Resolved: That, by 2040, the federal government should mandate that all new passenger vehicles and light trucks sold in the United States be powered by alternative fuels.
LD - we are skipping the new released topic on international courts because we live in Missouri. Always follow the MSHSAA topic, not the NFL one for LD.
Tuesday, December 2, 2008
Wednesday, November 19, 2008
Here's your benefit!
OKAY! You've had a few weeks to get used to coming by and checking the blog. As a reward to those of you who are regularly checking in, I'm giving you some BONUS!
The first 5 students who bring to me (in class) a sheet of paper with the following questions answered will get 10 bonus points. You may ask your classmates for help with these. Good luck!
1. What is your name/date/block?
2. What event do you do?
3. What are the speech times in Public Forum Debate?
4. Which student on our team is performing "Junie B Jones" as an HI?
5. What was the Bickel/Brewer topic this year?
6. Who is your mentor or mentee?
7. What did we do for Team Bonding this fall?
8. Who is the team's Debate Captain?
9. What does NFL stand for?
10. What month is District competition?
The first 5 students who bring to me (in class) a sheet of paper with the following questions answered will get 10 bonus points. You may ask your classmates for help with these. Good luck!
1. What is your name/date/block?
2. What event do you do?
3. What are the speech times in Public Forum Debate?
4. Which student on our team is performing "Junie B Jones" as an HI?
5. What was the Bickel/Brewer topic this year?
6. Who is your mentor or mentee?
7. What did we do for Team Bonding this fall?
8. Who is the team's Debate Captain?
9. What does NFL stand for?
10. What month is District competition?
Monday, November 10, 2008
PFD social networking topic: part II
Resolved: That, on balance, social networking Web sites have a positive impact on the United States.
OHS students brainstormed this topic today and thought about the following:
What does the term "social networking Web sites" include? Obviously myspace and facebook, but what others are included in this discussion? Would sites like classmates.com, eHarmony and other dating sites, youtube, or even general websites with comment boards count? Varsity, in looking at this question, decided that one must be pretty specific with how they define the term for discussion.
Pros (why these websites are good for the US)
Captalism: They allow for businesses, musicians, etc. to reach out to the public with their products.
Hegemony: social networking websites can contribute to a general feeling of goodwill or even make the US look better to people from other countries when they hear the voices of the average citizens.
Law Enforcement: There is some good data out there showing that law enforcement and other authorities have been able to use these websites to catch criminals via undercover coups.
Transportation of ideas: inventions, opinions, and other information is easily disseminated through these sites to the general public.
Safety: Through these websites, you can find information to help keep you safe (such as residences of convicted predators, etc).
Cons (why these websites are bad for the US)
Safety: sexual predators have used these sites to prey on the innocent.
Cyber-bullying: these sites are a playground for cyber-bullies.
Destruction of innocence: what is seen cannot be unseen. A young child can click around these sites and very easily and unintentionally view pornographic or violent material.
Abuse of power: Gives the government and other entities way too much information on private citizens' lives.
Deterrent to future jobs, colleges, etc.: some institutions have been known to check out the myspace/facebook pages of their prospects before hiring.
Time suck: These websites waste an extraordinary amount of time.
PRO OR CON: Many of the varsity agreed that the idea of how social websites impact elections would be a fascinating contention for either the pro or con side. Depending on how you frame it, you could argue that social network sites get the vote out, and that's good (voting's good, right?) or you could argue that it's not a fair representation since users of this technology tend to be younger and more liberal.
I just encourage you to check out the data, do your research, and have fun! We are only debating this topic once, so make it good!
OHS students brainstormed this topic today and thought about the following:
What does the term "social networking Web sites" include? Obviously myspace and facebook, but what others are included in this discussion? Would sites like classmates.com, eHarmony and other dating sites, youtube, or even general websites with comment boards count? Varsity, in looking at this question, decided that one must be pretty specific with how they define the term for discussion.
Pros (why these websites are good for the US)
Captalism: They allow for businesses, musicians, etc. to reach out to the public with their products.
