North Americans in Ottawa - Like "Intellectual Street Fighting"

From http://www.canada.com/ottawacitizen/news/story.html?id=03949a5a-7311-447b-8387-59ca18e7c1ae

'Intellectual street fighters' spar at debate championships
70 teams test their mettle in 3-day North American battle

Roger Collier
The Ottawa Citizen

Sunday, January 27, 2008

The prime minister stood at the podium, one hand in his pocket, the other waving excitedly, his eyes locked on the Speaker of the House. To his right, a fellow MP encouraged his leader with desk thumps and an occasional, "Hear, hear!" To his left, two members of the opposition scribbled madly in notebooks between bouts of whispering.

About seven minutes into his speech -- concerning the practice of jury nullification, where juries can refuse to apply the law if so compelled by their consciences -- the PM, dressed in jeans and a grey hoodie, raised his hand to indicate it was time to wrap things up.

This scene was repeated in many classrooms yesterday at Carleton University as part of the 2008 North American Debate Championships.

The three-day competition, run by the Canadian University Society for Intercollegiate Debate and the American Parliamentary Debating Association, brings together 70 two-person teams from across the continent. The final round will take place at 2 p.m. today at the Mayfair Theatre on Bank Street.

"Some describe debate as intellectual street fighting," said Andrew Lawrence, a third-year Carleton student and tournament co-director. "There's nothing quite like getting smacked down with a metaphorical two-by-four."

The championship has alternated between the U.S. and Canada since 1991. Carleton won the bid to host this year's competition over McGill University, which has already hosted it three times.

In each round, one team is designated as the government and the other as the opposition. They are given a topic 15 minutes before sparring begins. Subjects range from "Should sex offenders be registered?" to "Should private companies be permitted to buy kidnap insurance for their employees?"

"Most of the issues are topical, some are philosophical," said Mr. Lawrence.

Leon Grek, who is studying English literature and classics at McGill, has been competing in collegiate debates for three years. It's in his blood, he says. His father competed in high school and there were often debates around the family dinner table.

"There's an adrenaline thrill. It's not dissimilar to being on a sports team."

The competitors say good debaters must keep abreast of current affairs, as they have no idea what issue they'll be defending or condemning at any given tournament. They must also be confident, competitive and, most of all, willing to put the time in to hone their oratory skills.

"Good debaters are made," said Mr. Grek, "not born."

However, some believe to really excel, you have to be able to work a room.

"You need a lot of charisma to be a good debater," said Aneka Jiwaji, a first-year arts student at the University of Alberta.

Yale University in Connecticut has won the past two championships. The last Canadian school to win was the University of Toronto, which took home the trophy in 2005.

American and Canadian schools have different styles of debate. In the U.S., every point raised by one side must be refuted by the other. The debates in Canada tend to be broader in scope.

Style isn't the only difference.

"Canadian teams are more civil," said Lauren Henry, a third-year Yale student studying ethics, politics and economics.

Putin's Replacement Refuses to Debate

From http://www.presstv.ir/detail.aspx?id=40900&sectionid=351020602

Putin's successor refuses TV debates
Tue, 29 Jan 2008 21:47:07

Dmitry Medvedev
Putin's successor, Dmitry Medvedev, has declared he will not take part in joint events including a live television debate with his rivals.

"Dmitry Medvedev has informed the Central Election Commission about his decision not to take part in joint events," a member of his campaign staff said.

His opponents have criticized the move and said it would make it even harder for opposition candidates to gain airtime to get across their views.

Although official campaign rules envisage live TV debates among candidates, Putin and his United Russia have refused to take part in past elections saying they saw no worthy partners to debate with.

The 42-year-old lawyer is already way ahead of all hopefuls in opinion polls and is expected to dominate the 2nd of March presidential elections.

North Carolina A&T University Feels the Need for a Debate Team

From http://media.www.ncatregister.com/media/storage/paper277/news/2008/01/30/theWORD/Where.Are.Our.Great.Debaters-3177637.shtml

Where are our great debaters?
Alexandria Harper

Issue date: 1/30/08 Section: theWORD

The Great Debaters, which opened on Christmas day, brought back the spirit of debate.

Moviegoers were won over with applause as Wiley College of Marshall, Texas became triumphant over Harvard University.

This event changed the course of history but more importantly rejuvenated young minds in the power of spoken word. A&T students are now pumped to discuss issues that are effecting our generation. Public policy, entertainment, and even presidential debates are the swarming buzz around campus. There is only one problem.

A&T does not have a debate team. What this means is argumentation and discussion is left resting in the classroom. Friends argue with friends but the end result is often name calling and or bickering.

Organized arguments which are fact based are rarely achieved without the emergence of a debate team. A & T like Wiley College has a student body filled with intellectual and passionate individuals.

The best example of this is found in Dr. Myra Shird's 401 Argumentation and Debate class. On a normal day students engage in debates before class if officially slated to begin. The eagerness for expression is a pre-requisite to this course.

Bryan Fingers a junior majoring in English is a student in the class. He said "students need to be educated about the difference between arguing and fussing. To bring enlightenment all must be informed".

This statement is shared by others in the class who feel cheated by not having a debate team. "We fund political candidates and do not have a team that represents what we want to ask", said Quay Quick a senior speech communication major.

A cry among students to organize a debate team has much enthusiasm but is the faculty ready to wipe the tears away?

I meet with Dr. Shird after class to ask her opinion in an effort to gain a pulse reading on the facility. She said "the Political Science department and the Honors programs are voiced supporters in getting a team started. Mock debates are already held in these areas."

In her opinion the support already exist the problem is merely financial. "Funding is the biggest challenge; if we want to take communication to the next level money will have to be raised".

Students must also show their dedication by putting pressure on the University. Bryle H. Hatch a senior speech communication major believes "a university of this size with such strong academic departments and no debate team is a shame".

He said we must not forget that "A&T had such a huge role in the civil rights movement with the sit-ins started by the Greensboro four. Our political presents still stand strong today".

In the heat of debate, James Farmer Jr. a character in the movie Great Debaters made this statement. "We do what we have to do in order to do what we want". This quote seems basic because its implications are straightforward.

A&T students must act now and follow the motto recited in the Great Debaters. Otherwise our voices will be lost in the mere hope of creating a debate team.

Minister Backs Cork Worlds

From: http://www.podiumcommunications.com/worlds2009/

Minister Backs World Debating Championships

The Minister for Education and Science, Mary Hanafin TD has backed the hosting of the World Universities’ Debating Championships by the Law and Philosophical Societies of University College Cork.

Speaking in University College Cork on Thursday, the Minister said that she was a supporter of University debating and public speaking before speaking of her own time as a University debater.

The Minister was meeting with members of the Organising Committee of the Championships to discuss the backing of her Department for the event after formally opening UCC’s new multi-million euro Library extension. Paul Flynn, Head of Public Sector Partnerships of Cork Worlds 2009 said that it was the depth of organisational experience at UCC that made the University an obvious choice to host the event – the largest academic event in the world – and that organisers hoped that along with existing backers; Cork City Council, Fáilte Ireland and the Irish Examiner; the Department of Education and corporate sponsors would contribute towards Ireland hosting the best World Championships to date.

UCC first won the rights to host the World Championships in Vancouver in January 2007, and this was confirmed earlier this month by unanimous vote of the World Universities Debating Council, in Bangkok, Thailand.
Mark Collins
Director of Registration & Communications
For further information please e-mail communications@corkworlds2009.com

WUPID Motions - Very Fair

Good job on the motions for WUPID. Very balanced. Some of these should be copied and used at smaller tournaments.

From: http://www.smoothtournament.com/showcase/wupid/results_by_position.php

Motion Fairness - WUPID 2007 - Results

Hosted by Smooth Tournament - Debating Tournament Results

Standings Results Draw

Round 1

Motion: This House would pursue a policy of constructive engagement with rogue states

Opening Government

First: 5
Second: 0
Third: 4
Fourth: 1
Normalized: 126%

Opening Opposition

First: 2
Second: 4
Third: 3
Fourth: 1
Normalized: 113%

Closing Government

First: 0
Second: 2
Third: 2
Fourth: 6
Normalized: 40%

Closing Opposition

First: 3
Second: 4
Third: 1
Fourth: 2
Normalized: 120%

Round 2

Motion: This House believes that the state should only provide education in the medium of the first language

Opening Government

First: 2
Second: 1
Third: 3
Fourth: 4
Normalized: 73%

Opening Opposition

First: 2
Second: 5
Third: 3
Fourth: 0
Normalized: 126%

Closing Government

First: 3
Second: 1
Third: 3
Fourth: 3
Normalized: 93%

Closing Opposition

First: 3
Second: 3
Third: 1
Fourth: 3
Normalized: 106%

Round 3

Motion: THBT CIVIL DISOBEDIENCE IS AN INTEGRAL PART OF A PEACEFUL SOCIETY.

Opening Government

First: 4
Second: 1
Third: 3
Fourth: 2
Normalized: 113%

Opening Opposition

First: 1
Second: 5
Third: 4
Fourth: 0
Normalized: 113%

Closing Government

First: 2
Second: 2
Third: 2
Fourth: 4
Normalized: 80%

Closing Opposition

First: 3
Second: 2
Third: 1
Fourth: 4
Normalized: 93%

Round 4

Motion: THW GIVE THE KURDS A HOMELAND.

Opening Government

First: 3
Second: 1
Third: 3
Fourth: 3
Normalized: 93%

Opening Opposition

First: 1
Second: 6
Third: 2
Fourth: 1
Normalized: 113%

Closing Government

First: 4
Second: 2
Third: 4
Fourth: 0
Normalized: 133%

Closing Opposition

First: 2
Second: 1
Third: 1
Fourth: 6
Normalized: 60%

Round 5

Motion: This house believes the Bolivarian revolution has failed.

Opening Government

First: 2
Second: 3
Third: 2
Fourth: 3
Normalized: 93%

Opening Opposition

First: 0
Second: 3
Third: 6
Fourth: 1
Normalized: 80%

Closing Government

First: 6
Second: 2
Third: 1
Fourth: 1
Normalized: 153%

Closing Opposition

First: 2
Second: 2
Third: 1
Fourth: 5
Normalized: 73%

Entire Tournament

Opening Government
Normalized: 100%

Opening Opposition
Normalized: 109%

Closing Government
Normalized: 100%

Closing Opposition
Normalized: 90%

Hart House Wins North Americans

From: http://apdaweb.org/ and http://www.cusid.ca/

Finals: Hart House, Uni of Toronto (Jason Rogers & Jon Laxer, Gov) have won the 2008 North American Championships in the final they defeated Harvard (Mark Samburg & Kyle Bean)

Results Summary
(Team member initials used to distinguish teams)
Winners: Hart House RL Finalists: Harvard SB
Semi-finalists: MIT, Hart House SD
Qtr Finalists: Hart House LK, Yale MK, McGill GS, McGill SE
Octo Finalists: Hart House AP, Princeton SS, Yale BR, Amherst LN

Top Speaker: Josh Bone (Yale)
Top Novice: Zayn Siddique (Princeton)
Top Public Speaker: Vinay Kumar Mysore (McGill)

The Break
1 Harvard (Mark Samburg & Kyle Bean)
2 Hart House (Jason Rogers & Jon Laxer)
3 MIT (Dan Greco & Adam Goldstein)
4 Hart House (Nick Shkordoff & Dash)
5 Hart House (Alex Levy & Laura Kusisto)
6 Yale (Grant May & Steve Krieger)
7 McGill (Leon Grek & Padraic Scanlan)
8 McGill (Saro Setrakian & Catherine Evans)
9 Hart House (John Ashbourne & Raj Pattani)
10 Princeton B (Mike Shih & Zayn Siddique)
11 Yale (Josh Bone & Andrew Rohrbach)
12 Amherst A (Lily & Nic)

Motions:
Final - THB in an obligation to remain plugged in to the violinist.
Semis - Even if it is effective, THB torture is not acceptable.
Quarters - THW not distinguish between the freedom of belief and the freedom of religion.
Octos - THB a just state would be libertarian

Preliminary Rounds:
TH opposes the registration of sex offenders
TH prefers a draft to stop-loss
THW ban Kidnap & Rescue insurance.
TH supports Jury Nullification
THBT holocaust denial is not hate speech. Assuming no racial bias,
THS capital punishment.

25 State Championships in a Row

From http://www.montanasnewsstation.com/Global/story.asp?S=7781433

25 Championships in a row for Loyola High School
Posted: Jan 27, 2008 09:05 PM
Updated: Jan 27, 2008 09:05 PM
Loyola Sacred Heart High School brings home its 25th straight State speech and debate championship.

This year's senior first place winner, Emily Mihalic, won second award last year.

She says she knew this was her last chance to make something happen. "So the fact that I got first was achieving my ultimate goal and it was very emotional for me that I made it," said Mihalic.

Emily won first place for a speech on Modern day slavery in America. She is proud to be a part of the tradition that's been going on since before she was born.

Loyola Sacred Heart High School started practicing in September for speech and debate championship.

Their coach says all the preparing is like shaping a block of ice.

They won first and second place in policy debate and took three state championships in speech events.

This is the first time they've had a three time state champ, the winner is Dan Evans.

They are already starting to prepare for the Speech and Debate Competition next year.

Benazir Bhutto Remembered at Oxford Union

From http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/World/Benazir_returns_in_spirit_to_her_old_haunt_in_an_ironic_twist/articleshow/2712367.cms

OXFORD: In a sense it was yesterday once more as Benazir Bhutto returned here — in spirit — 34 years to the day she first spoke in the august chamber of the 185-year-old Oxford Union.

The Union, arguably the world's most prestigious debating society paid homage to its feisty former president's "snot-coloured" convertible, "sense of fun" and radical attempts to modernise its mossy practices with a discussion as provocative as it was ironic for the woman it commemorated.

With Bhutto's son and political heir, Oxford undergraduate Bilawal, stoically sitting through the Benazir Bhutto Memorial debate and her visibly emotional younger sister Sanam also in the couple-of-hundred-strong audience, the Union spent much of the evening and nearly half the night debating an ideal – separation of church and state — Benazir spectacularly failed to achieve in her two terms as prime minister.

Bhutto, who broke new ground at Oxford in 1977 by becoming the Union's first Asian woman president, would have appreciated, if perhaps not entirely enjoyed, the irony of her favourite debating club moving — and passing — the motion, "This house believes that the ideal state is a secular state" on an evening dedicated to her memory.

During her time in office, Bhutto was careful not to challenge disturb Pakistan's dangerously entrenched religious orthodoxies. Even though she repeatedly insisted she was a secular democrat to the core, it was on her watch that the Taliban first gained ground.

But Siraj Shamsuddin, a former senior civil servant when Bhutto was prime minister, who went into exile with her in London, told TOI she would have heartily agreed with the terms of the debate.

Paying public and moving tribute to her friend of 33 years, journalist and author Victoria Schofield told the assembled cast of fresh-faced students, politicians, clergymen, diplomats and international media scrum that Bhutto had, from the beginning, been committed to the ideal of "a secular, modern, democratic" Pakistan.

And also from http://www.ndtv.com/convergence/ndtv/story.aspx?id=NEWEN20080038830&ch=1/18/2008%208:33:00%20AM

Associated Press
Friday, January 18, 2008 (Oxford)
Former colleagues, friends and students attended a memorial debate by the prestigious Oxford Union debating society on Thursday, in honour of assassinated Benazir Bhutto.

Former Prime Minister of Pakistan Bhutto is an Oxford University alumni and was President of the Oxford Union in 1977, the first Asian woman to hold the post, according to the group's website.

Amongst those in attendance at the memorial debate was her son, 19-year-old Bilawal Bhutto Zardari, himself in his first year of studies at Oxford University.

In the wake of his mother's death he was chosen as her successor as leader of the Pakistan People's Party (PPP), though day-to-day leadership was to stay in the hands of his father, Asif Ali Zardari.

Zardari listened as former friends of his mother recalled her time at the Union.
''She (Benazir Bhutto) was amazingly firey and fun. Standing at this dispatch box she would enliven this chamber,'' said Alan Duncan, currently a member of British Parliament.

Faced with intense international media scrutiny, Zardari has pleaded for privacy as he pursues his studies at Oxford. He did not participate in the debate.

Suspected Islamic militants launched a gun and suicide bomb attack on Bhutto as she left a rally on 27 December 2007 in Rawalpindi, Pakistan.

Her death triggered riots that forced a six-week delay in the parliamentary polls, which are now scheduled for February 18 2008.

I know that there are a number of Bhutto critics who should feel welcome to comment here and get a real debate going about their issues.

Wisconsin High School Tops "The People Speak" Global Competition

From http://www.onlinemadison.com/main.asp?SectionID=1&SubSectionID=1&ArticleID=19790&TM=32536.29

Debate team places first in global event

By ANDREW UJIFUSA
Assistant Managing Editor

A group of Madison Central students has literally taken on the world, from Moscow to Chile to South Africa, and beaten all challengers. As a reward, they are taking a trip to the world's capital.

Students at Madison Central came out on top in the global competition known as The People Speak, a debate series that challenged American and international students to discuss and write about climate change and water resources.

For their efforts over the last several months, Maggie Brister, Ben Elam, Eric Rudsenske and Cameron Worrell, with the help of teachers Brett Mayfield and Laura Sue McClure, garnered the highest number of points for The People Speak challenge out of any school in the U.S. or abroad, tallying 4,750 points.

As a reward for their victory over other high schools near and abroad, the foursome along with Mayfield and McClure will travel to the United Nations Youth Leadership Summit from July 17 to July 19, along with the other top 10 schools in the U.S. and the top six point-getters among international schools.

The summit will allow students to participate in a service learning project, attend presentations by U.N. officials, and go on a tour of the U.N. headquarters at Turtle Bay. Mayfield, the debate team coach, and McClure, an environmental science teacher, will also attend training sessions concerning how to integrate global issues into classroom lessons.

The four students participated in a debate in mid-October where they argued the merits of private and government methods of controlling climate change.

Afterwards, in a poll of the school's student body, 1,080 students voted on questions such as whether the debates changed their minds on the issue of climate change, and whether they learned new information.

In addition, the four students participating in The People Speak earned points by writing essays and letters to public officials and posting blog entries on the topic.

The four students also produced four 60-second Public Service Announcement videos on the topic slated to be posted on the Internet.

In the final standings, Madison Central received 50 more points than any other U.S. high school, beating out Brother Rice High School from Bloomfield, Mich.

The top international school, Evanjelicke Gynazium in Tisovec, Slovakia, came in 200 points behind Madison Central.

The students participating in The People Speak will have another debate at Madison Central on March 24.

During a ceremony recognizing The People Speak participants at a county school board meeting last week, Superintendent of Schools Mike Kent joked that they may be better suited to tackle even bigger problems.

"We should consider booking this team on a trip to the Middle East instead," he said, getting a laugh from those in the room.

Asian Unity Declaration

The copy of the declaration with names can be found at:
http://debate.uvm.edu/dcpdf/pattaya_declaration.pdf

From Logan:

Greetings,

On the evening of the 3rd of January 2008, more than a hundred delegates from debate institutions around Asia gathered at conference room in Pattaya, to express their desire to hold one Asian tournament.

This meeting was widely publicized, onwards from the 1st of January when the idea took root. It was chaired by Ray Aguas, from Ateneo. The minutes of this meeting will be available soon.

Those at the meeting were cognisant that the real decisions would have to be made at the respective council meetings at All-Asians and AUDC, and were not trying to force the hand of either executive committee. What we were trying to do is as clearly possible express a desire to have one Asian tournament, and create debate on the benefits of having two tournaments, rather than the benefits of each tournament.

The plain truth is that the performance of Asian teams have dipped since the split. From multiple breaking teams, semifinalists and two-final appearances (2004 & 2005) in a row at Australs, to just octofinals last year. From a ground breaking finals (2004) and a strong number of breaking teams (2005) at Worlds to not a single team breaking at Bangkok. Regardless which tournament is better, both tournaments seem to have done less for Asian debating than one tournament did.

I fully understand there are rules and constitutions to follow but that should not mean nothing can be done or said now. If you believe Asia needs a unified debate community, say that and please help create the environment that encourages it.

62 people from 25 institutions have signed the Pattaya Declaration which reads:

We the undersigned
1.strongly support a Unified Asian Debating Championships in 2009
2.give authority to the Unity Committee to develop a framework to realize the above aim (1)
3.strongly beseech the councils of both the All-Asian Debating Championships and the Asian Universities Debating Championships to recognize our desire to have one Asian tournament and give their full cooperation to the Unity Council

The full declaration is attached with this email and available on the Facebook group (http://www.facebook.com/group.php?gid=8405677917), which you can join to add your voice to the cause.

Sincerely,
Logan

WUDC Documents Available - Judge Test, Budget, Agenda

I have scanned two sets of documents that people might be interested in.

