Jump to content
jacobstime

The State of West Texas Debate

Recommended Posts

While I haven't had much experience with West Texas debate, my partner Hunter Hall has. And like many others from the region, Hunter finds the current state of debate not only sub par but unable to operate the most basic tasks of running and encouraging debate effectively, regardless of having all of the tools at their hands. This isn't about individual tournaments, coaches, or teams but the region as a whole. So, this thread should serve as an open forum to discuss complaints and concerns regarding Debate in West Texas. All I ask of you is to provide a solution, starting point, or method that we can look to to overcome some of these problems. Obviously this thread isn't going to change the world, but lets start by bringing these issues into the light. 

Edited by jacobstime
  • Upvote 5
  • Downvote 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Pardon my grammatical errors and run ons...its late. real late. Also, I am not trying to be a cocky ass hole but I am living proof that these kids can make it in the national community because I was in a bid round last month. 

Edited by Hunter Robert Hall
  • Upvote 5
  • Downvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Do you think this discrimination stems from a sheer competition stand point or a more macro level xenophobia in the region that inevitably spills over into things like debate? And even if it was the latter, do you think debate can still be used as a site of contest?

 

I guess this question is open to anyone.

  • Upvote 5
  • Downvote 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

While I am sympathetic to your struggles in West Texas, it is hard to give much support (which I why I think that no one outside of yourselves has responded to this post) without any specifics as to what exactly happened. The offending poster on your facebook link seems to have deleted their posts, so it is hard to tell what is going on.

 

Rural Texas definitely has its quirks, I was once barred from judging and had my kids threatened with disqualification because I had the audacity to give RFDs (this information was not listed in the tournament invitation). The difference with West Texas seems to be that they are a bit more organized as a community than other small areas.

 

The source of most of these practices (non-disclosure, intentionally lay judges, community restrictions on disclosure/preperation/professional coaching) seems to come from a defensive position. Many members of the rural debate community feel as though they are under attack and that they have to defend their way of debate.

 

Almost every UIL/Rural/Lay/West Texas/Whatever term coach that I've ever met has a genuine interest in promoting the growth of their students and making the activity better. Many of them are eager to learn how to be competitive against the more successful schools in the state. However, these conterproductive fears come up when they think they are being excluded or cornered.

 

The tragedy of debate is that it teaches us to be excellent advocators of an ultimate and definitive truth. This sort of approach seldom works with real opinions where there are no ballots to be won. So my advice is to adopt a tone that is non-combative. Work from a position of how to include and improve the West Texas community, rather than from a position of stating its inadequacies.

Edited by -JD
  • Upvote 5

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thread update: 

 

There has been a covert attempt to bracket out this discussion by certain members of this community. Some "leaders" and "coaches" have chosen to back channel the UIL and TFA directors as well as Hunters future college debate coach in an attempt to hurt his debate future, with NO attempt to reach out to us. We exist outside of your jurisdiction, your move to bracket us out isn't going to work.

 

I think that its important to restate the goals of this thread

 

     1. Diagnostic - Often times problems and solutions are impossible to find without proper understanding of the situation. I am aware that this can make people uncomfortable, but that shouldn't prevent us from fixing it. The issues that Hunter talked about, might seem personal, and it is understandable to be offended. But that doesn't constitute attempting to PUNISH those involved. Attacking Hunter, and other debaters, but CONTACTING and PROVOKING punishment isn't going to make anything better. We all love debate, and we all want to make it better. More experienced debaters should be seen as community leaders, and not competition. This is evident in the attack to disqualify hunter for sharing strategies and evidence at a tournament he WASN'T competing at (which could only help promote clash and dialogue), and THREATENING to forsake truth for a personal vendetta (ie suggesting that you would drop hunter at the UIL state tournament). I will let hunter explain. Those involved will remain anonymous, but they're actions don't get the same luxury.

