International Public Speaking Competition: How to Enter and Prepare for ESU IPSC

Begin with the organization responsible for selection in your country or region. The ESU IPSC overview describes a route through national or regional competitions, with selected participants progressing to the international week in London. Its general age description is 16–20; the applicable age cutoff and other eligibility details belong in your edition's rules.

Treat entry as three connected tasks: finding the right contact, establishing that you can enter, and completing the required selection process. A teacher can help track these tasks while the student develops the speech.

Confirm eligibility, application requirements, and performance rules in writing. A general event description cannot tell you which age assessment date, selection procedure, or participation conditions your organizer applies.

Use this checklist when you contact the national organization:

• Eligibility: What is the age assessment date, and are there nationality, residence, school, or previous-participation conditions?
• Entry route: Who may apply, is nomination required, and which local or national selection stages apply?
• Application: Which forms, supporting documents, permissions, fees, and deadlines apply to this edition?
• Speech requirements: Which theme, language requirements, time limits, notes, and visual-aid rules apply at each stage?
• Other tasks: Are impromptu speaking and questions included, and what preparation conditions apply?
• Support and conduct: How should you request access arrangements, and what are the rules on coaching, collaboration, AI assistance, originality, and attribution?

Ask for the current rule documents as well as answers to individual questions. For a student under 18, a teacher or guardian can also ask which consent, travel, and supervision arrangements require attention. These are matters to clarify, not assumed entry conditions.

Adapt this email:

Subject: IPSC selection route and current entry rules

Dear [organizer],

I am [name], aged [age], studying/living in [country or region]. I would like to understand the route into your IPSC selection process.

Could you send the current eligibility rules, application instructions, selection stages, and performance requirements? Please also confirm the age assessment date, nomination process, and rules on coaching and AI assistance.

My teacher/contact is [name, if relevant]. Please let me know whom to contact about access or participation arrangements.

Thank you,
[name]

After the reply, make a single checklist with a task, owner, and confirmed due date for each requirement. Mark unanswered questions as pending. For example, “teacher confirms nomination procedure” is an actionable task; “sort out entry” leaves responsibility unclear.

If two documents give different instructions, send the organizer a focused comparison: name both documents, quote the conflicting requirement, and ask which version applies to your stage. For example: “The invitation permits notes on a device, while the attachment mentions paper cards. Which instruction should I follow for the national heat?” Keep the answer beside the relevant rule and share it with your teacher. This turns a vague concern into a question the organizer can resolve before you rehearse under the wrong conditions.

Develop one claim that a listener can understand, challenge, and remember. A broad theme gives you a starting point; your speech needs a position within it. Use the actual theme supplied by your organizer when drafting your entry.

For practice, start with a broad idea about community. “Community matters” offers little to debate. “Schools should give students responsibility for one shared space” creates a specific proposal. You can explain who would act, what would change, and why the change would help.

Example: “A common room becomes a shared responsibility when students help decide how it works. I would give a rotating student group responsibility for proposing its use, listening to other users, and explaining decisions. Adults would retain responsibility for safety and resources. The aim is to let students practice making choices that affect someone beyond their own friendship group.”

This example gives you an argument to test: would rotating responsibility broaden participation, or would confident students still dominate? The answer could improve the proposal by adding a way for quieter students to contribute.

Build your own claim with three questions:

1. What exactly do I want the audience to believe or reconsider?
2. Which reason makes that claim worth taking seriously?
3. What reasonable objection would require me to qualify it?

Write the claim in one sentence before expanding the opening. If you need several unrelated claims to explain your speech, choose the strongest and move the others into supporting roles. Keep a note explaining how your chosen angle connects to the official theme so you can check that relationship during revision.

Give the speech a clear argument, then attach evidence to the particular claim it supports. A useful working outline is: opening situation, central claim, two connected reasons, a serious objection, and a closing implication. Adapt its length after you know the relevant time limit.

Use the Pyramid Principle to test the hierarchy: can each example be traced back to a reason, and each reason back to the central claim? If a striking anecdote supports none of those reasons, remove it.