The first is the "judge test" administered to all judges. The answers are given at the end.
http://debate.uvm.edu/dcpdf/wudc_judge_test2007.pdf

The second is the Worlds Council agenda and attached to that the budget disclosure for the Assumption worlds. The tournament cost just short of $900,000 US. That is a lot given Thailand's pricing structure.
http://debate.uvm.edu/dcpdf/wudc_council_budget2007.pdf

International Competition for Young Debaters to be held at Oxford

From http://www.icyd.com/index.php?&MMN_position=1:1

ICYD 2008

Posted by: Mardi on 10/15/2007 04:46 AM
Registration is closed. Good luck to all of those debating in the regional rounds :-)

Welcome to ICYD 2008

For 2007/08, ICYD will once again be hosted by the Oxford Union, and your new convenors will be Mardi Macgregor and Kitson Symes, (mardi@icyd.com)

1. Registering for the Competition
- To register for the competition, please first read the 'How to enter' page.
- Then register using the Online Registration Form

2. Age limits and entry criteria
ICYD is for pupils aged under-15 on the 1st September of the year in which the competition commences. Ie. born on or after the 1st Sept 1992 for the 2007/08 competition.

3. Competition structure
The competition will run from the start of 2008 until the Finals Day in early May. Workshops will be held in January, followed closely by regional rounds. The top teams (last year, around one third of the teams) from these rounds will be invited to the International Finals Day in May.

4. Regional Rounds & Workshops
There will be seven regional rounds at Birmingham, Bristol, Cmabridge, Durham, Oxford, St Andrews and University College Dublin. These regional rounds will be in the form of a day long competition, with three rounds an a final, with the top teams progressing to the International Finals Day. Each region will hold a workshop in early January at your assigned university or in London to teach debating from scratch.

5. Finals' Day
The International Finals Day will be held in the Oxford Union on 10th May 2008. There will be three preliminary rounds of debating and an International Final held in the Chamber itself.

Best wishes,
Mardi Macgregor & Kitson Symes
Convenors, ICYD 2008

The debates are in the british parliamentary style . This is the style of debating used in virtually all the schools competitions run by universities in the UK and one of the most popular styles across the world.

The oxford schools guide to British parliamentary debating is a very good introduction. The details of how the Oxford Schools competition works are obviously not necessarily applicable to ICYD.

Here are examples of motions that we've had in previous years:

This house would abolish the monarchy
This house believes London should withdraw its Olympic bid
This house would legalise prostitution
This house would ban violent video games
This house would abolish private schools
This house would only jail violent offenders
This house would outlaw experiments on animals

To get ideas for arguments for different cases, a good start is www.debatabase.com. This has arguments in favour and against hundreds of motions, many of them written by top university debaters. Copying arguments from debatabase won't make you win the competition, you need to be able to explain them in a way that shows you understand the argument, and respond to the arguments made by the other side, but it is a very good place to get ideas.

The motions will be appropriate to where they are taking place. I.e. the UCD L&H round and finals day will not have motions based purely on the UK.

The motion for the first debate in the regional round will be released in advance . However the teams will not be told what position they are speaking in, this will be annonced fifteen minutes before the debate takes place. For the other rounds, both in the regional round and all the debates at finals day, the motion will also be announced fifteen minutes before the debate starts.

NPTE Parliamentary Team Rankings

The top 50 teams in this ranking of American parliamentary debating, mostly those in NPDA competition.

From http://npte.debateaddict.com/unleashed/rank.php?npteyear=2008

Rank Team Name NPTE Points Prelim Wins Prelim Losses Win Pct

1
Texas Tech PO (Putnicki / Owen)
58.00
32
4
88.890%

2
Western Kentucky MS (Chad Meadows / Tom Schally)
52.00
35
5
87.500%

3
Washburn CS (Annaleigh Curtis / Marcus Schultz-Bergin)
52.00
48
11
81.360%

4
Washburn DO (Tyler Dooley / Jessica Otto)
48.50
49
10
83.050%

5
Creighton KS (Kohlscheen / Storey)
47.00
24
3
88.890%

6
Wyoming RR (Tony Roberts / Jess Ryan)
46.50
36
8
81.820%

7
Biola MV (Stephen Mar / Peter Van Elswyk)
46.20
21
5
80.770%

8
Oregon PD (Katherine Preston / Ben Dodds)
45.00
37
10
78.720%

9
SIU CD (Kevin Calderwood / Kyle Dennis)
43.30
33
3
91.670%

10
Western Kentucky BlH (Brian Bloss / Kelcy Hathaway)
43.30
39
13
75.000%

11
Lewis and Clark CA (Scott Cheesewright / Eric Atcheson)
42.50
39
14
73.580%

12
Western Kentucky MP (Mullins / Parke)
39.80
41
11
78.850%

13
Air Force FS (Fleharty / Seefried)
39.40
30
11
73.170%

14
CSU - Long Beach JP (Aj Jenkins / Jacqueline Paterno)
39.15
43
15
74.140%

15
Western Washington KE (Krell / Elle)
39.00
32
11
74.420%

16
UC-Berkeley LS (Ryan Lawrence / Alex Smith)
38.80
25
10
71.430%

17
Willamette CL (Pete Crisalli / Eric Lowe)
38.50
27
13
67.500%

18
McKendree FL (Freivogel / Leonard)
36.90
24
11
68.570%

19
Colorado College KP (Kretz / Plaza)
36.50
30
12
71.430%

20
Wyoming DF (Lindsey DeVries / Jeffrey Fife)
36.00
31
13
70.450%

21
Western Kentucky HN (Adam Heugel / Lauren Nelson)
35.80
25
9
73.530%

22
Western Kentucky FM (Jessica Furgerson / Rachel Mosley)
35.50
30
11
73.170%

23
UCSD HS (Zachary Schultz / Hoomah Hefzi)
35.10
38
17
69.090%
24
Northern Arizona DF (Antonio De La Garza / Zach Freels)
34.20
34
11
75.560%

25
Washburn AJ (Joe Allen / Jeff Jones)
33.90
19
5
79.170%

26
Northern Arizona FW (Adam Fluke / Nicola Walters)
33.25
35
17
67.310%

27
Pacific FS (Steve Farias / Emily Sheldon)
32.90
40
24
62.500%

28
CSU - Long Beach FS (Aly Fiebrantz / Adam Swaller)
32.80
31
16
65.960%

29
Western Washington WP (Alysia Whitcomb / Colin Patrick)
32.50
29
14
67.440%

30
Washburn CM (Nathan Miller / Shanna Carlson)
32.40
38
20
65.520%

31
Texas Tech HM (Jeremy Henderson / Mike Mitchell)
32.40
36
25
59.020%

32
UNR AP (Max Alderman / David Pena)
32.10
34
11
75.560%

33
Truman BR (Mark Buchheit / Dylan Rothermel)
30.00
21
14
60.000%

34
William Jewell LL (Rachel Landes / James Luce)
29.30
26
26
50.000%

35
McKendree LL (Steve Loftus / Courtney Logan)
28.40
22
18
55.000%

36
Western Washington BF (Blackadar / Furste)
28.00
23
18
56.100%

37
Washburn AS (Dane Anderson / Becca Schmidt)
27.90
25
20
55.560%

38
Northern Arizona BR (Kaitlin Bundock / Travis Risner)
27.80
30
22
57.690%

39
SIU CT (Josh Campfield / Adam Testerman)
27.50
18
7
72.000%

40
UPS BE (Nikki Brokmeyer / Ali Edwards)
27.50
17
7
70.830%

41
CU-Boulder HJ (Rachelle Harris / Nathan Jeffries)
27.50
17
12
58.620%

42
Sterling SG (JD Smith / Emily Graham )
27.40
19
8
70.370%

43
Rice FJ (Richard Flores / Gary Johnson)
27.30
19
6
76.000%

44
Rice TN (Torous / Naylor)
27.30
22
8
73.330%

45
Rice DH (Kirti Datla / Hrishi Hari)
26.50
15
3
83.330%

46
Missouri Southern SH (Cody Snyder / Whitney Hart)
26.40
15
8
65.220%

47
SIU TT ( Testerman / Thomas)
26.30
16
6
72.730%

48
UNR CH (Jack Cholin / Matthew Hogan)
26.15
24
21
53.330%

49
Texas Tech HR (Horton / Reeves)
26.10
22
12
64.710%

50
Oregon OR (Alex O'Dell / Matt Rose)
26.00
21
14
60.000%

All Asians 2008 Announces Adjudication Core

Dear All,

I, Sarajit Baral, Chief Adjudicator of "15th All Asian Inter-Varsity
Debating Championship" , take immense pleasure to announce that NSU
All Asians has appointed the remaining members of its adjudication
team.

Jason Jarvis (South Korea), Adiba Shareen (Malaysia),
Siddharth Chauhan (India) and Jess Lopez (Phillipine) have agreed to
join the team as Deputy Chief Adjudicators. We have also appointed
Sinha Ibna Humayun as the Assistant to Chief Adjudicator for the
team.

Besides that, Alfred Snider (USA) has already agreed to share his
sheer knowledge and experience in our tournament as the Tab
Director.

I would like to take this opportunity to thank all of those
who applied for the DCA position.

NSU for years have contributed in the development and enrichment of
Debate and intellectual argumentation in Bangladesh and South Asia.
I hope with the current Adjudication Core we will able to ensure a
quality adjudication in the tournament.

Looking forward to see you in the Tournament.

Thanks & Regards
Sarajit Baral
CA, NSU All Asians

Scott Deatherage is New Director of National Association for Urban Debate Leagues

From http://naudl.org/newcomers_press.htm

Scott Deatherage named Executive Director of the National Association for Urban Debate Leagues
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
January 21, 2008
For More Information Contact:
Leonard A. Gail
Chairman of the Board of Directors
National Association for Urban Debate Leagues
(tel) 312-343-3502
(email) Lennygail@urbandebate.org
The Board of Directors of the National Association for Urban Debate Leagues (NAUDL) has named Dr. Larry Scott Deatherage as its Executive Director. Dr. Deatherage’s appointment concludes a four month nationwide search across the for profit business sector as well as the fields of non-profit administration, public education, and academic debate. He will work part time alongside NAUDL board chair Leonard Gail (who has been serving as interim Executive Director) until April 21 2008, when Dr. Deatherage will begin on a full time basis.

The NAUDL is the leadership organization of the Urban Debate movement. See https://www.urbandebate.org. It builds, strengthens, expands, and connects Urban Debate Leagues in cities around the country.
Research shows that competitive academic debate leagues help close the achievement gap and prepare low-income youth for college. Urban Debate Leagues (UDLs) have a track record of improving academic performance, building a bridge to college and developing leadership. For example, while the vast majority of urban debaters have parents who did not go to college and peers who often do not graduate from high school, UDLs send more than 75% of their students to four-year colleges.
Dr. Deatherage comes to the NAUDL from a historic tenure as the Director of Debate at Northwestern University where he coached the National Debate Champion seven times since 1994. Not surprisingly, he was named “Coach of the Decade” for the 1990s
At Northwestern, Dr. Deatherage also served as a Senior Lecturer in the Department of Communications Studies. Included in the classes he taught were: Mass Media and Political Campaign Strategies, Political Communication, Rhetoric of Social Movements, and Theories of Argumentation. He was twice a finalist for the Charles Deering McCormick University Distinguished Lecturer award. Dr. Deatherage received his Ph.D. in Communication Studies from Northwestern, his M.A. in Communication Studies from Baylor University, and his B.B.A. in Economics and Finance, also from Baylor.

NAUDL Board Chair, Leonard A. Gail, announced Dr. Deatherage’s appointment: “The NAUDL board is just delighted to have Scott at the helm. The search committee labored long and hard reviewing the submissions of nearly two-hundred applicants from around the country, and it was obviously worth the effort. Scott knows the importance of our mission to the nation’s urban youth and is committed to it. He brings to our organization a demonstrated record of excellence and leadership in a closely related field. And, he knows the critical importance of teamwork in pursing that kind of success.”

According Dr. Deatherage, “Academic debate was for me, as it has been for so many others, a life changing activity. So, I have tried to assist the local UDL while discharging my Northwestern coaching and teaching obligations. But, the prospect of devoting the entirety of my professional life to the NAUDL’s mission -- making debate opportunities available to more and more students nationwide -- is exhilarating.”
He continued, “I can’t wait to join with new and old colleagues and friends who have already devoted their careers to this noble pursuit. The NAUDL board has made clear that my job is to accelerate the growth of urban debate opportunities nationwide. I look forward to working alongside existing UDL directors, coaches, and other supporters to replicate the impressive successes that already exists.”
For more information about the NAUDL and Urban Debate, go to the NAUDL’s official website at www.UrbanDebate.org.

Other Schools Remember Their Own "Great Debaters"

Mervin Whealy, left, and John Goss, former students at Fresno State College, were the debate team that beat USC and Stanford to win a championship in 1960.

From http://www.fresnobee.com/263/story/336395.html

Undebatable Glory
In 1960, Fresno State's underdog debate team took on mighty USC and Stanford ... and triumphed.

By Doug Hoagland / The Fresno Bee
01/20/08 22:17:30

Nearly 50 years ago, two Fresno State students -- a droll musician and a bow tie-wearing preacher -- talked their way to victory over two of California's most prestigious universities.
John Goss, the musician, and Mervin Whealy, the preacher, were debaters. On one glorious weekend, they defeated debate teams from Stanford University and the University of Southern California -- the equivalent of David beating two Goliaths.

Now, a new film is generating unprecedented publicity for intercollegiate debate -- and a spark of nostalgia in Goss. "The Great Debaters" stars Oscar-winner Denzel Washington. Inspired by a real-life story, it's a drama about an underdog black college in Texas triumphing over Harvard University debaters in the 1930s.

Goss saw the film. He loved it. And like an old debater, he used it to make a point in public.

"Obviously, college debate teams don't get a lot of attention compared to collegiate sports teams," Goss wrote in a letter to the San Francisco Chronicle, "and it is great that Denzel Washington put this movie together to point attention to some of the more intellectual pursuits practiced at the university level."

While e-mail, text messages and other Internet communication are wildly popular, debate isn't going the way of the buggy whip, said Sam Nelson of the National Communication Association, a nonprofit organization of researchers, educators and students of human communication.

But even as debate flourishes at other American colleges, California State University, Fresno, no longer has a team because of money problems.

About 1,000 American colleges and universities are doing debate of one kind or another, said Nelson, a professor of communication and debate coach at Cornell University in Ithaca, N.Y., an Ivy League school.

"There is a tremendous need and desire for people to learn debating skills," added Nelson, who grew up in Merced. "People debate online in chat rooms. They aren't just trading recipes. Whether debate's done in the 1800s fashion of Lincoln and Douglas or the more trendy disputes that one may see on 'Entertainment Tonight,' it's still the same skills of argument and critical thinking."

Fifty years ago, Goss embraced those skills with vigor.

Raised in Fresno and a 1956 graduate of Roosevelt High, he was something of a big man on the Fresno State campus in 1960. He had been elected senior class president. He had a small band. Its name was a play on his last name: John Gauze and His Band Aids.

In debate, Goss was the hammer who pounded home points. Whealy was the sunny personality from Bakersfield who prepared the way with a smile and a hint of a Southern accent.

Before going on to teach, Whealy was a visiting minister at a small Baptist church in Hanford after finishing at Fresno State.

On their victorious weekend, Goss and Whealy competed in San Francisco against 25 teams from California, Nevada and Utah. The debate topic: Whether Congress should be given the power to reverse decisions of the U.S. Supreme Court. Teams debated each side of the issue in different rounds of the tournament.

Goss and Whealy beat USC in the semifinals and Stanford in the finals.

Many of the victory details have not faded with time.

Against USC, Whealy recalled, he and Goss argued for letting Congress overturn Supreme Court decisions. One of Fresno State's points: The court had shown itself unjust in rulings against workers and unions around 1900. Against Stanford, Goss and Whealy took the opposite side. Among their arguments was that some in Congress had attacked civil liberties in the late 1940s and 1950s, and the institution couldn't be trusted.

Goss remembers the two Stanford debaters. One was smart, bookish and spoke with an impediment, the kind of guy who might have worn a pocket protector. His partner was aggressive, articulate and had a great last name -- Proudfoot. The Stanford duo was formidable -- but in the end, they went down to two guys from Fresno State.

"Our debate coach said if it had been football, there would have been cheering for us when we got back," Goss said. "Instead, we snuck in under the cover of darkness, but we were real proud because Fresno State was always looked down upon as not being able to compete with the big schools in those days."

The campus had about 5,600 students then, compared to 22,000 now.

Whealy, who lives in Okinawa and commented by e-mail, said: "John Goss recognized our feats as being more important than I did at the time, but we were featured in a city newspaper article, picture and all."

The feel-good story soon ended, however. At another tournament, Goss and Whealy missed qualifying for the national championship by a few points.

Goss graduated in 1960 from Fresno State College -- it wouldn't become CSU Fresno until the next decade. He received a master's degree in public administration from USC and fashioned a career in city and county management, working in Phoenix, San Diego, Fremont, Alameda, Oakland, Chula Vista and San Bernardino. Now 69 and retired, he lives in San Diego.

Whealy graduated in 1961 from Fresno State. He earned a master's of divinity degree from Southeastern Baptist Seminary in Wake Forest, N.C., and a doctorate in history at the University of California at Santa Barbara.

Now 68, he has taught many years for the University of Maryland's adult teaching program -- serving in the United States, Europe, Korea, Japan and now Okinawa.

Both men credit debating skills with success after leaving Fresno State. Goss said in an e-mail that he became a better public speaker and researcher, and that he could see both sides of an issue -- which helped him as a city manager conducting labor negotiations.

Said Whealy: "Your mind has to be fast and agile. ... My debating experiences laid the foundation of my subsequent academic career. I still think of those debates with admiration and honor."

He hasn't seen "The Greater Debaters," but wants to.

Whealy's and Goss' 1960 triumph is now long forgotten at Fresno State. But officials there -- when told about the win -- found the story enjoyable.

The university's vice president for academic affairs, provost Jeri Echeverria, said the idea of little Fresno State beating mighty USC and Stanford is a story line that people can love. But, she said, much has changed at the university in the last half century at all levels of competition. "I'm not sure how much of an underdog we are today," she said.

From 1990 to 2003, Fresno State debaters beat Stanford, USC and other top schools, said communication professor Doug Fraleigh, who coached the team during those years.

"Small colleges can compete against the most prestigious schools in the nation if they do the work and have the resources," Fraleigh said.

He said he gave up coaching duties because the long hours conflicted with family responsibilities.

Budget problems in 2004 kept the university from hiring a new full-time coach.

There's been no team since then, and plans to get a new coach for the fall of 2009 could be affected by the state's budget crisis, Fraleigh said.

He understands that memories can loom large for former debaters. Fraleigh debated in high school and college, and he revels in recalling past competitions.

"I bore my friends and family," he said with a laugh.

Two More Prelim Debate Videos from WUDC

Here are two more prelim debates from WUDC. More coming. Made with FlipVideo camera.

See lots of debate videos at http://debatevideoblog.blogspot.com/

Debate - BP WUDC Round 5 Government Defenders for All

http://debatevideoblog.blogspot.com/2008/01/debate-bp-wudc-round-5-government.html

Round 5: This House believes that every criminal defendant should be required to use a government provided defense lawyer.

Government: Hanyang, Hong Kong
Opposition: Swinburne, Auckland


Debate - BP WUDC Round 9 Scarce Medical Resources

http://debatevideoblog.blogspot.com/2008/01/debate-bp-wudc-round-9-scarce-medical.html

This House would deny scarce medical resources to terminally ill patients.

Government: Brown, HW Smith
Opposition: Princeton, Harvard

Bangladesh Bid AUDC 2009

From stalinhasan@yahoo.com

Dear AUDC Members,

On behalf of the Bangladesh Debating Council-BDC and all Major
English Debating Universities of Bangladesh, I would like to announce
that Bangladesh is ready to BID AUDC 2009. After Organizing
Bangladesh Open 2007 with South East Asians in 2007, 20 Dynamic
Passionate People has already started their work to take preparation
to BID AUDC 2009.

We are committed for Excellent and Experience Adjudication Core
Selection for AUDC 2009. Quality and Regional Representation is our
main priority for selection the DCA's as well as for CA. We are
contacting to our Probable Sponsors. We can comeet for Five Star
Hotel for Accommodation, Business Class Transportation's for all
Participants and The Best Socials.

During the Bangladesh Open 2007 we have shown our Expertise for
Hosting an International Debating Event in Bangladesh and Moreover we
are focusing on India, Pakistan, Sri Lanka and Middle East as our
potential new Major participating Nations with AUDC's Core Members.
DCA Selection has already started and we are having very good
responses from South East Asia and from Indian Subcontinent.

AUDC 2008
After having conversation with IIUM Org, We are already contacting
all major English Debating Universities of Bangladesh, as for example
East West University, Independent University Bangladesh, Islamic
University of Technology-IUT, Chittagong University, Dhaka
University, Stamford University, American International University of
Bangladesh, BRAC University, Manarat International University and
United International University from Bangladesh for Participating
This year AUDC in Malaysia. This year Bangladesh is expecting to have
the Largest Contingent for AUDC ever like this year WUDC in Thailand.

Bidding Website for AUDC 2009:
The bidding website will be up by April 2008
The website will contain the DCA Selection Criteria
Sponsors Information and Tournament Shedule

Our AUDC Expansion Focus will be on Middle East and Indian
Subcontinent Participants:
We are already working on Kuwait Debating Society and with Doha
Debate Team from Middle East and Contacted with India Birla Debate
and India Verbattle Debate in specific with the other National
Debating Societies from South Asia to ensure these regional
representation to our AUDC in Bangladesh.

