[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
[Date Index] [Thread Index] [Author Index]
Return to main CEDA-L Archive Page

Strawfigure?

Anyway, I just wanted to clarify what I view as the problem. I think the
students we send off into the world are fighter jets in a world of
biplanes when it comes to cognitive function and verbalization. The
problem is, *presentationally* they're like Harleys at an equestrian
show. It really disturbs me that several of the Georgians who are here
now couldn't speak to an audience of non-debate people without <a>
freaking out -- the same folks who can debate for a crowd of hundreds of
their fellow debaters go ballistic at the thought of giving a piddly
little *pre-manuscripted* speech for an audience of strangers, even
after several days of practice, and <b> muttering, slurring, and using
debate cliches. In an episode that has passed into Georgia folklore, a
year or so ago I asked one of the debaters to explain a particular
argument to me in plain english. The argument had been written by a
non-debater, so obviously it could be described without debate lingo.
And yet, even after a prolonged discussion of possible plain-english
formulations of the argument, the best the debater could do were phrases
like "it's a blurring scenario."

I don't think either Professor Hunt or I said that debate was impairing
debaters' educational progress. Far from it -- the farthest possible!
But debaters do get *tunnel vision* in their acquisition of
communication skills. The only communicating that gets their dedicated
attention is a mode that is useful in no other situation on earth. I
believe in it because of a dozen lessons that it teaches and skills that
it fosters that can't be attained any other way to the same degree, but
if debaters end their careers with their communicative gearshift stuck
in "2AC overdrive," then I think we need to encourage them to branch out
and channel what they're learning into parallel experiences that enable
them to articulate their arguments to audiences without the crutch of
debatese and the barrier of speed. It's so danged **easy** -- the one
debater who did _two_ audience debates made great strides between the
two! What they do gives them all the equipment they need to become great
speakers. We just need to make sure that along the way they get to apply
the skills in ways that will be useful after they leave. Calcifying the
tools of an esoteric learning exercise is not the way to go.

Doyle Srader
University of Georgia
<706> 548-9938
Follow-Ups:
Archive created by Jonathan Stanton (jonathan@cs.jhu.edu)
Return to main CEDA-L Archive Page