Malacca Hosts Women's Intervarsity Debate Championship 2008

Photo: The Old Square in Malaca

From mizzymatherz@yahoo.com

Voices MMU Malacca proud to announce that we'll be hosting
Women's Intervarsity Debate Championship 2008.

A debate tournament just for the ladies!

Chief Adjudicator: Adiba Shareen from UiTM, Shah Alam. She was the All-asians 2007 champion.

DCA: Divya Swaminathan, from NTU, Singapore. (Australs Women's representative

Suriakala Sivalingam, from MMU Malacca

Details of the tournament:

Date: &nbs! p; 15th-17th February 2008
Venue: CLC, MMU Malacca
Rego: RM 60 per person (not including accomodation)
Format: Asian Parliamentary Format (n=1)
Accomodation: King's Hotel or King's Apartment, Ayer Keroh, Malacca

Registration opens today!

Details to be included:
Name of University/ Institution,
Number of Teams ( Name of 3 debaters per team),
Names of adjudicators,
Accomodation (whether or not you'll need)

Please submit your registration to womensiv.2008@

gmail.com.

For further inquiry about the tournament, please contact Suria (014-2612187/ 017-6070010), Ju-li (017-6239016) or Yi Ling (017-6125996).

Hope to hear from all of you soon!

Suriakala Sivalingam
Convenor
Women's IVMMU Malacca

IDEA Forum in Uganda

From mzaleski@idebate.org

I am reporting from Jinja in Uganda where IDEA, together with CRY-Uganda and AJPRODHO Rwanda are organizing its first ever debate youth forum in Africa. The Forum is part of the  Dialogue Through Debate project (www.idebate.org/dtd) supported by the European Commission and involving trainers, coaches and secondary school debaters from Rwanda and Uganda as well as staff from IDEA  and Informal Education Debate Centre from Lithuania.
The Forum is the last major event of the project which included series of trainings, study visits (Netherlands, Lithuania and Czech Republic) as well as public debates in Rwanda and Uganda.
Sanne, Veronika and Marcin have just arrived to Jinja and we will be starting with a meeting of trainers (16 persons) tomorrow morning - which will continue till Saturday afternoon.
Saturday is the arrival day and we are expecting 100 students and coaches from Rwanda and Uganda.
We will keep you informed about the progress of the Forum on regular basis and will post pictures as well as testimonies of the participants on our website.
If you would like to read more about the DTD project please visit www.idebate.org/dtd and follow the link to discussion board (at the bottom of the page).
All the best
Marcin

Bhutan Joins the Debate Community

From http://www.kuenselonline.com/modules.php?name=News&file=article&sid=9472

SAARC inter-school debate

Private school students win right to represent Bhutan
29 November, 2007 - For the first time ever, Bhutan will participate and compete against other SAARC countries in the super finals of the 10th Dr Mahbub Ul haq Memorial Inter-school Debate Competition in New Delhi, India, on December 3.

Rinchen higher secondary school, who won the national round, will represent Bhutan. In the national round, five high schools - Rinchen HSS, Nima HSS, Yangchenphug HSS, Kelki HSS and Motithang HSS locked horns on November 7 to debate on “Global warming, melting glaciers and rising sea levels spell doom for the South Asian region: A myth or a reality.”

Ugyen Wangchuk, 19 and Rinchen Lhamo, 18, both class XI-Arts students told Kuensel that they have been preparing hard for the coming debate. They are thorough with their speeches and have memorized all the points.

The topic for the super finals is “Unchecked consumerism and industrialization have led to global warming and climate change, which will affect the poor. The rich are responsible.”

While both of them are passionate about the global warming issue, Rinchen Lham will speak for the motion and Ugyen Wangchuk against.

“We are excited and happy to represent our country and school but are a little nervous too,” said Ugyen Wangchuk, who bagged the best speaker trophy in the national round.

Principal Kunzang Choden Tshering and proprietress Sangay Zam said that they are proud that their students are representing Bhutan at an international level. “We are hoping for the best, but it’s their participation that’s important,” said the principal.

Ugyen Wangchuk and Rinchen Lham will leave the country on November 30.

By Sonam Pelden
spelden@kuensel.com.bt

Mandarin and Taiwanese Language Speech Contest Attracts Fourteen Nations

From http://www.taipeitimes.com/News/taiwan/archives/2007/11/18/2003388351

Foreigners vie for prize in Hoklo, Mandarin contest

STRUT YOUR STUFF: Forty-five contestants from 14 countries competed yesterday in the annual Mandarin and Taiwanese Speech Contest held by the Rotary Club
By Jenny W. Hsu
STAFF REPORTER
Sunday, Nov 18, 2007, Page 2
For Tokuya Kumagai, learning Hoklo (commonly known as Taiwanese) is the best way for him to show his passion for the country.

"I want to learn Hoklo because I love Taiwan," he said yesterday in faultless Hoklo after only studying for three months.

Kumagai was one of the 45 contestants from 14 countries, including Slovenia, Poland, Japan, South Korea, Macedonia, the UK, Vietnam and the US, to compete yesterday in the 12th annual Mandarin and Taiwanese Speech Contest for Foreign Students held by Rotary Club district 3250.

"I believe speaking Hoklo is the most direct way for me to really understand the country and its people," he said, adding he would also recommend that his friends in Japan come to Taiwan to learn Mandarin.

Contestants were asked to deliver a five-minute speech related to their experiences studying language in Taiwan, with the winner taking home a NT$8,000 cash prize.

Eighteen-year-old Rhaissa Bittar from Brazil, who has been studying Mandarin in Taiwan for three months, said in her speech that Taiwan makes her heart happy, adding that the colorful food at the traditional market by her house was just one of the reasons.

"The vendors in the market are always very kind and hospitable. They always let me try different food. My neighbors also often ask me to drink tea with them," she said.

Christina Walters, a 17-year-old high school student from Minnesota, said she would consider pursuing a university degree in Taiwan.

Walters is currently the only full-time foreign student at George Vocational High School in Taipei.

"I became very interested in Taiwan when I started watching Taiwanese television shows online. I also really like Taiwan's music and fashion," she said.

Walters said that she had been a huge fan of Taiwanese boy band F-4 since watching the popular TV show Meteor Garden, which starred the group.

One Indonesian student said she chose Taiwan over China for her language studies because "Taiwan is a free country and the people are very kind."

Another student from Poland said she planned to pursue a degree in international politics at National Cheng Chih University after she finishes her one-year Mandarin language course at Tamkang University.

Stella Yang, the president of Rotary Club District 3520's Minsheng chapter, said that compared with their Taiwanese counterparts, foreign students were a lot more self-confident and independent.

"They are not afraid to show themselves," she said, adding with a laugh: "We find that foreign students who speak Mandarin or Taiwanese well often have a Taiwanese girlfriend or boyfriend."

Inter-University Debates Explore Impact of Western Media in United Arab Emirates

From http://www.ameinfo.com/139155.html

Inter-university debate finals spark lively discussion on 'Western media impact on local culture'

The topic of whether Western media has a negative impact on the culture in developing countries provided a strong spark for a lively and interesting discussion between teams from two universities in the finals of the annual inter-university Debate Championship organized by American University of Sharjah (AUS) recently.

The team from University of Wollongong in Dubai (UOWD), comprising Rohini Kamath, Irshad Aziz, Rumana Sadekar and Lif Hamouda, made a strong case against the competing AUS team who defended its stand that the Western media was indeed having a negative impact on the culture of developing countries.

'The debates were of very high order, and showed that students are knowledgeable in pressing issues of our time,' said Dr. Swapna Koshy, Instructor, College of Undergraduate Studies, UOWD. 'The finals were electrifying and both sides demonstrated deep maturity and understanding of topical issues. Events like these hone the presentation and thinking skills of students.'

Rohini Kamath, who was awarded 'Speaker of the Tournament' prize, the most coveted award reflecting consistent performance, said: 'The competition was tough and very demanding as it lasted a whole week. The event tested public speaking, quick thinking, reasoning and research skills. The topics centred on global issues. The topic for the finals was highly relevant and demanded great analytical reasoning.'

'The competition was intense,' remarked Irshad Aziz, another student of UOWD. 'As the topics dealt with 'real world' issues, there was a need for a deep understanding of each issue. It required sitting with the team and strategizing all angles of the topic. The entire event was a great learning experience and definitely helped each participant to sharpen their debating skills.'

Rumana Sadekar, another team member, said, 'It is not as much about winning as about gaining experience and confidence. It is about reasoning and logical thinking. The Debate championship was a great opportunity for all of us to learn from others.'

The calibre of the UOWD team members was reflected by the fact that each of them picked up at least one Best Speaker prize in the quarter and semi finals of the competition.

WUDC Council Agenda

From Ian Lissing:

Agenda for World Council 2008

Preliminary Council Meeting 12.28.2007
q Distribution of Meeting Minutes from Council meeting of Worlds 2007
q Roll Call
o Delegate Names
o Voting status
q Institution review
o N-1 Review
q Speaker Review
o 4 year rule
o ESL participants
o EFL participants
q Distribution of 2010 Bid Materials

Council Meeting 01.01.2008
q Roll Call
o Delegate Names
o Voting status

q Worlds 2007 Minutes
o Vote to accept minutes

q UBC Report & Accounts
o UBC Rep to report on Tournament
o UBC Rep to present final accounts

q Assumption Report & Accounts
o Assumption Rep to report on Tournament
o Assumption Rep to present initial accounts

q (Worlds 2009) Bid Defense
o Bid Defense Presentation
o Questions from council members
o Vote to Confirm UCC as 2009 hosts

q Bids for Worlds 2010
o Botswana, NTU, and Koç present bids (order to be determined by random draw)
o Questions from Council Members
o Vote on hosts for Worlds 2010

q Order of Distinction/World Council Member Emeritus

q Lunch Break

q Constitution Review
o ESL/EFL
o Eligibility Requirements
o N-1
o Regional Representation
q Committee Reports
o Chair
o Registrar
o Secretary
o Women’s Officer
o Equity Officer
o Regional Reports
q Other Business
q 2009 World Executive Committee Elections
q END

IONA Debate Rankings Update

The rankings, updated after Cambridge, are below. Victoria Wellington move up to 2nd place behind Cambridge after winning the competition, with Oxford's strong performance keeping them in contention at 3rd. UCD climb to fifth and ULU re-enter the top-10 at 8th. Seattle are the highest new entry at 18th. In the rivalry of the Inns, Inner narrowly overtake Middle.

Cambridge however retain their strong lead after the IV, clear of Wellington by over 100 points. While no other institution has yet won multiple competitions, Cambridge have taken three of the eight IVs so far this year.

Speaker rankings have been updated too for those who are interested.

JLM

University Debating Rankings 20/11/07 - After 8 Events

1		1	Cambridge	283.0
2		4	Wellington	171.8
3		3	Oxford	166.9
4		2	St. Andrew	122.4
5		12	UCD	105.9
6		8	Inner Temple	102.6
7		7	Middle Temple	91.7
8		15	ULU	90.0
9		5	LSE	86.6
10		6	Harvard	79.8
11		10	Manchester	67.0
12		9	Loyola Marymount	63.6
13		18	Yale	62.4
14		11	TCD	59.2
15		13	UCC	52.2
16		17	Bristol	52.0
17		14	KCL	48.6
18			Seattle	47.4
19		16	Nottingham	43.6
20		19	IIUM	34.4
21		20	UCL	33.6
22		21	Kings Inn	32.8
23		26	Durham	25.4
24		22	QMUL	21.7
25		24	Warwick	19.0
26		23	SOAS	18.8
27			Chicago	18.0
28		25	NUIG	17.4
29		27	BPP	17.2
30		28	Leiden	13.4
31		29	Princeton	13.2
32		30	Stanford	10.8
33			NLS India	9.6
34		31	Berlin	8.0
35		32	La Verne	7.8
36		33	Zagreb	6.0
37		34	Sussex	5.6
38		35	Claremont	4.8
39		36	Helsinki	4.2
40		37	Newcastle	3.2
40		38	Glasgow	3.2
42		39	DCU	2.4
43		40	Imperial	2.0
44		41	Bates	1.2

King's College London Debating Society is proudly sponsored by The Audit Commission.

Check out the society homepage at: www.kcldebating.org

Bangladesh Open 2007 - The Full Story

From the Bangladesh Daily Star 25 November 2007

IUT 1st Bangladesh Open 2007: 1st Global Esteemed Debating
Championship in Bangladesh.

Reported by:
Rashedul Hasan Stalin
Chief Adjudicator, IUT 1st Bangladesh Open 2007

Grand Final in 24 Carrot Gold Plated Five Star Westin Hotel, Five
star Transportation with 27 sited Business Class Volvo Bus,
Exclusive four star Accommodation for our participants in Washington
Hotel, Break Night Party in PM Launch with rocking DJ and Lighting,
Grand Opening and Closing Dinner, high standard debating and world
class adjudication made Bangladesh Open 2007 a grand success in
Bangladeshi English Debating Movement.

After a decade later debating community of Bangladesh for the first
time has taken a massive initiative to arrange The Biggest Global
Debating Championship in Bangladesh. Recently concluded IUT 1st
Bangladesh Open 2007 brought 28 teams, 58 worlds' top adjudicators
and many top debating universities from six countries. Australia,
India, USA, Pakistan, Malaysia and host Bangladesh were the grand
participant of this Mega International Debating Event.

The Championship started from November 15 and speed its excitements
till 19th. This exclusive international debating championship was
organized by Bangladesh Debating Council-BDC with the collaboration
of the host Islamic University of Technology-IUT. Bangladesh
International Tutorial-BIT, Channel 1, Washington Hotel Dhaka, AKTEL
and Bangladesh Porjoton Corporation were the other partners for this
Championship.

This championship actually started the journey of Bangladesh for
hosting International Debating Championship with all the core
requirements needed and that are used in Worlds, Asians and Australs
Debating Championships. We had the top Adjudication Panel; Worlds
Debating Tab Software for team draws, Adjudication test, Debater and
Adjudicator evaluation for the testing of the adjudicators
competency for the first time in Bangladesh which are very much
essential for to host international debating championship.

The Championship:

The championship was one of its won kinds. On November 14 we had the
press conference in Washington Hotel Dhaka who was our official
Hospitality Partner for the championship. The conference stated with
the introduction of our international participants and announcing
the valued features of this competition.

On November 15 National and International participants stated to
come for their Hotel Check In. The hotel was full with all the
participants of IUT 1st Bangladesh Open 2007. We had the Opening
Ceremony followed by Opening Dinner in Washington Banquette Hall in
same day. Our Corporate Partner AKTEL distributed free mobile SIM
with special corporate connection and One Lakh Taka life insurance
to each of our participant.

Day two was focused on Core Debating and with adjudication Test. Two
exclusive Business Class Volvo Buses transported our valued
participants from Hotel to IUT Campus in Gazipure. The day stared
with a mock Debate followed by Debaters and Adjudicators Briefing
and Adjudication Test. We had two rounds of debates on that day in
Worlds BP Format. Adjudicators ware rank according to their
performance in the adjudication test and the feedback from the
debaters.

