Scott's Corporate Debate Arguments

[ResIpsaLoc@aol.com]

I agree with the desire to keep research-based debate available, and think
that if something isn't done, there is going to be a winnowing-out of smaller
programs. In the last four years, I have coached or assisted informally three
teams: Miami, Florida International University, and UF. Only one of those
teams will be going to nationals.

While it is possible that I have a black thumb for debate programs, the real
problems lies in the area of making debate accessible for non-scholarship
debaters. At both FIU and UF, my debaters were given no money for debate,
limited copy support, no materials support, and had Lexis only at the
library. Almost all of the students worked at least parttime. Bluntly put,
these debaters are at a huge handicap, compared to well-funded teams.

At the CEDA level, there does not seem to be a practical way to limit
research or evidence, so the only thing I can think of is to adopt a strategy
similar to that used by the NCAA, wherein non-scholarship teams are allowed
compete against other non-scholarship teams, regardless of conference or
geographical location. The way this could work for CEDA would be to have a
seperate points list maintained for non-scholarship teams. This could then be
used by the teams that place well as ammunition in their fights with
administrations for more funding. 

Any other suggestions?

Mike Morris
Assistant Debate Coach
University of Florida

---

• Prev by Date: No Subject
• Next by Date: [Fwd: Religion and Debate]
• Prev by thread: Looking for SRJC-Kristi Kim
• Next by thread: [Fwd: Religion and Debate]
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread
  • Author

---

Archive created by Jonathan Stanton (jonathan@cs.jhu.edu)
Return to main CEDA-L Archive Page