Hegemony: social networking websites can contribute to a general feeling of goodwill or even make the US look better to people from other countries when they hear the voices of the average citizens.
Law Enforcement: There is some good data out there showing that law enforcement and other authorities have been able to use these websites to catch criminals via undercover coups.
Transportation of ideas: inventions, opinions, and other information is easily disseminated through these sites to the general public.
Safety: Through these websites, you can find information to help keep you safe (such as residences of convicted predators, etc).
Cons (why these websites are bad for the US)
Safety: sexual predators have used these sites to prey on the innocent.
Cyber-bullying: these sites are a playground for cyber-bullies.
Destruction of innocence: what is seen cannot be unseen. A young child can click around these sites and very easily and unintentionally view pornographic or violent material.
Abuse of power: Gives the government and other entities way too much information on private citizens' lives.
Deterrent to future jobs, colleges, etc.: some institutions have been known to check out the myspace/facebook pages of their prospects before hiring.
Time suck: These websites waste an extraordinary amount of time.
PRO OR CON: Many of the varsity agreed that the idea of how social websites impact elections would be a fascinating contention for either the pro or con side. Depending on how you frame it, you could argue that social network sites get the vote out, and that's good (voting's good, right?) or you could argue that it's not a fair representation since users of this technology tend to be younger and more liberal.
I just encourage you to check out the data, do your research, and have fun! We are only debating this topic once, so make it good!
Thursday, November 6, 2008
PFD - New Topic
Resolved: That, on balance, social networking Web sites have a positive impact on the United States.
OHS students haven't yet begun analyzing this topic in-class but on face value it seems - interesting? More to come....
p.s. Why did they capitalize "Web"? What the heck does "on balance" mean? ...comments?
OHS students haven't yet begun analyzing this topic in-class but on face value it seems - interesting? More to come....
p.s. Why did they capitalize "Web"? What the heck does "on balance" mean? ...comments?
Bickel and Brewer Results - round one
I wanted to drop a note of congratulations to three members of our team who did very well this year (so far) in the Bickel & Brewer competition. We received word this morning that L.P., R.P., and K.M. have broken into the top 32 schools and will be participating in out-rounds.
GREAT JOB! You get a trophy.
GREAT JOB! You get a trophy.
Monday, November 3, 2008
New Wave Debate: What's the point?
Spreading. Kritiks. Performance affs. Narratives. Debate (and not just CX, either) is taking off in a whole new direction in some areas of the country. The trouble is, not everyone likes it.
To understand this issue, one must first understand the concepts that are being discussed. First, and probably most controversial, is the strategy of spreading. Spreading is the strategy that some debaters employ in order to fit in many arguments in the course of their speaking time. This involves speaking very, very fast. You can see an example of this here. Spreading is seen in advanced CX rounds and some advanced LD rounds. It has not hit the PF world yet but I imagine it's only a matter of time before some teams begin employing this strategy in PF rounds.
I am conflicted about the idea of spreading as a strategy. While it makes sense to try to make more arguments, the debate you end up with is only going to be understandable to a few select people in the room (those that are used to debating or flowing spread rounds). I believe this to be antithetical to the concept of forensics, a word that means 'suitable for public speaking'. Spread rounds are not suitable for public consumption at all; they simply advance the 'in-crowd' of those who can follow the spread, and thus negate the idea of becoming a better forensicator.
Solution? I believe that the arguments put forth during a spread round can be legitimate. If you want to run a K, two off-case arguments, T, DAs, etc etc etc, I believe there should be a forum for you to get it all said. In this case, I believe that instead of speaking faster, the speech times should be extended. Perhaps a 10 minute constructive period would give one adequate time to say everything they would like to say. Unfortunately, due to the time constraints of rounds at tournaments, this is unlikely to happen in the near future.