The next day was full of debating and Break Night Suspense. After
having three rounds of debate in IUT Campus, participant'

s then move
to PM Launch at Bannai for the Break Night DJ party. The party
continued till the break night announcement where top 16 teams out
of 28 teams were announced for the quarter final rounds. The
adjudication core also announced the top 16 adjudicators to judge
the knock out rounds of this championship.

November 18 holds the quarter final of the Championship in
Washington Hotel simultaneously in its four grand ballrooms. The day
was free for all the non breaking teams. We had a free day tour for
our international participants. They visited National Parliament,
different places in Dhaka University, Shahid Miner, and National
Museum.

On November 19 eight teams debated in the Grand Semifinal in the
Washington Hotel. The four teams then move to the Grand Final of
this Grand International Debating Championship. The Grand Final
Vanue was the Expensive and Prestigious from all the social venues
we had for the championship. The Grand Ballroom of Five star Westin
Hotel Dhaka hosted the Prestigious Final of this Championship. All
the guest and participants were amazed to see the standard of
Debating followed through the night. Then the Grand Dinner offered
our international participants to test the Bangladeshi Food and
Music.

The Adjudication Team:

The World Class Adjudication Team was one of the main features of
this Championship. Rashedul Hasan Stalin and Mr. Addul Latif were
the two Chief adjudicators with other six international and local
Deputy Chief Adjudicators (DCA). Mr. Latif is the Chief Adjudicator
for Asian Universities Debating Championship 2008, was DCA in the
Australasian Debating Championship before, DCA of Asians twice and
Brock in the Worlds Semifinal Debate as an adjudicator.

I was privilege to work with him as the Chief Adjudicator for this
Championship. My adjudication achievement includes DCA of Asian
Universities Debating Championship 2008; I chaired three rounds in
Worlds 2007 and four rounds in Asians 2005 as an adjudicator. I was
the Chief adjudicator of three Pre World Schools from 2005-2007 and
Chief adjudicator in the IUT National Debating Championships in
2005.

Before selecting the DCA's; Bangladesh Debating Council-BDC and host
university IUT focused specially on the experiences of the
adjudication panel. After having the preliminary selection for DCA's
we have selected Claudia Newman-Martin from Australia, Alex
Dukalskis from USA and Fareez Bin Zahir from Malaysia. The Local
DCA's were Mohammed Saddam Hossain from IUT, Azim Ahmed from IUB and
Alam Ishraq Chowdhury (Rudra) from NSU. In the Deputy Chief
Adjudication Panel we had three worlds' top debaters with top
Bangladeshi debaters and adjudicator who had the most experience
from international debate. Their expertise includes:

Claudia ranked 5th best speaker in Australasian Debating
Championship 2007. She adjudicated the Octo finals, semi finals and
the Grand Final of Australian National Debating Championships in
2007. Claudia attended Australs in 2006 and her team broke 12th. She
was the Undefeated Australian National Debating Champions at the
Australian National Debating Championship in 2006.

Alex was placed 7th 2004 US NPDA National Debating Tournament; 13th
as a speaker in 2004 US NPDA National Tournament; Grand Champion,
2004 IDEA-NPDA Vilnius Open in Vilnius, Lithuania; 1st Speaker, 2004
IDEA-NPDA Minsk Open in Minsk, Belarus. Alex has conducted debate
trainings in the US, China, Korea, Uganda, and the Czech Republic.
Fareez Bin Zahir was the Chief Adjudicator for IIUM Debate League,
DCA for National Inter-school Debate in Malaysia. Fareez Bin Zahir
as debater has been very successful: broken at Australs, reached
semi finals of Asian Universities Debating Championship AUDC, He was
also crowned as Malaysian National Champion.

Mohamed Saddam Hossain was ranked 26th in the Asians 2005 as an
adjudicator, Being the National English Debating Champions in 2005,
DCA for Pre Worlds Bangladesh from 2005 to 2007. Azim got the
highest point from Worlds in 2005, National Champion in the IBA
Nationals in 2006, and DCA for Pre Worlds from 2005. Ruddra have
adjudicated in the Worlds in 2005, was DCA in Pre Worlds in 2007 and
breaking adjudicator in many national debating championships.

To support this very experience adjudication panel, Bangladesh
Debating Council-BDC had 25 World Debaters and Adjudicators
including Sara Lynch from Australian National University, Yem
Mohammed from IIUM-the Convener of 2008 Asians in IIUM, Shameem
Reza, Former AIDA Vice Chair, Broken in the Australs from
Bangladesh, Chowdhury AA Quaseed-AIDA 3 Adjudicator, Semifinalist
Public Speaker in 1996 Worlds, Adjudicated in the Final of Public
Speaking in Worlds in 1997, got 13 points from worlds, Tanveer Ahmed
Haroon-IBA Nationals Champion in 2006, Habibur Rahman-Top points
holder from Worlds and IBA Nationals Champion in 2006, Mahbub Manik
Breaking Grand Finalist adjudicator in Many Nationals, Anika Rahman,
MM Ashiquar Rahman, Asad, Sabbir and many more.

Participants and the Result:

IUT 1st Bangladesh Open 2007 had 28 teams from six different
countries including all the National Top English Debating
Universities, Schools and Colleges. International Institution those
who were registered as participants in the IUT 1st Bangladesh Open
2007 were IDEA from USA, ANU from Australia, IIUM from Malaysia,
NLSU from India, Lahore Institute of Management from Pakistan.

After participating five rounds of Debate, Quarter Finals and the
Semifinals; four teams' move to the Grand Final of the 1st
Bangladesh Open 2007 in Westin Hotel. We had two teams from
International Islamic University Malaysia B and A as the opening
Govt and Opening Opposition and two teams from Bangladesh; BIT A and
AIUB A in the Lower House. I chaired the final with my DCA's and
other panelist from the adjudication core. The motion of the Grand
Final was "This house believes that Companies should not hire the
Smokers". After one hour of debating battle IIUM A from Malaysia
became champion in this Grand International Debating Championship.
They were followed by IIUM B in the Second place, BIT A and AIUB A
in third and fourth place respectively.

The debate was an interesting one and with full crowed in the Grand
Ballroom of Westin, the Chief Guest, Vice Chancellor of IUT with
other Special Guest distributed the Trophies to the winner. The Top
Speaker of the Tournament was Tasneem from IIUM A. she was the top
speaker in the Worlds Public Speaking in 2007 and was crowned as the
ESL Champion in the last World Universities Debating Championship in
Canada.

Announcements and Continuation:

Bangladesh Debating Council-BDC with its affiliated institution will
be holding the Asian Schools Debating Championship in 2008 and will
bid for Asian Universities Debating Championship for 2009. BDC also
wish to continue this Global Debating Championship in Bangladesh
annually with its other visions.

Thanks and see you again:

Special thanks to IUT and all the members of IUTDS, The Convener of
this Championship Mabroor for excellent contribution with his
dynamic IUTDS Team, Moderator of IUTDC for his leadership role. We
would like to extend our gratitude for Lubna Chowdhury from BIT for
her special interest and continuous supports and to all of our
Sponsors who helped BDC and IUT to run this grand championship
smoothly.

IDAS 2007 Trainers Debate - Apologize for Colonialism

From the International Debate Academy, Slovenia, 2007
See http://internationaldebateacademy.blogspot.com

This House would apologize for Colonialism.
1st Proposition:
Alfred Snider, Director, World Debate Institute, University of Vermont, USA
Rhydian Morgan, Consultant, GRM Communications, UK
1st Opposition:
Neill Harvey-Smith, Consultant, Debate Chambers, UK
Branka Marusic, President, European Universities Debate Council, Croatia
2nd Proposition:
Sam Nelson, Cornell University, USA
Jens Fischer, Berlin Debating Union, Germany
2nd Opposition:
Loke Wing Fatt, S.A.I.D., Singapore
Uve Poom, Current Euros EFL Champion, Estonia

Qatar Debate Workshop

From http://www.gulf-times.com/site/topics/article.asp?cu_no=2&item_no=186654&version=1&template_id=36&parent_id=16

National debating group conducts workshop
Published: Sunday, 25 November, 2007, 02:07 AM Doha Time

QATARDEBATE, a recently established national debating organisation held its second round of workshops recently.
More than 300 students from 10 schools and universities participated in the workshops that aimed at developing local talent and promoting debating among Doha’s students.
Run by experienced debating coaches from Durham University and Oxford University, including a former world champion, the week-long programme provided aspiring debaters with exposure to a variety of styles and techniques and an introduction to mentors for their future development, according to an official.
“We were aiming both at students who had never debated before (an introduction to debating) and at students who attended the initial workshops in September (intermediate debaters),” said the official.
The founding coach of the programme, Andrew Goodman said: “The QatarDebate coaches have been incredibly impressed by the enthusiasm of teachers and faculty for introducing debate into the classroom and for coaching and judging debates. This support from teachers and faculty stands QatarDebate in good stead for its inaugural debate league which will take place next year and will rely on a core of committed teachers to judge debates and give feedback to students on how they can improve their debating.”

Ugly Scene at Oxford Union, Angry Crowd Protests "Fascist" Speakers

From http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/oxfordshire/7114343.stm

Angry scenes greet Oxford debate

PHOTO: The invitations to Nick Griffin (l) and David Irving were controversial

A controversial debate at the Oxford Union was disrupted when protesters forced their way into a building.

The BBC's Paul Moss, from The World Tonight, witnessed the angry scenes ahead of talks by BNP leader Nick Griffin and historian David Irving.

It was a far cry from the normal image of Oxford and its students.

Not a gown in sight, studies left behind for an evening, as hundreds of protesters besieged the Union Society, furious at the decision to invite the leader of the far-right British National Party to speak there, along with a historian who has denied that the holocaust ever happened.

Nick Griffin was bustled in surrounded by a group of skinheads to protect him.

David Irving's arrival was more low-key, but the presence of both set off a furious reaction among many students: "This has nothing to do with free speech," argued one protester, "it's about giving credibility to fascists, making them appear to be part of the mainstream."

Diminished audience

Another insisted, perhaps more improbably that "I would rather be at home writing an essay," but, he added, "an institution which I'm a member of is giving a platform to fascists and that is totally unacceptable."

Banners were draped over the walls surrounding the Union Society, bearing anti-racist slogans, while chants reverberated through the narrow streets outside: "BNP - off the streets" and "Nazi scum - go home."

Many had travelled from other cities to join the demonstration. A student down from Birmingham said it was important to have more people outside than among the audience.

In fact, the audience for the debate was diminished because many Union Society members were not able to get in.

Police blocked both entrances to the building to hold the protesters at bay, but that prevented even some of those with tickets from entering.

I think fascism is awful and abhorrent, but the way to take on fascism is through debate
Luke Tryl
Oxford Union

The result was an odd collection of mini-debates breaking out in the surrounding streets, with protesters engaging Union Society members on the finer points of political theory.

One group supporting the event held a banner aloft bearing Voltaire's famous dictum: "I disapprove of your views, but would fight to the death for your right to express them."

The woman carrying it insisted she had no time for the BNP, but wanted the chance to hear its leader explain what he stands for: "It's exactly the kind of thing that university is supposed to be about," she said.

But not everyone would settle for verbal jousting alone.

About 50 protesters managed to break into the debating chamber, delaying the event from starting.

Police eventually managed to remove them, but with the audience also having trouble getting in, the debate did not get going until just before 10pm, an hour and a half later than scheduled.

Qualified success?

Even then, the organisers decided to break it into two groups "for safety reasons."

So the BNP's Nick Griffin spoke in one room, while David Irving addressed students in another.

Nonetheless, the Oxford Union Society is insisting the event was a success, albeit a qualified one.

President Luke Tryl said: "I think fascism is awful and abhorrent, but the way to take on fascism is through debate.

"We had David Irving and Nick Griffin, both challenged and subjected to the proper scrutiny of students."

But Waymen Bennet of the organisation Unite Against Fascism said they had succeeded in all their aims.

He said: "I am proud to have stood with black people, white people, Jewish, non-Jewish, gay and straight, to stop a debate that had nothing to do with democracy."

President-elect and Mayor Meet Debaters at International Debate Academy

Photo: Dr. Danilo Turk, President-elect of Slovenia, with students

When the International Debate Academy left its instructional home in the little town of Ormoz and made its way to Slovenia's capital, Ljubljana, it got the recognition of some of the most prominent politicians in the country.

Dr. Danilo Turk, President-elect of Slovenia, addressed the debaters and judges at the opening ceremonies. Dr. Turk won an overwhelming mandate for President. He served for years as Kofi Anan's assistant at the UN in New York. He cautioned the debaters to understand the audience and not just the opponents in the debate and to recognize, in debating about equal opportunities, the distinction between discrimination and rational difference. He also answered several questions from the debaters, including how to respond to lies spread against you in politics.

Photo: Zoran Jankovic with tournament top speaker, Anna Mojca England Kerr.

Zoran Jankovic is the newly elected mayor of Ljubljana. He encouraged the debaters about visiting Ljubljana and indicated future cooperation with ZIP. ZIP will be co-sponsoring a conference in April to take place in Ljubljana. For more information, see http://debate.uvm.edu/betterworld.htm

Both politicians recognized the importance of debate in Slovenia, with Dr. Turk indicating he had been following it for several years.

Final Results of Internaional Debate Academy 2007

Tournament champs with UK's Rhydian Morgan in the middle: Filip Dobranic and Maja Cimerman

19 countries: Albania, Bulgaria, Croatia, UK, Germany, Rumania, Mongolia, Taiwan, India, USA, Serbia, Ukraine, Estonia, Canada, Singapore, Bosnia & Herzgovina, Russia, Slovenia, and Venezuela.
32 teams.
16 adjudicators.

Here are the results:

Semifinal Round

The motion is:
This House believes that women should get an equal position in war with men.

Hall A
1Gov Ceranic & Jankovic-Romano Serbia ADVANCE
1Opp Kerr & Belak Slovenia
2Gov Plostajner & Jakovac Slovenia ADVANCE
2Opp Gabric & Vlacic Slovenia
Judges: Branka Marusic (chair), Neill Harvey-Smith, Loke Wing Fatt, Steve Llano, Jens Fischer

Hall B

1Gov Kunej & Kranjc Slovenia
1Opp Dobranic & Cimerman Slovenia ADVANCE
2Gov Bellwood & Culy USA ADVANCE
2Opp Tertnik & Jenko Slovenia
Judges: Isabel Loewe (chair), Rhydian Morgan, Sam Nelson, Simon Grabrovec, Uve Poom

Final Round

This House believes that financial support from the state should be sufficient to live on without requiring work.

1Gov Bellwood & Culy USA
1Opp Dobranic & Cimerman Slovenia
2Gov Plostajner & Jakovac Slovenia
2Opp Ceranic & Jankovic-Romano Serbia

WINNER: Maja Cimerman & Filip Dobranic Slovenia

TOP SPEAKER: Anna Mojca England Kerr Slovenia

2 Spela Kranjc Slovenia
3 Simon Belak Slovenia
3 Spela Kunej Slovenia
5 Filip Dobranic Slovenia
6 Maja Cimerman Slovenia
7 Igor Jakovac Slovenia
8 Alia Bellwood USA
8 Edita Gabric Slovenia
10 Alexandra Neacsu Romania

Complete results can be found at http://debate.uvm.edu/dcpdf/IDAS2007FullTab.xls

MOTIONS FOR IDAS 2007 TOURNAMENT

Thanks to European Union program "All Equal, All Different" for the support of the equal opportunities motions during the tournament.