Adjudication Core:
Quality and Regional Representation for DCA's will ge given
priorities for Our Bid. Our success rate for collecting good DCA has
been establish with Bangladesh Open 2007 DCA Selection. So we can
guarantee you that the Adjudication Core will ensure the Quality and
Regional Representation for Our Bid.

Visa:
We have already started contacting with different ASIAN Countries and
South Asian Countries local Embassy in Bangladesh for Efficient Visa
process for our Valued International Participants.

Ground Breaking Socials will be our Another Feature:
We are finalizing our Social Partner one year before for AUDC 2009.
You will have Ground Breaking DJ party and Socials which i promise
will not be ME TOO like other Asians.

Registration Fees: 150 USD( Lowest Rego Fees will be Offered)
Registration Fees will be 150 USD for A Debater or for An Adjudicator.
10 Good International Adjudicator Will be given full registration
weaver.
10 more Adjudicators will be discounted 50% for their Ex Performance
in AUDC as a Debater or As an Adjudicator. We will asked AUDU to
Decide the Final Selections for these Quotas.

PLZ PLZ PLZ Leave your Comment in this group and help us to bring the
Quality and Convening AUDC for All of Us. Your Comment will be highly
appreciated.

DCA Selection Email:
Interested and Qualified People who are interested to submit their CV
for DCA Selection for AUDC Bid 2009 are requested to contact with me
before March 30, 2008 at my email: stalinhasan[at]gmail[dot]com. We
are hoping to have one DCA from India/Pakistan/Sri Lanka with others
from South East Asian Region. But Final Selection will be made during
the Bid Presentation in Malaysia.

Plz feel free to Contact with us at stalinhasan[at]gmail[dot]com.

--
Regards,
Rashedul Hasan Stalin
Cell: +88-01715495119
Founding Chair, Bangladesh Debating Council-BDC
Author & Contributor,
World Debating Website http://worlddebating.blogspot.com/
Asian Debating Website http://asiandebating.blogspot.com/
BDC E-mail list: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/bdcbd/
BDC Website: http://debatebangladesh.tripod.com

WUDC Results Per Position on Each Motion

Adjudication team at WUDC in Thailand

Thanks for Klaas van Schelven for this data. Complete analysis at the website. Food for thought on which motions were a problem and which were not. Here are just the overall results.

From http://www.smoothtournament.com/showcase/wudc_2008/results_by_position.php

Entire Tournament

Opening Government
Normalized: 79%

Opening Opposition
Normalized: 119%

Closing Government
Normalized: 87%

Closing Opposition
Normalized: 113%

New English School Wins Kuwait Debate Championship

From http://www.arabtimesonline.com/kuwaitnews/pagesdetails.asp?nid=10962&ccid=9

NES debaters win Kuwait Championship
The New English School (NES) marked a new page in its history on Jan 12, 2008 at the Sheraton Hotel by winning the ‘Kuwait Debating Championship’ finals after a hard-fought battle against British School of Kuwait (BSK). They triumphantly took the cup home as the Kuwait National Champion. The motion of the debate was “This house believes that the hosting of the Olympics is a good investment” where NES was proposing the motion and BSK was in the opposition.

The NES team comprised of Hassan Al-Kazemi (first speaker), Sanhita Dey (Team Captain and second speaker), Hilmi Bayri (third speaker) and was accompanied by their teachers Mrs Ingrid Maclean and Mrs Khedapa. A note of appreciation goes to Rahul Dass for his unquestionably invaluable participation in the NES team in the semifinals. Following this success Hilmi and Sanhita will be members of the Kuwait team travelling to Washington DC to represent Kuwait in the World Debating Championship.

36th Leeward Islands Debating Competition

From http://www.sknvibes.com/Education/NewsDetails.cfm/4321

Date Posted: Friday 18 January, 2008
St. Kitts to host debating championship

By Cherisse M. Sutton-Jeffers
Reporter SKNVibes.com

(Basseterrse, St. Kitts): The Clarence Fitzroy Bryant College and its Literary & Debating Society will be hosting the Thirty-Sixth Annual Leeward Islands Debating Competition (LIDC), from Thursday February 28th to Sunday March 2nd.

One hundred and seventy five college and high school students will make up six competing teams. The six teams will be representing St. Maarten, the newest member of the LIDC fraternity competing in St. Kitts for the very first time, Nevis, Antigua & Barbuda, Anguilla, St. Kitts and defending champion Montserrat. All teams will be accompanied by their staff sponsors.

The British Virgin Islands which hopes to join the LIDC fraternity in 2009 will send a small contingent to observe the proceedings.

On February 28th Anguilla will compete against Antigua &Barbuda in eliminations one, debating the topic “Popular Caribbean culture is the main contributor to the degradation of West Indian women.”

February 29th sees Nevis vs St. Maarten in eliminations two debating; “Vocational qualification is far more viable than a university degree.”

March 1st is the first semifinal, St. Kitts vs the Winner of eliminations one, debating “US foreign policy is the driving force behind the terrorist threat to that country.”

In the other semifinal, Montserrat comes up against the winner of eliminations two to debate “Combating the spread of HIV/AIDS in the Caribbean requires the decriminalization of both homosexuality and the commercial sex trade.”

The final is on March 2nd and the topic for debate is “The absentee and/or negligent father is mainly responsible for the proliferation of gang activity.”

New STA Tab Software Released

Date: Fri, 18 Jan 2008 02:52:15 -0800
From: "Jim Hanson" 

the NEW version of sta-xl plus (1.50) is now available.

representing over 40 minor and major new features--you will find this to be a significant upgrade.

we've also done 4 tournament tests with the program to assure it is stable and bug free (plus done multiple individual feature tests).

Versions 1.02 and 1.10 are now definitely outdated--you should start using 1.50--it is way better.

DOWNLOAD IT AT:
http://www.dannycantrell.net/sta/index.php


some of the new features included:

--automatic sweepstakes counting

--judge changing and switching

--longer lists to avoid scrolling (if you have run a big tournament with the program, you will really appreciate this)

--ability to sort lists and to choose to show only certain teams (eg just the open division teams)

--manually change pairings

--print single ballots

--know which elim ballots are missing

--round by round results (great for posting to net benefits, for warm rooms, and to get aff/neg stats on each round)

--final placing (great for sending in to npda and npte and for awards)

--new elim ballot avoiding confusion over who is aff/neg

--numerous other minor improvements

Slovenia World Schools Documentary Now Online

Slovenian debaters on the set of their other television program

From Bojana Skrt bojana.skrt@siol.net

A lot of people were asking me how they can see the documentary about Worlds Schools in Seoul which Slovenian national TV made and showed a few days ago. The film is now at the Slovenian TV web page. If you want to see it, please, go to the following web page: http://www.rtvslo.si/, click on AUDIO/VIDEO then go to PRIPOROČAMO, than go to SVETOVCI and there it is.

Half of the film is in Slovenian  - no English subtitle - half it is in English with Slovenina subtitles, so it will be possible to follow. The parts in Slovenian are mainly Slovenian debaters talking about themselves and their expectations and me critiquing their debates.  It is enough in English to be able to follow the film.

The film was shown on Tuesday evening, prime time and it seems to be a great success - lots of people watched it, I keep getting very positive feedback.

Hope you will enjoy it as well. And of course, I am curious about your feedback, the positive and the negative.

Bojana

California State Debate Tournament Jewish Holiday Conflict Compromise

From http://www.jewishjournal.com/home/preview.php?id=18772

2008-01-18
Passover scholastic debate conflict resolved, sort of
By Julie Gruenbaum Fax, Education Editor

After months of contentious back and forth over the scheduling of the statewide high school debate tournament on the first night of Passover, Jewish leaders and tournament organizers have reached a half-hearted detente that will not change the date but will ensure such a scheduling snafu will not happen again.

As part of the compromise, orchestrated by State Assemblyman Lloyd Levine (D-Van Nuys), the California High School Speech Association also wrote a letter of apology to its coaches, teams and the Jewish community -- a move the independent umbrella organization had refused to make at a board meeting in September.

"The California High School Speech Association regrets the unfortunate and unintentional conflict of the 2008 state championship tournament with the important holiday of Passover," the statement reads. "The California High School Speech Association takes enormous pride in the diversity of its membership. It is our desire to express our apologies that our actions will cause Jewish members of the speech community distress at having to choose between the Passover celebration and participation in the state tournament."

Jewish leaders were satisfied with the statement, but disappointed that the date was not changed.

"Obviously we did not win on the most important point, changing the date, but the board's actions in [January] were far more sensitive to the Jewish community than they had been in September," said Doug Lasken, a debate coach at Taft High School in Woodland Hills and CHSSA board member, who brought the conflict to light last June. "For this reason we feel the struggle has been worthwhile."

More than a thousand coaches, parents and students will spend three days, April 18-20, at Santa Clara University at the annual tournament, which culminates the year of debate competitions for schools across the state. The second day of the tournament -- a date set more than a year before the event -- coincides with the night of the first seder, the most observed and family-oriented ritual on the Jewish calendar.

Lasken and more than half his team could not attend the tournament, so they voted to boycott the event. Debate teams from Sherman Oaks Center for Enriched Studies and Oaks Christian High School in Westlake also voted to boycott the state debate tournament.

They will attend an alternative debate tournament on March 29, sponsored by the Los Angeles Unified School District, which wrote a letter of concern to CHSSA in October.

The Anti-Defamation League, the Board of Rabbis of Southern California and the Jewish Community Relations Councils of Los Angeles and San Francisco spent seven months trying to impress upon CHSSA how central the seder is to the ritual and family life of a broad swath of the Jewish community. They lobbied the group to explore a date change and offered their help to do so, but CHSSA continued to maintain that because venues were booked and paid for it was too late to change the date, which had been set more than a year in advance.

"Renowned pitcher Sandy Koufax never played on Rosh Hashanah and chose not to pitch during the World Series because it conflicted with Yom Kippur -- the World Series was not moved," Sharon Prefontaine, CHSSA president, told the Daily News in November. "Hank Greenberg, on the other hand, played on Rosh Hashanah but not on Yom Kippur."

"As much as we might want to protect them from it," she continued, "we understand that our students will have to make some difficult choices, at times, relative to their personal beliefs."

That attitude toward any religious or ethnic community was not acceptable to many in the Jewish community.

"We don't feel that high school students should have to make that kind of decision," said Alison Mayersohn, senior associate director of the ADL's Pacific Southwest Region. Students who work toward a goal all year shouldn't have to "make the choice between your religious observance and your family holiday, or to reach the pinnacle of success in an extracurricular activity."

Levine got involved this fall, meeting with both sides and bringing them together for a meeting in December. As a result of those meetings, the CHSSA board voted in January to insert into its bylaws a stipulation that it will avoid scheduling the tournament on major religious holidays, "within reason." It also voted to issue the apology, but voted not to have the apology posted on its Web site. It left up an earlier explanation that does not contain the words "regret" or "apology."

In a final irony, the alternative debate is scheduled for a Saturday.

While Rabbi Mark Diamond, executive vice president of the Board of Rabbis of Southern California, who was not involved in organizing the LAUSD debate, says he would have preferred a date that would have included Sabbath observers, it is Passover's near universal observance among the Jewish community that made this scheduling conflict akin to having the tournament on Easter Sunday.

"What I have said from day one, what we have been repeating over and over again to speech association officials, is that this conflict is so poignant and gut-wrenching for families because Pesach is a home-centered observance," Diamond said.

The alternative high school debate tournament, sponsored by LAUSD to accomodate Jewish students who cannot attend the statewide debate tournament scheduled for Passover, has been expanded to two days, Saturday, March 29 and Sunday, March 30. For information, contact tournament director Dlasken514@aol.com.

Three New Debates From WUDC Now Available

Always lots of debate videos available at

http://debatevideoblog.blogspot.com/

Debate - BP WUDC Octafinals - Sex Tourism

http://debatevideoblog.blogspot.com/2008/01/debate-bp-wudc-octafinals-sex-tourism.html

Motion: This House believes that governments in the developing world should invest in sex tourism.

Room: Emerald
Government: Auckland A, Sydney A
Opposition: Macquarie A, Vicgtoria C
Advancing: Auckland A, Sydney A

Debate - BP ESL Semifinals Doctors Reporting Domestic Abuse

http://debatevideoblog.blogspot.com/2008/01/debate-bp-esl-semifinals-doctors.html

ESL SEMIFINALS

Motion: This House would require doctors to report all cases of suspected domestic violence.

ROOM: Ruby
GOVERNMENT: Malaya A, IIUM E
OPPOSITION: Amsterdam B, Tilbury A
ADVANCING: Amsterdam A, Tilbury A

Debate - BP ESL Finals WUDC Thailand - Turkish Military Scularism

http://debatevideoblog.blogspot.com/2008/01/debate-bp-esl-finals-wudc-thailand.html

ESL FINALS, WUDC Thailand

The motion:
This House believes that the Turkish military should stop enforcing the separation of church and state.

ROOM: Conference Room A
GOVERNMENT: Amsterdam B, Tilbury A
OPPOSITION: IIUMD, IIUM C

WINNER: Amsterdam B

WSDC 2007 Videos Now on Sale

From Justin Reznick:

I received a message from YBM, the sponsor of the 2007 World Schools Debating Championships that were held here in Seoul. They wanted to announce that they now have a 15-DVD set (all the elimination rounds) available for purchase for individuals and institutions. Please visit http://www.yes24.com/Goods/FTGoodsView.aspx?goodsNo=2790509&CategoryNumber=002001002
for product details (site includes 2 short sample video clips).

Documentary About Slovenian World Schools Team is a Television Hit

Slovenia WSDC Team: Maja Cimerman, Filip Dobranic, Bojana Skrt, Teo Radic, Anna Mojca England-Kerr, Blashka Hunski (photo taken during training)

Over 100,000 people in Slovenia last night watched a RTV-Slovenia documentary about the Slovenian team at the World Schools Debating Championship held last year in Seoul. The team was 6-2 in prelims, won the World EFL title, and Filip Dobranic was top EFL speaker.

Za in Proti director and Slovenian WSDC coach Bojana Skrt said today by phone that she is very pleased with the documentary and how it presents the Slovenian national debate program that she manages. The students were well-represented and there is lots of footage from the debates themselves. The program was produced by the same person who arranges the weekly program of television debates (Tecma) broadcast nationally in Slovenia.

The WSDC can be a tense and rigorous competition, and is extremely difficult as native speaking teams compete against non-native speakers in what some has said is the most challenging debate competition in the world.

We will have more information and reviews of the program as they come in.

Bulgarian President Endorses IDEA Youth Forum

IDEA Youth Forum 2008 Newsletter is now available at:
http://www.idebate.org/ideaforum/?q=node/76#attachments

Here is a brief excerpt:

Welcome back to the IDEA Youth Forum Newsletter! I hope you enjoyed your holiday and you are ready for yet another year preparing for the event of the summer – The Youth Forum in Bulgaria! The biggest news is that his Excellency Mr. GEORGI PARVANOV, President of The Republic of Bulgaria, extended the auspices over our event. So who would dare to miss an event, where even the President is showing up?! That would be a major debate faux-paux, don’t you think? Read more to find out what else is new.

"Speech and Debate" Off-Broadway Play Gets Extended Run

From http://blogs.guardian.co.uk/theatre/2007/12/a_dramatic_turn_for_broadway.html

Off Broadway, a new black box theatre located several floors below street level on West 46th Street is enjoying an extended run of its debut offering, Stephen Karam's Speech and Debate, a play (and production, from Avenue Q director Jason Moore) that makes up in amiability and high spirits what it lacks in resonance and polish. And in a city where the greying of the theatre-going public is of much greater concern than in London, you have to cheer an audience composed largely of that elusive youth market that may like the idea of a play called Rock 'n' Roll until they realise that it comes with three hours of Stoppardian mental pyrotechnics attached.

It was also rated one of the top three plays of 2007 by AM New York.
From http://www.amny.com/entertainment/stage/am-bestbroadway1227,0,597104.story

3. SPEECH & DEBATE (Roundabout Underground)
The year's best Off-Broadway play is about three lonely teens at a Midwest high school. It was recently extended through February.

How to Bid to Host WUDC

Picture: Reactions to holding this incredibly complex event.

Ian Lising, outgoing council chair, has released this instructional document. Thanks to Colm Flynn for this.

Hello, anyone out there is the USA interested?

http://flynn.debating.net/Guide_to_Bidding.doc

Here is the table of contents:

I. Should we bid to host Worlds?
1. What do we get from hosting Worlds?
a. International Recognition
b. Immediate Worlds Exposure
2. What is our timetable for the bid?
a. Getting University Support
b. Getting Community/Corporate Support
c. Getting Materials Prepared
3. Who do we need to be on our Bid Team?
a. The Convenor/Championship Director
b. The Chief Adjudicator
c. Worlds Delegates
4. How does the Bid Process work?
a. Knowing your competition
b. Do we really need our DCAs now?
c. Pre-Council Materials
d. New Year’s Day

II. Great, we won the bid! Now what do we do?
1. Building your team
a. The Deputy Chief Adjudicators (DCAs)
b. Registration Director
c. Finance Director
d. Tab Director
e. Contingency Director
f. Equity/Women’s Officers
g. Accommodations Director
h. Event Directors
i. Communication Director
j. Logistics Director
k. Transport Director
l. Socials Director
2. Work out the details

3. Defend the Bid
a. The Mid-Year Report
b. The Ratification Process
4. Future Host’s Night

III. We have over a thousand people at our doorstep, what happens now?
1. Execute the Plan (Get enough sleep)
2. Trust your Team (Don’t micromanage)
3. Passing the Gavel (It is done)

Middle School Debate Prospering in Maryland

Brandon Theis listens as Emily Fenichel, during debate practice, argues in favor of dissecting animals in science class.

From http://www.baltimoresun.com/news/local/howard/bal-ho.debate13jan13,0,7004514.story

Power of debate not up for dispute
Interest is growing rapidly in programs now offered in all Howard middle schools

By Karen Nitkin | Special to the sun
January 13, 2008

Emily Fenichel, 12, flinched a little when she heard the assignment. She would have to argue in favor of dissecting animals in science classes, even though she personally hates the practice.

"It's so nasty," she later said.

"Remember, for good debaters, it doesn't matter what side you're on," said Nan Dove, the Gifted and Talented Program resource teacher at Oakland Mills Middle School. So Emily gathered her thoughts and made her arguments.

"It helps you learn about whatever animal you're dissecting," she said.

Emily is one of about 25 students at the Columbia school taking part in a debate program run by Dove. Since August 2006, the county has required all middle schools to have such programs, and has started a twice-yearly competition between schools.

The next competition, scheduled for 9 a.m. to 11 a.m. March 13 at Oakland Mills Middle School, will have students debate whether school uniforms should be mandatory. Fourteen middle schools have signed on to participate, double the number that participated in a similar competition in November.

Debbie Blum, the resource teacher for the gifted and talented education program countywide, helped write the curriculum for the middle school debate program and is organizing the competition. She noted that interest is growing each year. "It's very exciting," she said.

She said the middle school program gives students a foundation in debate before they go to high school, where they can take part in established debate programs that compete throughout the region. Blum said middle schools might eventually sign up to participate in regional leagues.

Middle school debate is slightly different from the high school format. In high school, two students go head to head, with one arguing in favor of a proposition and one arguing against it. In middle school, the students compete in teams of six to eight students. During the debates, two or more students make the opening argument, several deliver the rebuttal and a few are assigned closing arguments.

Before the debate program was required, some middle schools, including Oakland Mills, had informal programs in place. Dove said she started teaching her students the finer points of debate about four years ago, spurred by several students in the Gifted and Talented Program who had asked to learn about debate as an independent project.

The more formal program is offered at all middle schools as an instructional seminar, meaning any interested student can sign up for the class. At Oakland Mills, it is taught once a week for about 40 minutes. Dove said about one-quarter to one-third of the students in the program do not take Gifted and Talented classes.

Dove noted that the rigors of formal debate can motivate students who might not excel at "paper and pencil" schoolwork. "It's so powerful," she said.

She noted that debate teaches research and critical-thinking skills and is useful in all walks of life. "I just see it as a really powerful teaching tool," she said. "It makes them better students and better citizens."

Each year, more students sign on, Dove said. "I see that interest is growing," she said.

During a recent class of seventh- graders, Dove began by asking two students at a time to come to the front of the room to take sides on issues ranging from the driving age to whether zoos should be banned. Students were told which side they were to take.

Jenna Pekofsky, 12, argued that zoos should be banned because animals are better off in the wild. Aileen Amador, 12, said zoos are beneficial because they protect endangered animals.

Alicia Wooten, 12, was asked to give reasons why fast-food restaurants should be prohibited from selling food with high levels of fat and sugar. "The reason would be that obesity is such a large problem in the U.S.," she said after only a few seconds of thought.

Coming up with those top-of-the-head arguments was just the first part of the debate process. Finding facts to support both sides of the issue is key, Dove said. After about 20 minutes, she divided the students into two groups, asking one to research the pros of school uniforms and one to research reasons to oppose uniforms.

Students used laptop computers to look up newspaper articles and go to Web sites on the topic, taking notes as they scanned the information. They wouldn't find out until later in the month which side they would take in the March debate, but Dove said it was important for students to be able to argue either side with ease.

Kaitlyn Bejarano, 12, said she signed up for the class because "I've always wanted to debate about stuff," she said.