 

Important distinction - This is not a complaint with conferences. This is not a complaint with style. This is not a complaint with leagues. We understand that people have different views of debate, and adaption can be an effective skill, but PROMOTING lay debate is not good politics (http://i.imgur.com/Dgze8YQ.png And again, we understand wanting to expand the tournament size, but it shouldn't come at the cost of uninformed decisions, because whats the point of those debates if not educate debaters). I understand that sometimes lay judges are your only option, and that sometimes one has to be thrown in the back, but that is completely different from sponsoring it.  

 

     2. Dialogue - This thread isn't going to fix the world and it might make some people uncomfortable, but attempting to STOP the discussion by trying to contact higher authorities to PUNISH us for talking out is far worst. Debate is supposed to train us to be advocates, but killing the discussion because it hurts your feelings makes you look far worst. We agree, there is no perfect solution, and adopting a tone of noncombat is probably productive, but it is very clear that they choose not to listen. We aren't pointing fingers here, we have choose leave all parties anonymous for a reason, and have been as professional as possible. Back-channeling  higher authorities about punishment, and NOT contacting us about it only makes you look bad. This makes those in charge look more concerned with their image than it does at making debate better, when it was clear that was all we wanted. 

 

Solutions aren't easy, and I think the way we talk about things is important, but that doesn't matter if the few in charge decide they don't want it. This is cross-x.com, and I'm a moderator here. You can't stop this discussion and I guarantee that most people want it to happen. We don't do these things because they are easy.  

 

Important distinction - We tried to make this discussion about productive solutions to problems facing West Texas, and continue to do so. We don't want to make this about any one judge, school, or tournament. We think that, as a community, West Texas should work to make it better. One great thing about the internet is the ability to be anonymous, and while we choose to talk from our personal positions, we shouldn't be punished because you don't want to. 

 

To those in positions of authority in West Texas - Please, make an account. You don't have to give your name. You don't have to give your school. You don't have to give your gender, age, or favorite color. But we want you here. We want to here all ideas, regardless of where they are on the spectrum. If you want to be anonymous that is perfectly fine, but refusing to even acknowledge us is only going to make these problems worst. Please, accept our olive branch.

 

     3. There is more to debate than winning. I think everyone seems to agree that often those in charge are afraid to take action because they feel threatened, and thus get defensive and use their power to stop discussions. I hate to be the one to tell you this, but that's not how the real world works. In your academic cloister that might have helped you avoid your fears, but not here. This discussion is going to happen whether you like it or not. As educators you should be striving to expand your students arsenals, and I understand many of you do but we can do better. Hunter will talk about the larger instance of stigma against difference. But FEARING debaters that share evidence in events they aren't competing at is just ludicrous. Your goal, should be to push for evidence sharing and openness is things like disclosure of affirmative and negative arguments, because without doing so you inevitably hurt clash. With topics as big as Space, TI and LA researching negative strategies in virtually impossible unless you know where to start, and in places like West Texas where tournaments are limited and traveling is harder then wouldn't you want debaters to be able to encourage clash and specific resource? Nobody likes not having evidence to read in a debate round, and with topics as broad as these, not even knowing whats going on. Even generic strategies like the spending DA and politics are being increasingly harder to get links for and increasingly easy to answer. While I understand that disclosure is a massive debate in places like WT, thats what this forum is for. 

 

I reiterate this as an open forum discussion to resolve the issues of, but not limited to:

- Increasing better judging in West Texas. (Again, not certain styles but experience)

- Decreasing the competitive inequity between West Texas and the rest of the State pertaining but not limited to: disclosure, argumentative preferences, "speed reading", and the role of the ballot

 

We highly encourage all West Texas and debaters from more rural regions to join this discussion. Maybe solutions can be modeled. 