Kritiks, performance affs, and narratives: these are all new ways of looking at the old, tired, worn-out, same-ol, same-ol speeches of the 'old school' of debate. In the 'old school', the affirmative side presents their arguments and/or plan for the case in a fairly straightforward manner. In CX or LD, the debater would present first the problem, then the solution/s to said problem, then the advantages shown by adopting their solution. The negative side, then, refutes the arguments of the aff in a similarly straightforward manner. "My opponent thinks that this is a problem. Here is why this is not a problem." or "My opponent says that these good things will happen if we adopt their plan. I will show you how these bad things will happen instead."
A kritik (or critical argument), rather than debate in a straightforward manner, is a different kind of strategy for the negative side in CX or LD to employ. Rather than directly refute the arguments the aff is making, the neg will simply create a discussion about the philosophy or language that has been brought up in the debate, and how the judge ought to reject the parameters of the debate as a whole due to, for example, the racist language of the proposition, or the futile pursuit of money in the affirmatives plan, etc etc. The key word here is philosophy. These arguments tend to be very intellectual and theoretical in nature.
Performance Affs, seen mostly in CX but occassionally in LD, is a method of delivering your first affirmative constructive speech in an unconventional way, via video, poetry, theatrics, etc. The idea is that you are challenging the conventions of delivering a speech in a conventional way to get your point across. It is, of course, against the rules of debate to run most performance affs (many of them violate some rule about visual aids, etc) but you are trying to argue that the educational benefit of what you are doing outweighs any rules you are breaking.
Narratives (ran in CX and LD) look a lot like a conventional speech in that they take about 6-8 minutes to read. However, the text of the speech is set up more like a story than a debate. For example, someone might do a 'Batman Narrative' and tell the story of the latest batman movie to debate the idea that democracy fails. (In a crucial scene in the movie, people on a boat take a vote about an action they should take, and although they all vote to act in one way, they end up taking a different action). This is a powerful way to get a point across but certainly bucks the conventions of normal debate.
I enjoy watching kritiks, performance affs, and narratives if only for the sheer pleasure of listening to a student think in a philosophical way. However, in practice, these tactics end up being used by students who don't understand the theory behind them, they confuse the opponent, and the education of debate is not served.
Solution? Once again, I believe a seperate division should be created for students who want to debate in this manner. A new event, called "New Wave Debate" or something to that effect would be a nice way to allow students to explore philosophy but also maintain the traditional integrity of the original styles of debate.
Again, it would be unlikely that this will happen anytime soon, if at all, but in Mama Cole's perfect world, this would be the best case solution. And that's my two cents.
To understand this issue, one must first understand the concepts that are being discussed. First, and probably most controversial, is the strategy of spreading. Spreading is the strategy that some debaters employ in order to fit in many arguments in the course of their speaking time. This involves speaking very, very fast. You can see an example of this here. Spreading is seen in advanced CX rounds and some advanced LD rounds. It has not hit the PF world yet but I imagine it's only a matter of time before some teams begin employing this strategy in PF rounds.
I am conflicted about the idea of spreading as a strategy. While it makes sense to try to make more arguments, the debate you end up with is only going to be understandable to a few select people in the room (those that are used to debating or flowing spread rounds). I believe this to be antithetical to the concept of forensics, a word that means 'suitable for public speaking'. Spread rounds are not suitable for public consumption at all; they simply advance the 'in-crowd' of those who can follow the spread, and thus negate the idea of becoming a better forensicator.
Solution? I believe that the arguments put forth during a spread round can be legitimate. If you want to run a K, two off-case arguments, T, DAs, etc etc etc, I believe there should be a forum for you to get it all said. In this case, I believe that instead of speaking faster, the speech times should be extended. Perhaps a 10 minute constructive period would give one adequate time to say everything they would like to say. Unfortunately, due to the time constraints of rounds at tournaments, this is unlikely to happen in the near future.
Kritiks, performance affs, and narratives: these are all new ways of looking at the old, tired, worn-out, same-ol, same-ol speeches of the 'old school' of debate. In the 'old school', the affirmative side presents their arguments and/or plan for the case in a fairly straightforward manner. In CX or LD, the debater would present first the problem, then the solution/s to said problem, then the advantages shown by adopting their solution. The negative side, then, refutes the arguments of the aff in a similarly straightforward manner. "My opponent thinks that this is a problem. Here is why this is not a problem." or "My opponent says that these good things will happen if we adopt their plan. I will show you how these bad things will happen instead."
