Thursday Thing to Read: A New Season
December 1, 2005 – 9:19 pm by: Nick BubbIn today’s Thursday Thing to Read Tim Scheffler, attorney, Director of Debate, and assistant forensics coach at Madison Memorial explains why debaters should consider doing “forensics” or speech events in Wisconsin during the spring semester. Because not everyone can debate all year long, Mr. Scheffler’s argument is specific to debaters, specifically showing how an engagement in spring semseter activities can help one become a better debater.
Additionally, tomorrow we are live from Appleton East High School for the Challenge tournament. Enjoy both Mr. Scheffler’s article and our live coverage
A New Season
By: Tim Scheffler
In an attempt to help bridge the gap between our debate and speech seasons, this essay is written in an attempt to prompt policy debaters to continue participating in speech events in the spring. I’ve noticed a disappointing trend where many policy debaters reach the TOC in December or NFL/CFL qualifiers in January and call it a year. There are multiple events where debate skills can be put to use or even improved during the spring and many of those same events, with the participation of just a few new policy debaters, would become even better events within the state.
As a caveat I in no way set out to disparage the events not included in my discussion. I know there have been debaters successfully competing in interpretive events and the shorter time limit prepared speaking events, but as a general rule these events do not offer the same sort of framework that translates to improve or make strong use of debating skills.
Lincoln-Douglas Debate
This one is a no brainer as to how this one is connected. Policy debaters should not just presume debate is debate and start doing LD as one person policy, there are plenty of differences between the two. The differences, however, are not too much to over come, at least they aren’t anymore difficult than needing to adapt between V4 and VSS styles and preferred argument types as the occasion warrants. The best of LDers will commit as much time to LD as the top policy teams do, but having strong skills in flowing and quick critical thinking are all you really need and you’ll be able to get greater practice at these skills. LD will also help you become a far better kritik debater, giving a more expansive background on some of the elements policy takes for granted—particularly the use of a generally utilitarian framework and that morality gets defined many different ways and claims should be defined along with an underlying basis. Larger numbers in LD also have an added long-term benefit of demonstrating there is a desire to have the debate season be longer. If it is clear there are students clamoring to debate, more opportunities will be created to fulfill that need.
Extemporaneous Speaking
Where policy is an activity of the elite (in that it requires a trained person to compete, judge, or appreciate a varsity round), extemp is a universal forum. The necessary level of filing to prepare for tournaments directly helps in gaining a wide exposure to political events around the world. This aids in being able to have a wide set of knowledge to write and answer (even if analytically) a broad set of DAs. As an event extemp is home to the intellectual elite of forensics and is a chance to impress the average person with the depth of your knowledge and analysis. An added bonus is extemp is one of the most social events because rather than watching others speak, you are in the prep room waiting until the next speech time. If you appreciate debate for the camaraderie, extemp is also a good thing to try.
Group Discussion
I’ll start by admitting that this event, as it exists, is usually terrible to compete in. This is mainly a result of many of the competitors having no apparent commitment to doing well by doing a basic level of research and bringing in a plan based on that research. As a result a policy debater can do very well (the past two state champions are also policy debaters) by just applying the effort of bringing in research and an idea of how to solve the problem posed by the resolution. Just imagine a round with six topical counter-plans. A regular contingent of debaters in this event could easily make the event what it should be and raise the standard for group discussion. In the worst case, the result will be final rounds filled with debaters, which isn’t that bad at all.
Student Congress
Like group discussion, congress, generally held on Friday, isn’t always what it should be. What it is, is a good social activity, an opportunity to earn NFL points (a night of decent speeches can net you as many as winning four policy rounds), and the promise of debating and giving speeches without any real constraint as to topics and side. When only a few debaters show up or only one or two people from your school attend, the activity may seem dull and not worth the while of a serious debater. As more debaters (and serious congress competitors) participate, the quality of congress can rise dramatically and the event can be an entertaining and meaningful chance to debate.