 

 

Foot nooted ev: https://www.dropbox.com/s/utwxw8odbwrrx0c/Speech%20footnoted%20ev%20for%20crossx.docx

Edited by jacobstime
typos
  • Upvote 7
  • Downvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I believe that Jacob is 100% accurate on everything he said. I would like to begin by letting everyone know. I believe that debate is transformative and can be a loving community. I love ALL of the community. This is not a war against a community in anyway. We as debaters see problems and wish to fix problems. We are asked to do this in every round. Our skills to solve problems does not stop inside a debate round they extend to all life choices. There is a obvious conflict here and we recognize that. We wish to have a effective deliberation. We want everyone to come together and talk. In saying all of these things I wish to clarify some of the issues that Jacob said I would because I think that it is important. 

 

A community should be lead and directed in a positive way. Coercion is not a way to make a more inclusive and loving community. Jacob asked me to clarify this issue of UIL State and the threats that were pushed upon me as a individual. I will do so now. At a NFL district I was unable to debate because my partner could not attend. I entered into International extemp to stay on my feet speaking. It was unexpected that I was not debating at the tournament. Many individuals were very curious about the issue. As I was walking to a round I was asked by a friend of mine if I had prepped a teams affirmative because he had not heard about the affirmative and wished to be able to have a educational debate. I told him I had prepped the affirmative and I gave him a solid amount of cards to help him in the debate. (again i was not in the competition). As the day progressed the team my friend had hit figured out I helped out my friends. They notified the tournament director and what followed was coercive and a abuse of authority. FROM MY FIRST POST. "The director had a CLOSED meeting with all the coaches and assistant directors about the issue and then called in my sister (who was my coach at the tournament) and told her that they would be looking into DQing me from the tournament and also stripping me of my rights to compete in NFL ever again. They specifically said that it was against the rules to share evidence in any way. The next thing that happened was that a coach told my sister that "it was going to be a shame if they picked up my ballot at the state tournament and had this unethical action in the back of my head". This was a blatant threat to vote me down at the state tournament just because of this issue. My sister looked up the rule and there is obviously not a single thing in the rule book about sharing evidence. This issue sputtered out quickly but the fact that this happened is ridiculous."  I was in the dark and I was not informed that these discussions were happening. 

 

There are plenty of reasons as to why me sharing evidence with this team was a good thing: 1) It produced a debate round that had a substantive debate that was full of clash for both teams. I watched this debate round and it was a good round. The funny thing is that the affirmative team actually won the debate despite me giving evidence to my friends. 2) It went further than just the round. The affirmative went home and prepped answers to these specific arguments my friends made. MY friends went home and prepped out the aff themselves. Education is quantifiable and outweighs the short term benefits of thinking on your feet and refusing to disclose. 

 

Competition has been misunderstood in the community at hand. We wish to reach out to others to figure out ways we can help. I agree with JD on the issue that we should not be trying to wage a war against places. We stated problems to figure out ways to solve them in this forum. IF we are silenced through back doors of authority. There will be no difference. We must face that there is less tournaments and less people doing the activity in West Texas. We must realize that there is always fear of change. It's the history of debate. Individuals were scared of doing things like using laptops but we worked that out to better our community. We need to work this out for reasons of education and more importantly love in the community. 

 

I love the community in West Texas and there are SO many great people in the circuit...But we cannot ignore problems at hand. 

  • Upvote 5
  • Downvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I would like to clarify something. Jacob and I do not I mean to bully or offend in our posts. I apologize if they have come off that way in this thread but we feel that change can happen. I would also like to clarify that this might be happening in other places. It is happening in West Texas but it could also be happening in places like Oklahoma or New Mexico. 

  • Upvote 2
  • Downvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

First, I think I should say that I too encourage any coach from the West TX community to participate in this discussion. It is an important one, not only to me, but also many other debaters struggling to acquire different and/or progressive types of pedagogy in this area.

I am Kevin Thompson. Many of the West TX community knows my father, Max Thompson, as coach/principal/superintendent of Rising Star ISD. Many of you are also aware that RS ISD competes in a lot of West TX tournaments. I too competed in these tournaments when I was in high school and I am glad this discussion is finally taking place after all the years I tried for it to commence. 