A kritik (or critical argument), rather than debate in a straightforward manner, is a different kind of strategy for the negative side in CX or LD to employ. Rather than directly refute the arguments the aff is making, the neg will simply create a discussion about the philosophy or language that has been brought up in the debate, and how the judge ought to reject the parameters of the debate as a whole due to, for example, the racist language of the proposition, or the futile pursuit of money in the affirmatives plan, etc etc. The key word here is philosophy. These arguments tend to be very intellectual and theoretical in nature.
Performance Affs, seen mostly in CX but occassionally in LD, is a method of delivering your first affirmative constructive speech in an unconventional way, via video, poetry, theatrics, etc. The idea is that you are challenging the conventions of delivering a speech in a conventional way to get your point across. It is, of course, against the rules of debate to run most performance affs (many of them violate some rule about visual aids, etc) but you are trying to argue that the educational benefit of what you are doing outweighs any rules you are breaking.
Narratives (ran in CX and LD) look a lot like a conventional speech in that they take about 6-8 minutes to read. However, the text of the speech is set up more like a story than a debate. For example, someone might do a 'Batman Narrative' and tell the story of the latest batman movie to debate the idea that democracy fails. (In a crucial scene in the movie, people on a boat take a vote about an action they should take, and although they all vote to act in one way, they end up taking a different action). This is a powerful way to get a point across but certainly bucks the conventions of normal debate.
I enjoy watching kritiks, performance affs, and narratives if only for the sheer pleasure of listening to a student think in a philosophical way. However, in practice, these tactics end up being used by students who don't understand the theory behind them, they confuse the opponent, and the education of debate is not served.
Solution? Once again, I believe a seperate division should be created for students who want to debate in this manner. A new event, called "New Wave Debate" or something to that effect would be a nice way to allow students to explore philosophy but also maintain the traditional integrity of the original styles of debate.
Again, it would be unlikely that this will happen anytime soon, if at all, but in Mama Cole's perfect world, this would be the best case solution. And that's my two cents.
Thursday, October 30, 2008
NFL Points System
The National Forensic League is the national organization that OHS debaters belong to. Within this organization, our students are given the opportunity to earn points through the speaking opportunities (such as debate tournaments) they take advantage of. Here is how to check to see how many NFL points you have.
Step One: Open the NFL website at http://www.nflonline.org/.
Step Two: Click first on "Resources", then on "Membership Reports" (circled in the image below)
Step Three: Type in all or part of your name in the box that will appear. No need to put in your graduation year or merit number.
Step Four: Choose the appropriate student from the names listed (in this case, only one option is given).
Step Five: You will now see a page with all kinds of information about this student's speaking history. The information includes total points earned and what rank that student has acheived (more on ranks later).
Step Six: If you would like to see more detail, click on any of the speaking categories to get information about the tournaments this student has attended, who coached them, how many debates they won, what their score was in their round, etc, etc. (This example is Mama Cole's old record, and since I'm kind of old, the information is archived from before we used the internet to record points. Not much information is given here, but you can see that I received a total of 89 points by the time I graduated, in speaking events only. Your records will have much better information since it's all kept online now.)
Degrees of Membership (from the NFL bylaws):
Merit. Eligible persons who have 25 credit points, 10 of which were earned in competitive speaking, shall upon election, receive the Degree of Merit.
Honor. Members who have the Degree of Merit and a total of 75 credit points shall receive the Degree of Honor.
Excellence. Members who have a total of 150 credit points shall receive the Degree of Excellence.
Distinction. Members who have a total of 250 credit points shall receive the Degree of Distinction.
Special Distinction. Members who have a total of 500 credit points shall receive the Degree of Special Distinction.
Superior Distinction. Members who have a total of 750 credit points shall receive the Degree of Superior Distinction.
Outstanding Distinction. Members who have a total of 1000 credit points shall receive the Degree of Outstanding Distinction.
