will begin to step up. This could mean offering more online bid opportunities for rural students, reducing the threshold needed for an event to count, or even creating travel stipends to help rural schools attend tournaments they otherwise couldn’t afford.

At its core, forensics is not just about winning trophies or earning bids. It’s about amplifying voices. It’s about giving students, regardless of where they live, the chance to share their stories, their research, and their vision for the world. When rural students are excluded, intentionally or unintentionally, the activity loses some of its richness and purpose. 

Representation in forensics matters. If the community truly values diversity, then it must take steps to ensure rural states aren’t left behind. Because when a student from rural West Virginia stands up and speaks, they’re not just representing themselves — they’re representing a part of America that deserves to be heard.