Create one evidence card for every factual statement that needs support. Include:

• The exact claim you intend to make aloud.
• The source title, author or institution, URL, and publication date.
• The passage, finding, or definition that supports the claim.
• The population, place, period, or conditions the source actually covers.
• Your spoken attribution and the limitation you need to preserve.

Read the underlying source rather than relying on a search snippet. Check whether a report describes an association, an experiment, an opinion, or a recommendation. Your wording should preserve that distinction. A finding about one school does not automatically describe schools everywhere.

For the shared-space proposal, label predictions as predictions until you have evidence. “This could give students practice in negotiating priorities” expresses a proposed benefit without inventing a measured result.

The Ethos-Pathos-Logos framework offers another editing check: explain why the evidence deserves trust, make its human consequences understandable, and show how it supports your reasoning. Emotion can make the issue concrete; it cannot supply a missing factual link.

Assume listeners do not share your school routines, local references, or background knowledge. Explain the setting in a sentence, define an unfamiliar term, and make the relationship between your example and claim explicit.

For the shared-space example, describe a common room as a place students use between lessons before explaining its governance. Replace an unexplained committee abbreviation with the people who actually make the decision. Ask a listener from outside your school to summarize the proposal. Their version will show where your explanation needs work.

Rehearse delivery in short sections. Pause after the central claim, emphasize the words that distinguish your proposal, and finish each sentence before moving to the next idea. The guide to improving public speaking can support this broader delivery work.

Prepare questions in three groups: clarification, evidence, and challenge. A teacher or practice partner can ask:

• “What do you mean by student responsibility?”
• “What would show that your proposal had helped?”
• “Who would lose out under this arrangement?”
• “What happens when students disagree?”
• “Which part of your argument is least certain?”

Answer the question in your first sentence, then give the reason or example needed to support it. The PREP Method gives you a compact pattern: point, reason, example, point.

Example: “Adults would still make safety decisions. Students would propose uses and explain priorities within those boundaries. For instance, they could discuss how to balance quiet study with group activities.”

If you do not know an answer, identify the gap and say what you would need to investigate. A precise limitation is more useful than a confident guess. During rehearsal, have your partner vary the wording so you learn to listen rather than recite a stored response.

Prepare for a sustained argument, spontaneous thinking, and questions, while using your edition's instructions to determine the actual tasks. The ESU's 2025–26 participant and coach handbook includes prepared speeches, impromptu speeches, and questions. It is a historical format reference; national rounds may differ, and it does not settle the requirements of a later edition.

For a prepared speech, practice keeping the argument intact when you shorten an example or recover after losing your place. For spontaneous speaking, practice choosing one defensible point quickly and supporting it with a simple example. For questions, practice identifying the exact issue raised before answering.

Try a short practice prompt such as “What makes a shared space welcoming?” Choose a position, explain one reason, illustrate it, and return to the point. Set your own rehearsal interval initially, then adjust it to the confirmed event conditions.

Use impromptu speech examples to study compact structures and impromptu speech topics for varied drills. Treat those as practice resources. Keep a note after each attempt: where did the answer become clear, and which detail sent it off course?

Use SayNow AI to rehearse a section, review feedback, and repeat it with one specific improvement. Its personalized speaking practice includes real-time feedback on delivery, structure, clarity, and persuasiveness, alongside communication frameworks.

Choose the public-speaking scenario and work from a short outline of your claim, reason, and example. Speak the opening aloud, then review the feedback for one issue, such as a claim that arrives too late. Move the claim forward and try the opening again before changing another part.

Next, rehearse a brief explanation of your evidence. Check whether a listener can distinguish the source's finding from your interpretation. Keep a simple practice note showing the change you made and what still needs work.

Use teacher-led rehearsals to apply the organizer's judging criteria. Start a focused rehearsal in the public-speaking scenario, then bring the revised section to your next practice session.

Use this suggested four-week training plan once you have identified your entry route. Adjust the workload to your school commitments and the confirmed selection schedule. Each week should produce something you can use in the next rehearsal.