Hunter is not wrong about the state of West TX debate. So far, I see little wrong with anyone's posts on this forum. It is an unfortunate reality that the majority of debate coaches and people of power in the area do not allow things like evidence sharing to occur (among a slew of other things).

As many of you know, I really liked debating the K while in high school. This, as you can imagine, came with struggle. Not from apprehension (because my partner and I could explain things in ways my 7th grade debaters and my teachers could understand) but from irritation. I read kritiks not only from a strategic standpoint but also because I enjoyed reading these kinds of literature (DnG, Nietzsche, Baudrillard, Camus, ect.). When reading these in debate rounds, I received a lot of hate. I remember some ballots reading "even though I understand this argument and you are winning it, doesn't mean I will abandon my beliefs and vote for it." I think the worst comment was something along the lines of "WE don't allow THOSE arguments HERE." This was disheartening to me. I felt that an activity that was about fun, competition, and education was disallowing the ladder in a lot of aspects. However, I understand that this form of subjectivity is inevitable but it does stem from the top. Numerous times in high school I had to "adapt" to sleeping janitors, bikers, and at one time a mother with a screaming toddler.  Though the picture Jacob/Hunter attached doesn't reflect all of West Texas, it happens wayyyy to often here. I currently debate at Texas Tech and after about 7 years of living/debating here, not much has changed. JD is correct this stems from fear. This fear comes at a consequence though. As I hear about coaches in the area calling MY debate coach to talk negatively about Hunter, I become infuriated and encouraged. THIS POST/FORUM IS NOT AN ONSLAUGHT AGAINST WEST TEXAS DEBATE. IF YOU THINK THAT IT IS AND YOU FEEL THE NEED TO PICK ON A HIGH SCHOOL STUDENT, YOU SHOULD BE ASHAMED OF YOURSELF. YOU ARE NOTHING MORE THAN A BULLY AND THE REASON THIS FORUM EXISTS.

My post is just stemming from personal experiences. There are many different other examples of problematic practices I have experienced as a high school debater in the area but that isn't the purpose for this thread. This thread is about solutions. Here are some that I think are important and are a good start

1) evidence sharing is good- it promotes better debate and better understandings of evidence. Way too often have I been in rounds or judged debates that people just "read" things and had no idea what they said

2) experienced judges need to increase in quantity- though it is incredibly easy to get a lot of lay judges (and I also recognize the inevitability of lay judges), that does not mean that it is good. Students go to tournaments prepared to debate and too often I had too debate in front of (and my debaters now have to debate in front of) people that vote on who has the best tie, who had the cutest accent, and (including my experience of) voting down a team because they didn't wear a skirt instead of a pantsuit, had large earrings, ect. Tournament directors/coaches need to hire people or get people to dedicate BEFORE the tournament. This world isn't utopian either- there are A LOT of experienced debaters that are now college kids that could love the extra cash. You know who they are but we rarely get contacted. Even if judges aren't paid, I know a lot of people willing to sacrifice their weekend that are qualified to debate so that people are screwed over in their debates.

3) engaging with the wiki

4) being open to change that is inevitable with the way debate is changing, growing, and progressing

5) (and to me one of the most important ones) coaches need to not only promote what they deem as "safe" and "understood" to them but encourage different types of learning. I was lucky enough to have my father as my coach. One of the most important things he taught me as his son and as his pupil was that "people don't like it when you're different but those people also said the world was flat." I am not expressing coaches and tournament directors in the area are dumb- quite the contrary. This area has the ability to become so awesome, and to me, a lot of it already is. Hunter was just in a bid round. Chris Leonardi, a graduate of Dumas, just won CEDA 2 years ago and has reached deep outrounds of the NDT as well. I, too, consider myself a successful collegiate debater. The people in this community have impacted me enough to do this for a living and obviously have had some positivity put into my life. However, this isn't about me. It is about coaches, teachers, and especially the debaters. If a kid wants to read Foucault, let that kid read Foucault. If they say "hey, I can make a debate argument out of this," let them do it. I know I lost a lot of ballots simply because I was a K debater (whatever that means) but it gave me joy. Restricting what kids can and can't say (so long as it isn't racist, xenophobic, homophobic, sexist, ect.) is the antithesis of being a teacher. Too often I hear kids say "our coach won't let us read that". What is this doing besides sustaining anti-education?