1. This House believes that all universities should have an equal opportunities officer.
2. This House believes the state should provide free education in the languages of ethnic minorities.
3. This House believes that the state should pay for trans-gender surgeries.
4. That this House would remove the right to refuse life-saving medical treatment.
5. This House would take a hard line against Iran.
6. This House believes that romantic relationships between university instructors and their students should be illegal.

SEMIFINALS:
This house believes that women should get an equal position in war with men.

FINALS:
This House believes that financial support from the state should be sufficient to live on without requiring work.

Stand by for an announcement of next year's International Debate Academy.

Oxford Union Gives Platform for Holocaust Denial

From http://ukpress.google.com/article/ALeqM5iMGa6omEi6Wv8uIn60kIFI8GeKNA

BNP leader to speak at university

Hundreds of protesters are expected to gather at Oxford University after students voted to allow BNP leader Nick Griffin to speak at their union.
Controversial historian David Irving, who was jailed for Holocaust denial, has also been invited to the free speech event.
Their presence on the list of speakers had already prompted a series of high profile withdrawals from the platform, including Defence Secretary Des Browne.
Despite opposition, the Oxford Union Debating Society members voted by a margin of two-to-one to extend an invite to Mr Griffin.
Martin McCluskey, president of the Oxford Student Union, said it was "disgraceful" the pair were being given the same platform as past speakers who include Mother Theresa and the Dalai Lama.
Sabby Dhalu, secretary of campaign group Unite Against Fascism, said: "If the event goes ahead as it stands, it does not even have the appearance of a 'debate'. Oxford Union will have to hold itself responsible for any subsequent repercussions on the threats to the safety of students if it proceeds with this decision."
Lee Jasper, secretary of the National Assembly Against Racism, added: "Oxford Union is jeopardising the safety of the students by continuing with this event. It is not too late to rescind these invites - Oxford Union gathers growing condemnation with every moment it continues being complicit with facilitating a meeting promoting fascism and Holocaust denial."
Defending its decision, the Oxford Union Debating Society said it was important to give people of all views a platform. Luke Tryl, president of the society, said: "They will be speaking in the context of a forum in which there will be other speakers to challenge and attack their views in a head to head manner."
Mr Griffin, who was convicted in 1998 for incitement to racial hatred for material denying the Holocaust, has repeatedly insisted the BNP is not a racist group.
Mr Irving has insisted he was not a Holocaust denier - despite spending three years in prison for the crime.

Debate - Should Military Recruiters Come to High Schools?

From http://voice.paly.net/view_story.php?id=5987

Military recruiters create campus debate
Students question ethics of No Child Left Behind Act-sanctioned lunchtime military recruiting

Posted Fri Nov. 16, 13:09:52 PST 2007
BY TYLER BLAKE AND KEVIN HARVEY OF THE CAMPANILE

Pro

Businesses advertising for student work is a familiar sight among veteran students of Palo Alto High School. The familiar tables encircle the Quad, students mill from table to table and employers hand out free pens to attract students to hear their pitch. Always among these potential employers are the major branches of the United States Armed Services: the Army, Navy, Air Force and Marine Corps. There has been a movement in the past to remove these tables from the Quad to "protect" our children from the "menace" of Army recruiters. However, these attempts are misguided at best and severely prejudiced at worst.

Though many in the liberal haven that is the Bay Area would not like to admit it, the military is a legitimate career choice for many young Americans who are making their way into the workforce for the first time. The armed forces offer many benefits not found in other entry-level jobs, including guaranteed lifetime employment, medical insurance and a pension plan upon retirement. Of course, the military is not the career for everyone, but for some, it may just be the best available option. Students at Paly deserve the right to be exposed to all possible career choices when making a decision about their futures and the military is just as legitimate as the myriad of other options advertised on Paly's campus. Allowing the biases of a few to inhibit the choices of the many would make a mockery of the free exchange of ideas that Palo Alto High School promotes.

Disallowing the military to recruit on campus is not only an unwise decision, but may also be an illegal one. Under President Bush's No Child Left Behind Act, military recruiters must be provided "the same access to secondary school students as is provided generally to post-secondary educational institutions or to prospective employers of those students," which simply means that military recruiters must be offered the same ability to advertise on campus as other businesses. If the Paly administration wanted to ban military recruiters from campus, they would have two options.

One, ban all employers and colleges from advertising in any way on campus. This would end the College Fair and Career Day, among others, limiting Paly students' exposure to post-graduation opportunities immensely.

Two, forfeit all federal money that Paly currently uses in its day-to-day operation. One can clearly see that banning recruiters from campus would cause undue hardship for the Paly community, no matter which option the Paly community chooses under the No Child Left Behind Act.

Although the members of the Paly community may have only the best of intentions when trying to remove military recruiters from campus, the drawbacks are immeasurably harsh when compared with the relative innocence of allowing military recruiters on campus.

The severely limited options or the potential decrease in funding that would be a reality at Paly in the absence of military recruiters would unfairly disadvantage students who are still deciding on their futures by eliminating a legitimate career choice from consideration and undermine the mission of the school as an institution.

Con

Military recruitment officers frequently arrive on the Palo Alto High School campus to offer students the services of the United States military. Like all government organizations, the military has the undeniable right to enter public vicinities, such as the Paly campus. However, once on campus, officers misrepresent their branch of the military as they attempt to recruit students.

Pamphlets, fliers and stickers lay on one or two tables erected by the recruiting officers. Around the tables, several of them typically construct a small area where students can compete in short activities to test an individuals' endurance and strength. On occasion, a small car or motorcycle engine is placed inside the booths and is activated to display its pure and raw power.

After witnessing the engine's irrefutable power and participating in the rigorous events, testosterone is in the air. Boys are ready to become men — ready to give their lives to the United States government.

Recruitment officers use these types of techniques to lure students, particularly males, into joining the Unites States military. Officers convey an image to students that competition, endurance and strength are what the military is all about. However, what they don't disclose to the students are the painful and harsh aspects of war.

The decision of whether or not to join the military is a complicated and difficult one. Students trying to decipher their goals for the future need to know unbiased facts about the military. It is imperative that military recruiters on campus have strict guidelines and boundaries that best benefit the students and the campus environment. Recruiting officers need to disclose all the details about military lifestyle, duties and obligations.

In addition, when other different organizations for post-high school options come to Paly to recruit students, they have a set time within an enclosed room, such as the English Resource Center, where they can talk about their institution. However, the military is an exception. Military recruiters set up their booths around the quad, which is the main thoroughfare on the school campus.

Through this arrangement, the military is better able to force students to recognize the military presence and is better able to target a larger number of students to recruit.

It is easiest for recruiters to talk with students at lunch because it is when most students have free time to talk. However, the quad is an inappropriate setting to discuss such a vital issue as to what a student should do with his or her life after high school. In a lunch setting, there are numerous opportunities for students to pressure one another into giving their personal information to the military.

As military officers are always going to be allowed on campus and the military is a career some Paly students may choose, advertising for their cause should be permissible. However, to prevent students from being pressured, recruiting officers should not be allowed to request students' information on campus.

As an alternative, students should be encouraged to sign up for a mailing list from home where they would be sent more information about the military after discussing their career opportunities with their parents.

Elimination Debates at International Debate Academy

Photo: Vesna, Tuna, Mario, Milan

The semifinals have just begun at the Faculty of Economics in Ljubljana.

The motion is:

This House believes that women should get an equal position in war with men.

Hall A
1Gov Ceranic & Jankovic-Romano
1Opp Kerr & Belak
2Gov Plostajner & Jakovac
2Opp Gabric & Vlacic
Judges: Branka Marusic (chair), Neill Harvey-Smith, Loke Wing Fatt, Steve Llano, Jens Fischer

Hall B

1Gov Kunej & Kranjc
1Opp Dobranic & Cimerman
2Gov Bellwood & Culy
2Opp Tertnik & Jenko
Judges: Isabel Loewe (chair), Rhydian Morgan, Sam Nelson, Simon Grabrovec, Uve Poom

Results to come soon.

International Debate Academy Training Concludes in Slovenia

In the small town of Ormoz, Slovenia, there were a lot of different languages being spoken as people from seventeen different nations gathered to focus on Worlds/BP format debating for six days, from 17-22 November 2007.

The program is sponsored by Z.I.P. (Za in Proti, Institute for Culture of Dialogue, the Slovenian national debate program) and the World Debate Institute (University of Vermont USA) and is now in its fifth year.

People attended who are citizens of: Slovenia, USA, UK, Germany, Singapore, Croatia, Serbia, Bulgaria, Romania, Albania, Ukraine, Estonia, Russia, Bosnia, Taiwan, Canada, India and Mongolia.

The program had a number of illustrious faculty members, including:

• Loke Wing Fatt, SAID Singapore and WUDC breaking judge.
  
• Jens Fischer, Germany, Chief Adjudicator at Euros.


• Neill Harvey-Smith, WUDC finalist and Chief Adjudicator for Euros
  2008, now with Debate Chambers, United Kingdom.


• Steve Llano, USA national champion coach, St. Johns University, USA.


• Branka Marusic, President of European Universities Debating Council, Croatia.


• Rhydian Morgan, Chief Adjudicator at numerous UK tournaments, now with GRM Communications, United Kingdom.


• Sam Nelson, USA national champion coach, Cornell University, USA.


• Uve Poom, Europeans EFL Champion and Euros 2008 organizer.


• Bojana Skrt, World Schools EFL Champion coach twice, Slovenia.


• Alfred Snider, USA national champion coach, Director of World Debate Institute, University of Vermont, USA.

With sixty people occupying the Hotel Ormoz, the days were full of learning activities. Each day included a morning lecture, a drill and exercise session, and then a full critiqued debate. Afternoons consisted of two slates of elective classes (where students can pick from 4-5 different subjects to attend), followed by another full critiqued debate. Evenings were free, but included a number of social events, such as the country exhibition and the kitsch party.

The following are some of the elective topics:
Poom:

• Intl relations 1


• Intl relations 2


• Economics for idiots


• Debating about rights
  
  Fatt:


• Research methods


• Humor


• Rebutting


• Motion analysis
  
  Marusic:


• Motion interpretation


• Case division


• Counter proposals
  
  Morgan:


• Style vs. substance


• Identifying clash


• Newman hierarchy


• Principles of criminal justice


• Zen debating - knifing without the knife


• Derivation of rights
  
  Harvey-Smith:


• Economics with NHS, aka how to win debates on economics against economists, by an economics grad.


• Politics with NHS, aka how to win debates on political theory against politics students, by a politics postgrad.


• Philosophy with NHS, aka how to beat utilitarians in debate, by a philosophy postgrad.


• Law with NHS, aka how to beat lawyers in debates about law, by a man who hates lawyers.


• Extensions; how to speak brilliantly as the third speaker in British Parliamentary debates.
  
  Snider:


• Note-taking before and during the debate


• Your 15 minutes prep and how to use it


• Mine is bigger than yours, comparing arguments
  
  Llano:


• Samurai debate


• Classical rhetorical theory


• Advanced opposition strategy
  
  Skrt:


• Strategy: How do we debate when we do not have a clue about the topic? What do we do when the first government comes out with a really bad case? ….
  
  Nelson:


• Tricks are for Kids. The role of the trickster in argumentation and its implications for current debate practice.


• Public speaking like you mean it! How to be a persuasive speaker


• Make love not war. Rejecting the warrior narrative in debate and replacing it with a more functional mindset: Debater as lover!


• Games people play. Debate games that teach you how to hone your debate skills.
  
  Separate coaching electives were held, including:


• Experiential learning - Poom


• Drills and games to teach debate - Fatt


• Adjudication - Harvey-Smith


• Training program model - Snider


• Team based research strategy - Llano


• Running university debate club: keep them coming, keep them staying, keep them motivated. Skrt


• Fundraising for the university debate club. Skrt


• Organising debate tournament. Skrt


• Organising public debate. Skrt
  

One other event of note was the show debate that was staged by the faculty. Steve Llano and Bojana Skrt chaired a debate on the motion; this House would apologize for colonialism. The first government team was Alfred Snider and Rhydian Morgan, the second government team was Jens Fischer and Sam Nelson, the first opposition team was Neill Harvey-Smith and Branka Marusic, and the second opposition team was Loke Wing Fatt and Uve Poom. The debate was a spirited affair, but was fairly serious (unlike many show debates) and tried to provide real examples to the student audience. The video will be posted online very soon. No decision was announced and the students kept talking about their individual decisions late into the night.

With sponsorship grants to debate motions on the issue of equal opportunities, many of the motions shared this these. Motions for the practice debates included:

• This House would bring George W. Bush to trial for war crimes.


• This House believes in cultural and racial assimilation.


• This house would support an independent state for the Kurdish people.


• This House supports affirmative action to solve for the effects of discrimination.


• This House would grant immunity to dictators who step down voluntarily.


• This House believes that there should be no religious holidays recognised as national holidays.


• This House believes the criminalisation of hate speech is a bad idea.


• This House believes all public bathrooms should be unisex.
  
  On Friday morning everyone boarded a bus for Ljubljana where they were housed in a dormitory and a tournament is now going on at the University of Ljubljana’s Faculty of Administration and the Faculty of Economics.
  
  More on the tournament in a separate post.
  

Bangladesh Open Results

From stalinhasan@yahoo.com

Dear all,

Bangladesh Debating Council-BDC organized the 1st Global Debating Championship in Bangladesh from November 15 to November 20, 2007. Islamic University of Technology, Bangladesh hosted this BP Format Global Esteemed Debating Championship; IUT 1st Bangladesh Open 2007 with Worlds MINI and South East Asians. Australia, USA, Malaysia participated with 28 other top local Debating Institutions from Bangladesh in this Grand Debating Championships.

Motion for the Final:
This House Believes That companies should not hire the Smokers.

Championship Results:
Champion: International Islamic University Malaysia A
Runner up: International Islamic University Malaysia B
3rd Place: Bangladesh International Tutorial A
4th Place: American International University A

Top Speakers:
Tasniem Ahmed Elyass from IIUM A (International)
Faiza Rahman from Bangladesh International Tutorial BIT A (Local)

Adjudication Core:
CA: Rashedul Hasan Stalin (BDC)
CA External: Abdul Latif (Malaysia)
DCA: Claudia Newman-Martin from Australia (ANU)
Alex Dukalskis from USA (IDEA)
Fareez Bin Zahir from Malaysia (IIUM)
Mohammed Saddam Hossain (BDC)
Azim Ahmed (BDC)
Alam Israq Chowdhury (BDC)

Regards,
Rashedul Hasan Stalin
Chief Adjudicator, Bangladesh Open and Worlds MINI 2007

Strong Bids for WUDC 2010

There are strong bids for WUDC in 2010. Those on their way should familiarize themselves with the choices so as to make a good one. Here are some links.

