Hi All,
I'm looking for the results of the KOC 2011 debating IV. It happened in September 2010 so I'm presuming it happened again this year in 2011. Does anyone have the results (especially the tab). If so please e-mail me at colm_flynn@hotmail.com
UPDATE: Thanks to Michael and Manos I now have this tab.
Thanks,
Colm
This Blog has now moved to idebate.org/worlddebating - all future posts will be made there!
13 October 2011
Loyola Marymont win US Open 2011
Loyola Marymount A (James Mollison & Jack Ewing) have won the 2011 US Open Debating Championships.
Final: Motion: This House supports a weak dollar.
OG St. John’s A
OO Loyola Marymount A
CG La Verne F CG
CO Loyola Marymount B CO
Judges: Rob Margesson, Steve West, Rachel Fabian
Semifinals Motion: This House supports drone strikes
OG St. John’s A
OO Loyola Marymount C
CG Regis A
CO Loyola Marymount B
Judges: Josh Martin, Rob Ruiz, Brian Pride
OG Loyola Marymount A
OO Vermont A
CG La Verne H
CO La Verne F
Judges: Rob Margesson, Steve Llano, Steve West
The full tab can be found here
Final: Motion: This House supports a weak dollar.
OG St. John’s A
OO Loyola Marymount A
CG La Verne F CG
CO Loyola Marymount B CO
Judges: Rob Margesson, Steve West, Rachel Fabian
Semifinals Motion: This House supports drone strikes
OG St. John’s A
OO Loyola Marymount C
CG Regis A
CO Loyola Marymount B
Judges: Josh Martin, Rob Ruiz, Brian Pride
OG Loyola Marymount A
OO Vermont A
CG La Verne H
CO La Verne F
Judges: Rob Margesson, Steve Llano, Steve West
The full tab can be found here
12 October 2011
2nd World Debate Forum - Featured Presentations!
Hello Everyone!
There's about a week remaining to submit your presentations for the 2nd
World Debate Forum! We currently have 10 presentations registered and have space
for 6 more. I've shared some of the presentation below - we will also feature
presentations about debate in Africa (with specific focus on the Pan-African
championships and growth of debate), Arabic debate in the Middle East, debate
and conflict resolution and the growth of WSDC in Asia.
In case you've missed previous emails, the forum will be held at Ateneo de
Manila University from the 4th to the 7th of January 2012. Your registration fee
of 75 USD includes accommodation at the Great Eastern Hotel Manila,
transportation to the forum venue, breakfast, lunch and snacks. More details on
the website at www.worlddebateforum.org.
If you are interested in sharing your thoughts (or participating in the
forum), email me or visit the website now to register.
Abstracts of some of the presentations are listed below.
Alex
Dukalskis
Executive Director,
IDEA-US, PhD Candidate, Notre Dame
|
Debate and Journalism
Workshops Over the past two years, IDEA and the Open Society Foundations have conducted a unique series of debate and journalism workshops. Regional in scope, seven such workshops have taken place in Thailand, Uganda, Moldova, Latvia, Kyrgyzstan, and Nepal and have featured about 250 students from 19 countries. This presentation will provide an overview of the unique curriculum of this series of workshops as well as discuss ways in which it may be adapted to other subject areas. |
Sharmila
Parmanand
Co-CA Berlin Worlds
2013, MA Candidate, Melbourne University
|
Debate and Political
Engagement There is increasing synergy among university debate organisations, the media, and youth activists in shaping public discourse in the Philippines. Student debaters, in partnership with NGOs and civil society groups, have been involved in voter education campaigns during elections and generating awareness and lobbying for the passage of crucial legislation such as land reform, freedom to information laws and reproductive health laws. This presentation explores opportunities for further collaboration across these spheres and beyond Metro Manila. |
Suthen Tate
Thomas
CA Koc Worlds 2010, CA
UADC 2012
|
High School Debate
Development in Iraq The presenter will share his experiences running a course on debating involving high school teachers in Iraq. Highlights will be lessons learned and strategies for sustainability. |
David
Crane
Executive Director,
IDEA UK
|
Introducing the new
idebate.org
The new idebate.org contains a range of great features designed to help debating societies gain more members, communicate with existing members, organise live events, take part in online video or text debating and form groups. The site includes a social network allowing debaters to stay in touch with, learn from and share with other debaters. It also contains a much expanded Debatabase that debaters can contribute to for the first time, plus online learning and mentoring facilities too. Come to this session to learn how these features can be used to benefit you, your organisation and debating as a whole |
Logan
CA Botswana Worlds
2011, Visiting Professor, Chung Ang University,
Seoul
|
Compulsory Debate
Course in Chung Ang University
For the last 5 years it has been mandatory for all students in the Business College of Chung Ang University to do one semester of debate. This presentation looks at how the course was run (syllabus, evaluation strategies) and impacts on students based on PRCA surveys that were conducted at the start and the end of the course (with comparison to sample groups). |
Cheers
Logan
Interesting end to Kentucky Policy Debate
Rob Ruiz, Director of Forensics at the University of LaVerne
sent me an interesting story that it has taken me a couple of days to get my
head around. The story goes like this:
At the recent Policy Debate competition at Kentucky
University (one of the largest Policy debate competitions in the US) the Loyola
Marymount team of James Mollison and Jack Ewing went undefeated in every round
and picked up all the ballots. They ended up breaking and made it through the
knock out rounds to the Final, collecting all the ballots except
"one," which didn't matter since they beat the 3rd through 8th best
team in the competition and ended up in the Final against the number 2 school,
Georgetown.