In conclusion, it is worth noting that, for most schools in Wisconsin, the addition of a few quality debaters in spring events would be very welcome. A few skilled speakers can make the difference in earning a team award or going home empty handed. Debate often suffers scrutiny in terms of budgets and the more prominent and successfully any schools academic programs are, particularly those as close as speech and debate, the more all such programs are likely to flourish. Speaking for the entire year keeps you better prepared of the next season as well as adding validity to the claims that policy debaters are capable of communicating and excelling at communication not done rapid fire and really are the top performers in the forensics world. It may also provide the opportunity to try and attend a national tournament in a non-debate event, and watch some of the best debaters in the country in the elimination rounds. Hopefully, this piece does plant a seed of interest in at least a few debaters and we will see many of the state’s best thinkers and speakers demonstrating their skills through out the year, not just in September through December.
4 Responses to “Thursday Thing to Read: A New Season”
For me, extemp was harder in many ways than policy or LD debate and I strongly encourage every policy debater to give it a try. Without question, debaters who participate in extemp get better at debate…the ability to organize one’s thoughts and arguments quickly and then present them in a persuasive fashion within time constraints is ridiculously difficult. The skills one learns in extemp can be translated directly to CX and rebuttals in policy debate… it makes you smarter, more organized, and better able to communicate your arguments extemporaneously (hence the name, I guess), which in debate means without much prep time.
I enjoyed the article, Tim, and just wanted to echo your advice!
~Bill
By Bill Batterman on Dec 1, 2005
“I’ll start by admitting that this event, as it exists, is usually terrible to compete in.”
I can’t decide what shocks me more about that sentence: that I forgot to edit an explicit offense to a forensics event or that Tim ended a sentence in a preposition. Probably the latter.
By Nick Bubb on Dec 1, 2005
I end sentences in prepositions, especially writing later at night after rocking out to the sweet sounds of Grandstand.
I didn’t really feel it was offensive as I wrote it. I’ve heard from enough judges and competitors over the last 10+ years and from my own experience that preliminary rounds are often competatively weak and less intellectually engaging. Elim rounds, however, are much better once you have everyone in the room willing to engage in the intellectual enterprise.
And thanks for the word of endorsement, Bill. If readers don’t believe me, listen to Bill, a better high school debater than I ever was.
By Tim Scheffler on Dec 2, 2005
This is a great story (and great idea this time of year, to boot). One thing I have been pushing is more mutual appreciation of these two activities within their respective seasons. If any educational theme or objective is pervasive among the forensic events of debate and speech, it’s the understanding and adaptation to audience (whether it’s “playing” to the stock issues in Policy Debate or using a presentational “pop” between characters in a Solo Acting piece). An “Us vs. Them” mentality flies in the face of what debate should ultimately advocate: that differing viewpoints have merit.
I definitely think that participation in Policy Debate has made my Student Congress debaters more competitive in terms of their ability to analyze issues, respond to opposing arguments, and incorporate substantive research.
One of my students recently told me she heard that some schools (not necessarily in Wisconsin) make every one of their forensics students participate at least once in Extemp, because it makes them better able to think on their feet in any other event. The first skill my college speech class (COMM 101) professor covered was to speak extemporaneously. It’s something that people in the professional world and business environments need to do on a daily basis to be successful.
Group Discussion: I agree that there are some issues with some students not doing research and relying on their interpersonal acumen alone to carry them. However, that’s why those contestants inevitably fail. Adding to Tim’s comment, I think that discussants (a term I’ve picked up from talking to Minnesotan forensicators) who do not participate in Policy Debate are entirely capable of picking up those beneficial skills from competing among debaters. So infusing more debaters into the event would improve it. Moreover, former two-time state champion Paul Seymour from Sheboygan North has developed a more dynamic (changing) menu of questions for this season that should help prevent simple re-tooling of research or ideas from week-to-week as was done when the topics were arranged around the same theme. Finally, and this is a little off-topic, but let’s drop the word “Group” from before this category to avert ongoing confusion about it, and just call it “Discussion.” As we start preparation for the forthcoming Speech season, my new students keep asking if they need to find other members to create a group!
By Adam Jacobi on Dec 2, 2005