Turkey: Read about it at
http://globaldebateblog.blogspot.com/2007/11/ko-university-debate-club-bids-for-2010.html

Singapore: Read about it at
http://globaldebateblog.blogspot.com/2007/10/ntu-singpore-wudc-2010-bid-announces.html

Botswana: Read about it at
http://globaldebateblog.blogspot.com/2007/09/botswana-to-bid-for-wudc-in-2010.html

Complete Reg Details for WUDC Thailand

From the organizers: crackertariq@yahoo.com

Dear All,

About a month away from the largest world ever! We really need you guys to fill up your details completely online. If you guys are coming early and wish to accomodate on campus, that is fine. Please visit our website, then go to the contacts link and email the accomodation director. They will help you get accomodated on campus. We are only providing transporation from December 26 till January 5. We will not provide transporation after or before that. We apologize. We can assist in any you wish though.

Once again, please do fill up your details asap. I have set a new deadline of Monday 26th, November. Please I beg you guys to do it. We are finalizing all venues etc at the moment. We need the most accurate numbers we can get. As of now 800 or so people have completed details. We have around 1200 participants. A lot of you have not completed your details.

If you do not fill in all your details by MOnday 26th, November, you are risking not being picked up or having too little to eat. So please help us so we can help you.

All of you who need 100% Kosher food. You must contact me directly. I so far only have 3 people. I am not sure if that number is at all accurate.

kind regards,
Tarique

USA Debate Coach Rates Presidential Debate Performances

From http://jmsnews.wordpress.com/2007/11/16/115/

Audio: UNLV Debate Coach Rates the Prez Debaters

Posted by Jessica Tripp on November 16, 2007

Jake Thompson, the UNLV debate coach gives his opinion of the debate
Mobile post sent by jessat69 using Utterz. Replies. mp3
This entry was posted on November 16, 2007 at 4:13 am and is filed under Democratic Presidential Debate, debate, politics. Tagged: candidates, debate coach, Democratic debate, Jake Thompson, presidential, UNLV, Vegas. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.

Stand By for a Pause

I am in Ljubljana with Bojana Skrt (Slovenia) and Loke Wing Fatt (Singapore) and we are on our way to Ormoz, Slovenia for the 5th International Debate Academy. We will return to Ljubljana next Friday for the concluding tournament, but until then we will be a bit isolated in Ormoz, and may not have regular Internet access. Therefore, there may not be my usual two posts a day for a while, but I will see what I can do to find a way.

Please be patient. The news of the world of debate will continue, and I will catch up with it when I can.

New Debate Website Focuses on European BP Debate

Peter Mesarec has a website that is worth a look. It has an interesting collection of videos as well, just click on the "Debate Videos" link.

Photo: Peter with partner Masa in 2003 at International Debate Academy.

http://www.debate.najvecji.si/

Here is the splash page text:

University debates, BP debates

The University debates that take place all around the world are always in different formats, but in the Europe and GB, the most popular debate format is BP - British parliamentary. The format is described on the next sites, more important you will be able to find different debate topics or debate motions, as we like to call them. This is a site that has culmulated motions from the Worlds University Debate championship, European University Debate Campionship and motions from other tournaments. You can use these motions for your preparation for BP tournaments or for your tournament. Finding a good motion is always important for running a good tournament. This is where we help you.

The calendar that you can see on the left is showing all most of the debate tournaments that will happen in Europe and around it. You are welcome to contribute using the contact us form. The calendar is not the best that you can find, but we are working on that. We are inviting you to be our publisher and find the debate tournaments and send the dates to us, so that we can post them on the site.

The site also features videos from different debates from around the world and different educational videos. You are of course invited to help us here, send us links from videos you have uploaded or you just found and think that they would interest the world debate community.

What is a debate topic or debate motion?

Debate motion is the topic or the title of the debate. It is always set by someone else and not the debaters, so that no one in the debate has any specific knowledge about the topic. The topics should not be too narrow, because all debaters should be able to debate the motion, meaning that they have basic knowledge about the topic.

Well, you can have different ones, for the British parliamentary debate we normaly use motions that start with This house would (THW) or This house believes (THB), this house is taken from the British parliament. Open motions are those, where the government has a lot of space to define what they would like to debate about. An open motion would be "THW open the doors", and closed motion would be "THB that the EU should do more to promote condoms to help prevent the spreading of HIV/AIDS in Africa". You will find more articles about "how to debate" on this website, so just browse the menus on the top and on the left.

"The Great Debaters" Movie Trailer

The excitement is building for this movie.



http://videos.trailerspy.com/movies/view/95/the-great-debaters-trailer/

A Debate Story from Kyushu

I found this interesting story about a high school debate tournament in Japan. I think it shows how our debating experiences all over the world can have some important commonalities.

From http://kyushuchronicles.wordpress.com/2007/11/13/big-debate-news/

Big Debate News
Nov 13th, 2007 by peaquah
Resolution: All primary and secondary schools in Japan should have classes on Saturday.

Unlike last year where we had to trudge away in the rain, this year my students stayed for the entire debate tournament. Why you wonder?

BECAUSE WE TOOK SECOND!

This means that instead of debate being finished/finito/owari we are now contenders for the All-Kyushu title (tournament December 8th), and I have to start generating fake affirmative speeches at an alarming rate. I don’t have brain power to write too much more since my thighs are so sore I can’t cross my legs from a 16 km walk I did yesterday with the 1-1 homeroom. Think of it this way: it’s essentially like taking second at a state tournament in a state with five times the population of Montana. Out of five million people, our team is number two. It’s quite an honor and all the teachers at school have been patting my arm all morning, saying “thank you, Sensei.” Praju and I went up to the Superhero homeroom to watch the team tell the rest of their class and the students clapped and cheered. The debaters couldn’t hide their proud smiles.

The hi-lites:

On the way to the debate Ryosuke, our single boy, got a flyer for a womens’ college.
In the gas station where we bought our lunches in the morning I was patting everyone’s backs and arms, trying to encourage them. One girl looked around in surprise and we all realized she didn’t belong to our school. They teased me about it all day.
As soon as they broke into the final match they burst into tears and we were hugging and jumping around the room. I grabbed Mio so hard we tipped into a table.
They lose in the final round (their fourth match of the day) on the affirmative side. They’d won the previous three on the negative side. I approached their table after it was over and asked, “what happened?” Ryosuke shrugged. “Three times negative,” he said, “our brains couldn’t switch.”
At the end of the debate the other ALT judges came up to say how unique our arguments were, how much they liked our team. (FYI: I wrote most of their negative argument.) “Peaquah Sensei,” the debate team said, “we didn’t realize how smart you are.” I tapped the side of my head, “now you know,” I said, and we all laughed.
After it’s over the judges ask Ryosuke what he really thinks. He looks at the other two girls on his team. “Of course we don’t want to go to school on Saturdays,” he says, and we all laugh. “When we heard this resolution we thought we are really, really negative.”
We took them out for ice cream and pictures afterward and as we ate our sundaes I watched the lights go out in Ryosuke’s head. They’d gotten back from New Zealand the night before, and not only was it a feat they’d pulled off, but it was one they’d pulled off with 10 hours of jet lag on them. “I’m really lagging,” Ryosuke said when I asked him if he was tired from the plane. As soon as the final match was over his energy level plummeted, and I felt for him, for the work he’d put in to get them to that level. He won second place for them with all his flow charts and logical thinking. In the first round the ALT coach leaned over to ask, “how did he get so good?” I shrugged. “We don’t really know. We just pointed him in the right direction.” I remembered the rides back from speech contests in high school, how we stood in the gym of Bozeman/Helena/Butte High getting our certificates and then we all piled onto the bus for the ride back and I’d fall asleep, my nose pressed against the bus’ window. I saw that same relief on Ryosuke’s face after it was all over, that he could flip through his New Zealand pictures without the debate tension like a cloud in his head. And that made it all worth it. Because that level of relief? That drop in energy and ensuing exhaustion? That means he’d pushed himself as hard as he could, he gave the number one team a run for their money, and he came out the other side gripping a handle on the train, his head on his chest, finally able to sleep off a bit of that New Zealand lag while we all poked him from behind, reminding him NOW it’s time to PARTY.

Baltimore Urban Debate League Buzz for November

The BUDL BUZZ
Baltimore Urban Debate League
November 2007

Dear BUDL friends and supporters,

A quick note to thank all of you for your fantastic support of the League. The Baltimore community continues to wrap its arms around BUDL and we want you to know we feel and are so grateful for your support.

With your help as coaches, judges, volunteers, in kind donors, financial contributors and through your words of encouragement you make our work possible and more than that, you make it fun!

# As you will read in the BUDL Buzz below, another exciting year of BUDL programming is underway: Matt Skarzynski has joined the BUDL team from AmeriCorps and is BUDL's new community outreach coordinator. He will be working at schools, organizing public debates, organizing community-based events, and bringing our programs to you.
# Hundreds of students have come out on Saturdays for our competitive tournaments at the middle and high school levels.
# Our young people are traveling and competing nationally at the highest levels of debate and are making a name for themselves at home with plans for public debates.
# Our new class of BUDL high school Apprentices have been assigned to middle schools and are eager to help.
# Our College Access programming is going strong with one-on-one counseling, SAT prep classes, college fairs and more.

Thanks again for all you do!

Pam Spiliadis, Executive Director

Debaters came in droves to first tournaments

On Saturday, October 27, 200 high school debaters from 25 schools arrived at Walbrook for BUDL's first high school tournament. At the end of the day, City College took home first place overall, followed by MERVO.

The previous weekend, 75 middle school debate teams competed at the first middle school tournament of the season at Roland Park Elementary. The topic for this tournament dealt with whether convicted felons should be allowed to vote. The Roland Park middle school team took home the big trophy.

BUDLers get serious in Newark

On October 20, a busload of BUDLers made their way to Newark, New Jersey for the Jersey Urban Debate League (JUDL)'s 4th annual College Bridge tournament. We joined the New York, Rhode Island and Boston leagues, in addition to a number of schools from New Jersey at the tournament. (Photo: Varsity BUDLers Kalu Ndem (left), Tavon Powell (center) and Alex Washington discuss strategy and get their game faces on before heading to Rutgers.)

Save the date - Celebrating Success

Celebrating Success
Thursday, April 24 2008
Center Stage
5:45 - 8:00 p.m.
For tickets, click here.
For sponsorship opportunities, click here.

# By April 2008, BUDL will have plenty to celebrate: We will have held 15 debate tournaments for our more than 1,000 participating debaters.
# We will have launched debate squads in 9 new middle schools. We will have prepared at least 50 high school students for the SAT and college application process.
# We will have taken top debaters to regional and national debate tournaments to compete.
# We will have partnered with area healthcare and research institutions to help our students prepare for Public Debate Month in May, on the topic of HIV/AIDS awareness and youth violence.

Join us on Thursday April 24, 2008 to celebrate the successes and achievements of our students, schools and staff. Enjoy cocktails and fare, conversation with students and friends, and a live debate.

Apprentices2007 Meet BUDL's Apprentices

Twelve high school seniors and juniors have joined the BUDL staff as Apprentices, part of a peer-to-peer learning program sponsored in large part by the Annie E. Casey Foundation, Associated Black Charities and the Hoffberger Foundation. Over the course of the school year, the Apprentices will each mentor and coach a middle school debate team, organize a series of community-based public debates, and attend weekly three-hour professional development seminars. The Apprentices for 2007-2008 are:

# Brittany Wedlock, a junior at Reginald F. Lewis High, likes to, "as a student and a person, take any opportunity that comes [her] way." Through debate she's "mastered many new skills" and has "become a part of [her] community;" two elements motivating her as an apprentice.
# Raymond Mark, a junior at Carver Vocational Technical High, enjoys "[helping] younger people" and "[getting] more people to like debate." As an apprentice he wishes to share the opportunity that exists in debate for a person to learn about new and broad subjects like Americorps, Peace Corps, and events in Africa.
# Nicole Cheatom, a senior at Western High, has been debating since the 7th grade, an accomplishment that has helped her "become a better speaker, organize [her] thoughts," and taught her "to be more optimistic." Nicole is excited to share the love that she feels for debate with others.
# For Diamond Powell, a junior at Forest Park High, debate is a "fun, positive, and cool escape" that allows her to be heard. She intends to pursue college after high school and understands the apprenticeship program is a way she can do so.
# As a result of the debate readings and studies in which he's participated, Dwayne Jackson, a senior at Forest Park High, has recognized "limitless fields of potential within [himself] and in those around [him]." He is the co-captain of Forest Park's debate team and possesses resolve to change the world.
# Bionca Brown, a junior at Mergenthaler Vocational Technical High and a BUDLer for two years, enjoys helping her team's novice debaters present their cases. She intends to give middle school debaters "hints and tips on how to run and defeat a case" and to ensure that "they actually know what it is that [they] are debating."
# Viviana Armadillo, a senior at Patterson High, has been debating for three years, time which has "expand[ed] [her] world from small to large." She has a "passion for debate, a passion for learning" and "feels that middle school students deserve to learn."
# Five years of debate experience has taught Danielle Keize, a senior at Maritime Industries Academy High, that "education is not just what a book says," but requires her own research. Danielle is interested in attending college in order to pursue a career in the field of aerospace engineering.
# Sharrie McCain, a junior at Coppin Academy High, has in the past worked with students younger than herself in various after-school programs. In college, Sharrie intends to continue debating, as it has taught her the value of being a leader and a mentor.
# Jerod Stevenson, a junior at Francis M. Wood High, has experienced debate as a personally transformative and social event. He is excited to participate in the apprenticeship program as it will help him "become more of a different person."
# Maurice Watson, a junior at Southside Academy, has learned through debate that "[his] opinion counts" and that "[he] can also make a difference in life." The apprenticeship program will allow him to work with new people and ensure that he remains active.
# Debate has helped Denaya Barnes, a senior at City College High, to "mature as a person," and to "develop political skills and social skills." As an apprentice, she's happy to engage in work that she loves.
Make a contribution

A gift to BUDL today can make a difference...
# $50 will buy a team of two students the necessary supplies (evidence tubs, paper for copies and notes, research tools) for the upcoming debate tournaments
# $100 will cover the costs of food and trophies for one student at the rest of the tournaments this year
# $250 will send one student to BUDL's Countdown to College Summer Camp this summer
# $1,000 will help to cover the total costs of an upcoming tournament
# $5,000 will sponsor a school's debate squad for the year

So many volunteer opportunities

There are plenty of volunteer opportunities with the Baltimore Urban Debate League that are fun, exciting and give community members a chance to work with the students and teachers of the Baltimore City Public School System. Here are some:

# Be a judge: Spend a day judging debate rounds at the next BUDL tournament
# Be a tournament coordinator: Spend a day helping BUDL with event logistics at the next tournament
# Be a mentor: Attend a SAT prep workshop or a college essay writing workshop to lend your talents and expertise to BUDL debate students
# Be a traveling volunteer: Each month, BUDL staff takes students to out-of-state tournaments. Join the fun as an adult attendee to one of these competitions

Post a job

Looking for top candidates to fill a job opening at your company or organization? Post your full time or part-time job announcement in BUDL's new online Job Bank, accessed by many talented BUDL alums and students.
About Us

The Baltimore Urban Debate League is a 501(c)3 organization founded in 1999 to enrich the academic experience of students from Baltimore City's public middle and high schools through debate-based learning and activities. BUDL is especially interested in students with untapped potential, who are disengaged from the contemporary classroom. Debate motivates students who have never before felt the thrill of being responsible and rewarded for their own learning. www.budl.org.
email: pam@budl.org
phone: 410-752-2835
web: http://www.budl.org

Northeast Asian Open Results

From Jason Jarvis

NEAO 2007 @ Incheon University, Incheon, Korea
Nov. 9-11
All Asians format w/45 teams
CA: Sunhee Kim, Incheon Univ.
DCA's: Yui Miyaichi (Keio Univ., Japan), Ray Yen
(Wenzao Univ., Taiwan), Loganimal (Chung Ang Univ,
Korea)

Champion: DAE 3 (Debate Association of Ewha)
Runner Up: Korea University 1

Semifinalists:
EDiS (Ewha Debate Society)1
Yonsei University 1

Quarterfinalists:
Hanyang Univ. 1
Hanyang Univ. 3
Hanyang Univ. 5
EDiS 5

EFL Champion: BFSU 1 (Beijing Foreign Studies)

Speaker Awards:

1. Kim, Ah Young (EDiS 1)
2. Song, Na Young (Yonsei 3)
3. Tied:
Sophie Lee (DAE 3)
Monica Jang
5. Tied:
Lee, Seung Ah (EDiS 1)
Chung, Yoonjin (EDiS 1)
7. Cho, Hyung Gyu (Hanyang 1)
8. Oh, Hyun Suk (Yonsei 3)
9. Kim, Eui Yun (KDS 2)
10. Hur, Youngran (EDiS 5)

Top EFL Speaker:
Zhou, Shengru (Beijing Foreign Studies 1)

Jason Jarvis
Assistant Dean and Lecturer

Korea Development Institute Graduate School of Public Policy and Management
http://www.kdischool.ac.kr/
Office: 82-2-3299-1031
Email: debatekorea@kdischool.ac.kr

President, All Asian Debate Championship Executive Council

RAND Corporation Fellowship Targets Debaters

From Tim O'Donnell

Once again, the Pardee RAND Graduate School is offering a fellowship for
a former debater.  The relevant details are below.  Applications are due
to me by December 9th.