"You learn how to look up good research, how to find both sides of the story," she said.

She took part in the November competition, which pitted teams from seven schools against one another and had students arguing the pros and cons of social networking sites like Facebook.

Danielle Amos-Lawrence, 12, said the program has been fun. "I like finding facts to back up what I say," she said.

2nd Intl Conference on Argumentation, Rhetoric, Debate and the Pedagogy of Empowerment

Create a global academic footprint for your work and your career.

Great keynote speakers, international draw, quick turnaround on submitted abstracts, invitation letter to show your administration and help gain support. Last year 120+ attendees and 84+ papers. Join us for year two.

2nd International Conference on Argumentation, Rhetoric, Debate and the Pedagogy of Empowerment
11-12-13 April 2008, Ljubljana, Slovenia
The conference begins with registration at 1200 11 April 2008.
The conference ends with the closing ceremony at 1500 13 April 2008.
The conference sessions will be held on the beautiful campus of the University of Ljubljana Faculty of Administration.

The World Debate Institute at the University of Vermont USA, the National Education Institute of the Republic of Slovenia and ZIP, Za in proti, zavod za kulturo dialoga/ Pro et contra Institute for culture of dialogue Slovenia invite all scholars and practitioners of argumentation, rhetoric, debate, and educators using deliberative education methodologies to the International Conference on Argumentation, Rhetoric, Debate and the Pedagogy of Empowerment -- THINKING AND SPEAKING A BETTER WORLD, 11-13 April 2008, Ljubljana, Slovenia

Main website: http://debate.uvm.edu/betterworld.htm
Application form: http://debate.uvm.edu/conf08appform.doc
News website: http://betterworldconference.blogspot.com/

The conference will welcome scholars and educators from diverse fields for vigorous dialogue and exchange. This conference will unite scholars of argumentation and rhetoric, teachers, and organizers of local, national and international debating networks to discuss critical thinking and advocacy discourse through pedagogy. We intend for the conference to welcome all who are involved in public discussions and debates about different issues.
This conference is extremely timely. A global information society which seeks reasoned solutions to problems through broad citizen involvement needs to develop and refine techniques for criticizing and validating ideas through discourse and then impart these to new generations of citizens if we are to create a better future and avoid looming crises. This conference represents a unique opportunity to share ideas, network and cross-fertilize with global critical thinkers.

The conference will generate a proceedings volume in the form of a book with completed papers. Submissions will be selected from the papers available at the conference.

The program for the conference will have three themes. Submissions are encouraged to center their work on one of the three themes and to submit proposals to the appropriate conference division. Interdisciplinary work that might fit into more than one category is welcome.

• Argumentation and rhetoric. The study of the use of logic and reason to criticize and analyze ideas through communication is important to our world. Those interested in research on argumentation theory, criticisms of communication acts and scholarship on argumentation practice are encouraged to submit to this division.
• Debate. The use of formal argumentation forums and debating to educate and empower citizens is a growing movement throughout the world. Those interested in work on the practice and theory of debate competition, public debates, research on the impact of debate for participants, and theorizing about debate paradigms are encouraged to submit to this division.
• Critical thinking/pedagogy. Teaching and the methodology of teaching in the active classroom is an extremely important field. Those interested in using debate, discussion and argumentation in classrooms, discussion of experiences and teaching lessons relating to communication and critical thinking are encouraged to submit to this division.

Keynote Speakers:

• Argumentation - Frans van Eemeren, University of Amsterdam. Frans van Eemeren, perhaps the most noted argumentation scholar in the world, has agreed to be the keynote speaker in argumentation at the 2008 conference. Professor van Eemeren will also serve on the argumentation evaluation committee along with David Williams of Florida Atlantic University will also be on that committee.
• Debate - Omar Salahuddin bin Abdullah, MultiMedia Univerity, Malaysia. Recognized as the "father of Asian debating" and recent winner of the first distinguished service award by the World Universities Debating Championship, Dr. Salahuddin has agreed to be our keynote speaker.
• Pedagogy - Kate Shuster, Claremont Graduate School, USA. Kate Shuster has been a worldwide leader in understanding and applying active methods in the classroom at various levels. One of her areas of emphasis has been oral literacy and how it can be successfully taught. Kate has eight recent books to her credit and a number of important works in submission. She is perhaps best known for her efforts to promote debating and critical thinking in middle schools.

Paper proposals (a less than one-page abstract) should be submitted as soon as possible but not later than 15 February 2008. The committees will evaluate proposals in hand each month and inform those submitting papers of the committee's decision. Full copies of papers should be provided electronically by the beginning of the conference. ALL PAPERS AND PRESENTATIONS MUST BE IN ENGLISH.

Format for papers will be that of the Modern Language Association. For information, see http://www.docstyles.com/mlacrib.htm . You can download a copy of the guidelines at http://debate.uvm.edu/dcpdf/mlacrib.pdf .

A committee of conference organizers and scholars will examine submissions to each division.
The members of the argumentation division committee are:

• David Williams, Florida Atlantic University, USA
• Frans van Eemeren, Department of Speech Communication, Argumentation Theory and Rhetoric, University of Amsterdam

The members of the debate division committee are:

• Bojana Skrt, ZIP Slovenia.
• Sam Nelson, Cornell University, USA
• Loke Wing Fatt, SAID, Singapore

The members of the pedagogy division committee are:

• Alfred Snider, University of Vermont USA
• Zora Rutar, National Education Institute, Slovenia
• Maria Wolrath Söderberg, Department of Rhetoric, Södertörn University College, Sweden

Proposals and full papers for argumentation should be sent to David Williams at davidcratis@hotmail.com
Proposals and full papers for debate should be sent to Bojana Skrt at bojana.skrt@siol.net
Proposals and full papers for pedagogy should be sent to Alfred Snider at alfred.snider@uvm.edu

Those wishing to attend the conference without submitting a paper are very welcome but must register.

The Conference will be held on the beautiful campus of the University of Ljubljana Faculty of Administration. The participation fee is 65 Euros and covers the conference sessions, reception, coffee breaks and materials as well as a banquet. The participants will be accommodated in different locations in Ljubljana, depending on the budget option they choose. There are different accommodations possible, from low cost high school dormitory to moderate hotels in Ljubljana to the best hotels in Ljubljana. Low cost accommodations must register through Bojana Skrt, while all others must be booked by the attendees. We will be supplying a list of suggested hotels soon. The conference is a non-profit project and all organizers are unpaid. The participation fee is designed to cover costs only.

Please note that registration for admission to the conference and low cost housing must be coordinated through Bojana Skrt bojana.skrt@siol.net. Registration deadline is 15 March 2008.

The payment for the participation fee should be transferred to ZIP bank account by March 15 2008 or in cash on arrival. All inquires about application, payment and other information should be sent to Bojana Skrt at bojana.skrt@siol.net.

Travel to Ljubljana is possible through many forms. Regular air service from most European cities is available, including on a number of discount airlines such as Easyjet. Train and bus service is convenient with arrivals at the city center. We will not be arranging pick ups from arrival points because it is quite easy. We will be publishing low cost options for airport pick up.
Ljubljana travel guides can be found at: http://www.lonelyplanet.com/worldguide/destinations/europe/slovenia?_http://www.randburg.com/si/ljubljana.html_http://www.ljubljanalife.com/

Organizing committee:
Bojana Skrt, Za in proti, zavod za kulturo dialoga, Slovenia
Alfred C. Snider, World Debate Institute, University of Vermont, USA

XFire Debate Club Grows in Strength -- Debating Games

From http://www.escapistmagazine.com/news/view/80592-Xfire-Debate-Club-Goes-Indie

Xfire Debate Club Goes Indie
Corvus Elrod posted on 14 Jan 2008 10:00 am
amanda fitch, aveyond, chris pasley, debate club, independent games, jay is games, john bardinelli, kongregate, xfire

The Xfire Debate Club is presenting a panel on independent gaming this month.

The Xfire Debate Club is a regular event hosted via the popular Xfire instant messaging platform. January's event, The State of Independent Games, promised to be large enough that they've added an extra Q&A session to the usual debate. On Thursday, January 24, at 5:00 p.m. EST, you can join Xfire for a Live Chat with independent game developers who will be online to answer your questions about game design and the trials and tribulations involved in breaking into the game industry.

On Friday, January 25, also at 5:00 p.m. EST, the Xfire Debate Club will feature a debate on the current state of independent games, the issues involved in the development and marketing of games and what the future looks like for the genre of indie games.

Guest panelists include John Bardinelli (of JayIsGames), Amanda Fitch (developer of Aveyond), Chris Pasley (director of Games at Kongregate.com and many others.

In order to participate in the Xfire Debate Club, you will need to download the free Xfire software and register a free account. The Xfire platform provides many services including--instant messenger, server browser, peer-to-peer file downloads and in-game messaging.

News from IDEA January 11

January 11th, 2008

Dear INN Readers,

I have headline news coming from the IDEA office in Oregon, U.S. The sun came out for nearly three hours today. It was glorious. I can’t recall the last day that it didn’t rain here, but I don’t mind excessive water—it’s a valuable resource. In fact, water is the topic for the spring TPS Global Debates: “Resolved: Water should be national property.” You can begin working on your spring Global Debate campaign now and get an edge on the competition! Go to www.thepeoplespeak.org for the latest news on the Global Debates. IDEA’s Debatepedia is busy working on material for the spring topic. Visit this topic on Debatepedia at: http://wiki.idebate.org/index.php/Resolved:_Water_should_be_considered_national_property. I’ll prepare for the topic by staring gloomily at the rain outside of my window. ~Arminda

DEBATE TRACKER: Your Name Here

Have you updated your information in Debate Tracker lately? Debate Tracker is a great tool for debaters to find one another and for organizations to make contacts. It’s also a great way to ensure that you hear about IDEA opportunities and to showcase your debate activities by getting Debate Tracker points! There are 16,000 users currently registered in Debate Tracker, which makes it a great resource for finding people! But, it only works when contact information is up-to-date! Please take a moment and update your information with IDEA in Debate Tracker. If you have lost your username and password, email alathrop@idebate.org for a reminder.

Congratulations to the top point leaders in Debate Tracker!

1) Bakhytzhan Kurmanov (Kazakhstan)

2) Aiste Dumbryte (Lithuania)

3) Blanka Netopilova (Czech Republic)

4) Jan Dragoun (Czech Republic)

5) Sylvie Kristalasova (Czech Republic)

Congratulations to the Associations With the Most Debatetracker Users!

1) Asociace Debatnich Klubu (Czech Republic)

2) Teachers for Democracy and Partnership (Ukraine)

3) Slovak Debate Association (Slovakia)

4) Youth Educational Forum (Macedonia)

SUBMIT AN ARTICLE TO IDEBATE!

The deadline to submit an article about news from your club is February 1^st. Email alathrop@idebate.org with inquiries.

IDEA Weekly Trivia

Q: What famous Swiss citizen said of nuclear bombs: "If I had known, I would have become a watchmaker"?

A: Albert Einstein.

Tell Debate Enthusiasts You Know to Join the IDEA Mailing List! http://www.idebate.org/debate/listserv.php

IDEA International Tournament of Champions for Parliamentary Debate: May 15^th-17^th

IDEA’s 2008 ITOC for Parliamentary Debate is a parliamentary debate tournament open to all secondary school students. The tournament begins with a one-day parliamentary debate workshop on May 15^th, followed by two days of exciting debate at Willamette University in Salem, Oregon. The fee to participate in the tournament is $25. Fees are waived for all participants outside of the U.S. and Canada! IDEA’s ITOC offers fun evening activities and a unique international experience you’ll be sure to remember! Registration opens January 10^th and closes April 15^th. Space is limited! See updates about this event at www.idebate.org.

IDEA Trains in Korea

On January 19-20, IDEA will hold a middle school debate training at Seogwi Jungang Girl's Middle School in Seogwipo, Jeju in South Korea. Jeju is a small island off the southwest coast of Korea and students from several schools on the island plan to attend. The training will be run by Alex Dukalskis, IDEA Program Coordinator in Seoul and Elizabeth Humphrey, current Fulbright Grantee in Seogwipo and former internationally successful debater for Willamette University. Both trainers will introduce the students to debate and then work with them as they put their skills to use in several practice debates.

You Can Be on IDEA Radio

Email debates and reports to IDEA to be broadcast live on our IDEA Radio. Simply email inquiries to Nat Towsen at radio@idebate.org. If you don’t have material to contribute, you should still give IDEA Radio a listen—it’s quite entertaining!

Cool Opportunities for European Youth at: http://www.salto-youth.net/training/

IDEA’s New and Improved Website: www.idebate.org

New World Debate Rankings Out

From http://flynn.debating.net/colpoint.htm

2008 World Rankings

This ranking is calculated by adding together the points (i.e. 3 for a win, 2 for 2nd, 1 for 3rd and 0 for 4th) won by each team representing an institution at the World Debating championships over the previous 5 competitive Worlds for that institution.

Where an institution hosted the championships in the last 5 years, and was therefore barred from participation that year, their score will be calculated over the past 6 years.

Where teams are tied on the the same points these ties have been broken based on the total known points (i.e. all points that institution has earned since Cork 96)