I love this community way to much to see this happen for much longer. These are not "attacks" against this community I hold dear. This forum is about resolving prevalent problems. Emailing UIL/TFA directors to bar kids from competition for expressing their feelings on a debate forum does nothing but put you on the wrong side of history. This isn't to say there are wrong or right kinds of debate. But there ARE wrong and right ways to run tournaments and encourage out-of-the-box thinkers.

Be on the right side of that history.

-Kevin

Edited by txag15
  • Upvote 7

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

A lot of that resonates with me. One thing in particular. EVEN IF you don't want your debaters reading critical arguments, why bar them from learning it? Why not, educate them, encourage them, MAKE THEM read up and prepare strategies against these arguments? This is two fold - 1. those supposed "annoying k debates" are no longer as annoying because both sides are exploring and developing arguments, much like any other argument. 2. Your teams can BEAT those "k hacks". Most critical debaters in rural regions rarely face substantive opposition, and would definitely be caught off guard if a team started reading intricate answers to their arguments.

 

The UIL can't save you. Nationally competitive teams are the ones winning the UIL state tournament too. So hiding from TOC and TFA tournaments quite literally stunts the growth of debaters. Obviously not every team can afford to travel that much, so why no try to make the locals as competitive as possible?

 

50 years ago people thought you were cheating if you read off case arguments in the 1NC. 40 Years ago people thought you were cheating if you read an aff that defended only a specific instance of the resolution and talked fast. 30 years ago you were cheating of you read counterplans. 20 years ago people thought you were cheating if you read Critiques. 10 years ago people thought you were cheating if you used a laptop. No matter how you feel about debate, its here to stay. Adapt and prepare.

  • Upvote 3
  • Downvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I propose the creation of a thread on this sub-forum, that will be pinned, that contains a list of college debaters/former debaters/debaters open to more than just traditional debate and their contact info open to judging tournaments in the region. All tournament hosts will be contacted, and asked to post with updates, if we can advertise for them via proxy. Directors hosting tournaments can post in the thread, calling for judges, availability, payment, contact and tournament info. 

 

Not every person regularly checks joy of tournaments and it seems that often times tournament hosts fail to reach out to college and former debaters, in an effective manner. How about instead of contacting your facebook friends, you exclusively contact your debate friends. Cross-X acts as an automatic filter.

 

Those posting about availability can follow the thread, and get email (and mobile?) updates AUTOMATICALLY any time someone posts in the thread. 

 

While I don't think this will drastically increase the quality of judges, it organizes and mobilizes those who already exist in it.

Edited by jacobstime
  • Upvote 3
  • Downvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This thead means the world to me, and it because of that I personally could talk about this all day. But I want to present you two  major problems and how to fix them. Also, as a disclaimer. I do not want anyone thinking I am attempting to damage, hurt, or destroy this community. So if you have a problem with anything I am about to say, please contact me and not my coach.

 

I've been debating in the West Texas circuit for the past two years and about four months, due to some amazing experiences and opportunity's as well as some tremendous support from my parents, I have had the ability to reach out and debate out of this circuit some and let me just say I love what I have found.