If have any questions, please let me know (I am here to help!)

Best,

Tim

---------

The PRGS Debate Fellowship

The Pardee RAND Graduate School (PRGS) has reserved a fellowship for an
outstanding candidate to be nominated each year by the PRGS Debate
Fellowship Committee. The fellowship will be awarded to a past
participant in the National Debate Tournament, who also shows
outstanding prospects for success as a thinker or scholar in an area of
public policy, preferably national security or international affairs.

The PRGS PhD Program

The Pardee RAND Graduate School (PRGS) was founded to train successive
generations of policy analysts to master the analytical tools required
help decisionmakers in both the public and private sectors find
solutions to some of the world’s most difficult, sensitive, and
important problems. PRGS is a component of the RAND Corporation, the
world’s original and best-known “think tank.”  Over more than 50 years,
RAND researchers have invented and refined many of the analytical tools
that set the worldwide standard for policy analysis.

Academic and practical experiences are interconnected at PRGS.
Coursework in such fields as economics, statistics, political science
and the social sciences is complemented by part-time work as on RAND
research projects.

Working on RAND research teams serves two important purposes. First, it
helps fellows to enter a community of practice where they may obtain
professional skills and tacit knowledge that the academic program alone
cannot convey.  Second, it pays for school: the PRGS/National Debate
Tournament Committee Fellowship is earned by work on RAND research
projects.

PRGS fellows work on policy related projects throughout their course of
study.  PRGS fellows have the opportunity to join teams of RAND
researchers, initially as apprentices and later, as their skills
develop, in roles of increasing responsibility and independence. At any
time at RAND, more than 1,000 research projects are underway. With the
exception of those projects that require security clearances or have
similar special requirements, nearly all of RAND projects may
potentially be open to PRGS fellows, depending on the specific needs of
the project.

Most fellows work on a variety of projects during their time at RAND,
giving them exposure to a range of policy areas, research methods,
colleagues, and clients. By the time they graduate, most fellows have
accumulated the equivalent of at least two years of job experience in
policy analysis and policy consulting--in addition, of course, to their
Ph.D. degrees. Often, project work also provides an important part of
the foundation for the dissertation required of all graduating fellows.

The Fellowship includes:

• Cost of tuition while you are enrolled.
• Annual base stipend.
• Fully-equipped office-style cubicle space within RAND
Corporation.
• The use of a laptop computer for the duration of a fellow’s
studies.
• The exact Fellowship amount will be determined after tuition has
been set for the 2008-09 year. For purposes of comparison, the value of
the Fellowship in the 2007-8 academic year was $44,750 ($21,000 tuition
plus $23,750 stipend).  The entire amount of the Fellowship is subject
to United States federal and state income tax. The Fellowship extends as
long as a student is in good academic standing making progress toward
degree completion, and subject to the terms outlined below in “Earning
the Fellowship.
• Tuition may be subject to increases in subsequent years, but
Fellowships have historically been increased concurrently to maintain
the stipend level.

Earning the Fellowship

To earn the full Fellowship, the recipient will be expected to perform a
minimum number of days working on RAND projects each year (including the
summers).  During the first year, Fellows are engaged in the core
courses, and are required to work a minimum of 60 days (or the
equivalent of 12 weeks). In years 2 and thereafter, fellows are required
to work a minimum of 155 days (or 31 weeks) per year.

Qualifications

To be eligible for nomination, a candidate must:

• Have participated in the National Debate Tournament during the
ten years prior to the date of application; and
• Meet the selection criteria for admissions established by PRGS
(which are outlined below).

The ideal candidate will also show outstanding promise as a thinker and
scholar in the areas of national security or international affairs
(although candidates from other fields will also be considered), and
have a record of success as a collegiate debater.

Nominations

By December 9, 2007, candidates must submit the following (via scanned
email attachment) to Tim O’Donnell, PRGS Debate Fellowship Committee
Chair, at timothyodonnell@gmail.com:

• A letter of application, indicating interests and
accomplishments relevant to policy analysis, and summarizing the
candidate's collegiate debate record;
• A letter of nomination from one collegiate debate coach; and
• Transcripts from undergraduate institutions attended.

Upon completion of the selection process, the debate selection committee
will submit the name of its nominee(s), along with supporting materials
to the PRGS.  A nominee must also complete and submit an application for
admission directly to PRGS, according to the process outlined on the
PRGS website (www.prgs.edu/Admission.html). All nominating documentation
and application materials must be received by PRGS no later January 10,
2008. However, the PRGS admissions committee will review candidates upon
receipt of nominating materials, as long as the application is complete.

Candidates who are not selected by the NDTC are still eligible to apply
for admission to PRGS.

PRGS Admission Criteria

PRGS selects up to 25 doctoral fellows each year on the basis of
intellectual power, creativity and a practical bent.

All applicants must have completed at least a bachelor’s degree from an
accredited institution, and possess superior quantitative, logical
reasoning and English language communication skills. An advanced degree
is not required. No preference is given to any particular undergraduate
major or course of study, but all students must have a working knowledge
of univariate calculus by the time of enrollment. Coursework in
statistics, economics and more advanced calculus is helpful, but not
absolutely required.

Beyond their academic capabilities, PRGS fellows share several key
attributes. They combine passion and discipline: a palpable passion to
help change the world for the better, and the demonstrated discipline to
master the intellectual tools that will help them do so. The ideal PRGS
fellow is organized, self-motivated and socially adept.

PRGS also seeks diversity in the broadest sense of the term. An
important part of the graduate experience is the learning that takes
place as students interact with each other, especially about different
life experiences and training, cultures, and ways of thinking.

PRGS limits admission to students who can participate full-time in its
combined research-and-study program. Because the courses are taught in
sequence, students must begin their study in the fall quarter.

For More Information, contact: Alex Duke, Assistant Dean at
alex_duke@prgs.edu or consult the PRGS website at www.prgs.edu


Timothy M. O'Donnell
Director of Debate and Associate Professor of Speech
University of Mary Washington
316 Combs Hall
1301 College Ave.
Fredericksburg, VA 22401
todonnel@umw.edu
(540) 654-1252 (office)
(540) 654-1569 (fax)

Koç University Debate Club Bids for 2010 WUDC

Fellow debaters,

We are delighted to announce that Koç University Debate Club will be bidding to host the World Universities Debating Championships 2010. After building up a tradition of hosting excellent events, culminating in our hosting of the largest ever European Championships in August 2007, we have decided that we are now ready and able to take on the massive challenge that hosting Worlds has become.

Worlds has not come to Eastern Europe this century and we believe that a Worlds hosted in Turkey would open up debating at the highest level to many new universities just as it has admirably done in Asia. We will be bidding to host Worlds in Antalya, based out of a 5-star resort and have already secured substantial institutional and corporate support.

Our Chief Adjudicator will be Can Okar, CA of Europeans in 2007, top ten speaker and semi-finalist at Worlds as well as former European Champion. Mehmet Fatih Inal and Suleyman Onay, two of the driving forces behind the OrgComm of Euros, will be our Co-Convenors, and a large portion of the OrgComm that worked on Euros will be part of the club in two years. We had over 100 volunteers at Euros and believe that the passion and hospitality we can offer Worlds will be unmatchable.

If you have any questions, please don’t hesitate to contact us. Our website is now online and can be found at www.kuworlds2010.com. It has all of our contact details as well as further information and videos. You can also join our Facebook group for updates as well as to show us a bit of support! Lastly, if you need references, speak to anyone who has been to join us in past years and ask them what they think...

We look forward to meeting you all in Thailand and would like to take this opportunity to wish both Botswana and Singapore the best of luck in their bids. It is an exciting time for global debating when there are so many universities jostling to host Worlds.

Koç University Debate Club

Contemporary Argumentation and Debate Call for Submissions

From Allan Louden – louden@wfu.edu

CALL FOR MANUSCRIPTS

Contemporary Argumentation & Debate

Submission Policy

Contemporary Argumentation and Debate: The Journal of the Cross Examination Debate Association, is a refereed journal dedicated to publishing quality scholarship related to the theory and practice of debate (academic and pubic sphere), and argumentation (theoretical and applied).

Submission Guidelines

Manuscripts should be prepared in accordance with the Publication Manual of the American Psychological Association. The journal employs a blind review system. Manuscripts must be submitted electronically in a current Word or rich-text format. Identification materials--the author(s), institutional affiliation, mailing address, e-mail address, and phone numbers--should only appear on the first page. The first page should also note any previous public presentation of publication of any portion or form of the manuscript. The manuscript should not contain internal references that identify the author in a way to compromise blind review. All correspondence relating to the manuscript, including notification that the manuscript has been received, will be directed to the specified author. Authors submitting to Contemporary Argumentation and Debate must give exclusive right of review to this journal until such time that the review has been completed. Upon acceptance, assignment of copyright will be made to the Cross Examination Debate Association. CAD is an annual publication with manuscripts are accepted throughout the year.

An electronic copy of the manuscript should be sent to:

Allan Louden – louden@wfu.edu

Editor, Contemporary Argumentation and Debate

Department of Communication

Box 7347, Reynolda Station

Wake Forest University

Winston-Salem, NC 27109

2008-09 USA High School Topic Choices Down to Health Care and Alternative Energy

From Angela Hays 
Attached are the results from the first round of balloting for topic
areas for the 2008-2009 national high school policy debate topic.
Ballots were sent to all 50 states, the National Forensic League,
National Debate Coaches Association and the National Catholic Forensic
League last August. After a period of discussion of the five topic
areas, states conducted balloting in September and October. Results
were sent to NFHS headquarters by October 19, 2007.

Two final topics, Health Care and Alternative Energy, were selected as
the favorites.

Also attached is a new ballot that solicits responses to the two final
resolutions. Please allow several weeks for discussion on this ballot.
Your office should conduct another vote during November and December.
Please send your final tally to the NFHS office by January 4, 2008. We
will announce the favored topic and resolution by e-mail (to state
associations/contact persons only) on January 8. The topic
announcement will also appear on the NFHS Web site (www.nfhs.org).

The 2008 Topic Selection Meeting will be held in Austin, Texas, August
1, 2 and 3. Specific information regarding lodging, travel arrangements

TOPIC BALLOT

Mark only the topic and resolution you prefer.  The area that receives the most votes will be the 2008-09 debate topic and resolution.

_____ HEALTH CARE
Resolved: The United States federal government should establish a universal health care system in the United States.

_____ ALTERNATIVE ENERGY

Resolved: The United States federal government should substantially increase alternative energy incentives in the United States.

Syracuse University has New Debate Team

From http://media.www.dailyorange.com/media/storage/paper522/news/2007/11/09/News/Newly.Founded.Debate.Team.Finds.Success.In.Fall.Competition-3090840.shtml

Newly founded debate team finds success in fall competition
Lauren Myers

Issue date: 11/9/07 Section: News
PrintEmail DoubleClick Any Word
Page 1 of 1
In its first semester of competition, the Syracuse University Debate Team is letting the opposition know of its arrival.

Despite the fact that it is a young team with little funding, the team met with much success at tournaments it has attended so far this year. At a championship tournament at Cornell University last weekend, the team had four of its speakers place in the top 10 out of 40 novice speakers.

Sophomore Caleb Sheldon, a mathematics and economics major, began the program last spring. Right now, the team has about 15 members who travel to different tournaments on the East Coast.

This semester, the team traveled to three different tournaments to kick off the start of its competition season. Because the team has little experience, it is considered a novice within the competition, and it doesn't qualify for the varsity round of tournaments.

Of the members who were at the tournament, four placed in the top 10. Freshman aeronautical engineering major Benjamin Strom-Weber was first, freshman music business major Matthew Gasda was fifth, freshman journalism major Caitlin Dewey was ninth and junior international relations major Ashley Morris was 10th.

The debate team also fared well in the teams competition. Two teams composed of Strom-Weber/Gasda and Sheldon/Dewey placed third and fourth, respectively, out of 20 novice teams.

The team is funded by the honors, Arts and Sciences and communications and rhetorical studies departments; however, its budget is smaller than most other schools, which hinders its ability to travel, compete and expand, Sheldon said.

Morris, the team's events coordinator, is working with other campus and student organizations to plan for the future, get the team's name out and to generate fundraising ideas.

Sheldon and Strom-Weber both would like to see funding for the team increase in the future.

"One of the ways to get better is to go to more tournaments, and right now, we only have enough funding to go to about five out of 25 tournaments," Sheldon said.

One of Sheldon's goals for the team is for it to qualify for nationals, which will be at Massachusetts Institute of Technology in April. He recognizes that this will be challenging, because in order to qualify, teams must accumulate points at tournaments, and the SU team does not have the funds to travel to very many tournaments.

Morris would like the team to have a stronger presence at competitions.

"We're competing against schools like Yale, Harvard and Brown who have traditionally dominated the competition, so we want to build a reputation as a team that can compete," she said.

Morris said she believes the team encourages its participants to be better, more educated citizens. Members are required to read newspapers and keep up with current events, and the debate experience allows them to be more involved in both the country and the world, while thinking on their feet.

For Strom-Weber, one of the most enjoyable parts of his experience on the debate team is the conversations he has with other teammates, as well as competitors.