Rank Team Country 2008 2007 2006 2005 2004 2003 Total All Time Points All Time Rank
1 Sydney Australia 101 150 111 106 109 577 1090 1
2 Oxford Union England 99 121 103 93 95 511 1012 2
3 Cambridge England 77 94 101 95 88 455 870 3
4 Monash Australia 87 59 50 103 90 389 836 4
5 UC Dublin Ireland 103 101 0 98 68 15 385 706 6
6 Yale US 91 100 109 37 32 369 679 7
7 UC Cork Ireland 64 64 99 59 60 346 669 8
8 Ateneo de Manila University Philippines 76 48 49 77 94 344 774 5
9 Queensland Australia 90 98 78 28 46 340 622 12
10 TC Dublin Ireland 68 65 133 33 35 334 656 10
11 Hart House U of Toronto Canada 56 82 76 52 47 313 616 13
12 Int. Islamic Uni Malaysia Malaysia 74 42 43 77 72 308 566 14
13 Melbourne Australia 83 18 53 75 65 294 665 9
14 New South Wales Uni of (UNSW) Australia 45 49 44 51 95 284 655 11
15 Hong Kong Uni Hong Kong 65 70 25 59 56 275 396 30
16 MARA, Uni Teknologi Malaysia 60 38 16 93 60 267 377 34
17 Nanyang NTU Singapore 77 27 31 89 0 42 266 480 18
18 Chinese University of Hong Kong Hong Kong 34 54 53 68 56 265 369 35
19 Victoria Wellington New Zealand 87 0 18 63 74 242 444 22
20 La Verne US 51 49 59 41 38 238 542 16
21 British Columbia, University of Canada 29 0 45 49 74 41 238 305 45
22 Alberta Canada 62 64 38 18 55 237 427 24
23 National University of Singapore (NUS) Singapore 66 46 28 29 61 230 566 15
24 Australian National University Australia 45 44 25 26 85 225 523 17
25 Queens Canada 49 49 62 31 34 225 426 25
26 Harvard US 49 73 60 0 42 224 344 39
27 Bates College US 26 63 76 30 28 223 479 19
28 International Christian University Japan 32 33 38 60 60 223 368 36
29 Singapore Management University Singapore 44 37 14 71 53 219 229 64
30 Multimedia University Malaysia (Voices) Malaysia 51 27 24 0 70 41 213 283 47
31 Princeton US 51 44 39 30 47 211 455 21
32 McGill Canada 52 50 52 16 38 208 425 26
33 Universitas Indonesia Indonesia 63 0 35 40 67 205 270 51
34 Keio Japan 45 38 44 48 26 201 227 66
35 Macquarie Australia 35 38 62 16 49 200 421 27
36 Durham England 14 53 60 30 34 191 384 33
37 Sydney, Uni of Tech Australia 38 26 58 46 17 185 358 37
38 Colgate US 45 55 52 33 0 185 233 63
39 Ewha Womans University (EDiS) South Korea 37 14 47 61 24 183 183 77
40 Stanford US 32 52 33 33 32 182 392 32
41 Dilman, Uni Philippines Philippines 46 0 0 65 65 176 285 46
42 Galway L&D Ireland 32 29 51 36 28 176 236 62
43 St Andrews Scotland 48 50 59 14 0 171 309 43
44 Alaska US 43 48 53 0 27 171 225 67
45 Hong Kong Polytechnic Hong Kong 30 0 51 39 39 159 171 83
46 Glasgow Union Scotland 15 31 63 29 13 151 472 20
47 Swarthmore US 31 39 44 0 33 147 242 59
48 Chulalongkorn Thailand 46 0 0 55 45 146 261 53
49 Hebrew Israel 44 27 35 0 38 144 400 29
50 Mahidol Thailand 49 26 0 42 24 141 180 79
51 Middle Temple England 34 33 32 17 22 138 321 41
52 National Law School of India (NLSIU) India 70 15 13 13 23 134 191 76
53 Rhodes South Africa 59 0 33 0 39 131 436 23
54 Zagreb Croatia 36 35 14 21 25 131 339 40
55 Uni of London Union England 16 0 86 27 0 129 307 44
56 Brandeis US 46 15 24 18 26 129 243 57
57 Auckland New Zealand 63 0 11 34 20 128 241 60
58 Bristol England 16 12 18 33 49 128 204 72
59 Fordham US 0 46 40 0 41 127 405 28
60 Portland US 26 72 26 0 0 124 166 87
61 Kyung Hee South Korea 38 19 19 27 19 122 122 104
62 New York University US 28 13 28 16 36 121 228 65
63 Cape Town South Africa 33 0 68 0 18 119 277 48
64 Boston US 0 26 39 28 26 119 119 105
65 Inner Temple England 17 14 42 22 20 115 277 49
66 Malaya Malaysia 39 0 0 37 38 114 114 107
67 Claremont US 29 40 43 0 0 112 211 71
68 Duke US 47 26 39 0 0 112 112 110
69 Seikei Japan 28 29 0 28 21 106 156 91
70 Manila, Uni Philippines Philippines 40 0 0 63 0 103 192 75
71 London School of Economics England 44 45 0 0 14 103 169 86
72 Kansai Gaidai Univ (KGU) Japan 20 37 9 26 10 102 102 121
73 Mona UWI West Indies 9 40 0 28 23 100 165 89
74 Western Australia Australia 13 0 34 17 35 99 245 55
75 Dhaka Bangladesh 28 41 0 10 20 99 99 123
76 Jamaica, Uni of Tech West Indies 20 27 20 11 20 98 143 96
77 Minnesota US 0 12 25 27 31 95 107 115
78 Ottawa (EDS) Canada 12 29 15 19 19 94 265 52
79 Yokohama City YCU Japan 23 18 10 25 18 94 94 126
80 De La Salle University - Manila Philippines 27 0 0 27 39 93 352 38
81 Kebangsaan Malaysia 0 0 0 76 15 91 137 98
82 Massachusetts Institute of Technology US 15 29 27 0 17 88 238 61
83 Otago New Zealand 0 0 15 44 26 85 112 112
84 Tsuda Japan 22 27 17 17 0 83 98 124
85 Chicago US 0 31 50 0 0 81 148 95
86 Chung Ang University South Korea 21 29 5 24 0 79 79 143
87 Tokyo International University Japan 30 13 35 0 0 78 88 134
88 Malacca MU Malaysia 32 0 0 46 0 78 78 144
89 Osaka Japan 8 26 0 34 9 77 77 146
90 North South Dhaka (NSU) Bangladesh 31 10 0 35 0 76 273 50
91 Lahore (LUMS) Pakistan 38 0 0 38 0 76 141 97
92 Haifa Israel 0 23 37 0 15 75 179 81
93 Carleton Canada 14 42 18 0 0 74 165 88
94 Lincolns Inn England 0 16 15 20 22 73 150 92
95 Calgary Canada 0 41 31 0 0 72 72 151
96 King´s Inn Ireland 0 0 29 41 0 70 249 54
97 Hong Kong UST Hong Kong 34 35 0 0 0 69 149 94
98 Oregon US 0 0 42 0 27 69 112 111
99 Western Washington University WWU US 29 21 18 0 0 68 68 154
100 Loyola Marymount US 15 30 9 0 13 67 86 135
101 California State University US 26 28 13 0 0 67 85 138
102 Vassar College US 14 10 14 14 14 66 197 74
103 IDC (Interdisciplinart Center Herzliya) Israel 24 0 27 0 15 66 90 129
104 Padjadjaran Indonesia 0 0 0 55 11 66 66 157
105 Wilfrid Laurier University WLU Canada 29 25 11 0 0 65 65 159
106 Cave Hill UWI West Indies 21 33 10 0 0 64 76 147
107 Witswatersrand South Africa 46 0 0 17 0 63 393 31
108 Botswana, University of Botswana 15 22 0 0 26 63 106 116
109 Amherst US 28 32 0 0 0 60 110 113
110 KUiTTHO Malaysia 0 11 11 38 0 60 70 153
111 Birmingham England 0 19 0 28 12 59 104 118
112 Singapore Polytechnic Singapore 0 0 0 0 59 59 59 168
113 IU Bremen Germany 7 25 26 0 0 58 58 170
114 Stellenbosch South Africa 0 14 0 28 14 56 244 56
115 Thammasat Thailand 20 0 0 23 10 53 53 174
116 Western Ontario Canada 14 26 12 0 0 52 199 73
117 York Canada 18 16 0 17 0 51 159 90
118 San Beda Philippines 27 0 0 11 13 51 90 130
119 Berlin Germany 0 14 37 0 0 51 64 160
120 Sains Malaysia Malaysia 24 14 0 13 0 51 63 162
121 Temasek Polytechnic Singapore 38 0 0 0 13 51 51 177
122 Swinburne University of Technology (Sarawak Campus) Malaysia 32 0 0 18 0 50 50 180
123 Royal Holloway England 19 30 0 0 0 49 49 182
124 Seattle US 0 37 12 0 0 49 49 183
125 Limerick Ireland 17 0 0 0 31 48 242 58
126 Erasmus Netherlands 0 0 12 14 21 47 181 78
127 Institut Teknologi Bandung Indonesia 13 0 0 12 22 47 47 188
128 Hanyang University South Korea 45 0 0 0 0 45 45 193
129 Hobart and William Smith Colleges US 15 14 16 0 0 45 45 194
130 Yonsei University South Korea 45 0 0 0 0 45 45 195
131 Adelaide Australia 0 0 13 31 0 44 95 125
132 Putra Maylaysia Malaysia 0 0 0 29 14 43 86 136
133 Korea U South Korea 36 0 7 0 0 43 43 197
134 Society for Associated Inter-Tertiary Debaters (SAID) Singapore 0 12 17 14 0 43 43 198
135 Brown US 28 0 13 0 0 41 133 99
136 MGIMO University of Moscow Russia 0 0 13 15 13 41 60 166
137 Islamic University of Technology Bangladesh 12 0 18 11 0 41 41 203
138 Santo Thomas Philippines 26 0 0 0 14 40 321 42
139 Dublin City University Ireland 14 0 10 0 16 40 62 163
140 Queen Mary London England 15 13 0 0 12 40 52 176
141 Bonn Germany 0 27 13 0 0 40 40 204
142 Colombo Sri Lanka 26 14 0 0 0 40 40 206
143 Tel Aviv (TAU) Israel 13 0 25 0 0 38 82 141
144 DLSU College of Saint Benilde Philippines 0 0 0 12 26 38 77 145
145 National University of Juridical Sciences India 25 0 0 13 0 38 38 209
146 Leiden Netherlands 0 13 23 0 0 36 75 148
147 Helsinki Finland 18 18 0 0 0 36 36 217
148 UTM Terengganu Malaysia 9 0 7 20 0 36 36 218
149 Griffith University Australia 0 27 8 0 0 35 47 187
150 Johns Hopkins US 0 18 16 0 0 34 110 114
151 George Washington US 16 18 0 0 0 34 89 132
152 Pacific Lutheran US 0 34 0 0 0 34 67 156
153 Tokyo Foreign TUFS Japan 17 17 0 0 0 34 34 222
154 DAE South Korea 33 0 0 0 0 33 33 224
155 East West University Bangladesh 0 0 0 19 14 33 33 225
156 King's College England 0 18 0 0 14 32 48 185
157 Bonaparte Netherlands 0 15 17 0 0 32 32 227
158 Deakin Australia 0 0 9 0 22 31 42 199
159 Cornell US 0 0 31 0 0 31 37 212
160 Edinburgh Scotland 0 0 0 18 12 30 219 68
161 Manchester England 0 18 0 0 12 30 47 189
162 Foreign Affairs University (China) China 0 9 0 0 21 30 30 229
163 Lesotho, National University of (NUL) Lesotho 10 20 0 0 0 30 30 230
164 Dundee Scotland 0 0 13 0 16 29 149 93
165 Tilbury Netherlands 14 15 0 0 0 29 37 214
166 Massey New Zealand 0 0 0 17 12 29 29 231
167 Wesleyan University US 28 0 0 0 0 28 39 207
168 Guelph Canada 12 0 0 0 15 27 169 85
169 Arellano University School of Law Philippines 0 0 0 19 8 27 60 165
170 William & Mary US 14 0 13 0 0 27 55 172
171 Utrecht Netherlands 0 0 0 14 13 27 53 175
172 Babes-Bolyai University (UBB) Law Romania 0 14 13 0 0 27 27 239
173 Guangdong Commercial College China 0 0 0 9 18 27 27 240
174 Northwest US 0 26 0 0 0 26 103 120
175 Manitoba Canada 14 12 0 0 0 26 67 155
176 Indepedent University Bangladesh Bangladesh 0 0 0 26 0 26 41 202
177 Occidental US 0 15 11 0 0 26 26 244
178 Universiti Malaysia Sabah (UMS) Malaysia 0 0 0 26 0 26 26 245
179 Saskatchewan Canada 0 25 0 0 0 25 91 128
180 University of Dhaka, Institute of Business Admin (DU - IBA) Bangladesh 0 0 0 25 0 25 37 215
181 Incheon South Korea 15 10 0 0 0 25 25 247
182 Columbia US 0 11 0 0 13 24 176 82
183 Smith US 0 0 24 0 0 24 126 103
184 Fudan University Shanghai China 11 0 0 0 13 24 24 255
185 Koc Turkey 24 0 0 0 0 24 24 256
186 Fairfield US 0 0 0 12 11 23 132 100
187 Louisiana US 0 23 0 0 0 23 75 149
188 Stockholm School of Economica in Riga (SSE) Latvia 11 0 12 0 0 23 57 171
189 Akuntasi Indonesia 0 0 0 23 0 23 23 258
190 Middle East Technical University (METU) Turkey 0 23 0 0 0 23 23 260
191 Assumption University Thailand 0 22 0 0 0 0 22 80 142
192 Atma Jaya Indonesia 0 0 0 21 0 21 21 268
193 Freiburg Germany 0 0 21 0 0 21 21 273
194 Kyoto Japan 0 11 10 0 0 21 21 274
195 Singapore Institute of Management Singapore 0 0 0 0 21 21 21 279
196 Vermont US 11 10 0 0 0 21 21 280
197 Deree Greece 0 0 20 0 0 20 169 84
198 Khon Kaen University (KKU) Thailand 20 0 0 0 0 20 20 281
199 Macau, University of Macao 20 0 0 0 0 20 20 282
200 Saint Benilde Philippines 20 0 0 0 0 20 20 283
201 Tokai University Japan 0 20 0 0 0 20 20 285
202 Leeds England 0 0 19 0 0 19 93 127
203 Baguio Debate Council Philippines 0 0 0 19 0 19 19 287
204 Grays Inn England 0 0 0 0 18 18 179 80
205 Athens University of Economics and business (AUEB) Greece 0 0 18 0 0 18 18 292
206 Hong Kong Baptist University Hong Kong 18 0 0 0 0 18 18 293
207 Temple US 0 0 18 0 0 18 18 297
208 Zhongshan China 0 0 0 0 17 17 17 302
209 Aberdeen Scotland 0 16 0 0 0 16 116 106
210 Mount Saint Vincent US 0 0 0 0 16 16 16 308
211 Pretoria South Africa 16 0 0 0 0 16 16 309
212 Yokohama Nat Japan 0 16 0 0 0 16 16 311
213 Lyceum of the Philippines University (LyP) Philippines 15 0 0 0 0 15 18 294
214 BPP Law England 0 0 0 15 0 15 15 312
215 Oklahoma US 15 0 0 0 0 15 15 313
216 U Tech Malaysia Malaysia 0 0 0 14 0 14 131 101
217 Ljubjana Slovenia 14 0 0 0 0 14 49 181
218 Amsterdam Netherlands 14 0 0 0 0 14 25 246
219 Hawaii Pacific US 14 0 0 0 0 14 14 317
220 Legal Workshop Australia Australia 0 0 0 0 14 14 14 318
221 Lethbridge Canada 0 14 0 0 0 14 14 319
222 McMaster Canada 0 14 0 0 0 14 14 320
223 Northern Arizona US 0 0 14 0 0 14 14 322
224 RRIS Latvia 0 0 14 0 0 14 14 323
225 Waikato New Zealand 0 0 0 14 0 14 14 328
226 Utara Malaysia Malaysia 0 0 0 13 0 13 61 164
227 Help University Malaysia 0 0 0 13 0 13 13 330
228 Indian Institute of Technology, Delhi India 0 0 0 0 13 13 13 331
229 Montana US 13 0 0 0 0 13 13 333
230 Sophia University Japan 4 9 0 0 0 13 13 337
231 STAN-UKSW Indonesia 0 0 0 13 0 13 13 338
232 Universitas Islam Indonesia Indonesia 0 0 0 13 0 13 13 340
233 Lewis & Clark US 0 12 0 0 0 12 44 196
234 Dalhousie Canada 12 0 0 0 0 12 41 201
235 Nottingham England 0 0 12 0 0 12 24 257
236 Carroll US 0 0 12 0 0 12 21 271
237 Bina Nusantara University Indonesia 0 0 0 0 12 12 12 341
238 Bucharest Romania 12 0 0 0 0 12 12 342
239 Hankuk University of Foreign Studies South Korea 12 0 0 0 0 12 12 347
240 Moscow State Linguistic University MSLU Russia 0 0 12 0 0 12 12 349
241 National Institute of Dramatic Arts (NIDA Sydney) Australia 0 12 0 0 0 12 12 350
242 Sichuan International Studies University China 0 0 0 12 0 12 12 354
243 Tsinghua China 0 12 0 0 0 12 12 357
244 UNITEN Malaysia 0 0 0 12 0 12 12 358
245 Tallinn Estonia 0 0 11 0 0 11 38 211
246 Higher School of Economics Russia 11 0 0 0 0 11 35 219
247 Panteion UPSS Athens Greece 0 0 11 0 0 11 28 234
248 Newcastle England 0 11 0 0 0 11 26 243
249 Cardiff Wales 11 0 0 0 0 11 24 253
250 Aberystwyth Wales 0 0 0 0 11 11 11 361
251 George Fox US 0 0 11 0 0 11 11 364
252 Hasanuddin, Makassar Indonesia 0 0 0 11 0 11 11 365
253 Kyiv National Taras Shevchenko University KNTSU Ukraine 0 11 0 0 0 11 11 367
254 Southern Illinois US 0 11 0 0 0 11 11 372
255 Willamette US 0 10 0 0 0 10 213 70
256 Oporto Portugal 0 10 0 0 0 10 21 278
257 Tokyo Women's Christian University Japan 0 10 0 0 0 10 15 315
258 Airlangga Law Indonesia 0 0 0 10 0 10 10 378
259 EKU Tuebingen Germany 0 0 10 0 0 10 10 380
260 ENSAE France 0 0 10 0 0 10 10 381
261 Hamburg Germany 0 0 10 0 0 10 10 383
262 Wuhan China 0 10 0 0 0 10 10 391
263 West Indies West Indies 0 0 9 0 0 9 85 139
264 AMHK Hong Kong 9 0 0 0 0 9 9 392
265 Aoyama Gakuin University Japan 9 0 0 0 0 9 9 393
266 Beijing Broadcasting Institute China 0 0 0 9 0 9 9 394
267 INTI Sarawak Malaysia 0 0 0 9 0 9 9 397
268 LMU Munich Germany 0 0 9 0 0 9 9 399
269 Nara Women's University Japan 9 0 0 0 0 9 9 401
270 Nusantara Indonesia 0 0 0 9 0 9 9 402
271 Ocean University of China China 0 9 0 0 0 9 9 403
272 South-Central University for Nationalities US 0 9 0 0 0 9 9 406
273 Yogyakarta State University Indonesia 9 0 0 0 0 9 9 408
274 Beijing China 8 0 0 0 0 8 17 298
275 Ahmad Dahlan University Indonesia 8 0 0 0 0 8 8 409
276 Batu Lintang Malaysia 0 0 0 8 0 8 8 410
277 Sriwijaya Indonesia 0 0 0 8 0 8 8 417
278 Turkish Hope International College Bangladesh 0 0 0 8 0 8 8 418
279 Padjadjaran University (UNPAD) Indonesia 8 0 0 0 0 8 8 419
280 Wenzao Ursuline College of Languages Taiwan 8 0 0 0 0 8 8 421
281 Kansai University of Foreign Studies Hotani Japan 0 0 0 7 0 7 7 424
282 Shih Hsin Taiwan 0 0 0 0 7 7 7 426
283 Warwick England 0 0 6 0 0 6 47 190
284 Kobe Japan 0 0 0 0 6 6 6 429
285 Shenyang China 0 0 6 0 0 6 6 431
286 Winnipeg Canada 0 6 0 0 0 6 6 432
287 Rijeka Croatia 2 0 0 0 0 2 11 370
288 Waseda Japan 0 0 1 0 0 1 1 436
289 Strathclyde Scotland 0 0 0 0 0 0 213 69
290 Concordia US 0 0 0 0 0 0 129 102
291 Delhi University India 0 0 0 0 0 0 113 108
292 St Stephen India 0 0 0 0 0 0 113 109
293 Athens University of Greece 0 0 0 0 0 0 105 117
294 Colorado US 0 0 0 0 0 0 104 119
295 Tasmania Australia 0 0 0 0 0 0 102 122
296 Denver US 0 0 0 0 0 0 89 131
297 Windsor England 0 0 0 0 0 0 89 133
298 Uni College London England 0 0 0 0 0 0 86 137
299 Norman Manley Law School West Indies 0 0 0 0 0 0 82 140
300 Bogaziçi University Turkey 0 0 0 0 0 0 73 150
301 Maryland US 0 0 0 0 0 0 72 152
302 Sacred Heart US 0 0 0 0 0 0 65 158
303 Croatian Academic Croatia 0 0 0 0 0 0 64 161
304 St Michael's Canada 0 0 0 0 0 0 60 167
305 Uni of Pacific US 0 0 0 0 0 0 59 169
306 Memorial Canada 0 0 0 0 0 0 53 173
307 Law, Uni Philippines Philippines 0 0 0 0 0 0 50 178
308 Regina Canada 0 0 0 0 0 0 50 179
309 Waterloo Canada 0 0 0 0 0 0 49 184
310 Wyoming US 0 0 0 0 0 0 48 186
311 Dublin Institute of Technology Ireland 0 0 0 0 0 0 46 191
312 Creighton US 0 0 0 0 0 0 45 192
313 Canterbury New Zealand 0 0 0 0 0 0 41 200
314 City University London England 0 0 0 0 0 0 40 205
315 Natal South Africa 0 0 0 0 0 0 38 208
316 Southampton England 0 0 0 0 0 0 38 210
317 Maribor Slovenia 0 0 0 0 0 0 37 213
318 Yugo Deb Net Yugoslavia 0 0 0 0 0 0 37 216
319 Rhode Island US 0 0 0 0 0 0 35 220
320 Medical University of Southern Africa South Africa 0 0 0 0 0 0 34 221
321 Bentley US 0 0 0 0 0 0 33 223
322 Southwest Texas US 0 0 0 0 0 0 33 226
323 Jamaica UWI West Indies 0 0 0 0 0 0 32 228
324 Xavier Institute of Management Philippines 0 0 0 0 0 0 28 238
325 Australian Schools Australia 0 0 0 0 0 0 28 232
326 College of Law UK England 0 0 0 0 0 0 28 233
327 Pertanian Malaysia 0 0 0 0 0 0 28 235
328 Sam Houston US 0 0 0 0 0 0 28 236
329 Williams College US 0 0 0 0 0 0 28 237
330 Bond Australia 0 0 0 0 0 0 26 241
331 Missouri US 0 0 0 0 0 0 26 242
332 Modesto US 0 0 0 0 0 0 25 248
333 Pohang Uni of Sci and Tech US 0 0 0 0 0 0 25 249
334 St. Aug UWI West Indies 0 0 0 0 0 0 25 250
335 Aus Def Forces Acad Australia 0 0 0 0 0 0 24 251
336 Bryn Mawr College US 0 0 0 0 0 0 24 252
337 Far Eastern University (FEU) Philippines 0 0 0 0 0 0 24 254
338 Charles Czech Republic 0 0 0 0 0 0 23 259
339 Regis US 0 0 0 0 0 0 23 261
340 NAPDC (Ngee Ann Polytechnic Debating Club) China 0 0 0 0 0 0 22 264
341 RAU South Africa 0 0 0 0 0 0 22 265
342 Campion Canada 0 0 0 0 0 0 22 262
343 Mindanao State University (MSU) Philippines 0 0 0 0 0 0 22 263
344 Takushoku Japan 0 0 0 0 0 0 22 266
345 US Airforce US 0 0 0 0 0 0 22 267
346 AUB (American University Beruit) Lebanon 0 0 0 0 0 0 21 269
347 Bangladesh University of Engineering & Technology (BUET) Bangladesh 0 0 0 0 0 0 21 270
348 Florida US 0 0 0 0 0 0 21 272
349 Lisbon Portugal 0 0 0 0 0 0 21 275
350 Maryland BC US 0 0 0 0 0 0 21 276
351 Nevada US 0 0 0 0 0 0 21 277
352 UNISA South Africa 0 0 0 0 0 0 20 286
353 Tenaga Malaysia 0 0 0 0 0 0 20 284
354 Free State South Africa 0 0 0 0 0 0 19 288
355 Middlebury US 0 0 0 0 0 0 19 289
356 San Sebastian Philippines 0 0 0 0 0 0 19 290
357 USA Trinity US 0 0 0 0 0 0 19 291
358 Metropolitan Bar School US 0 0 0 0 0 0 18 295
359 Nebraska US 0 0 0 0 0 0 18 296
360 Connecticut US 0 0 0 0 0 0 17 299
361 Government of Pakistan Pakistan 0 0 0 0 0 0 17 300
362 Hong Kong City Hong Kong 0 0 0 0 0 0 17 301
363 Bermuda West Indies 0 0 0 0 0 0 16 303
364 Col. Of St. Hild and Bede England 0 0 0 0 0 0 16 304
365 Handong South Korea 0 0 0 0 0 0 16 305
366 Iowa US 0 0 0 0 0 0 16 306
367 Kanda Japan 0 0 0 0 0 0 16 307
368 South Highlands Australia 0 0 0 0 0 0 16 310
369 Solicitors Ireland SADSI Ireland 0 0 0 0 0 0 15 314
370 Berkeley US 0 0 0 0 0 0 14 316
371 Morehouse College US 0 0 0 0 0 0 14 321
372 Ryerson Canada 0 0 0 0 0 0 14 324
373 St Lawrence US 0 0 0 0 0 0 14 325
374 TC Melbourne Australia 0 0 0 0 0 0 14 326
375 Troy University Japan 0 0 0 0 0 0 14 327
376 EAP Germany 0 0 0 0 0 0 13 329
377 Maryland College Park US 0 0 0 0 0 0 13 332
378 Muenster Netherlands 0 0 0 0 0 0 13 334
379 QUT Canada 0 0 0 0 0 0 13 335
380 RMC Canada 0 0 0 0 0 0 13 336
381 Texas US 0 0 0 0 0 0 13 339
382 Clarion US 0 0 0 0 0 0 12 343
383 Collin US 0 0 0 0 0 0 12 344
384 Davis US 0 0 0 0 0 0 12 345
385 Groningen Netherlands 0 0 0 0 0 0 12 346
386 Leicester England 0 0 0 0 0 0 12 348
387 Pamantasan Ng Lungsod Maynila Philippines 0 0 0 0 0 0 12 351
388 Queen Mary Glasgow Scotland 0 0 0 0 0 0 12 352
389 Richmond US 0 0 0 0 0 0 12 353
390 Tacloban, Uni Philippines Philippines 0 0 0 0 0 0 12 355
391 Trinity College Toronto Canada 0 0 0 0 0 0 12 356
392 Virginia US 0 0 0 0 0 0 12 359
393 Wollongong Australia 0 0 0 0 0 0 12 360
394 Rutgers University US 0 0 0 0 0 0 11 371
395 Creighton Med US 0 0 0 0 0 0 11 362
396 Durban Westville South Africa 0 0 0 0 0 0 11 363
397 Kirori India 0 0 0 0 0 0 11 366
398 N.U. Malaysia Malaysia 0 0 0 0 0 0 11 368
399 Ormond Australia 0 0 0 0 0 0 11 369
400 Springbok South Africa 0 0 0 0 0 0 11 373
401 Symbiosis India 0 0 0 0 0 0 11 374
402 Toronto Literary Canada 0 0 0 0 0 0 11 375
403 Westminster England 0 0 0 0 0 0 11 376
404 Namibia Namibia 0 0 0 0 0 0 10 385
405 Acadia Canada 0 0 0 0 0 0 10 377
406 Bar Ilan University (BIU) Israel 0 0 0 0 0 0 10 379
407 Gatton US 0 0 0 0 0 0 10 382
408 Lausanne Switzerland 0 0 0 0 0 0 10 384
409 Sheffield England 0 0 0 0 0 0 10 386
410 Soros International 0 0 0 0 0 0 10 387
411 Swansea Wales 0 0 0 0 0 0 10 388
412 Trinidad UWI West Indies 0 0 0 0 0 0 10 389
413 Vista University South Africa 0 0 0 0 0 0 10 390
414 Graduate School of Economics and Business Russia 0 0 0 0 0 0 9 396
415 Clackamas US 0 0 0 0 0 0 9 395
416 Kyrghystan Kyrghystan 0 0 0 0 0 0 9 398
417 Murdoch Australia 0 0 0 0 0 0 9 400
418 Pittsburgh US 0 0 0 0 0 0 9 404
419 Potchefstroom South Africa 0 0 0 0 0 0 9 405
420 Vilnius Lithuania 0 0 0 0 0 0 9 407
421 Bucknell US 0 0 0 0 0 0 8 411
422 Cath Uni Portugal Portugal 0 0 0 0 0 0 8 412
423 Davao Philippines 0 0 0 0 0 0 8 413
424 Downtown US 0 0 0 0 0 0 8 414
425 Punjabi India 0 0 0 0 0 0 8 415
426 Robert Schuman France 0 0 0 0 0 0 8 416
427 University of Sciences Malaysia Malaysia 0 0 0 0 0 0 8 420
428 City New York US 0 0 0 0 0 0 7 422
429 ILI Uzbekistan Uzbekistan 0 0 0 0 0 0 7 423
430 Landbouw Netherlands 0 0 0 0 0 0 7 425
431 UPSI Philippines 0 0 0 0 0 0 7 427
432 Waterford Ireland 0 0 0 0 0 0 7 428
433 Lehigh US 0 0 0 0 0 0 6 430
434 Arkzin Croatia 0 0 0 0 0 0 5 433
435 Southeast University China 0 0 0 0 0 0 4 434
436 Nanjing University China 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 435

Use "Great Debaters" Movie to Promote Debate

The comments from readers have been included.