 

1) The atmosphere of competition in debate. I have been told many many times that I am full of myself in rounds, and that I will lie about anything (I want people to understand that I HAVE to do this due to the level of judging, the bottom line is that confidence wins a lay judges vote even when you dropped conditionality). I also have heard people rumoring about how they cut awesome new solvency blocks against me. I think that when you take this to the root, the problem is that they cut the evidence out of spite of the competitor not the ability to win their neg round. Notice how I said they cut it against me and not my aff? I've never really understood the aspect of "secrecy" when it came to debate. I know far to many debaters who will ruin relations and severe attempts at friendship due to what they believe is a leg up in the game. I think it doesn't take a nine diamond coach to realize the acceptance and happiness that the TOC/National HS Circut has with one another. I think there are a few reasons they do and I will explore them with my "how can we fix this problem"

 

A) Better disclosure practices. You should not be shying away from the question "Do you disclose past 2NR's or Plan Text/Role of the Ballot". All the refusal of doing so does is lead to our "secret mine mine mine" epistemology which has inherently been what routs this awful atmosphere. I have been telling people I will disclose since my sophomore year, I am even open to site course if they write down the authors they want after the round. Show me you care enough about the round and I will give you what you want.

 

 

B. Wiki usage. Without an official case list, schools with plenty of resources, coaches etc and are in the “inner circle†acquire a disproportionate amount of information relative to others. I'm sure we have all seen this, and I personally coming from a 2A school have felt the effects, open caselist helps to eliminate and solve for the issues those bring.

 

2) Judges unwillingness to adapt.

I recently had a judge tell me "I haven't voted for a CP in 5 years, and you will be wasting your time to even speak of them." I think that it is this type of exclusion and oppression that leads to bad discourse and ability to honestly gain education through debate. This summer I was talking to an East Texas judge at a 3A High School and she was commenting on her critism of the fact that she was a "straight stock issues" judge for many years. She told me that she realized that if every single round becomes a defensive solvency attach, you never gain education other than to cut cards to answer that argument. I agree.

I believe A) Let's be 100% honest, economic decline probably won't lead to nuclear proliferation, but patriarchy will lead to zones of sacrifice. If we can include discourse on topics that will ratify and democratize individuals, why do we exclude it? We always fight for impact calc in our 2NR's.. let's make the world about that.

 

When debaters feel free to express themselves, they grow not only education, but confidence and maybe a change of heart. I was going to reference Bronx AL's Salsa aff, but's talk about Emporia's home aff.  The final round of the NDT had 40+ people in it, with hundreds streaming in. Do you not think that many people stopped and thought about how debate had become a home to them? Or how they could further express and give a home to teams like Emporia? I can promise you I did.

 

All in all debate has completely changed my life, and I love it. But as does everything else in life we have to adapt and change. Think off a interp performance, after each round, ballot, and criticism you try something more or don't do it again or edit it. The community should allow themselves to do the same. Be open to criticism (As in don't email coaches of the contributors to this thread), Learn and read from them, and then act upon them. That is my final word.

 

 

 

p.s excuse my awful grammar mistakes, I am also prepping for a tournament this weekend.

Edited by thatladlogan
  • Upvote 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

it's horrible here lmao i can't do anything that i'd like because i'm trapped into the same repetitive debates due to limitations set by judges

you do not get to read the k

you do not get to spread

you do not get rfd

you rarely get oral critiques you haven't heard a million times

 

every 2nc we've read this year is literally a solvency dump with like 3 cards about an advantage

every 1nc we've read is either cp/T or da/T

when we are aff nobody understands our 1a so we spend 99% of the time trying to explain things like how FIAT works and what colonialism is

 

i don't expect national level debate around here but it would be nice to at least get a true tab judge more than once a tournament (thanks zz)

grats hunter for getting out of here and into national level debating, from what i've seen u deserve it

 

sorry if this post is hostile, but i'm tired of my potential being stunted. see some of u at the tournament tomorrow. 