"You can talk about almost anything, and you get the chance to discuss subjects you would normally never discuss," he said.

Sheldon also said he thinks the discussions are a highlight of the group's experience.

"We debate every topic under the sun, and many of our discussions have a lot of moral and philosophical undertones," he said.

He added that the team members learn a lot through these discussions and through researching and writing their own cases.

Update from Venezuela

From (identity hidden):

Dear Tuna,

I imagine you must be very busy with the IDAS workshop but just wanted to tell you that José Ramón Morales will be leaving for Slovenia next Friday and is truly excited. The WDI workshop last August was a great motivation to him and since his return to Ccs he's been devoting time and energy to start a much needed community of debaters in Venezuela. Brenda Montes was here for a wokshop in October and she showed him and others how to begin one. Too bad I couldn't get the financing for the tickets for the other two other students who also wanted to go badly to Slovenia. Perhaps next time.

You may also want to know that we may be doing some debates on the radio sometime soon and that your book Voices in the Sky comes as from heaven. José was interviewed on the radio this morning about debates. On the one hand we've so far tried to keep the debate initiative low key so as not to be in the government's eye and be accused of CIA agents, conspirators, and other such qualifications, but on the other there's no way we can keep it quiet if we want to grow.

Attached you'll find some photos of Brenda's workshop. Brenda is the one in the center in the group photo. Sandra will be coming to Ccs next Friday for another workshop. And here a link of the atmosphere in the universities here, as chavistas try to take them over. This happened two days ago as opposition students came back from a beautiful and peaceful march against the Constitutional Reform and the chavistas welcomed them to the campus with gunshots: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KQFXOkK_K7w

Best of luck in Slovenia!

WUDC Thailand - Update Registrations Now

Dear Participants,

I hope all of your preparations are going well for your trip to Thailand to attend Assumption Worlds. I request you all to complete all your registration details by November 20th. Please do this! Fill in all your accomodation, transporation, food etc.

A lot of you have emailed me asking about airport pick up etc. Each and every one of you will be picked up and we are arranging transportation back to Bangkok from Pattaya for all of you. You must leave 4 hours in advance from Pattaya back to Bangkok to catch your flights. It is imperative for us to have all your information so we can prepare all the logistics. Please provide all the information for each and every delegate. On November 20th I will be extracting all the information from the database and distributing it to all the departments to start preparing for the tournament. I! really hope you guys take this request very seriously. Please help us make this tournament a great success!

I appreciate all the support you guys have given us. Thank you for your patience! I pray and wish all of you a safe trip to Thailand. Looking forward to seeing all of you!

Last but not least, we apologize for any of our short comings during this past year. I can assure you we are trying our best experience you can possibly get at a tournament. Assumption Worlds is going to be a 400 team tournament. It is a challege and honor for all of us to host all of you this year.

Thank you for your kind attention.

kind regards,

Tarique Shakil

European Youth Debating Competition

From James Probert james_probert@esu.org of the English Speaking Union

The ESU is cooperating with CCN Communications Consulting Network and PlasticsEurope to help stage the United Kingdom leg of a European Youth Debating Competition involving over 1000 young leaders around the EU. One of ten events, in ten major European cities, the day will examine the issues of energy and resource use, climate change and technological progress through a debate. The British event is being held in City Hall in London on Monday 26 November at 2pm. Open to anyone aged 16-20, you can choose to be one of the 6 main speakers for each side, or a ‘free speaker’ able to make contributions at any time on any side. The ten best contributors from both the main speakers and the free speakers will be selected to go on an all-expenses-paid trip to Brussels to debate in the European Parliament with 90 other young Europeans next spring.

The ESU is offering a free workshop to any schools who wish to bring a group of students, with teacher accompaniment, to Dartmouth House on the morning of the debate, between 9.30am and 1pm, and will provide lunch and coach transport for all workshop participants from Dartmouth House to City Hall.

Individuals, whether at school or not, or school groups with or without teachers who do not wish to attend the workshop, are very welcome to come straight to City Hall at 1.50pm.

If you have reasonable expense claims to make for the cost of travel from London or nearby, we may be able to reimburse you. Contact james_probert@esu.org to find out if you are eligible.

To register your name for any of the parts of the day, or for more information, email james_probert@esu.org. For more information on the Europe-wide series of events, visit www.young-leaders.net/eydc.

James Probert

Deputy Director of Education &
Head of the Centre for Speech and Debate

The English-Speaking Union

37 Charles Street

London W1J 5ED

T: 020 7529 1550

F: 020 7495 6108

E: james_probert@esu.org

W: www.britishdebate.com

W: www.esu.org

Wake Forest Tournament to Use Text Messaging

From smithr@wfu.edu

During the tournament we will send broadcast messages to the cell phones (and/or computers) of all who want the messages. We will use Twitter. This will allow you to get messages updating where we are in the ballot collection/pairing process ("pairings in 10 minutes" is an example) and will help us help you ("Harris MIA with ballot!" is an example). "Cal BP running new Golan aff" is a hypothetical message from the scouting dept. Here's the quick and easy way to get the messages on your phone:
1. Send a text message to 40404 (it doesn't matter what's in the text message)
2. You will then receive a text from twitter (40404) asking you to send your name to confirm you want a twitter mobile account (this may take a minute); reply to this message with your name.
3. Send a message to 40404 that contains "follow wfushirley" (as written exactly here with a space between follow and wakedebate, without the quotes)
4. You should receive a confirmation text from twitter saying that you'll receive wfushirley updates You can learn more about Twitter and sign up to send an recieve via AIM and other computer channels at twitter.com

-- Ross K. Smith Director of Debate Wake Forest University 336-251-2076 (c) 336-758-5268 (o) http://groups.wfu.edu/debate/ http://www.DebateScoop.org

Pastor Debates Porn Star

From http://media.www.bgnews.com/media/storage/paper883/news/2007/11/08/Campus/Pastor.Porn.Star.Square.Off.In.AdultFilm.Debate.On.Campus-3086821.shtml

Pastor, porn star square off in adult-film debate on campus

By: Freddy Hunt

Posted: 11/8/07

Last night in the Union, a debate raged -- the horny vs. the holy, the seedy vs. the sacred, the pervert vs. the preacher. Porn star Ron Jeremy, who has appeared in nearly 9,000 adult videos, and Chris Gross, an anti-porn advocate, argued over the effects of the pornography industry on society.

Gross, a pastor who founded xxxchurch.com, an online anti-porn ministry, tore into the adult film industry, claiming it is desensitizing to viewers and damaging to relationships.

"You're going to be disappointed with sex, if you aren't already, because it doesn't measure up to porn," Gross said. "Girls on campus can't compete with porn."

Although Jeremy agreed that porn is often used for self-gratification, he argued that it could actually strengthen relationships.

"It can be used to masturbate - I used to masturbate to Gilligan's Island," Jeremy said. "But couples see the movie together, they see half the movie, get up and then go to the bedroom."

The message porn sends to the viewers, Gross believes, is one that degrading women is all right, and with the exception of guy-on-guy videos, porn is for men.

"Sure, women can make money, Jenna Jameson has something like $14 million," Gross said. "Women can make money, but that doesn't mean it empowers them. It's all about the guys, it empowers the guys."

Jeremy, who has a master's degree in special education, said it's not degrading because he knows many women who enjoy what some would consider rough and degrading sex acts, like receiving a facial.

"I don't mind getting an orgasm on my face," Jeremy said after the speech. Those who engage in it, he said, consider it romantic.

Being as easily accessible as it is, Gross believes porn is destructive and addicting, especially to young people, damaging their libido, ability to be intimate and their perception of reality.

"You may have the right to choose to watch it, but there is no such thing as 'Please watch porn responsibly,' " he said. "It's addictive and you will watch it more and more."

This is why Gross created xxxchurch.com - to help people overcome their adult film addiction. Gross has even attended adult film conventions and distributed Bibles that read "God Loves Porn Stars" on the cover.

But Jeremy said he believes porn should be compared to other vices that can be either abused or respected, like alcohol, automobiles or MySpace.

"You don't blame a whole business for a couple of idiots that aren't doing it right," Jeremy said.

The debate touched a lot on whether or not porn is degrading to women, but Missy Fletcher, senior, said she believes porn degrades men as a sex toy as well.

"It's really degrading to men, too, because it reduces man to the level of an animal. Instead of a man being able to love a woman and give himself completely to her, it's more like, 'No, I can't control myself, I want to use her for my own selfish kicks.' These people are so much more than porn portrays them as."

Some members of the audience, like sophomore Corey Dwyer, didn't take the debate as seriously and just wanted to see one of their favorite porn stars in person.

When a member of the audience asked Jeremy how many women he has been with, he answered nearly 4,000, and the crowd erupted. Then Gross answered the question, saying just one, and the crowd erupted even louder.

Winter Debate Teaching in Korea

From Jason Jarvis

Greetings everyone!

I am in need of 10-15 faculty members for KDI School of Public Policy and Management Winter School Preliminary Term from January 4 - 31.

This year we are teaching debate as level 2 and level 3 english. We are likely going to have government officials from a wide range of countries (including Iraq!). Faculty will teach 4 hours a day 5 days a week for 4 weeks. Weekends will be free.

We have a budget of about $5300/per faculty member to cover housing, plane ticket and food/salary. Effectively the less money we spend on housing/plane fare, the more money the faculty member will have left over as salary/spending money. I have been assured
that the budget money is allocated and ready to be used.

As the courses will be taught to graduate students, an MA or PHD is preferred, a BA with a strong teaching record may be acceptable in selected cases.

If you are interested please send a CV to:
debatekorea@gmail.com

Information about the KDI School can be found here:

http://kdischool.ac.kr

Jason Jarvis
Assistant Dean and Lecturer

Korea Development Institute Graduate School of Public Policy and Management
http://www.kdischool.ac.kr/
Office: 82-2-3299-1031
Email: debatekorea@kdischool.ac.kr

President, All Asian Debate Championship Executive Council

Legal Affairs Magazine Offers Library of Debates

From http://legalaffairs.org/webexclusive/dc_archives.msp

Huge text archive of debates on important and timely topics. Here is the lead-in for one debate:

KEEPING THE INTERNET NEUTRAL?

Christopher S. Yoo and Timothy Wu debate.

This Week's Entries: Monday | Tuesday | Wednesday | Thursday

Whether you browse Wal-Mart's website or that of your local hardware store, your Internet Service Provider gives your request equal treatment—called "network neutrality." Networks may soon become less neutral, however, because of proposed regulatory changes and corporate mergers among ISPs which could reduce consumer choice. Neutrality has been seen as beneficial for innovation and for democracy, since a "tilted" Internet may shut out independent political voices as well as small entrepreneurs. But neutrality has potential drawbacks. It may discourage innovative new services that require investment by an ISP, for example, and reduce the Internet's stability and security.

Should ISPs be allowed to play favorites among websites and offer non-neutral Internet connections to their subscribers?

Christopher S. Yoo is Professor of Law at Vanderbilt University Law School, where he directs the Technology and Entertainment Law Program. Timothy Wu is Professor of Law at Columbia Law School. He is the co-author, with Jack Goldsmith, of the recently-published Who Controls the Internet?

Other debates available include (partial list):

04.14.06
A CAR-INSURANCE MODEL FOR HEALTH CARE?
Theodore R. Marmor and Michael D. Tanner debate.
Read the debate.

04.07.06
JUDGES IN LAB COATS?
Michael L. Martinez and Jay P. Kesan debate.
Read the debate.

03.31.06
CHOOSING YOUR CHILD'S SEX?
John A. Robertson and Barbara Katz Rothman debate.
Read the debate.

03.23.06
FINDING FAULT WITH NO-FAULT DIVORCE?
Justin Wolfers and Katherine S. Spaht debate.
Read the debate.

03.20.06
IS FAIR V. RUMSFELD BAD FOR FREE SPEECH?
Mark Moller and Angus Dwyer debate.
Read the debate.

03.17.06
PARENT-FREE ABORTION?
Kimberly Mutcherson and Teresa S. Collett debate.
Read the debate.

03.03.06
BANNING BANS ON EMINENT DOMAIN?
Judy Coleman and Steven D. Anderson debate.
Read the debate.

Carleton WIns Canadian Championship

From http://www2.carleton.ca/fpa/news/?p=90

Carleton shines in National Debating Championships
The Carleton Debating Society has much to be proud of after competing in the British Parliamentary National Championships held in Edmonton from November 2-4. Carleton’s stellar performance at the event underscored its reputation as one of the top debate schools in the country.

In addition to placing first in both the debating and public speaking competitions, the Carleton team produced a record-breaking number of final-round contestants. The competition, hosted by the University of Alberta, also marks the first title tournament won by the Carleton University Debating Society.

Crowned Canadian British Parliamentary Champions were Adam Coombs (B.A., History) and Garnett Genuis (BPAPM), while Ian Freeman (English) was named top speaker.

Daniel Westlake and teammate Andrew Lawrence (both in Political Science) earned sixth place, and Carleton placed a total of five speakers in the top twenty overall ranking.
The British Parliamentary National Championships drew participants from schools across Canada and the US, and was adjudicated by judges from around the world.

Carleton hopes to build on this success over the next year. Daniel Westlake and Andrew Lawrence will compete at the World Championships in Thailand in December. In January, Carleton University will host the North American Championships, the largest debate tournament in Canada, with Ian Freeman as Chief Adjudicator.

Competition to Find Britain's Best Corporate Speakers

From http://www.trainingzone.co.uk/cgi-bin/item.cgi?id=174951&d=680&h=608&f=626&dateformat=%25e-%25h-%25y

Competition to Find Britain's Best Speakers

The College of Public Speaking is launching a competition to find the UK's top corporate orators.

Speakers will be expected to demonstrate skills in terms of gestures, speech construction, speaking with conviction, use of voice, vocabulary and word pictures, humour and audience rapport. The college also stipualtes that speeches must not be read.

The theme for the inaugural 2008 speech competition is “'business and carbon footprints” and the initial heats of the contest will take place in mid-January in Cheapside.

Contest organiser, Vince Stevenson, said: “This is a marvellous opportunity for individuals to develop themselves in a friendly, supportive and pressurised environment. Speech contests emulate the rigours of a tough business world where millions of pounds can be won and lost on one strong presentation.”

Further details are available at www.collegeofpublicspeaking.co.uk/Corporate_Challenge.html

More on Law Tournament in India

From http://www.hinduonnet.com/thehindu/thscrip/print.pl?file=2007110558590300.htm&date=2007/11/05/&prd=th&

Delhi college talks its way to a trophy

Staff Reporter
Analysis and logic to the fore at debate championship
— Photo: K. Murali Kumar

COMPETITIVE SPIRIT: Students taking part in a debate on the National Law School of India University campus in Bangalore on Sunday.

BANGALORE: If those who had attended the finals of last year’s International Parliamentary Debate Championship organised by the National Law School of India University experienced a sense of deja vu they could not be faulted. For, the sixth championship on Sunday was a repetition of last year’s final between Faculty of Law, Colombo, and Ramjas, Delhi, with both teams strategising to the last word until Ramjas College, Delhi, took the trophy home.