From http://www.insidehighered.com/views/2008/01/07/odonnell

‘The Great Debaters’: A Challenge to Higher Education

By Timothy M. O’Donnell
“The banquet of my Wiley years was the tutelage of Tolson.”
— James Farmer, Lay Bare the Heart

Over the holidays, many may have gone to the theater to see The Great Debaters, the major motion picture from Denzel Washington and Oprah Winfrey. The film tells the extraordinary tale of the 1935 Wiley College debate team, its legendary coach Melvin B. Tolson and his most famous student, Dr. James L. Farmer Jr. One of the “Big Four” leaders of the Civil Rights Movement, Farmer put his debate training to use as the architect of the movement’s strategy of non-violent protest and direct action.

Most of the attention lavished on the movie has focused on how it helps audiences reflect on the ways in which racism permeates society. But the film also creates an opportunity for – and poses a challenge to – colleges and universities to provide all students with the fundamental academic experience that is debate. In addition to offering audiences opportunities to reflect on the ways in which racism permeates human society, the film challenges colleges and universities to provide all students with the fundamental academic experience that is debate. At a time when higher education is simultaneously financially constrained and seemingly awash in projects to create centers of excellence (teaching, civic engagement, service learning, and deliberative democracy) The Great Debaters reminds us that academic debate is a proven investment in the core values of our institutional missions.

Washington, who both directs and stars in the film, has taken the lead by donating $1 million to reestablish the Wiley College team, which lapsed after Tolson’s departure from the school. Washington’s generosity is a testament to his belief in the power and virtue of a debate education and a wake-up call to institutions of higher education to make academic debate a part of any serious strategic plan.

We all value the skills of argument and critical thinking; intercollegiate debate teaches these – and much more. Indeed, there is no better vehicle for stimulating undergraduate research, fostering tolerance and open mindedness, instigating engagement with the issues of the day, promoting understanding of global connections and inculcating the method of interdisciplinarity. Debate constitutes a series of connected academic experiences and teaches students to ask questions and seek answers to serious academic questions. Participation in debate, at any level, is life altering and has real consequence for students and their institutions alike. The skills, knowledge and habits of mind nurtured through academic debate are on display every day in virtually every profession, not the least of which is higher education.

A few years ago, John E. Sexton, president of New York University, said that his four years in high school debate “were the educational foundation of everything I did.” “I’m saying the finest education I got from any of the institutions I attended, the foundation of my mind that I got during those four years of competitive policy debate; that is, 90 percent of the intellectual capacity that I operate with today — Fordham [University] for college, Fordham for the Ph.D., Harvard for law school — all of that is the other 10 percent.” But debate skills are not reserved only for exceptional students like Farmer and Sexton. All students should have the benefits of a debate education.

Because audiences around the globe will see The Great Debaters, it gives higher education a rare opportunity to promote this fundamental activity and garner support for it. How can we in higher education see this film, understand its message, and not return to our campuses to make those opportunities available to students? College administrators should be rushing to build strong debate programs in institutions where none presently exist. Meanwhile, universities that already have such programs should exercise a leadership role by committing to reinforce and showcase existing programs.

Compared to intercollegiate athletics and other costly endeavors, debate is, dollar for dollar, an efficient use of institutional resources. It requires no multimillion dollar complexes, playing fields, stadiums or expensive equipment. All that is necessary are classrooms, coaches, office supplies and support for travel and research. Debate is an inexpensive, educational and effective way to both promote schools and enhance the quality of the academic experience.

The movement to rediscover debate has already begun. Urban debate leagues at the middle and high school level are flourishing under the leadership of the National Association for Urban Debate Leagues and The Great Debaters will undoubtedly cause demand for debate to surge in the coming years. However, these leagues cannot shoulder the burden of a nationwide debate renaissance alone. They need colleges and universities to take a leadership role. Specifically, higher education must do three things.

First, we need to create viable opportunities for high school graduates who seek to continue their debate education after high school. Creating new programs and reinforcing existing programs is essential.

Second, and equally important, we must recruit, train and produce a new generation of professional debate educators. There are many middle and high schools around the country eager to offer debate opportunities to students, but they are unable to find qualified teachers with debate experience because the demand for quality coaches far outstrips the supply. To meet this shortfall, our institutions must generate capacity by fielding debate programs that give students opportunities to learn the coaching craft through rich individual learning experiences. In addition, thoughtful consideration should be given to the ways in which such a commitment spurs curricular innovation at both the undergraduate and graduate level as well as educational partnerships of local, regional and state constituencies. Finally, the creation of new opportunities to join the debate teaching fraternity must move in lockstep with efforts to retain, reward, and renew our best debate teachers.

Third, as the nation’s longstanding incubators of free expression, innovative thinking, democratic deliberation and social change, college and universities must do more to promote the role of debate as a necessary component of a well functioning society. Strong debate programs are essential because they showcase best practices. Debate programs are and should be key players in efforts to foster civic engagement and democratic responsibility.

The Great Debaters reminds us that the values of debate are the values of the academy itself. Even critics will admit that debate’s insufficiencies are due as much as anything to insufficient institutional commitment to a debate education. To be true to our core values, we need to promote the activities that create better students and better citizens. Debate does this. An America where academic debate becomes a prominent fixture on every campus would be a better America. Every college and university has many James Farmers strolling the hallways and quadrangles of its campuses; but we must lay the foundation for achievement. There will be no better opportunity to bring this to fruition than the one that now lies before us. The time for debate is now.

Timothy M. O’Donnell is chair of the National Debate Tournament Committee and director of debate at the University of Mary Washington, in Fredericksburg, Va.

Comments

HEAR..., HEAR!
My compliments to Timothy in challenging the “Let’s-all-get-along” American Society by laying out a rational argument for change. Argumentation and Debate on issues is a far better remedy for this country’s ills than the emotional responses that pervade America and the American media and fail to rise above the limbic center of the brain and allow the proper use of the decision-making power of the human pre-frontal cortex. Can we encourage people to simply “think” about what they do?..and the consequences of their action? Is there still hope?
Edward Winslow, A “tired” retired Business Professor, at 8:55 am EST on January 7, 2008

IF ONLY ...
I know that I gained much by my own experience in both high school and intercollegiate debate.
But my time as a debater and more recently as a coach and judge saw the activity change drastically, and what actually happens in intercollegiate debate today bears no resemblance to what one sees in “The Great Debaters.” Persuasive speech and eloquence are hardly to be found — debates are almost entirely determined now by tactics, many of which I find abhorrent. Debaters have been clocked speaking nearly 400 words per minute in their attempt to spit out more arguments than their opponents can answer. Teams seek out arcane, narrow cases for or against the question in an attempt to win by surprise rather than by presenting the best case that gets to the heart of the real issue.
What passes for argument is often nothing more than the statement of a claim followed by the almost unintelligible rapid reading of a quotation from some polemicist or off-beat social theorist, as if that were sufficient evidence.
Not that this is all bad: debaters today learn to think quickly and nimbly, and gain tremendous research skills. All debaters who pursue the activity seriously gain in intellectual depth and learn a great deal about matters of public policy. The trouble is they do so in an environment that is almost hermetically sealed from the way advocacy is carried on in any meaningful forum — the courthouse, the boardroom, the meeting hall, and the legislature.
I’d say that intercollegiate debate has for some time been stuck in a bad kind of medieval scholasticism (I don’t say this lightly, as I’m a medievalist myself) and is badly in need of a renaissance. Only when that happens will we reap the many benefits of debate that Prof. O’Donnell cites.
John Marlin, The College of St. Elizabeth, at 9:50 am EST on January 7, 2008

The problem with the Great Debaters and Tolson is that he wrote the debate material which the students then memorized and delivered. Certainly that training is better than nothing, but perhaps the program lapsed after him because there was no one available to write the material for the students after he left. I am unfamiliar with debate, but I cannot believe it is helpful to equate education with memorization. You can be concerned with winning or with teaching, but when you allow students to do their own work it will be less than the professor can do and jeopardize winning. I was disappointed to find that Tolson did not trust his students enough to let them present their own efforts. I do not believe that presents a model of teaching that is worth emulating. Tolson may have been a brilliant man, but I do not believe he was a brilliant educator, despite the cult of personality and admiration his students felt for him.
Perry, at 11:05 am EST on January 7, 2008

REBUTTAL
Mr. O’Donnell, a debate coach, writes like a debater, not a truth-seeker—one-sided, argumentative, simplistic. This is a problem with debate (I was a four-year debater in high school), and extends beyond what Mr. Marlin aptly describes as the disintegratiion of current debate into tactics. It was always tactics (at least as far back as the 1950’s when I was passionattely involved), but not as absurdly so as it is now.
Debate is to exploration as being a lawyer is to being a philosopher; like the sophists, debaters often try to make the worse cause seem the better. The goal is to win, to defeat.
It has its uses. I got much confidence, glibness, and pleasure from debating. But I now forbid my students to write argumentative, theses-driven papers with positions and conclusions (they have plenty of practice doing so in their other courses). I ask them to explore subjects diversely, complexly, often with contradictions and ambivalences, as we do in class.Some have trouble doing so at first, being afraid of suspending what they have been taught to do. But they adjust, loosen up, take risks, and find writing to exciting—not just a requirement. Most importantly, of course, the papers are fun to read, and, as a retired teacher who couldn’t stay away from teaching, I have the luxury of being in it for the intellectual fun.
David, Professor emeritus of English at USC, at 2:55 pm EST on January 7, 2008

TOLSON’S TEACHING METHODS
Every debate educator runs into the question Perry mentioned, but after 17 years of coaching I know that students who do not research their arguments cannot excel. The strongest programs in the modern day have both coaches and students involved in argument brainstorming. Educators who attempt to stay involved in the conversation through collaborative research have much more to offer their students than those who pay little attention to the topic.
Even in the movie, the students’ success in the final debate (with a new topic, and no Tolson) is testament that learning by doing was far more productive than merely being told. As a PhD student, I learned far more doing collaborative academic research with my professors than listening to a lecture on how to do it. Debate is time-intensive for coaches because it relies on a collaborative model instead of a more detached classroom model.
The sad thing is that Tolson had to turn away 90% of the students that wanted to debate, presumably because he lacked staff or travel support to handle any more of them. One wonders how many more lives could have been invigorated by the experience if there had been resource support for a larger team.
Eric Morris, Director of Forensics at Missouri State University, at 3:00 pm EST on January 7, 2008

DEBATE AS AN EDUCATIONAL TOOL
One of the most powerful educational aspects of debate as I have observed it is in the opportunity for the participant to select the subject matter to be shared. People tend to learn best when they are most involved in the subject matter, and in this traditional lectures often fail to elicit the best work of the student. When a student is allowed to do his or her own research on a topic of interest to that individual, there is much more learning taking place on all levels, and the experience is much more memorable, win or lose. Montessori would also teach one that deeper learning is accomplished when what is learned is shared with others, as in debate.
Kit Potter, at 7:15 pm EST on January 7, 2008

CONSTRUCTIVE CONFLICT
John Marlin writes that in formal win/lose debates, “Persuasive speech and eloquence are hardly to be found. . .” David writes, “like the sophists, debaters often try to make the worse cause seem the better.” It’s interesting to find two debate coaches corroborate psychologist Alfie Kohn’s assessment: “The point is not to arrive at a fuller understanding of the question at hand or to form genuine convictions” (57).
I enjoyed _The Great Debaters_, and I applaud its appeal to intellectualism. I also understand the appeal in the storyline’s transition from a physical fight in the beginning to debate as “blood sport.” But Alfie Kohn points out that competition is far less productive and far more destructive than we might think.
What if O’Donnel’s plan were realized as intercollegiate, cooperative problem-solving rather than “blood sport"? “In a debate (as opposed to a discussion or dialogue,” Kohn argues [argument as distinct from debate], the point is to win rather than to reach the best solution or arrive at a compromise with which everyone can be satisfied” (156). Are we afraid of the solutions that college students might propose as a result of their research and their mutual explorations in rhetoric? (I’m talking non-adversarial rhetoric.)
See Alfie Kohn, _No Contest: The Case against Competition_—Why We Lose in Our Race to Win_. See also Deborah Tannen, “The Roots of Debate in Education and the Hope of Dialogue.” See how these two authors might respond to Edward Winslow’s concern about the “Let’s-all-get-along American society.” There can and should be conflict. Knowledge, as Bruce Ballenger argues, is advanced in being contested. What if the most rigorous use of the cerebral cortex, though, is in participating skillfully in constructive, “cooperative conflict"? (Kohn 156-57).
Randall Spinks, at 9:05 pm EST on January 7, 2008

“REBUTTAL” (SELF-PARODY?)
Nice argument. Hopefully the students you are shielding from advocacy won’t see it.
Steve, at 2:40 pm EST on January 8, 2008

TODAY’S GREAT DEBATERS: A MODEL FOR CHANGE
I consider myself a colleague and a friend of both Tim O’Donnell and Eric Morris. And I agree whole-heartedly with criticisms offered by John and David. I also support the work of Kohn and Tannen offered by Randall Sparks. As such, I think a middle ground exists to make policy debate a true tool of educational empowerment and policy leadership. Doing so is critical to the future of American and world leadership.
Since fall 2000, the University of Louisville has attempted to recreate the style and method of debates found in “the Great Debaters". As the only African American PhD director, with the only nationally competitive predominately African American team, we have attempted to utilize a persuasive style of debate in an effort to examine the racial dimensions of the nationally selected topic with varying degrees of success. Over seven years, we have broadened our squad mission: to increase effective decision making in a multi-cultural society.
Towards such ends, we offer a simple solution to the current excessiveness of competition within intercollegiate policy debate: a non-competitive purpose that guides competitive decision making. If debate squads had a non-competitive purpose which drove strategic competitive decisions, every student and coach would have superimposed an educational foundation to check the excesses of pure competition. This idea is grounded in the experiences and debates of the Louisville team over the last seven years.
This can create the constructive conflict idea suggested in Randall’s post and I believe is consistent with Tannen’s goal of searching for truth through a dialogic form of debate, as opposed to the oppositional competition concerns shared by David.
In this model, policy debate can begin to embrace the diversity of its participants and protect the educational value of both debate and true policy making, which includes real training in persuasion, something the traditional education system sorely lacks, as does contemporary policy debate.
Louisville offered to make our competitive debate a pilot series this spring to all the members of CEDA and the NDT if squads would take on a mission statement for their debates against Louisville. They all rejected. So our students will have competitive debates about debate this semester, defending a model of competitive debates supporting a squad non-competitive purpose, as superior to those willing to defend the current model of intercollegiate policy debate.
I agree with Tim and Eric, everyone should have the opportunity to debate, and the value of debate can change the world. The debaters of the 1930 debates over segregation became the lawyers, judges, and activists of the sixties. But colleges and universities also have the responsibility to create a form and style of debate that holds the activity accountable to the larger institutions to achieve the goals of said organizations. We hope people continue to think about debate, critically that is.
Ed Warner, Jr., Director of Debate/Assoc Prof Communication at University of Louisville, at 2:40 pm EST on January 8, 2008

CRITICS USE RED HERRINGS
Most, if not all, of the criticisms of debate are not new, nor are they particularly compelling. At the end of the day, even if the critics are correct, one must ask the question, “is providing the opportunity for our students to learn the skills of debate better or worse?” In other words, does learning debate actually worsen our educational system?
I hardly think so. Plus, critics (and others) should bear in mind that there are different types of debates — different styles, formats, experiences, etc. I personally find the policy forms of debate to be the most educational, but all forms of debate are helpful to all students. Nothing is perfect — and the English professor at USC’s approach to education certainly lacks perfection — but that doesn’t mean debate, or the “complex” and “non-thesis/argument” based English class doesn’t offer more positive educational benefits than not.
Joseph Zompetti, Dr. at Illinois State University, at 6:25 pm EST on January 8, 2008

WIN/LOSE
Professor Zompetti,Where do you stand on official win/lose structures?
Randall Spinks, at 3:15 pm EST on January 9, 2008

World Schools Plans for Washington 2008

This is the first of four newsletters we will be posting to keep you up to date on our plans for WSDC Washington, D.C. 2008. We are all having great fun overcoming obstacles and breaking down brick walls to make this a remarkable experience. We look forward to having you as our guests from September 5, 2008 to September 15, 2008.

Many of you will need a visa to enter the United States. Unfortunately there is nothing we can do to assist in this process. The web site we used for information is http://travel.state.gov/visa, but please check with your specific embassies for specific information. Everyone will need a machine readable passport and the following countries participate in the Visa Waiver Program:

Andorra Finland Japan Norway Sweden
Australia France Liechtenstein Portugal Switzerland
Austria Germany Luxembourg San Marino United Kingdom
Belgium Iceland Monaco Singapore
Brunei Ireland Netherlands Slovenia
Denmark Italy New Zealand Spain
Citizens from Canada and Mexico can find additional information on the Homeland Security web site.

We will be greeting everyone at Ronald Reagan Airport, which is just a short ride to Crystal City, Virginia, where our hotel is located. Hopefully, everyone will enter the country at one of our major ports and transfer to a domestic flight for the last leg of your journey. We regret that we can only provide transportation to the hotel from Ronald Reagan.

We will be staying at the Hyatt Hotel in Crystal City. This is a beautiful full service hotel that is accessible to the Washington DC metro. The metro is a convenient and inexpensive way to see all the important sights in Washington. You could spend a week just going through the Smithsonian Institute, an educational and research institute with over nineteen museums containing 142 million items in its collection. You will also want to see many of the other points of interest such as the African Museum and the Holocaust Museum, Arlington Cemetery, the Capital building, and the National Archives. Try to get to some of the fun museums such as the Spy Museum and the Postal Museum. The list is endless and we will have a packet ready for you on arrival to help you maximize the experience. Entrance to all museums and monuments in Washington that are run by the Federal Government are free of charge. We are also trying to make sure you have some free time to just wander through such wonderful neighborhoods as Georgetown and Chinatown. Many of you may want to extend your stay in the United States and visit some of our other exciting cities, such as Baltimore, Philadelphia, New York, or Boston. Trains from historic Union Station can take you there.

We are exploring some interesting places for you to visit on tour day. Mount Vernon, the home of George Washington, is very accessible. A pleasant boat ride to Mount Vernon lets you experience what it was like to arrive at the mansion in the eighteenth century. Monticello, the home of Thomas Jefferson, and Williamsburg, a restoration of the eighteenth century colony, is only about two hours away. For the shoppers among you, the Inner Harbor in Baltimore is a day trip. History buffs might enjoy a two hour trip to Philadelphia or to Gettysburg. Look for more information on these opportunities in upcoming newsletters.

We are all excited about having you as our guests and will do whatever possible to facilitate you visit. For you convenience, we have established a web site at http://web.mac.com/wsdc2008. This is where you can find any future newsletters, the schedule, and registration. We also have a Face book group started and hope you will join and let us know about you. If you need personal contact, I can be reached at phyllishi@aol.com.

See you all next September,

Phyllis Hirth
Convener, WSDC – Washington, D.C. 2008

2008-2009 USA High School Policy Debate Topic Announced

Subject: NFHS Debate Topic Announcement

From: "Angela Hays"

Date: Wed, 9 Jan 2008 11:08:43 -0500

Following are the final results for the 2008-2009 national high school debate topic balloting. Ballots were first sent to states, the District of Columbia, the National Forensic League, National Debate Coaches Association and the National Catholic Forensic League last August. After a period of discussion of the two final topic areas, states conducted balloting in December and January. Results were sent to NFHS headquarters by January 7, 2008.

Alternative Energy was chosen with 31 of the 38 votes cast for the topic. Following is a breakdown of how the states voted, as well as NCFL, NDCA and NFL. The vote in Ohio and Colorado resulted in a tie.