Premier Distinction. Members who have a total of 1500 credit points shall receive the Degree of Premier Distinction.
Try looking yourself up now and see what you learn! Then, I recommend looking up your friends. Good luck!
Step One: Open the NFL website at http://www.nflonline.org/.
Step Two: Click first on "Resources", then on "Membership Reports" (circled in the image below)
Step Three: Type in all or part of your name in the box that will appear. No need to put in your graduation year or merit number.
Step Four: Choose the appropriate student from the names listed (in this case, only one option is given).
Step Five: You will now see a page with all kinds of information about this student's speaking history. The information includes total points earned and what rank that student has acheived (more on ranks later).
Step Six: If you would like to see more detail, click on any of the speaking categories to get information about the tournaments this student has attended, who coached them, how many debates they won, what their score was in their round, etc, etc. (This example is Mama Cole's old record, and since I'm kind of old, the information is archived from before we used the internet to record points. Not much information is given here, but you can see that I received a total of 89 points by the time I graduated, in speaking events only. Your records will have much better information since it's all kept online now.)
Degrees of Membership (from the NFL bylaws):
Merit. Eligible persons who have 25 credit points, 10 of which were earned in competitive speaking, shall upon election, receive the Degree of Merit.
Honor. Members who have the Degree of Merit and a total of 75 credit points shall receive the Degree of Honor.
Excellence. Members who have a total of 150 credit points shall receive the Degree of Excellence.
Distinction. Members who have a total of 250 credit points shall receive the Degree of Distinction.
Special Distinction. Members who have a total of 500 credit points shall receive the Degree of Special Distinction.
Superior Distinction. Members who have a total of 750 credit points shall receive the Degree of Superior Distinction.
Outstanding Distinction. Members who have a total of 1000 credit points shall receive the Degree of Outstanding Distinction.
Premier Distinction. Members who have a total of 1500 credit points shall receive the Degree of Premier Distinction.
Try looking yourself up now and see what you learn! Then, I recommend looking up your friends. Good luck!
Wednesday, October 29, 2008
The Kidney Machine Problem
Students at OHS and OFRS have been asked to consider the kidney machine problem below, and become advocates for their candidate. Many wonderful arguments have already been raised about the moral right to human life, the worth of an individual to society, what it's like to grow up without a parent, and more. After careful consideration, 5 candidates will be given the machines (theoretically) on Wednesday of next week. Please take a moment to vote for the people you think most worthy of a machine. You can vote on the right side of this page.
Tonight, the Laymen's Board of Review of General Hospital meets to consider applicants for the use of its kidney machines. Each of the patients described below has been evaluated by the medical staff, and it has been determined that each will probably die in 6-8 weeks without the constant use of the machine. Unfortunately, there are only five machines available for home use. The Board must rank in order the eight applicants.
John Hallbright. Age 31. Married. One child, a daughter, age 4. College graduate. Works as a teller in a bank. Wife also employed, as an elementary school teacher.
Marie Villareal. Age 39. Unmarried. College graduate. Holds Master's in physical therapy. Employed at VA hospital for 14 years; is head of Physical and Occupational Therapy treatment center.
Pamela Watson. Age 23. Married, no children. College graduate. Teaches social studies and is cheerleader advisor in junior high school. Husband is a teacher in the high school.
Avery Smith. Age 51. Married. Three children, daughter age 19, sons 17 and 15. High school graduate. Owner and operator of Smith Industries, Inc., a machine shop which employs 150. City councilman for 12 years; member of library board of directors for 6 years. Has suffered several heart attacks (last one 3 1/2 years ago), and medical bills plus lack of heath insurance cause him to make application for the free machine.
William Work. Age 11. One of seven children of Mr. and Mrs. Ralph Work.
Walker Red Cloud. Age about 40. Ojibwa Indian. At least four children by two wives. Fourth grade education. No occupation.
Nancy Adams. Age 34. Divorced, three children. Daughter, age 7, twin sons, 6, all in her custody. Employed as a secretary in a real estate office.