This four-day event, which is co-sponsored by The Hindu and Kotak Mahindra, had 42 teams participating from 35 colleges. Nagaraj from Kotak Mahindra gave away the trophy to the winning team which comprised Prithvi Rohan Kapur, Harsh Malhotra and Kartik Misra.

The event was presided over by NLSIU Vice-Chancellor Jayagovind. Harsh Malhotra won the award for the best speaker. The same team from Ramjas College had lost out to another Sri Lankan team last year.

“It feels good to take the trophy home this time. The competition was good and they felt we were the best team. We are obviously happy,” said Harsh Malhotra.

NLSIU did not participate in the competition to make sure the game was fair but the joy of organising an event of such magnitude was evident. Students cheered for both teams and gave adequate ground support to the Sri Lankan team.

Topic
The finalists were given the topic, “This house will take away the powers of the judiciary to punish contempt of court.” While the team from Colombo posed as the government, as is the procedure in parliamentary debate, they defined the “house” as the British House of Commons.

“This year’s competition is more about analysis and logic rather than language or eloquence. With diverse themes such as sports, education, law and the like, knowledge and understanding of issues were put to test,” said Siddharth Chauhan, chief adjudicator of the competition. The Sri Lankan team was happy with the experience and said they wanted to get a feel of Bangalore before they leave. “The competition was tough. The Indian teams get many hours of practice with inter-college debates and so on. This is rather limited back home. This is my first time in India, it was nice to meet everybody,” said Luwie Niranjan, student from Faculty of Law, Colombo.

National Law School Tournament in India

From malcolmx_00@yahoo.com

6th National Law School Debate - report

The 6th NLS Debate was held over four days (November 1-4, 2007) at the National Law School of India University (NLSIU) campus in Nagarbhavi,
Bangalore. The tournament attracted participation from 42 teams representing 23 educational institutions. The ‘NLS Debate’, launched in 2002 by the Literary and Debating Society of NLSIU, has in the matter of a few years emerged as the Indian sub-continent’s largest parliamentary-

style debating championship. It follows a rigorous format modeled on international competitions such as the All-Asian and AUDC championships. The six editions held so far have attracted participation not only from the best Indian universities but have also
drawn teams from Pakistan and Sri Lanka. We take pride in the fact that many teams who participate in the NLS Debate go on to perform exceedingly well in international competitions.

The schedule for this year’s event was as follows:
November 1, 2007: Introductory Briefing and Demonstration Debate followed
by first preliminary round
November 2, 2007: Rounds 2, 3 and 4
November 3, 2007: Rounds 5 and 6 followed by Quarter-finals
November 4, 2007: Semi-Finals and Grand final

The following institutions were represented:

1. Amity Law School (ALS), New Delhi
2. Army Institute of Law (AIL), Mohali
3. Chanakya National Law University (CNLU), Patna
4. Faculty of Law, Colombo University
5. Kirori Mal College (KMC), New Delhi
6. Lady Shri Ram College (LSR), New Delhi
7. Lovely Institute of Law, Jalandhar
8. M.S. Ramaiah Institute of Technology (MSRIT), Bangalore
9. National Academy of Legal Studies and Research (NALSAR), Hyderabad
10. Nirma Institute of Law, Ahmedabad
11. National Institute of Technology (NIT),Raipur
12. National University of Juridical Sciences (NUJS), Kolkata
13. Rajiv Gandhi National University of Law (RGNUL), Patiala
14. Ram Lal Anand College, New Delhi
15. Ram Jas College, New Delhi
16. Ram Manohar Lohia National Law University (RMLNLU), Lucknow
17. Rashtriya Vidyalaya College of Engineering (RVCE), Bangalore
18. Shri Ram College of Commerce (SRCC), New Delhi
19. Sri Venkateshwara College, New Delhi
20. St. Stephen’s College, New Delhi
21. Symbiosis Law College, Pune
22. University Institute of Legal Studies (UILS), Chandigarh
23. University School of Legal Studies, Guru Gobind Singh Indraprastha
University, New Delhi

After the conclusion of the preliminary rounds, the top 8 teams proceeded to the knock-out stage. The following motions were debated upon at the
various stages of the tournament.

Demonstration Debate
• This house believes that televised singing competitions promote mediocrity

Round 1 (Theme: Public policy and governance)
• This house will levy higher excise duties on vehicles that pollute more
• This house believes that the President and Vice-President of India should be elected through universal adult franchise
• This house believes that post-conflict societies should choose reconciliation over criminal prosecution

Round 2 (Theme: Women)
• This house will prescribe the death penalty for those convicted of rape
• This house will lower the age of consent for marriage
• This house supports reservations for women in legislatures

Round 3 (Theme: International Relations)
• This house believes that the Non-Aligned movement (NAM) is a thing of the past
• This house believes that the Association of South-East Asian Nations (ASEAN) must act against the Myanmar junta
• This house supports the construction of the Iran-Pakistan-India pipeline

Round 4 (Theme: Sports)
• This house believes that the Board of Control for Cricket in India (BCCI) should give the Indian Cricket League(ICL) its space
• This house believes that India is not ready for hosting a ‘Formula One’ race
• This house believes that cricket team managements are justified in issuing ‘gag-orders’ to their players

Round 5 (Theme: Education)
• This house supports reservations for religious minorities in educational institutions
• This house will prohibit formal prayers in public schools
• This house believes that the government should regulate private coaching institutions

Round 6 (Theme: Internet)
• This house will ban social networking sites in educational institutions
• This house believes that free online databases are in the best interests of authors
• This house believes that Voice Over Internet Protocol (VOIP) applications will replace fixed and mobile telecom services

Quarter-Finals (Theme: Tourism)
• This house will ban ‘space tourism’
• This house believes that foreigners and citizens should be charged the same entry fees for visiting historical monuments
• This house believes that the re-selection of the ‘Seven Wonders of the World’ was a farce

Semi-finals (Theme: Economics and Development)
• This house will tax agricultural income in India
• This house will not force private commercial banks to operate branches in rural areas

Grand Final (Theme: Free Speech)
• This house will take away the power of judges to punish for contempt of court

The grand final was contested between teams from Ram Jas College, New Delhi and Faculty of Law, Colombo University. The running trophy was won by the team from Ram Jas College which consisted of Harsh Malhotra, Kartik Mishra and Prithvi Rohan Kapoor. The winning team also took home a cash prize of Rs. 18,000 -/- while the runners-up team received Rs. 12,000 -/-. Cash prizes of Rs. 6,000 -/- each were also given to the losing semi-finalist teams from Kirori Mal College, New Delhi and St. Stephen’s College New Delhi. Harsh Malhotra of Ram Jas College was declared the ‘best speaker’ of the tournament (out of 126 speakers) while Parth Mehrotra of Kirori Mal College, New Delhi was declared the ‘second best speaker’ for the same. A special prize for ‘dignified’ conduct throughout the tournament was given to the team from Chanakya National Law University (CNLU), Patna.

The main sponsor for the event was Kotak Mahindra Bank whose contribution enabled the arrangement of accommodation and food for the participants as
well as healthy prize-money for the tournament.

Contacts:
Postal address: The Literary and Debating Society (2007-08)
The Student Bar Association, National Law School of India University, PO Bag 7201,
Nagarbhavi, Bangalore (560072)
e-mail: debate@nls.ac.in

Tournament Director: Aditya Verma: +91 99867 69785
Adjudication Core: Arghya Sengupta, Yaman Verma, Sidharth Chauhan

regards,
Sidharth Chauhan
Literary and Debating Society,
National Law School of India University, Bangalore
+91 98869 22576

Tickets Available for NYC Economist Debates

From Noel Selegzi:

The Economist has generously offered us a limited number of free tickets for next Saturday’s inaugural Economist’s Debates in New York City.

Details on the Debates are listed below. Please contact Rudo Moyo (rmoyo@idebate.org) if you would like a ticket. We will distribute the tickets on a first come first serve basis. Please do not ask for a ticket if you do no intend to use it, since we are hoping that the Economist will continue to offer us these tickets free of charge.

Best,

Noel

THE ECONOMIST IMPORTS ITS HIGHLY REGARDED DEBATE SERIES FROM LONDON

On November 10, eight thinkers debate about America and Happiness, and Religion and Politics

What
The Economist imports its highly regarded debate series to the US and tackles two of the world’s thorniest issues: Wealth and Happiness; and the Separation of Church and State. Economist editors moderate the Oxford-style debates, with two leading authorities arguing each side. In a democratic flourish, the audience will decide the winning side.

Who
The Economist hosts: Jeffrey Sachs, Betsy Stevenson, Will Wilkinson, Tyler Cowen, Rev. Barry Lynn, Irshad Manji, Fr. Richard Neuhaus, and Walter Russell Mead.

Where
Gotham Hall, 1356 Broadway (at 36th Street), New York, NY 10018

When
10 November, 2007

3pm-4.30pm: Wealth and Happiness: America is failing at the pursuit of happiness. Executive editor Daniel Franklin moderates a debate on the economics of happiness. On the affirmative, Jeffrey Sachs and Betsy Stevenson; on the negative, Will Wilkinson and Tyler Cowen.

5.30pm-7pm: Religion and Politics: Religion and politics should always be kept separate. Editor-in-chief John Micklethwait moderates a debate on religion’s role in politics. On the affirmative, Rev. Barry Lynn and Irshad Manji; on the negative, Fr. Richard Neuhaus and Walter Russell Mead.

Tickets
$30 for one debate, $40 for both ($20/$30 for Economist subscribers).

Purchase online at www.economist.com/nydebates or call 1.800.965.4827.

Tickets must be purchased in advance – not available at the door.

Media enquiries: debatesmedia@economist.com

======

Jeff Sachs, Director of the Earth Institute, Columbia University, is noted for his work with governments and international agencies on problems of poverty reduction, debt cancellation, and disease control.

Betsy Stevenson, of The Wharton School, writes on the impact of public policies on women and families.

Will Wilkinson, a policy analyst at the Cato Institute, has researched the moral dimensions of Social Security reform and the policy implications of the psychology of happiness.

Tyler Cowen is the Holbert C. Harris Professor of Economics at George Mason University. His most recent book. “Discover Your Inner Economist: Use Incentives to Fall in Love, Survive Your Next Meeting, and Motivate Your Next Dentist”, has just been published by Dutton.

Rev. Barry Lynn, a long-time civil liberties activist and lawyer, has served as executive director of Americans United for Separation of Church and State since 1992.

Irshad Manji is Senior Fellow with the European Foundation for Democracy. She is also author of The Trouble with Islam Today: A Muslim's Call for Reform in Her Faith.

Fr Richard Neuhaus was named one of America’s 25 most influential religious leaders by Time Magazine in 2005. He is President of The Institute on Religion and Public Life.

Walter Russell Mead is a leading expert on US foreign policy at the Council on Foreign Relations.

IONA Debate Rankings 4 November 2007

From kcl_debating@yahoo.co.uk

The IONA Rankings are shown below, updated after Imperial. When I get the Newcastle and Durham results, I will update further. Congratulations to Bristol B, Eve Hibbert-Kene and Marc Delahanty, for winning the competition, to Lewis Iwu for topping the speaker tab, and to Oxford A, Bristol A and Sydney/Melbourne for making the final. Congratulations also to the whole Imperial team who put on a fantastic tournament. Bristol's victory take them to 7th in the rankings, while Oxford move into the top 5.

In response to various questions and requests I got last year, I have decided to this year also run individual speaker rankings, I know some people are interested to have such a system, and several societies have mentioned it would be useful to help with their team selection processes. The system is based on the IONA ranking system, well-performing speakers at every tournament will earn points and then be ranked according to a score calculated by averaging their 8 best performances. I won't e-mail it round to everyone like the University rankings, but if institutions or individuals are interested, they can e-mail me at any point to get the current rankings.

Jonathan LM

University Debating Rankings 04/11/07 - After 3 Events

1		1	Cambridge	121.4
2		2	LSE	72.2
3		3	Middle Temple	51.2
4		10	Oxford	48.2
5		5	Inner Temple	45.6
6		4	ULU	42.0
7		17	Bristol	40.0
8		7	UCL	33.6
9		6	Nottingham	31.2
10		12	QMUL	21.7
11		8	SOAS	18.8
12		9	Warwick	17.8
13		11	Manchester	16.4
14		14	BPP	13.6
15		18	KCL	7.8
16		13	Sussex	5.6
17		15	Durham	4.0
18		16	Imperial	2.0

King's College London Debating Society is proudly sponsored by The Audit Commission.

Check out the society homepage at: www.kcldebating.org

Hosting a Debte Tournament Takes a Lot of Work

From http://www.hattiesburgamerican.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20071102/NEWS01/711020321/1002

PHOTO: Oak Grove junior William Wild, debate tournament director, organizes the Oak Grove Warrior Invitational Tournament information box.

Hosting debate tournament takes a lot of work
By Melissa Powell

I always thought the difficult part of debate was debating, but I now realize how much work it takes to host a tournament.

Oak Grove High School will host its fourth annual Debate Invitational today and Saturday.

While the members of OGHS forensics hurriedly prepare for the big event, other key people are doing their parts - the parents.

Being a first-year member of the team, I never knew that so much work was required to be a host school. The parents of the students who are involved do an incredible amount of planning to make the weekend possible.

So, what exactly is involved in hosting a debate tournament?

Obviously, you have to provide the location for the debating to occur. You need to get people to judge the debating. You need to plan which rooms house which event, who is keeping time in each event, who is in charge of the "tab" room where ballots are sent, who will keep track of points and awards, what will the students and judges eat, how will you schedule each event, what trophies will be awarded, and, most importantly, how will you fund everything?

OK, location: Oak Grove High School. Check. That is the easiest on the list of things to do.

Each OGHS forensics member is required to provide two judges for the weekend, each signing up for specific time slots. Sound easy? It is actually harder than you think to find two people willing to sacrifice their weekend to listen to others argue or act. It can be done, though, and most students recruit family members who have interest in debate or OGHS debate alums who are always willing to sacrifice for forensics.

So, judges? Check.

The OGHS team always elects a tournament director who is a student in charge of the home tournament. This year's director is extremely capable and organized. William Wild, a junior, is meeting the difficult task with his perfectionism and perseverance.

"My job as tournament director is to coordinate, to conceptualize and to execute the annual OG Warrior Invitational. Hosting an event of this magnitude is a huge undertaking, but with everyone's support, I know these efforts will prove successful," Wild said.

The difficult part of the tournament that requires the most work is finding the funding and providing food for all who are involved over the weekend. This is where the parents come in.

The Forensics Booster Club solicits local businesses for food donations, and members help in planning the tournament and making the school aesthetically pleasing to the visitors.

The parents provide four meals and snacks for the judges during the two days and operate a concession stand for the debaters. Debater Michael Chancellor's parents are spending a lot of time this week cooking. Betty Chancellor is preparing chili, chicken gumbo, jambalaya and ham.

Each booster member is also supplying a dessert. Businesses also have donated food for the tournament.

Local businesses can also donate money to the tournament. By purchasing an ad for the tournament's program, businesses can help support the forensics team. Each team member is required to sell $200 worth of ads.

Junior Kristin Greer's mother, Lanelle Greer, is extremely involved with the tournament. For three years, she has helped plan the event.