Alternative Energy			Health Care
Alabama	Alaska	Arizona	Colorado*	Georgia	Kansas
Arkansas	California	Colorado*	Minnesota	Mississippi	N Dakota
Florida	Hawaii	Idaho	Ohio*
Illinois	Indiana	Iowa
Michigan	Missouri	Montana
Nebraska	Nevada	New Hampshire
New York	Ohio*	Oklahoma
Oregon	Pennsylvania	S Dakota
Texas	Utah	Virginia
Washington	Wisconsin	Wyoming
NCFL	NDCA	NFL

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

The 2008 Topic Selection Meeting will be held in Austin, Texas, August 1-3. Specific information regarding lodging, travel arrangements and daily schedules will be sent to your office at a later date. You may also check our Web site at: http://www.nfhs.org/web/2006/08/speech_debate_theater_association.aspx

2008-2009 NATIONAL HIGH SCHOOL DEBATE TOPIC

ALTERNATIVE ENERGY

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

The demand for energy worldwide is expected to grow over 50 percent by 2030, and most economies are fundamentally fossil-fuel based. International competition for these fossil fuels is growing intense and access to oil especially is often located in places that are geographically hard to reach and geopolitically challenging. The United States federal government needs to articulate a sound and sustainable energy policy that pursues alternative energy resources, so that it has access to available, sustainable, and secure sources that move the country away from its addiction to fossil fuels.

Affirmative plans would require the use of incentives to promote alternative energy sources, including but not limited to solar, wind, geothermal, hydroelectric, and nuclear power, as well as, biofuels, hydrogen fuels, new technologies, and conservation measures. Negative approaches to the topic would include a number of case specific solvency debates, the problems and impacts of using government incentives, and many different disadvantage scenarios such as foreign policy implications of decreasing oil imports, collapse of economies such as those of the Middle East and Russia, and relations disadvantages, as well as, a good number of disadvantages specific to particular affirmative solutions. Counterplan ground might include states/private industry, as well as, international solutions, and critical argumentation might include capitalism and the environment. Current federal policy tends to support big oil and other fossil fuel companies; ultimately, our very civilization will pay a high price for our lack of oversight and action on the issue of energy.

Pause For Relocation

Our table at the final WUDC banquet: Loke Wing Fatt (standing), Bojana Skrt, myself, award-winner Omar Salahuddin, Inie Salahuddin and Madame Pyanart from Chulalongkorn University.

There will be a several day pause in reporting here as I spend some time on an island near Pattaya called Ko Sahmet, supposed to be one of the most beautiful places in the world. I could use a break.

Thanks top all of the thousands of people who followed GLOBAL DEBATE during 2007, especially during WUDC Thailand. Your words (and criticisms) were appreciated. Look for a lot more (and the addition of editorials) in 2008.

I will be back in circulation when I reach Kuala Lumpur on my way back to the USA. I will report again from there on January 9 2008.

Inaccuracies in "The Great Debaters"

From http://www.nypost.com/seven/01042008/gossip/pagesix/a_great_bunch_of_bloopers_838891.htm

January 4, 2008 -- THE talented student orators depicted arguing a slew of fact-based issues in "The Great Debaters" might have had a problem with their own movie - because it's full of historical inaccuracies.
In the inspirational drama, directed by and starring Denzel Washington, the Oscar-winner plays volatile debate coach Melvin Tolson, who took an African-American college team in the segregated South from obscurity to a nail-biting showdown with the reigning debate champions at Harvard University. But although the film is based on the true story of the debating team at Texas' Wiley College in the 1930s, Harvard's participation is completely made up. Wiley did in fact beat the reigning champs, but they were actually student debaters from the University of Southern California.
"The Wiley team never wrote to Harvard, never debated Harvard, never beat Harvard," a knowledgable source tells Page Six. "And no Harvard administrator would have ever referred to the university as an all-white college since it had long been integrated."
In another glaring error, the black team couldn't even have called themselves victors as they did in the movie because blacks were not truly considered part of college debating circles until after World War II.
Despite the alterations, Harvard allowed the script to be shot on its stunning Cambridge campus. Asked why the facts were fudged, Washington told the Harvard Crimson student newspaper: "We set the debate here because Harvard is the gold standard." He also noted, "Harvard just sounded better, to be quite honest."
Despite its complimentary nod to Harvard, the movie - from Oprah Winfrey's Harpo Films, the Weinstein Company and MGM - Crimson film critic Daniel Howell complained it was too formulaic and predictable. "Considering the film is a debate movie, I was hoping to be jerked in one direction and then the other as each debate worked itself out," Howell wrote.
"I felt no such agitation . . . We are suspended in the painless world of continuity editing - nothing dare disturb us from our slumber." He concludes, "Spike Lee it ain't."

WUDC - Unofficial Tab Now Available

Convenor TJ rides in on elephant

From http://www.smoothtournament.com/showcase/wudc_2008/standing.php?moduletype=teamstanding

Top 100 Here

Ranking Team Name Round 1 Round 2 Round 3 Round 4 Round 5 Round 6 Round 7 Round 8 Round 9 Total Score Speaker Points WUDC art
1 OXFORD UNION A 3 3 2 3 2 3 3 3 3 25 1538 7, 2, 0, 0
2 CAMBRIDGE A 3 3 3 3 3 2 1 2 2 22 1569 5, 3, 1, 0
3 QUEENSLAND E 3 1 3 3 3 2 3 1 3 22 1484 6, 1, 2, 0
4 YALE A 3 3 2 3 3 1 2 3 1 21 1537 5, 2, 2, 0
5 SYDNEY UNION B 3 0 3 3 2 2 3 3 2 21 1486 5, 3, 0, 1
6 SYDNEY UNION D 2 3 3 0 1 3 3 3 3 21 1475 6, 1, 1, 1
7 AUCKLAND A 3 2 2 3 2 3 0 3 3 21 1472 5, 3, 0, 1
8 SYDNEY UNION C 3 3 1 3 3 3 0 1 3 20 1500 6, 0, 2, 1
9 MONASH A 3 3 3 2 2 3 2 0 2 20 1494 4, 4, 0, 1
10 SYDNEY UNION A 3 3 3 2 0 3 2 3 1 20 1493 5, 2, 1, 1
11 CAMBRIDGE B 2 2 3 2 3 0 2 3 3 20 1472 4, 4, 0, 1
12 HART HOUSE C 3 3 2 2 1 2 2 2 3 20 1468 3, 5, 1, 0
13 L&H A 3 3 0 3 3 1 2 3 2 20 1451 5, 2, 1, 1
14 OXFORD UNION B 1 3 3 3 3 1 1 2 3 20 1451 5, 1, 3, 0
15 HART HOUSE B 3 3 3 3 1 0 1 2 3 19 1502 5, 1, 2, 1
16 OXFORD UNION D 3 2 3 2 1 1 3 1 3 19 1487 4, 2, 3, 0
17 MIDDLE TEMPLE A 3 1 2 3 3 1 3 3 0 19 1486 5, 1, 2, 1
18 ST ANDREWS A 3 2 3 1 2 3 2 2 1 19 1485 3, 4, 2, 0
19 QUEENSLAND A 3 3 1 3 1 3 2 1 2 19 1482 4, 2, 3, 0
20 VICTORIA WELLINGTON A 2 3 3 2 2 2 3 1 1 19 1464 3, 4, 2, 0
21 YALE E 3 2 1 2 2 1 2 3 3 19 1460 3, 4, 2, 0
22 SYDNEY UNION E 3 1 2 3 3 2 3 2 0 19 1454 4, 3, 1, 1
23 MACQUARIE A 3 2 3 0 3 1 2 3 2 19 1449 4, 3, 1, 1
24 MONASH B 3 0 3 3 2 3 0 3 2 19 1446 5, 2, 0, 2
25 YALE C 2 3 0 3 3 1 2 2 3 19 1445 4, 3, 1, 1
26 VICTORIA WELLINGTON E 3 3 0 2 2 3 1 2 3 19 1435 4, 3, 1, 1
27 DUKE A 3 0 2 3 2 2 1 3 3 19 1431 4, 3, 1, 1
28 BRANDEIS B 2 3 3 1 3 0 3 2 2 19 1416 4, 3, 1, 1
29 QUEENSLAND B 3 2 3 3 1 2 1 3 0 18 1485 4, 2, 2, 1
30 OXFORD UNION E 3 1 3 3 1 0 3 1 3 18 1460 5, 0, 3, 1
31 MELBOURNE C 2 2 2 3 2 3 3 0 1 18 1460 3, 4, 1, 1
32 L&H B 3 3 2 0 3 3 1 1 2 18 1454 4, 2, 2, 1
33 MCGILL C 1 2 3 1 3 2 3 0 3 18 1450 4, 2, 2, 1
34 ADMU A 3 3 0 3 1 0 3 3 2 18 1445 5, 1, 1, 2
35 PRINCETON B 3 2 1 2 3 1 2 3 1 18 1441 3, 3, 3, 0
36 YORK A 3 1 3 0 3 3 3 0 2 18 1440 5, 1, 1, 2
- VICTORIA WELLINGTON C 3 0 3 1 0 3 3 2 3 18 1440 5, 1, 1, 2
38 RHODES A 0 3 3 3 1 1 3 1 3 18 1440 5, 0, 3, 1
- ALBERTA A 3 1 1 3 3 3 0 3 1 18 1440 5, 0, 3, 1
40 QUEENS B 2 3 2 1 2 2 2 3 1 18 1437 2, 5, 2, 0
41 MCGILL A 3 3 2 1 2 2 3 2 0 18 1435 3, 4, 1, 1
42 TCD HIST A 3 2 0 3 1 2 1 3 3 18 1428 4, 2, 2, 1
43 CAMBRIDGE D 3 2 0 2 3 0 3 3 2 18 1427 4, 3, 0, 2
44 HELSINKI A 2 2 1 3 2 0 3 2 3 18 1419 3, 4, 1, 1
45 STANFORD A 3 3 0 1 3 1 2 2 3 18 1415 4, 2, 2, 1
46 NTU E 1 2 0 3 2 3 2 3 2 18 1345 3, 4, 1, 1
47 MELBOURNE A 3 2 2 2 1 2 1 1 3 17 1467 2, 4, 3, 0
48 OXFORD UNION C 3 3 3 0 1 3 2 2 0 17 1461 4, 2, 1, 2
49 MONASH D 3 3 1 3 3 0 3 0 1 17 1459 5, 0, 2, 2
50 HARVARD B 3 2 1 2 2 1 3 3 0 17 1450 3, 3, 2, 1
51 NUI GALWAY A 3 1 0 2 3 2 1 3 2 17 1447 3, 3, 2, 1
52 UCC PHILOSOPH B 3 2 3 2 2 1 1 1 2 17 1447 2, 4, 3, 0
53 TCD HIST B 2 3 2 3 0 3 2 1 1 17 1435 3, 3, 2, 1
54 UCD LAW A 3 2 0 3 1 1 3 1 3 17 1434 4, 1, 3, 1
55 HART HOUSE A 1 3 1 3 3 2 1 2 1 17 1433 3, 2, 4, 0
56 INNER TEMPLE A 2 3 2 2 0 1 2 2 3 17 1425 2, 5, 1, 1
57 PRINCETON A 3 2 2 0 1 3 3 0 3 17 1415 4, 2, 1, 2
58 TCD PHIL A 3 2 3 1 0 1 3 1 3 17 1412 4, 1, 3, 1
59 WESTERN WASHINGTON B 1 3 3 2 0 3 3 0 2 17 1411 4, 2, 1, 2
- CAPE TOWN A 2 3 3 0 0 2 1 3 3 17 1411 4, 2, 1, 2
61 MELBOURNE B 1 3 3 2 0 1 1 3 3 17 1409 4, 1, 3, 1
62 CAMBRIDGE C 2 3 2 2 2 1 2 2 1 17 1399 1, 6, 2, 0
63 SMU B 3 1 3 0 2 2 1 3 2 17 1393 3, 3, 2, 1
64 UCC LAW A 2 0 3 3 3 0 3 0 3 17 1390 5, 1, 0, 3
65 LIMERICK A 2 3 1 2 0 1 3 3 2 17 1388 3, 3, 2, 1
66 UCD LAW B 1 3 3 0 3 3 0 3 1 17 1386 5, 0, 2, 2
67 SWARTHMORE A 1 2 2 3 2 0 2 3 2 17 1386 2, 5, 1, 1
68 WITWATERSRAND B 2 1 1 3 3 2 3 2 0 17 1381 3, 3, 2, 1
69 QUEENS A 1 1 3 1 1 2 3 3 2 17 1376 3, 2, 4, 0
70 UPD A 1 3 0 1 1 3 3 2 3 17 1370 4, 1, 3, 1
71 HEBREW B 2 1 1 3 2 3 0 3 2 17 1363 3, 3, 2, 1
72 HARVARD A 2 3 3 1 0 3 1 2 1 16 1460 3, 2, 3, 1
73 VICTORIA WELLINGTON D 2 3 1 2 3 2 0 1 2 16 1452 2, 4, 2, 1
74 ADMU B 3 3 2 3 0 2 0 1 2 16 1444 3, 3, 1, 2
75 ANU A 3 2 2 1 3 0 3 1 1 16 1444 3, 2, 3, 1
76 YALE B 3 3 3 1 0 3 0 0 3 16 1443 5, 0, 1, 3
77 ULU A 3 3 1 3 2 3 1 0 0 16 1443 4, 1, 2, 2
78 PRINCETON C 3 0 3 2 2 3 2 1 0 16 1441 3, 3, 1, 2
79 MCGILL B 3 0 3 2 0 2 1 2 3 16 1421 3, 3, 1, 2
80 CAPE TOWN B 3 3 0 1 3 0 3 0 3 16 1418 5, 0, 1, 3
81 GW A 2 2 1 1 3 3 1 3 0 16 1418 3, 2, 3, 1
82 YALE D 2 3 1 2 2 2 1 3 0 16 1413 2, 4, 2, 1
83 MACQUARIE B 2 2 3 2 3 0 0 3 1 16 1410 3, 3, 1, 2
84 BRISTOL A 2 0 3 2 3 3 0 2 1 16 1407 3, 3, 1, 2
85 HARVARD C 1 3 0 3 1 3 2 1 2 16 1405 3, 2, 3, 1
86 QUEENSLAND C 3 3 1 0 1 2 3 0 3 16 1403 4, 1, 2, 2
87 MONASH C 3 2 1 3 1 1 2 2 1 16 1402 2, 3, 4, 0
88 HONG KONG A 3 2 1 1 1 3 3 0 2 16 1401 3, 2, 3, 1
89 UCD LAW C 1 3 0 3 2 2 2 1 2 16 1400 2, 4, 2, 1
90 UT SYDNEY A 3 2 2 0 1 3 2 2 1 16 1399 2, 4, 2, 1
91 ST ANDREWS B 3 2 2 2 0 3 3 1 0 16 1396 3, 3, 1, 2
92 TCD PHIL B 3 2 2 0 0 3 0 3 3 16 1386 4, 2, 0, 3
93 UPM A 3 1 2 3 1 1 0 3 2 16 1381 3, 2, 3, 1
94 UNSW B 1 2 1 3 2 1 2 3 1 16 1376 2, 3, 4, 0
95 ALBERTA C 2 1 3 1 3 0 1 3 2 16 1374 3, 2, 3, 1
96 NTU C 3 2 0 2 0 3 3 2 1 16 1372 3, 3, 1, 2
97 MELBOURNE E 1 2 3 1 1 0 3 2 3 16 1371 3, 2, 3, 1
98 WITWATERSRAND A 2 2 2 1 2 2 3 2 0 16 1369 1, 6, 1, 1
99 AUCKLAND B 2 2 1 0 2 2 2 2 3 16 1366 1, 6, 1, 1
100 INDONESIA A 3 0 2 2 1 3 0 3 2 16 1365 3, 3, 1, 2

WUDC - Top Ten Speakers

MAIN SPEAKERS

1 Sam Block CAMBRIDGE A 88 87 86 90 87 87 85 91 89 790
2 Samir Deger-Sen OXFORD UNION A 83 85 79 84 87 86 93 92 92 781
- Joshua Bone YALE A 87 86 85 86 89 87 84 90 87 781
4 Adam Bott CAMBRIDGE A 86 83 87 88 89 86 85 88 87 779
5 Kitson Symes OXFORD UNION D 85 85 83 84 82 80 86 84 88 757
- Lewis Iwu OXFORD UNION A 81 80 78 79 85 84 87 90 93 757
- Naomi Oreb SYDNEY UNION C 83 81 81 83 84 90 81 84 90 757
8 Andrew Rohrbach YALE A 85 88 78 81 85 85 85 84 85 756
9 Richard Lizius HART HOUSE B 87 84 79 85 82 83 85 85 84 754
10 Fiona Prowse MONASH A 85 81 81 87 89 80 88 84 75 750

WUDC - Amsterdam Wins ESL, Keio Wins EFL

ESL FINALS

The motion:
This House believes that the Turkish military should stop enforcing the separation of church/mosque and state.

ROOM: Conference Room A
GOVERNMENT: Amsterdam B, Tilbury A
OPPOSITION: IIUMD, IIUM C
WINNER: Amsterdam B

EFL WINNER:

Keio A

WUDC - Oxford Wins

Ending their record-breaking run, Oxford A won the final round.

This House would believes that those who contract AIDS should be able to recover damages from those from whom they contracted it. (Wording unclear, it was announced verbally only once)

Winner: Oxford A
Runner ups: Cambridge B, Monash A, Sydney A

WUDC - ESL Final Pairings

Adjudication team meets before briefing

ESL FINALS

The motion:
This House believes that the Turkish military should stop enforcing the separation of church and state.

ROOM: Conference Room A
GOVERNMENT: Amsterdam B, Tilbury A
OPPOSITION: IIUMD, IIUM C

WUDC - Main Semifinal Results

Convenor TJ at Banquet

MAIN SEMIFINALS

Motion: This House believes that extreme economic need should be grounds for asylum.

ROOM: Conference A
GOVERNMENT: Brandeis B, Oxford A
OPPOSITION: Yale E, Monash A
ADVANCING: Monash A, Oxford A

ROOM: Conference B
GOVERNMENT: Queensland E, St Andrews A
OPPOSITION: Cambridge B, Sydney A
ADVANCING: Sydney A, Cambridge B

WUDC - ESL Semifinal Results

"Hi Mom!" (Note to mother reading at home)

ESL SEMIFINALS

Motion: This House would require doctors to report all cases of suspected domestic violence.

ROOM: Ruby
GOVERNMENT: Malaya A, IIUM E
OPPOSITION: Amsterdam B, Tilbury A
ADVANCING: Amsterdam A, Tilbury A

ROOM: Emerald
GOVERNMENT: IIUM D, Koc A
OPPOSITION: IIUM C, Hong Kong B
ADVANCING: IIUM D, IIUM C

WUDC - ESL Semifinal Pairings

ESL SEMIFINALS

Motion: This House would require doctors to report all cases of suspected domestic violence.

ROOM: Ruby
GOVERNMENT: Malaya A, IIUM E
OPPOSITION: Amsterdam B, Tilbury A
ADVANCING: to be announced tonight

ROOM: Emerald
GOVERNMENT: IIUM D, Koc A
OPPOSITION: IIUM C, Hong Kong B
ADVANCING: to be announced tonight

WUDC - ESL Quarterfinal Results

International Islamic University Malaysia is scoring big in the ESL division. Hearty congratulations.

ESL QUARTERS

Motion: This House would force religious adoption agencies to place children with homosexual couples.

ROOM: Opal
GOVERNMENT: Hebrew B, Tel Aviv A
OPPOSITION: Tilsbury A, Amsterdam B
ADVANCING: Amsterdam B, Tilbury A

ROOM: Yellow
GOVERNMENT: IDC-Herz, Botswana A
OPPOSITION: IIUM E, Malaya A
ADVANCING: IIUM E, Malaya A

ROOM: Pearl
GOVERNMENT: EDIS A, IIUM D
OPPOSITION: IIUM B, IIUM C
ADVANCING: IIUM C, IIUM D

ROOM: Noparat
GOVERNMENT: Koc A, Honk Kong B
OPPOSITION: Hong Kong D, Zagreb B
ADVANCING: Hong Kong B, Koc A

WUDC - Main Quarterinal Results

MAIN BREAK QUARTERS

Motion: This House would force religious adoption agencies to place children with homosexual couples.

The first team listed finished first, the second team listed finished second.

ROOM: Blue
GOVERNMENT: Yale C, Monash A
OPPOSITION: Oxford A, Middle Temple A
ADVANCING: Oxford A, Monash A

ROOM: Emerald
GOVERNMENT: Auckland A, Melborne C
OPPOSITION: St Andrews A, Sydney A
ADVANCING: St Andrews A, Sydney A

ROOM: Ruby
GOVERNMENT: Cambridge B, Queensland A
OPPOSITION: Duke A, Queensland E
ADVANCING: Cambridge B, Queensland E

ROOM: Jade
GOVERNMENT: Yale A, Queensland B
OPPOSITION: Yale E, Brandeis B
ADVANCING: Yale E, Brandeis B

WUDC - ESL Octafinal Results

ESL OCTAS

Motion: This House would support the use of mercenaries by the United Nations.