Edited by georgebushsdogpaintings
  • Upvote 5

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

it's horrible here lmao i can't do anything that i'd like because i'm trapped into the same repetitive debates due to limitations set by judges

you do not get to read the k

you do not get to spread

you do not get rfd

you rarely get oral critiques you haven't heard a million times

 

every 2nc we've read this year is literally a solvency dump with like 3 cards about an advantage

every 1nc we've read is either cp/T or da/T

when we are aff nobody understands our 1a so we spend 99% of the time trying to explain things like how FIAT works and what colonialism is

 

i don't expect national level debate around here but it would be nice to at least get a true tab judge more than once a tournament (thanks zz)

grats hunter for getting out of here and into national level debating, from what i've seen u deserve it

 

sorry if this post is hostile, but i'm tired of my potential being stunted. see some of u at the tournament tomorrow. 

thanks for posting- showing this isn't just an issue from people on the outside (now) looking in. However, you should probably read a disad with that counterplan yo

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's because there are no attempts to have discourse and communication inside or outside of rounds. Also, there are complains about victimization happening yet these same people with complains are turning around and doing the SAME THING.

#LOOKINGFOWARD

Edited by thatladlogan
  • Upvote 2
  • Downvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

i don't understand why at the tournament today there were posters everywhere saying "no disclosure! no oral critiques!" it makes no sense

Sometimes people fear change, and sometimes those are the ones in charge. They know its coming and severely underestimate the SCOPE and PURPOSE of what we have to say.

 

Denying disclosure, in light of previous discussions is a direct refusal to educate. What ever happened to coaches being educators?

Edited by jacobstime
  • Upvote 1
  • Downvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sometimes people fear change, and sometimes those are the ones in charge. They know its coming and severely underestimate the SCOPE and PURPOSE of what we have to say.

 

Denying disclosure, in light of previous discussions is a direct refusal to educate. What ever happened to coaches being educators?

This may have been a paradigm based decision by the tournament director or it may have also had to do with not only wanting to keep the schedule on time, but accelerate it due to the weather conditions and possible travel implications for guests returning home. Our area's coaches are still eduactors. If you like how this area does things, okay. If not, you can visit elsewhere as you see fit. posted at 9:33 pm central time.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This may have been a paradigm based decision by the tournament director or it may have also had to do with not only wanting to keep the schedule on time, but accelerate it due to the weather conditions and possible travel implications for guests returning home. Our area's coaches are still eduactors. If you like how this area does things, okay. If not, you can visit elsewhere as you see fit. posted at 9:33 pm central time.

That stuff is happening at almost every tournament. We already had a conversation about why disclosure is extremely important for education on Facebook. 

 

Also that's just unnecessary. UT didn't accelerate its schedule because of the weather and i'm sure the debaters understand how long tournaments can go on for, and would probably take a 15 minute discussion about the round (which that time gap is inevitable because of tabulation) to learn what they did right/wrong, and improve.

 

"you like how this area does things, okay. If not, you can visit elsewhere as you see fit."  Also this is a terrible logic. Its the logic of sectionalism and has proven to breed disparities in the quality of debate. Why thats bad is answered above. 

  • Upvote 1
  • Downvote 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That stuff is happening at almost every tournament. We already had a conversation about why disclosure is extremely important for education on Facebook. 

 

Also that's just unnecessary. UT didn't accelerate its schedule because of the weather and i'm sure the debaters understand how long tournaments can go on for, and would probably take a 15 minute discussion about the round (which that time gap is inevitable because of tabulation) to learn what they did right/wrong, and improve.

 

"you like how this area does things, okay. If not, you can visit elsewhere as you see fit."  Also this is a terrible logic. Its the logic of sectionalism and has proven to breed disparities in the quality of debate. Why thats bad is answered above. 