Mary Parenti. 12 years old. IQ 87. Teachers describe her as shy, withdrawn, and inhibited. Family immigrated to New York the year she was born. Family owns restaurant where both parents work.
(Thanks to San Jose State University for the module)
Tuesday, October 28, 2008
A Plethora of Speaking Opportunities
Did you know there are almost 100 NFL-endorsed events in speech and debate? I was putting together a list for the Finley River crowd, and was amazed by all the options listed on the NFL website. There are even some events that I know about that I didn't see on this list, so I imagine the total events tops 100! This truly shows that there is something for everyone in speech and debate.
What events would you like to learn more about?
THESE ARE THE ONES OHS STUDENTS COMPETE IN
CX Debate
PF Debate
LD Debate
Student Congress
Bickel/Brewer
Dramatic Interp
Duet
Duo
Duo Improv
Extemporaneous
Humorous Interp
Mock Trial
One Act Play
Original Comedy
Original Oratory
Poetry
Prose
Radio Announcing
Readers Theatre
Story Telling
Voice of Democracy
THESE ARE THE ONES OHS STUDENTS
HAVE NOT COMPETED IN
Advocacy
After Dinner
Analysis of Address
Announcing
Bible Interp
Book review
Children’s Literature
Cold Poetry
Comic Book Interp
Creative Expressive
Creative Story Telling
Creed Speaking
Declamation
Demonstration
Discussion
Dramatic Performances
Duet Oral Interp
Duo Dramatic
Duo Reading
Editorial Comment
Expository
Farrago
Four Minute
Great Speeches
Humorous Declamation
Impromptu
Impromptu Duet
Individual Oral Interp
Informative
Interp of Public Address
Interpretive Reading
Interps
Interview
Literature Program
Manuscript Reading
Memorized Public Address
Moments in History
Monologue
Odyssey of the Mind
Optimist Oratory
Oratorical Analysis
Oratorical Commentary
Oratorical Declamation
Oratorical Inter Declamation
Oratorical Interp
Oratory
Original Works
Original Advocacy
Original Commentary
Original Persuasive
Original Prose and Poetry
Original Public Address
Panel
Pentathalon
Performance of Literature
Play Reading
POI or PPI
Program Poetry
Program Reading
Radio Commentary
Retold Story
Salesmanship
Serious Interp
Soap Box Speaking
Solo
Special Occasion Speaking
Speech to Entertain
Spontaneous Argument
Sportscasting
Standard Oratory
Table Topics
Tall Tales
Thematic Analysis of Public Access
Thematic Interp
TV Announcing
Verse Reading
What events would you like to learn more about?
THESE ARE THE ONES OHS STUDENTS COMPETE IN
CX Debate
PF Debate
LD Debate
Student Congress
Bickel/Brewer
Dramatic Interp
Duet
Duo
Duo Improv
Extemporaneous
Humorous Interp
Mock Trial
One Act Play
Original Comedy
Original Oratory
Poetry
Prose
Radio Announcing
Readers Theatre
Story Telling
Voice of Democracy
THESE ARE THE ONES OHS STUDENTS
HAVE NOT COMPETED IN
Advocacy
After Dinner
Analysis of Address
Announcing
Bible Interp
Book review
Children’s Literature
Cold Poetry
Comic Book Interp
Creative Expressive
Creative Story Telling
Creed Speaking
Declamation
Demonstration
Discussion
Dramatic Performances
Duet Oral Interp
Duo Dramatic
Duo Reading
Editorial Comment
Expository
Farrago
Four Minute
Great Speeches
Humorous Declamation
Impromptu
Impromptu Duet
Individual Oral Interp
Informative
Interp of Public Address
Interpretive Reading
Interps
Interview
Literature Program
Manuscript Reading
Memorized Public Address
Moments in History
Monologue
Odyssey of the Mind
Optimist Oratory
Oratorical Analysis
Oratorical Commentary
Oratorical Declamation
Oratorical Inter Declamation
Oratorical Interp
Oratory
Original Works
Original Advocacy
Original Commentary
Original Persuasive
Original Prose and Poetry
Original Public Address
Panel
Pentathalon
Performance of Literature
Play Reading
POI or PPI
Program Poetry
Program Reading
Radio Commentary
Retold Story
Salesmanship
Serious Interp
Soap Box Speaking
Solo
Special Occasion Speaking
Speech to Entertain
Spontaneous Argument
Sportscasting
Standard Oratory
Table Topics
Tall Tales
Thematic Analysis of Public Access
Thematic Interp
TV Announcing
Verse Reading
Friday, October 24, 2008
Our First Tournament
Hey Everyone!
