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

Re: Future of Debate

LISTEN TO ME sucked.  I'd rather swallow a bullet than debate like that.
Prior to my first year as an NDT debater, fresh out of high school, I
attended the Arizona Debate Institute.  The opening lecture was Clark
Olsen ranting about "the death of NDT debate".  Quite a downer to hear
that this thing you want so much to do is *gulp* DYING before you even get
a chance to play.  That was 1988.  Clark and his troupe denounced that
wacky "NDT style" and marched indignantly off to CEDA.  Well, less than 10
years later, I'll wager 10 bucks you couldn't tell a CEDA round from an
NDT round (and not just because we're debating the same topic).  Looked at
from this perspective, I have a hard time understanding why folks think
NDT/CEDA is dying.  The numbers may have been dropping in the past, and
there are still justified concerns about continuing reductions in
membership, but keep in mind that this past year was the beginning of a
grand experiment that could substantially increase the strength of both
organizations.  We shouldn't fear diversity of formats, nor should we fret
about those folks who decide that this game is simply too rigorous
(whether those perceptions are fueled by research burdens, travel
schedules, speaking style, or whatever). We should focus instead on
extending our outreach to students in high school, to make them aware of
debate opportunities in our joint community, to put interested students in
touch with our programs, and to foster a cooperative relationship between
NDT/CEDA programs and the high school communities in their area.  I've
spent the past four weeks teaching debate to a middle school class in
Dallas, an experiment intended to expose students to debate before they
have to choose electives in high school.  7 of 18 students have requested
to change their schedules for next year so that they can be in the debate
class.  This four-week unit is being fashioned into a mini-curriculum to
be integrated into the 8th grade Speech class, and the materials will be
offered to any other junior high/middle school that wants to participate.
Our time is better spent with outreach initiatives such as this, since the
alternative is to address the concerns of our intercollegiate colleagues
who've chosen to leave, and the only way to please these folks is to
RADICALLY alter the content and form of NDT/CEDA debate.  Rather than bend
to the will of those unwilling to put in the time and effort, let's go
find the folks that do.  


Now, with that said, does that mean that we shouldn't address other
issues, such as "burn out" , the length of the season  or of individual
tournaments, etc.?  Absolutely not.  It simply means that we should
address these issues without the emotional charge of a seige mentality.
Our activity isn't doomed.  Clark was simply wrong (I'm sure you're all
shocked).  We'll be fine if we just step out of our offices and into our
communities.

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