You and I will never see disclosure the same way and I am okay with that whether you are or not. We both think eduacation and improvement is important, but we disagree on how that should occur. Schools that host tournaments that mandate case disclosure have areas of the invitation and information section on JOT that encourage schools to seek other competiton oppurtunities if you do not wish to comply with otheir case disclosure policies. Have you told them that they have terrible logic as it is the logic of sectionalism and has proven to breed disparities in the quality of debate? I doubt you have or have the nerve to do so in the future. You may have competed at these tournaments. While I disagree with those hosts' views, I respect their right to have such views and mandate such policies. They do not hide it in the fine print. It is easy to find and plain to see. They do not seek to permanently change the views of those that choose to attend. They only seek guests' compliance while they are there. The whole JOT posting is very professional and the schools and their staffs are highly respected. You want the world to think for themselves and not be mindless robots. Do you really feel that way? If so, accept the fact that not everyone thinks like you and your partner. You 2 would be great with a world full of mindless robots as long as they thought like you and you held the remote controls. Your hypocrisy is laughable. I am not saying the world should think like I or any of my friends do, except with regard to being open minded and accepting of the thoughts of others. Why should we be so open minded about disclosure and other things this thread mentions when you are not open minded enough to accept us for the way we are. I ask no one to change simply to agree with me. People should change or not as they see fit. Accept me and others as different or not. Persuade the ones you can, but accept or at least avoid the ones you can not.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The new hashtag for this conversation on twitter and Facebook is #lookingforward

 

Everyone should use this! 

I do not get this to work om twitter. I did not try on FB.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't think Hunters and Jacob's want, of West texas to go progressive, is a means of mindless robots.  Your interpretation to how education should go about and their interpretation of how education should come about via debate, I agree should be respected. However, the question then becomes which methodology is producing what we call "education", more educational. Their method entails telling the debaters what they need to work on. This then allows, for the obvious reasons, to make things better. Make things better in the sense that they know what they did wrong. They know what happened, and how they can improve. The next things about disclosure of affs. Come on now, is it really educational for teams to read weird affs, that has hardly any literature basis except in regards to the basis of the aff? There's enough judges in the general who do not like the T debate. Even if you convince me that a majority of judges will buy T in that area, which they may and frankly I don't really care, the principle of fairness is just completely down the drain. Debates are supposed to be fun but, what happens when all the time one team wins because they have arguments that no one else knows about? How is that, in turn, education? Debates where one team has no idea what is going on, and the other team in all honesty, tells barley anything about the aff except that the other side dropped it. For spreading, anyone can really get good at spreading. It takes time, patience, reading drills, ect. It's not like a particular person, unless they physically (such as a large speech impediment) or mentally can not do it. Spreading, also increases education. It allows for greater indepth argumentation due to a increased pace of speed. Finally, it's not very fair when evidence is not called out after the round. I remember as a freshman, going into these rounds where teams would have weird affs that no one has heard about. Talk about why the evidence is terrible, and it not be called for. A lot of the time, the judges hate that too. I mean, what can you do? If that and T is all you have. In retrospect, I offer the last following comments. I think Hunters suggestion about what we should, as said above, is education. Your comment above about people being educators, and about you and others have a process of educating your kids is fair. No one should ever tell you what you're doing is in correct. What you're doing, is educational. HOWEVER, depriving kids of the above things, and maybe more or a little less, is depriving them a opportunity for education. What are paradigms? A lens through which we view something, correct? What happens when this lens becomes so narrow? Especially in a activity in which we all participate in? The education, becomes narrower and narrower. Education, yes, still happens. The question becomes, how much of a depth of education. IS denying these things good?  Is denying them a chance to view things in a different lense, such as what they suggest, bad?

 

On the other hand, is denying them the opportunity to view debate as WTJAZZ indicates, which I agree is educational in it's aspects as hunter's strategy is educational in its different aspects, bad?

 

The question becomes one of a tradeoff. As all people in debate, we should be here for educational purposes. What happens when one lens is destroyed because of a tradeoff as indicated? We should encourage debate of all caliber. One of different perspectives. Will we agree with all of them, obviously not. 

Edited by debatefool
  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...

×
×
  • Create New...