It's your Debate Captain, C.D.! [initials used for privacy] I just wanted to take a minute and give a special shout-out to everyone on the team that placed at our very first tournament! :)
JD, 2nd place, LD Debate
AB, 2nd place, Improve Duet Acting
LH, 2nd place, Improve Duet Acting
AB, 3rd place, Duet Acting
LH, 3rd place, Duet Acting
BI, 4th place, HI
MM, 4th place, PF Debate
Squeaky, 4th place, PF Debate
KM, 6th place, OO
Please congratulate these people when you see them.
If you didn't 'break' please don't get discouraged. We have many more tournaments to come, and I have full confidence in every single person on this team.
Remember, together we can accomplish so much.
It's your Debate Captain, C.D.! [initials used for privacy] I just wanted to take a minute and give a special shout-out to everyone on the team that placed at our very first tournament! :)
JD, 2nd place, LD Debate
AB, 2nd place, Improve Duet Acting
LH, 2nd place, Improve Duet Acting
AB, 3rd place, Duet Acting
LH, 3rd place, Duet Acting
BI, 4th place, HI
MM, 4th place, PF Debate
Squeaky, 4th place, PF Debate
KM, 6th place, OO
Please congratulate these people when you see them.
If you didn't 'break' please don't get discouraged. We have many more tournaments to come, and I have full confidence in every single person on this team.
Remember, together we can accomplish so much.
Wednesday, October 22, 2008
Finley River Shout Out
Just a note to say 'hey' to all of the debaters at Ozark Finley River school. It was great to meet you guys today and I can't wait to work with you some more next week! In the meantime, you can check out the official debate website at www.nflonline.org. I'll bring in information about all the events next time I come. OH! And the debate movie we were talking about is called "Resolved" and the website is here.
Tuesday, October 21, 2008
The Secret Life of Bees
I'm currently reading this wonderful book, The Secret Life of Bees. I'll admit that I'm not very far into it yet but already in the first ten pages I've discovered a very doable DI. I photocopied the pages and they're available to whomever would like them. This cutting is about a young girl who witnesses a horrible fight between her parents in which her mom takes out a gun. The gun drops to the ground, and the girl, unsure of what's going on, picks up the gun and accidentally shoots her mother.
I imagine there are more DI cuttings hidden somewhere in this gem of a book, if anyone else wants to give it a shot. Also, it's now a box office film, meaning that it would be received well by lay judges who have seen the movie.
If you do DI or DUO, I recommend reading as many of these kinds of books as possible! They are great resources for material!
I imagine there are more DI cuttings hidden somewhere in this gem of a book, if anyone else wants to give it a shot. Also, it's now a box office film, meaning that it would be received well by lay judges who have seen the movie.
If you do DI or DUO, I recommend reading as many of these kinds of books as possible! They are great resources for material!
Monday, October 20, 2008
Should felons vote?
The new Lincoln-Douglas debate topic is as follows:
Resolved: In a democratic society, felons ought to retain the right to vote.
This will be the topic LD students will debate in December, January, and the first week of February.
Here's what the novice discussed in 1st block today:
What kind of values/value criterion would work with this case?
Resolved: In a democratic society, felons ought to retain the right to vote.
This will be the topic LD students will debate in December, January, and the first week of February.
Here's what the novice discussed in 1st block today:
What kind of values/value criterion would work with this case?
- Democracy
- Justice
- Equality
- Social Contract
- What else?
What are some good reasons for felons to be able to vote?