ROOM: Opal
GOVERNMENT: Indonesia C, Hebrew B
OPPOSITION: Tel Aviv A, Hong Kong C
ADVANCING: Hebrew B, Tel Aviv A

ROOM: Pearl
GOVERNMENT: Amsterdam B, NJUS A
OPPOSITION: Chulalongkorn A, Tilsbury A
ADVANCING: Amsterdam B, Tilsbury A

ROOM: Noparat
GOVERNMENT: EDIS C, DAE A
OPPOSITION: IIUM E, Botswana A
ADVANCING: IIUM E, Botswana A

ROOM: Blue
GOVERNMENT: Malaya B, Malaya A
OPPOSITION: IDC-Herzolliah, LUMS B
ADVANCING: Malaya A, IDC-Herz

ROOM: Ruby
GOVERNMENT: LUMS C, NSU C
OPPOSITION: IIUM B, EDIS A
ADVANCING: IIUM B, EDIS A (2-1)

ROOM: Unknown
GOVERNMENT: IIUM D, IIUM C
OPPOSITION: SAINS Malaysia A, Bandung A
ADVANCING: IIUM D, IIUM C

ROOM: Emerald
GOVERNMENT: Indonesia E, Hanyang D
OPPOSITION: Zagreb B, Hong Kong D
ADVANCING: Zagreb B, Hong Kong D

ROOM: Yellow
GOVERNMENT: Chulalongkorn B, Hong Kong B
OPPOSITION: Koc A, Indonesia A
ADVANCING: Koc A, Hong Kong B

WUDC Videos Coming Soon

It may take a week or so, but at least eight videos will be posted from WUDC on our partner video site, http://debatevideoblog.blogspot.com/ . There are a fair number of BP videos there now, but perhaps not of the extremely high quality that we hope to bring in soon when these are all processed. We have some top rounds from WUPID already there. You want Sydney A? Check them out now.

We use a FlipVideo mini camera, download to a Mac as an AVI file, translate it to a Podcast format, and then upload it to Google Video. The Google Videos are then mounted on our Debate Video site listed above.

Be patient, and there will be more there, at least one from each elimination round.

WUDC - Main Octafinal Results

HEADLINES:

• Five American Teams in Quarterfinals
• Four Sydney Teams Drop
• Three Oxford Teams Drop
• All Three Queensland Teams Advance

Motion: This House believes that governments in the developing world should invest in sex tourism.

Room: Yellow
Government: Cambridge A, St Andrews A
Opposition: Hart House B, Melborne C
Advancing: Melborne C, St Andrews A (on a 4-3 split)

Room: Ruby
Government: Oxford E, Queensland E
Opposition: Queensland A, Oxford B
Advancing: Queensland A, Queensland E

Room: Blue
Government: Queensland B, Victoria A
Opposition: L&H A, Yale A
Advancing: Queensland B, Yale A

Room: Noparat
Government: Hart House C, Sydney B
Opposition: Yale E, Brandeis B
Advancing: Yale E, Brandeis B

Room: Jade
Government: Sydney D, Cambridge B
Opposition: Sydney E, Duke A
Advancing: Cambridge B, Duke A

Room: Emerald
Government: Auckland A, Sydney A
Opposition: Macquarie A, Vicgtoria C
Advancing: Auckland A, Sydney A

Room: Pearl
Government: Monash B, Sydney C
Opposition: Yale C, Monash A
Advancing: Yale C, Monash A

Room: Opal
Government: Oxford A, Middle Temple A
Opposition: Oxford D, L&H B
Advancing: Oxford A, Middle Temple A

WUDC 2 January 2008 - On to Pattaya

One other bit of news from the council meeting yesterday – Sam Greenland of Sydney was named as council equity officer.

Today people slept a bit late today and then began checking out. Breakfast was left open late so that people could have it. It was then packing and the check out process. The check out process was a bit strained, but they were trying to find people who had yet to pay (and apparently there are a number of then) but we got through all right. Getting on the buses was a bit long, and quite a line. Two from Cork tried to butt in ahead of us but the courageous Bojana Skrt would have none of it and harassed them until they went to the back of the line. Not a good example of arguments from them, like “But our friends are here,” and “It’s not like no one else is doing it,” but then ended up surrendering to Bojana’s logic and went to the end. I hope they act as better hosts in Cork next year.

We got on the buses, and then once again ended up sitting on them for an hour waiting for all of the buses in our time slot to load so we could convoy to Pattaya. Once we got going the ride was okay, and soon we could see we were nearing the ocean.

We pulled into a huge tourist complex and unloaded. I mean, a HUGE complex. There are a number of towers and our has over 40 floors. The check in process was not as bad as I had feared, and within a few minutes there was a key and a room assignment.

The rooms seemed a bit musty, there were some dust balls in the corner and the toilet seat could use a little cleaning. It met my standards of acceptability. The pool is huge and the beach was is nice. There is no wireless or Internet in the room, but there is a spot nearby where I can file reports. The restaurants in the complex seem predictable – slow service and mediocre food. However, right outside the gate and across the street there were two excellent local restaurants – cheap, tasty, spicy and authentic. That is where I will try to eat.

There are some complaints about the lack of information about when the ESL octafinals will be.

There is a growing and quite audible grumbling about the marginalization of Asians here, especially the judges. The adjudication core seems to have slighted quite a few very well known and respected Asian judges (like people who judged the quarterfinals in UBC not making the break at all). People keep mentioning more and more names, and even I recognize them. Some claim that this is a function of a “whites first” attitude of the adjudication core, and others claim that there are personal scores being settled between some of these judges and members of the adjudication core. I am just reporting what I hear lots of people saying. I am not familiar enough with the situation to make my own argument.

Still others are grumbling about the low quality of many Asian judges who came because they were not good enough to debate for their schools and others who came for the vacation rather than the tournament. I did notice that a number of the trainees in the rounds I was in or chaired were quite weak, but I worked to try and help them understand the adjudication process. They were, after all, trainees.

I think I was treated quite fairly. I scored a perfect mark on the test, I have 35 years of judging experience and I rated the teams in the demo debate exactly as the adjudication core did. I was put in with some good chairs as a panelist, and they must have liked me because on the second day I started chairing. Then on the third day I either saw an awesome debate as a panelist, chaired a ESL bubble debate and in the last round chaired what I thought was quite a good debate among four American teams – Harvard, Princeton, Brown and HW Smith. I thought my calls in these rounds were spot on with other experienced judges and my policy debate flow sheet detail helped me quite a bit discussing decisions. I did not expect to be a breaking judge and I was not. Next year, perhaps I will start complaining if I don’t break. We shall see. I may not be nearly as good as I think I am, but then that is something which might be true for many of us.

I was a bit concerned at the judging test not seeming to count for much. When asked about the way some of the questions were worded, the adjudication team told the judges in the briefing room that they only looked at the test if people got more than three wrong. Then at the council meeting they kept saying how the test was used to rate the judges. That seemed a bit contradictory.

I will report tomorrow as regularly as I can about how things are going.

Worlds Council Notes - Part Three

Fireworks at break night

The council passed the report of the EFL/ESL subcommittee. It passed unanimously after some discussion, although apparently much less than in previous years.

The equity subcommittee has presented a code of conduct for examination and approval. There as some general discussion about specific wording, but there seemed to be broad agreement about the need for a code and most of the points in this code. There is some considerable concern about the legal liability for the council and for specific members of the council. The proposal passed.

Review of eligibility.

The Israelis got their food covered.

Neill Harvey-Smith was elected president. Adiba Shareen was elected registrar.

Worlds Council Presents Special Awards

The Council created a new award, WORLD COUNCIL MEMBER EMERITUS, recognizing contributions and giving the right to advise the council without voting rights.
Awards preentd to:
Dr, Omar Salahuddin bin Abdullah
Ray de Cruz

Neill Harvey-Smith then presented an identical award to Ian Lissing.

Errors in ESL Breaks Announced

There were some omissions from the ESL break.
Very apologetic to these teams, not breaking:
So, we will hold ESL octafinals.

1. 17 Hebrew B
2. 16 Indonesia A
3. 16 IIUM B
4. 15 Malaya A
5. 15 Botswana A
6. 15 IIUM D
7. 15 Indonesia E
8. 14 Tilbury A
9. 14 Amsterdam B
10. 14 Zagreb B
11. 14 IIUM C
12. 14 IIUM E
13. 14 IUDC A
14. 13 EDIA A
15. 13 Koc A
16. 13 Indonesia C
17. 16 13 Tel Aviv A
18. 13 HK B
19. 13 LUMS C
20. 13 Malaya B
21. 13 DAE A
22. 13 SAINS A
23. 13 HK D
24. 13 NUJS A
25. 13 Chulalongkorn A
26. 13 Hanyan D
27. 13 Banduk A
28. 13 EDIS C
29. 13 LUMS B
30. 13 NSU C
31. 13 Chulalongkorn B
32. 12 HK C

Q: What went wrong?
A: Our fault, they were not properly entered into the computer. Entry failure. We were late, had to get to the break night party, checked when we got there, lots of errors. Explanations about data entry failure.

Koc Wins 2010 WUDC

THE VOTE FOR WORLDS

The ballots have been handed out, one per country, and coutries with more schools representing get more votes up to a maximum of four.

Ballots are not secret, but are written, and then will be confirmed verbally.

Koc = K, NTU = S, Botswana – B

Japan – K
Australia – B
Bangladesh – K
SAfrica – B
Phil – S
HK – B
Indonesia – S
Thailand – S
India – K
NZ – S
Romania – K
Slovenia – K
Turkey – K
Latvia – K
Singapore – S
Finland – K
England – K
SKorea – B
Russia – K
Ireland – K
Scotland – K
Israel – K
Botswana – B
Netherlands – K
Canada – B
USA – K
Lesotho – B
Germany – K
Barbados – B
Jamaica – B
Malaysia – S
Macao – S
Croatia – K
China – B

TOTALS:
Koc – 40
Botswana – 25
Singapore - 17

This brings us to a second round.

Singapore 3 K
Bangladesh 4 K
Croatia 2 K
Japan 4 K
Macao 1 K
Israel 3 K
Australia 4 B
Safrica 2 B
HK 3 B
China 3 B
Phil 3 K
Indonesia 2 K
Turkey 1 K
Lativa 1 K
Slovenia 1 K
Romania 1 K
England 4 K
Finland 1 K
Thailand 2 B
NZ 1 K
India 2 K
Ireland 4 K
Skorea 4 B
Scotland 2 K
Russia 1 K
Netherlands 3 K
Canada 4 B
USA 4 K
Barbados 1 B
Lesotho 1 B
Jamaica 2 B
Germany 2 K
Botswana 1 B
Malaysia 4 B

Koc 51
Botswana 30

Worlds Council Notes - Part Two

Bids for WUDC:

Nanyang Technological University, Singapore

• Showed a short video, very flashy.
• Singapore in accessible. Huge flights, Singapore is cheap for flights. Singapore Tourism Board will try to get discounted prices.
• Australasian worlds bridges Asia and Australia. We hope to promote Asian debate.
• NTU is very efficient, and on time. 30 minutes within schedule. Just hosted an 8 round two-day tournament that ended in the early evening. The campus is very suitable, 5-minute walk to get to convening room to all debate rooms.
• We will use the tab used in this tournament. NTU designed this software, so we can fix it.
• 2010 is Visit Singapore Year, $Sing 200,000 grant in sponsorship, we plan a $Sing 1 million tournament.
• $US450, 350 team cap. If there is demand, we will expand if the DCA agree that it is acceptable. Regional representation, because we can find quality.
• Lots of socials. Problems last time, we promise better.
• Question: How do you integrate different schools of thought, Asian versus Western.
• Answer: I will travel to learn about and work on these issues.
• Question: How can you assure quality adjudication in lower rounds?
• Answer: Lots of high quality judges available in Singapore and in adjacent areas. We will also sponsor adjudication seminars.
• Question: kosher food at regular cost?
• Answer: yes.
• Question: You hosted 2004, to do it every four years?
• Answer: Yes. Not inequitable to host again after six years, but we can do it well with good adjudication.

Koc University, Turkey

• Can Okar & Ozal, we have run tournament after tournament in Turkey, and we have done it the right way.
• If we lose, it is not the last chance. But, we have 100 people involved, institutional memory might be lost with this nucleus that has run recent tournaments.
• Accessible: Antalya is easy to get to, it is a tourist center. It has facilities and infrastructure. The time of year is a good time, it is still warm but not tourist season.
• Hotel: 5 star hotel, 57,000 square meetings. Hosts all debaters. All-inclusive. All food will be free and open. Soft drinks free, all kinds of Turkish brand alcohol at all times, at any time of day.
• Debate rooms are in the hotel, go to beach pr hotel easily.
• Socials: You know that we hold good socials, this time we will go further. Five bars in the hotel, five parties at once.
• Euros sets a record.
• Cost: we are affordable, we only promise what we can do. 35o Euros, 10,000 Euro budget to reduce that rate for teams that need help.
• Development is important. We need to expand debating. Tragic if we did not go to someone new.
• Our priority is Europe, Turkey, Turkey is next to Middle East, close to Africa.
• Can’t have development without great judges. At Euros we flew in people to have good chairs in every room. Need to meet the needs of lower rooms as well.
• 100 great chairs.
• Food and drink: a lot of experience, we have messed up, we apologize if we messed up, and we learn and are trying. Hotel has a contractual obligation so we can hold them responsible.
• Q: What is panelists giving feedback on chairs?
• A: I will like to do it, at Euros we asked them to advise. Ask people to look at forms, even 1000 per round.
• Q: How many teams in a hotel?
• A: Cap at 360, not want to go much higher. We could go to 800, but will not. 3-team institution cap. Hotel rooms converted into debating rooms. Creating a global debating complex.
• Q: Registration and transport cost.
• A: 350 Euros, 150,000 Euros we are raising, Asian $200 more than Singapore.
• Q: Security on Turkey. Turkish government attack Iraq, PKK. Terrorism is a factor.
• A: No, I cannot guarantee absolutely. Police are aware of movements. Police are good and efficient. Terrorism is not that major an issue.

University of Botswana, Botswana

• Justice, English my 5th language.
• Development of debate in Africa: 53 countries, only 3 have come to Worlds. We want to add more countries. Has not been in Africa, no chance to learn.
• Things are safe in Botswana, safest country in Africa, transparency Intl rates it as the best in Africa, safe at night.
• Botswana has hosted vents with over 3000 participants.
• Organizational committee knows what they are doing. Participants have been involved for over ten years, Logan and Joanna helping us.
• Easy to get sponsors. Fly to Johannesburg. Provide luxury coaches from Joburg, and it takes three hours by bus. This will be before the World Cup in South Africa, we are working on discounts.
• Botswana is lax on visa requirements.
• 90 classrooms and large lecture rooms.
• #1 hotel in the country.
• Hospitality: we will provide for all dietary requirements.
• $US350, because of sponsorship.
• Grand final at convention center, Irish Pub, free day at game reserve, break party at a golf estate.
• Logan: consistent bidding process, lots of support.
• Adjudication team: Logan, Sam Block, Joanna also.
• List of people who have committed to come. Need standards for adjudication that is the problem, not bad people. Will use pre-worlds tournaments.
• I am part of it because each generation needs to see the world.
• Now is the last time.
• Q: Explain ground transportation. Exhausted.
• A: 80-minute flight to Gabarone, $100 flight from Joburg to Gabarone.
• Q: Largest number of teams?
• A: University can manage large events.
• Q: Will you fly in adjudicators.
• A: If we have money, but we are getting commitments from people who will come. Examples given. South Africa will assist us.
• Q: Kosher food?
• A: We will. All dietary. No extra costs.
• Q: Funds raised?
• A: Budget not dependent on sponsorship, but the university will fund us, largest diamond mine in the country, so we will raise more funds.

Worlds Council Notes - Part One

Here are my notes from part one of the meeting.

WUDC COUNCIL MEETING NOTES

Passed a motion to recognize two different programs in Bangladesh as being individual and different for the purpose of registration.

Minutes were briefly disputed. Barbados had a number of factual errors. But, they were passed.

UBC Report: ran a deficit, questions about ESL-EFL tab not being available, congratulated.

Cork next year report:

• Preparation is moving forward.
• Limited to 300 teams: capacity of university, adjudication pool will be deeper, cannot do 400 teams, cap is 3 per institution.
• Equality officer, women’s officer, finance officer.
• Finance: backing from public bodies, university, so we have sufficient backing. Will work to increase funding in the next year.
• Registration: $400 Euros per delegate, it is higher, Ireland is expensive country, and covers core costs only. Two stages: initial interest, receive payment, accept credit cards and wire transfers. Deadline is not set. 3 months notice of when it is open. It will fill up quickly. No composite teams.
• Visas: available to help you. Bangladesh suggests delegation of authority to avoid travel to India.
• Hotels: three hotels – 1 is adjacent to University, 2 in Cork City center (not that far) buses will shuttle people. Hotels assigned in the order of when you register. 4 star hotel.
• Food: minority food requirements will be provided, no extra costs.
• Social directors: two of them, incremental increase in parties, aiming to make people miss flights because of the parties.
• Grand final in city hall.
• Adjudication: yet to choose the tab, adjudication team decided. Unbalanced feedback based on regions. Judge feedback system, 3 draw rooms video linked.
• http://corkworlds2009.com, it is the primary means of communication.
• Party on January 2.

Assumption report:

• Finances: teams still owe us money, still need to refund some,
• Today is free travel day. The financial balance sheet was presented.
• Income: $926,196, Expenses: $926.196, with Assumption throwing in balance to make a balance.
• England mentioned some communication problems and some serious waiting times.
• Answer: some staff not fluent in English did not adequately label new schedules as “new” and when.
• Ireland: were DCAs informed when it was raised to 400 teams?
• DCAs: No, we were not informed until they were entered and paid. DCAs seemed very unhappy that the team cap was raised. Organizing committee admitted that they raised team cap without consultation.
• Ireland: At the bid, Assumption said they would fly over judges, but then they did not. Why was it not done?
• Answer: We said we would do it with sponsorship, but we could not find any.
• England: Can you present initial accounts?
• Answer: should be 100% finalized by tomorrow morning.
• Cork: Why could we not have used some of the other funds used to bring some of these judges?
• Answer: Some things in Thailand cost less than a ticket to Thailand. Extra teams might also have created a problem.
• Israel: Kosher food promised, website said dietary requirements met. No extra fee noted. Then, kosher participant were asked to pay extra $300 for kosher food a week before the tournament. Council needs to make a decision about this.
• IONA: Some dietary requirements were all of a sudden not met when we move to a new location?
• Answer: This was a miscommunication; we will provide it as possible. We did post food ingredients so people could know. We are trying to customize as much as possible.
• Question: How did kosher food handled?
• Answer from Israel: They had to get their own.
• IONA: Number of delegates did not get the food they were required. I emailed, I was told I would be served, and I worked with the food director, but so far only 1 breakfast, no food at two social events, egg and boiled rice. MSG allergies, nut allergies, seafood allergies, problems with ingredients lists. People got sick.
• Answer: I will build a list and make sure it goes well in Pattaya.
• England: Should consider financial redress to those not receiving promises food.
• Answer: We will make sure Pattaya will be better. Kosher meal needs should consult so we can build a guideline.
• Assumption: We emailed and tried our best.
• Europe: But you failed. People got bad explanations.
• Germany: There seem to have been different standards for judging. Was there one?
• DCA answer: We had a test, we tried to use feedback and update evaluations, at the end of the day we readjusted rankings, we had an hour-long briefing and had three or four slides on definitions, nobody asked any questions, we had an item on the test, but it is hard to control.
• Japan: Might not have gone to the briefing, so no way they would know. Judge briefing should be mandatory.
• DCA: No one who did not take the test ever chaired a round.
• Jamaica: A person asked to chair with no WUDC experience, comment was that “those teams will not break anyway.” We need to make sure we stay within the spirit of WUDC, judges were too concerned with beer and not quality. EFL teams were marginalized and there was a condescending manner.
• DCA: Always be nice, always be positive, these were parts of our briefing. More experienced judging was moved up in the end. We tried to make sure that every team in ESL/EFL break had experienced chairs. We demoted people, we acted to protect damaged teams.
• Jamaica: We thank you for your efforts.
• Barbados: I chaired in UBC, bit only chaired one. Feedback on chairs was too late. Judges impose their own views. Many judges marginalized us. On the bus judges were making fun of debaters, do not ridicule people. We are not here as a sideshow.
• DCA Answer: We filed complaints, we had a merit-based system, we asked for feedback on chairs and got some earlier even without forms, we asked for respect to all teams. We did knock people out of breaking because of rudeness.
• Suzuki/Equity: Some judges say things that are unacceptable, but we cannot blame adjudication core for bad behavior. We have a code of conduct, so talk to equity officer about it. 5 equity issues were handled about judge behavior. Please raise the issue with us in the formal procedure.
• USA: American teams were expecting Thai Airways discount would work, but it did not. They waited for the code, but then when they did it did not work, no follow up on contact, and then they lost money. This really hurt USA teams.
• TJ: Passwords were not activated, we complained to them, we tried.
• Cork: Judges, again. Adjudication core cannot be held accountable for people who were ignorance. They tried.
• Derek Lande: There is a lot of pressure to increase team caps, and then judging is being spread too thin. We may have to decide to set a limit on size. Cork is 300, but judging is also a reason. Every institution needs to send the best judges, not the runner-ups.
• Derek Lande: Stop sending inexperienced judges and lots of them. That is a bad move.
• Ian Lissing: Do not send the second-class citizens of your debating societies, this brings down the level. Send better judges, get better judges.
• Ian Lissing: Thanks to Assumption for being gracious hosts.