Lanelle Greer said the tournament is a team effort involving the coaches, students and parents.

Around 18 to 21 schools participate in the Oak Grove Invitational, and as many as 40 community judges are needed tonight and 60 on Saturday.

All those involved are confident things will run smoothly this weekend and want to encourage the community to support area forensics teams.

Melissa Powell is a senior at Oak Grove High School.

Global Debate Experiments with MarsEdit.

Things in the blogosphere move quickly.

This blog started as an iWeb blog, but that was too time consuming and too cumbersome. The swich was made to Blogspot, which was simple and easy if not extremely aesthetic.

One problem with Blogspot is that you have to be online to update, but at least it does it fairly quickly, unlike iWeb.

To experiment with the next stage I have chosen MarsEdit. MarsEdit allows you to use Blogspot, but to compose offline and author each post with some additional features. The next few days will be totally experimental, so bear with me.

USA NPTE Team Rankings 1 November 2007

National Parliamentary Tournament of Excellence Team Rankings

Rank Team Name NPTE Points Prelim Wins Prelim Losses Win Pct

1
Texas Tech PO (Putnicki / Owen) 35.50
17-2
89.470%

2
Western Kentucky MP (Mullins / Parke) 32.30
22-2
91.670%

3
Biola MV (Stephen Mar / Peter Van Elswyk) 31.25
13-3
81.250%

4
CSU - Long Beach JP (Aj Jenkins / Jacqueline Paterno) 29.55
21-8
72.410%

5
Western Kentucky BlH (Brian Bloss / Kelcy Hathaway) 28.30
18-6
75.000%

6
UCSD HS (Zachary Schultz / Hoomah Hefzi) 28.15
15-7
68.180%

7
Western Kentucky FM (Jessica Furgerson / Rachel Mosley) 26.30
18-6
75.000%

8
UNR AP (Max Alderman / David Pena) 25.55
18-4
81.820%

9
Washburn NJ (Chris Neill / Jeff Jones) 24.10
17-4
80.950%

10
Washburn DO (Tyler Dooley / Jessica Otto) 23.90
15-4
78.950%

11
Western Washington KE (Krell / Elle) 23.50
16=4
80.000%

12
Pacific FS (Steve Farias / Emily Sheldon) 23.10
23-12
65.710%

13
Lewis&Clark AC (Atcheson / Cheesewright) 23.00
17-3
85.000%

14
Washburn CS (Annaleigh Curtis / Marcus Schultz-Bergin) 22.90
15-4
78.950%

15
Western Kentucky MS (Chad Meadows / Tom Schally) 22.80
14-4
77.780%

16
Drury RD (Scott Ross / Jeff Davis) 22.10
16-5
76.190%

17
Washburn AJ (Joe Allen / Joelle Jasper) 21.06
17-4
80.950%

18
Pacific EM (Anne Eastlick / Broc Maples) 19.45
17-11
60.710%

19
CSU - Long Beach FS (Aly Fiebrantz / Adam Swaller) 19.25
18-11
62.070%

20
Point Loma NW (Jaimee Wanta / Daniel Nadal) 18.65
15-7
68.180%

21
Oregon PD (Katherine Preston / Ben Dodds) 18.00
11-2
84.620%

22
UNR CH (Jack Cholin / Matthew Hogan) 17.65
13-9
59.090%

23
Willamette CL (Pete Crisalli / Eric Lowe) 17.50
9-3
75.000%

24
CSU - Long Beach KL (Nadia Khan / Amber Lundy) 17.05
16-13
55.170%

25
Rice DH (Kirti Datla / Hrishi Hari) 17.00
10-2
83.330%

26
SIU CD (Kevin Calderwood / Kyle Dennis) 16.50
13-1
92.860%

27
WWU WP (Alysia Whitcomb / Colin Patrick) 16.50
13-7
65.000%

28
Abilene Christian GS (Tony Godfrey / Brandon Smith) 16.20
10-2
83.330%

29
Texas Tech HM (Jeremy Henderson / Mike Mitchell) 15.81
13-7
65.000%

30
Northern Arizona BR (Kaitlin Bundock / Travis Risner) 15.75
14-9
60.870%

USA NPDA Sweepstakes 1 November 2007

National Parliamentary Debate Association Sweepstakes

From http://cas.bethel.edu/dept/comm/npda/stats/schools?season=2007-2008&sort=byrank

Rank School Total #1 #2 #3 #4
1 Western Kentucky Univ 117.33 36 31.5 27.83 22
2 Washburn Univ 104.42 29.83 29 27.83 17.75
3 Univ of the Pacific (CA) 83.71 27.5 19 18.71 18.5
4 El Camino Col 77.92 22.25 22.25 22.17 11.25
5 Pt. Loma Nazarene Univ 70.17 22.17 21 15 12
6 Rice Univ 69.12 27 23.83 18.29 0
7 Northern Arizona Univ 63.66 22.75 18.5 13.13 9.29
8 CA State Univ - Long Beach 63.54 19.75 17 13.67 13.13
9 Cedarville Univ 57.17 24.17 20.17 12.83 0
10 Western Washington Univ 55.96 18.63 17.33 13 7
11 Carroll Col (MT) 52.86 25 14.86 13 0
12 Wheaton Col 52.83 23.33 11.17 10.83 7.5
13 Biola Univ 51.42 23 10.25 9.17 9
14 Texas Tech Univ 50.73 16.5 16.14 14.33 3.75
15 Hillsdale Col 43.5 18.17 9.17 9.17 7
16 Whitman Col 41 23.33 17.67 0 0
17 Lewis & Clark Col 40.08 19.33 12 8.75 0
18 Univ of Oregon 39.62 25.83 7.5 6.29 0
19 Univ of Wyoming 38.48 16.14 11.5 10.83 0
20 Univ of NV - Reno 38.38 11 9.75 8.88 8.75
21 Col of Idaho 38.33 21 17.33 0 0
22 Kansas Wesleyan 38.25 15.17 11 8.33 3.75
23 McKendree Col 37.83 17.33 12.83 7.67 0
24 Vanguard Univ 36.25 13.75 10 8.75 3.75
25 Irvine Valley Col 35.96 11.88 10.83 10.75 2.5
26 Santiago Canyon Col 35.83 13.33 12.5 10 0
27 San Diego Christian Col 34.88 14 14 5 1.88
28 USAFA 34.57 15 11 8.57 0
29 Southern Illinois Univ 34.29 12.13 11.17 11 0
30 Truman State Univ 34.21 14.71 12 7.5 0

USA NDT Swepstakes 1 November 2007

National Debate Tournament - policy debate

From http://commweb.fullerton.edu/jbruschke/web/NDTPoints.aspx

School Total Points

1 Binghamton 373
2 Kansas (Univ. of) 320
3 California 243
4 Emory 240
5 Missouri State 238
6 Kansas State 232
7 Oklahoma 222
8 Harvard 219
9 Wichita State 218
10 Southern California 203
11 Texas (Austin) 202
12 Towson 195
13 Liberty University 194
14 Richmond (Univ.) 174
15 Gonzaga 173
16 Idaho State 170
17 Cornell University 169
18 Wyoming 167
19 Dartmouth 159
20 Kansas City Kansas C 156
21 San Francisco State 154
22 Central Oklahoma (Un 152
23 James Madison 147
24 U.S. Military Academy 146
25 Appalachian State 143
26 CSU Fullerton 139
27 Baylor 137
28 Texas-Dallas 135
29 Northern Iowa (Univ.) 135
30 Miami (Florida) 133

Top 30 in USA CEDA Swepstakes 1 November 2007

Cross Examination Debate Association - Policy Debate

From http://commweb.fullerton.edu/jbruschke/web/CEDAPoints.aspx

School Total Points Tiebreaker Points

1 Binghamton 155 42
2 Kansas (Univ. of) 118 12
3 California 90 15
4 Emory 90 4
5 Harvard 86 18
6 Wichita State 85 18
7 Kansas State 80 12
8 Oklahoma 78 17
9 Liberty University 74 8
10 Missouri State 70 2
11 Southern California 66 6
12 Cornell University 60 5
13 Texas (Austin) 60 1
14 Wyoming 57 8
15 Dartmouth 55 7
16 Gonzaga 55 4
17 Richmond (Univ.) 54 6
18 Towson 52 4
19 U.S. Military Academy 51 5
20 Idaho State 51 1
21 James Madison 50 9
22 Northern Iowa (Univ.) 48 11
23 Texas-Dallas 48 3
24 Northwestern 48 3
25 San Francisco State 47 13
26 Appalachian State 47 5
27 Baylor 46 5
28 Central Oklahoma (Un 44 1
29 Miami (Florida) 43 8
30 Wake Forest 43 7

Millions in China to View Student Debate

From http://www.princeton.edu/main/news/archive/S19/39/30G96/index.xml?section=featured

Student debate will air to millions of viewers in China

by Emily Aronson · Posted November 1, 2007; 12:36 p.m.

Students from Princeton and Tsinghua University in Beijing recently competed on campus in a Chinese language debate that will be featured in a China Central Television (CCTV) program to be seen by millions of viewers in China.

The debate between the Tsinghua students and junior David Cohen-Tanugi and sophomores Jonathan Kent and Tamar Walker was held Sept. 25 in Jones Hall. It was recorded by a CCTV film crew documenting the Tsinghua team's debates at Princeton, Columbia, Yale and Harvard, among other schools around the world.

The international debates were organized by CCTV, the state television network in China, and the Tsinghua team's journey will be the focus of a documentary featuring interviews with the Princeton students and showing campus life at Princeton and other competing schools. An airdate for the documentary has not been announced.

The Princeton students were selected and trained for the debate by Professor of East Asian Studies Chih-p'ing Chou, who also is director of the Princeton in Beijing language study program and the East Asian Linguistics Project, as well as lecturers Zheng Qu and Yan Zhuang.

"All three of our students did extremely well, and the team from Tsinghua University was very impressed by their command of the Chinese language," Chou said. "I believe that students are the best representatives of the University, and I'm confident that the Princeton debate team will impress Chinese television viewers with their Chinese language and keen analytical skills."

For the debate, the Princeton students were asked to take the affirmative position on the question of whether gambling should be legalized throughout the United States. The debate followed a three-part format: Walker made an opening statement, all three students offered an extemporaneous rebuttal of the Chinese team's arguments and Cohen-Tanugi made a closing statement. Each student also was asked to showcase a talent, with Kent performing a traditional Chinese comedic performance called Xiangsheng, Cohen-Tanugi writing calligraphy and Walker singing a Chinese song.

"We are constantly looking for new opportunities for our students to improve their Chinese proficiency and fluency," Chou said. "The debate encouraged them to use Chinese creatively and in a real-life situation."

In a report issued after the competition, debate organizers said the students' language proficiency made for an engaging debate. A translated version of the report said: "The students' exceptional performance cannot be separated from the careful and focused instruction that is provided to Princeton students."

Cohen-Tanugi, who is fluent in English, French and German and also is studying Spanish, said the debate was a unique opportunity to hone his Chinese language skills. The physics major said one of the reasons he came to Princeton from his native France was the University's Department of East Asian Studies and Chinese language instruction.

"The University's instruction of Mandarin is more than just intensive," he said. "It's also designed in an extremely efficient way, which enables students to learn very quickly."

Even with this instruction, however, Cohen-Tanugi said participating in the debate was much different than using the language conversationally.

"Surprisingly, there is a lot of memorizing that goes into Chinese debate competitions," he said. "Whereas speaking Chinese conversationally is naturally more spontaneous and unrestrained, competing in a Chinese language debate seems to be a time of strict adherence to an official position and of formal sentence structures."

Although Yale was selected by debate judges as the winning U.S. team, which means its debaters will travel to China to compete in a final round with students from Tsinghua and the other winning international teams, the Princeton students said participating in the debate and CCTV documentary were valuable experiences.

"I hope that the debate broadcast will show Chinese audiences the growing popularity of Chinese language learning in the United States," Kent said. "The program may also be many Chinese television viewers' first introduction to Princeton University, and it would be gratifying if our debate increases awareness about Princeton in mainland China."

International Independent Schools Public Speaking League

Seems to be mostly from Canada, but with their tournament this year in the UK.

From http://www.iispsl.org/index.html

Welcome to the official website of the International Independent Schools Public Speaking League. For the past twenty-four years, the IISPSL has hosted an annual public speaking and debating competition that has attracted competitors from around the world. Upon invitation, recognized independent schools may send teams of three competitors to the four-day competition, typically hosted by one of the Canadian member schools. Students compete in a variety of public speaking events selected from four categories. All competition is in the English language. Throughout its history the tournament has provided a means for students from Canada, the United States and the United Kingdom, to advance to the World Individual Public Speaking Competition, held later in the same school year.


We invite students and teachers of the independent school community in Canada and beyond to review this website, where information about the league, the tournament, event categories and rules can be found throughout. Questions and comments can be directed to the site webmaster.

It was in the hopes of allowing enthusiastic students to demonstrate their talents as well as to strengthen the relationship between private schools across Canada that the IISPSC was created under the direction of John Aimers. In 1982 he and John Messenger organized the first tournament of this sort. Held at St. John's Ravenscourt School in Winnipeg, Manitoba, it proved to be a great success. Encouraged by this result, the organizers decided to make the competition an annual event. As its popularity grew, American students were seen more and more often. By now, the IISPSC has prospered to such an extent that in recent years, even schools from as far away as the United Kingdom, Argentina, and Cyprus have begun to send competitors regularly. Consequently, the tournament is also recognized for its ability to help create new friendships among students from different geographical regions, thus bringing together the international community from the level of today's youth.

The annual tournament of the IISPSC extends over a 5 day period, routinely hosted on the 3rd weekend in October by a member school in North America. In recent years the event has attracted 165 competitors representing 45 Independent Schools from Canada, the United States, England, Bermuda, Argentina, Scotland and Cyprus. After 2 rounds of competition, high-scoring speakers in each event proceed to the final round which determines the winner in each event. From the scores in the regular round, the overall ranking is determined. This overall ranking is used to select one-half of the Canadian and American teams which will attend the Individual World Debating and Public Speaking Championships.

Each of the annual IISPSL competitions begins with a detailed briefing for coaches, competitors and judges. Students attending the event should be familiar with the rules governing their chosen events and are welcome to download the judging ballots from the event descriptions below. In each event there shall be at least two rounds of preliminary competition and a final round. Students are discouraged from using material from previous competitions, particularly for prepared events. There are time penalties for going under the minimum time or over the maximum in all events other than the two types of debating. A 15 or 30 second warning by the timer shall be given to indicate the lower or upper limit of all events. The tournament organiser, after consultation with the executive, may disqualify any competitors who, for any reason, do not follow the rules.

Each competitor shall compete in one event in each of three of the four categories listed below.

a. Category I: Impromptu Speaking, Extemporaneous Speaking
b. Category II: Parliamentary Debate, Newscast
c. Category III: After-Dinner Speaking, Persuasive Speaking
d. Category IV: Interpretive Reading, Drama, Cross-Examination Debating

2007 International Independent Schools' Public Speaking Championships, UK
We look forward to seeing you at Queen Anne's School, Caversham from October 23 - 29, 2007.