- helps with rehabilitation (felons who participate in a democracy are more likely to follow its rules)
- It's only fair since they are subject to the laws and taxes of the country
- restricting felons from voting may have racist connotations, given the percentage of minorities in prison
- when is a felon not a felon? figuring out when or if the voting rights should be reinstated to a felon can make this a tricky subject
- more people voting = better democracy
- What else can you come up with?
What are some good reasons for felons to be banned from voting?
- revoking voting rights is a valid punishment
- by upholding the affirmative side, one has stripped away the opportunity to restrict felons who have committed voter fraud
- Democracy = representation of public opinion. Most people are "not in favor of granting [voting rights] to incarcerated felons"*
- what else can you think of?
Overall, this is one fascinating topic, and should give us lots of good practice for districts.**
I'm looking forward to reading your cases! Make sure you define your terms - especially "democractic society" and "felons", and be on the lookout for opponents to bring up other countries besides the USA. Good luck!
*see West Coast Briefs, page 7
**(The February/March MSHSAA topic is the one we debate at districts...in other words, the one after this one on the MSHAA site. Ignore the January/February topic on the NFL site - we don't debate that one in Missouri).
Thursday, October 16, 2008
Essay Contests approach deadlines!
Bickel-Brewer and the VFW Voice of Democracy contests are approaching their deadlines! If you are writing essays for these contests, manage the next 12 days carefully so you can finish with honors!
Good Luck!
Good Luck!
Wednesday, October 15, 2008
Mushroom Cloud Press
We have new scripts!
Big Mama Cole was recently able to use her magic skills of persuasion to procure a slew of new interp scripts for GO54! These scripts, from Mushroom Cloud Press, are a mix of humorous and dramatic and are suitable for one or two actors/actresses.
I am temporarily lifting my ban on pre-cut interp scripts for varsity members so we can get these scripts out into our team! Come by and read some - they are great!
Big Mama Cole was recently able to use her magic skills of persuasion to procure a slew of new interp scripts for GO54! These scripts, from Mushroom Cloud Press, are a mix of humorous and dramatic and are suitable for one or two actors/actresses.
I am temporarily lifting my ban on pre-cut interp scripts for varsity members so we can get these scripts out into our team! Come by and read some - they are great!
New topic - PF Debate
Resolved: That the United States government should implement universal health care modeled after the French system.
In GO54 today, students were abuzz with talk of the new topic. Mostly, the discussion centered on the pros and cons of a nationalized health care system. Here's what we came up with:
PROS:
The poor and disenfranchised will be taken care of.
Everyone will have access to medical care, regardless of financial or health situations.
No more copays = more money in your pocket.
France's system is regarded as one of the best in the world.
It's a way to guarantee everyone a human right (good health).
CONS:
There may be longer waiting periods.
Taxes will go up.
We already have some notion of nationalized health care through Medicaid, etc. and these systems are said to be 'broken'.
It isn't fair that healthy people should carry the burden of those who make bad lifestyle choices.
Health care is not a human right.
It will be very interesting to see what each team chooses as their contentions! Good luck!
In GO54 today, students were abuzz with talk of the new topic. Mostly, the discussion centered on the pros and cons of a nationalized health care system. Here's what we came up with:
PROS:
The poor and disenfranchised will be taken care of.
Everyone will have access to medical care, regardless of financial or health situations.
No more copays = more money in your pocket.
France's system is regarded as one of the best in the world.
It's a way to guarantee everyone a human right (good health).
CONS:
There may be longer waiting periods.
Taxes will go up.
We already have some notion of nationalized health care through Medicaid, etc. and these systems are said to be 'broken'.
It isn't fair that healthy people should carry the burden of those who make bad lifestyle choices.
Health care is not a human right.
It will be very interesting to see what each team chooses as their contentions! Good luck!
Welcome to the blog!
Hey kiddos! You can thank Mrs. P for this blog - she gave me the idea to make a blog to post all kinds of information relating to speech and debate. I hope to post info such as topic discussions, reminders, and acting ideas. If you have any suggestions just head to GO54 and let me know. I'll try to find a regular time for updating, so check back often!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