Upon finding out that the two finalists from Georgetown were
African American and then finding out that the final was to be held at Campbell
Hall, a "former" slave house, the Loyola Marymount team (two
Caucasian students) immediately found this Georgetown team to have a
discussion. The Loyola team offered to give Georgetown the ballots as well as
the WIN in finals if they choose NOT to have a Final debate and instead, spend
the time allotted to have a discussion on racial problems considering this
tournament final was in a former slave house named Campbell Hall and one of the
finalist's last names was actually Campbell. They tell them that a racial forum
involving everyone is far more important to them and the Georgetown team decides
to accept. For the next couple of hours, the entire tournament becomes a forum
for discussion about the racial issues facing society today.
Now this story is certainly an interesting one. As a person focused on competitive debating
my initial reaction was why the hell did they agree to concede the final and
instead hold an open discussion about racial issues. Surely there are more than enough discussions
about the problems of society in the media.
Would the audience, organizers and sponsors not be disappointed not to
get a debate on some prepared topic.
However on reflection this shows a willingness to forgo the
glory of competition to instead debate more fundamental problems in wider
society. Remember that initially
debating societies were set up not to compete among each other but to give
students a chance to hone their rhetorical skills by discussing the important
issues of the day. Once the great
chambers of university debating were some of the few places where people could
go and watch the major topics discussed.
Perhaps we may think that the media has replaced this with a near
constant stream of discussion panels on radio and TV. However that assumes that
there is a free media in the country and that a “free” media does not have an
editorial agenda dictated from on high.
I’m sure there were people who were disappointed that they
did not get to watch a formal debate that night. However I would use this story as an
opportunity to remind people that the weekly meetings in your debating society
need not be, and in fact should not be, about preparing for Worlds, Regionals
or Nationals. You can easily hold
competitive debates in smaller training sessions. Instead debating societies should use at
least some of their main weekly public meetings to hold large, open, balanced
debates on issues of public interest. It may be an issue related to your local
college or it may be a discussion on a global crisis. Whatever the topic debating societies are
uniquely positioned to give students a chance to listen to and take part in
discussions about issues that impact on them (even if they don’t realize
it). Debating societies can invite guest
speakers to address the student body that no other society would attract.
Now it may be that you think your society does not have the
resources to do this. Well in my experience most colleges like large public
debates because they attract media attention and it takes very little spin to
conjur up images of Oxford, Cambridge, Harvard etc in the minds of university
officials. If you are willing to hold large debates on issues of public
interest you will find that the resources to do so tend to be easier to come by
than you may suspect. You may be in a
coach led club rather than a student led society and believe you as a mere
student have no control over what debates happen. Well in my experience most
good coaches are happy to have their students take the lead on organizing
events within the debate club. Ask and see what happens.
So as I said on first reaction I thought the decision of
Loyola and Georgetown was a strange one. But on reflection I believe it may
show that in the drive towards a global competitive circuit we have lost focus
on some of the core benefits debating societies should bring to their local student
body. If you are in a debating society
that has never organized a public debate why not add it to your to do list for
this academic year.
11 October 2011
Worlds Eligibility
With a little more than two months to go to DLSU Worlds in Manila Tom Jackson has posted a guide to eligibility when it comes to speaking at Worlds on the English National Universities Debating Council on facebook.
Having chaired two council meetings eligibility has always been a big issue. I chaired a meeting that had to tell one team they could not speak (they were representing a national association not an actual university) so do not expect that simply turning up means you will be allowed to take part. If you don't meet the criteria you will be excluded.
Tom's guide on facebook is broadly excellent in providing guidelines on eligibility. However there are elements in Tom's guide that I feel would need clarification from council (specifically the idea that Speakers may speak for a regional debating association in the absence of a Debating Union at their University or that you can somehow get around the rules by only speaking with first years in the term before Worlds). Basically as a rule of thumb you should (a) Be a registered Student in a third level institution (b) Be competing for the third level institution at which you are registered. (c) have not spoken at 4 worlds in the past even if they were for different institutions.
If you feel you don't meet those three rough guidelines and Tom's guide has not clarified things for you then you should contact the DLSU org comm and Worlds Council Chair Jens Fischer ASAP. You don't want to spend a lot of money travelling to Worlds only to discover you can't compete.
Having chaired two council meetings eligibility has always been a big issue. I chaired a meeting that had to tell one team they could not speak (they were representing a national association not an actual university) so do not expect that simply turning up means you will be allowed to take part. If you don't meet the criteria you will be excluded.
Tom's guide on facebook is broadly excellent in providing guidelines on eligibility. However there are elements in Tom's guide that I feel would need clarification from council (specifically the idea that Speakers may speak for a regional debating association in the absence of a Debating Union at their University or that you can somehow get around the rules by only speaking with first years in the term before Worlds). Basically as a rule of thumb you should (a) Be a registered Student in a third level institution (b) Be competing for the third level institution at which you are registered. (c) have not spoken at 4 worlds in the past even if they were for different institutions.
If you feel you don't meet those three rough guidelines and Tom's guide has not clarified things for you then you should contact the DLSU org comm and Worlds Council Chair Jens Fischer ASAP. You don't want to spend a lot of money travelling to Worlds only to discover you can't compete.
New research on impact of debate from the ESU
The ESU is pleased to launch a research paper into the impact of teaching debating skills to school-aged pupils today.
In association with CfBT (the Centre for British Teachers) and EdComs, the ESU launches a research paper Debating the evidence: an international review of current situation and perceptions, exploring what is currently known about the impact and benefits of participating in debate activities.
Download it here: http://esu.org/news/item/?n=13810
Source: WSDC mailing list
In association with CfBT (the Centre for British Teachers) and EdComs, the ESU launches a research paper Debating the evidence: an international review of current situation and perceptions, exploring what is currently known about the impact and benefits of participating in debate activities.
Download it here: http://esu.org/news/item/?n=13810
Source: WSDC mailing list
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)