http://www.debatecoaches.org The NDCA provides curriculum support for teachers and coaches who train students in debate, forensics, speech, and argumentation. Copyright 2012 David Childree, Director of Forensics at the American Heritage schools in Florida, shares his initial thoughts on the NFL 2012 Public Forum topic.Resolved: Stand Your Ground laws are a legitimate expansion of the doctrine of self defense.  

]]> <rss@debatecoaches.org> (Carol Green) /2012/05/stand-your-ground-nfl-nationals-pf-resolution /2012/05/stand-your-ground-nfl-nationals-pf-resolution Tue, 15 May 2012 13:57:00 EDT Chase Williams, assistant Public Forum coach at Lake Highland Preparatory School in Florida, shares his views on the NFL Nationals 2012 Public Forum Topic.   Resolved: Stand Your Ground laws are a legitimate expansion of the doctrine of self defense.   The public forum debate community truly embraced their love of topics “ripped from the headlines” by selecting the 2012 NFL Nationals topic. As a result, teams will have to ensure that they strike a proper balance between acknowledging the sensationalized cable TV arguments surrounding the Trayvon Martin case and establishing a substantial debate that does not get sidetracked by one single example of “Stand Your Ground” legislation. As is always the case with NFL Nationals topics, teams must do a large amount of background reading to become true experts on the topic area, rather than just the specific question of the resolution. The resolution itself concedes that there is indeed a “doctrine of self defense” that shall be the frame of reference for teams and judges. However, the team that best defines that doctrine, whether they are debating as the affirmative team or negative team, will have the upper hand in the round. By defining the “doctrine” early in the round – as either a framework argument or definition – teams will have the opportunity to link to a specific theory or warrant that justifies such an interpretation of “self defense.” Once a team wins the “doctrine” definition that is likely linked to the rest of their case, it will be difficult for their opponents to gain offense in the rest of the debate – as such, expect much of the discussion in your rounds to revolve around what the “doctrine of self defense” truly is and how can we expand or shrink that doctrine.   The question of “legitimacy” will pose another opportunity for a framework or definition debate, as teams will have to decide what determines what is or is not legitimate. It is important for teams to recognize that their audience may not agree with their interpretation of “legitimate,” so it will be important to utilize both the summary and final focus speeches to give judges multiple places to vote and to fully explain why those areas to vote prove a legitimate or illegitimate extension of the “doctrine of self defense.” Unlikely any other topic this year, the NFL Nationals topic will challenge students to have a debate based in both theory and empirical analysis at the same time. Students that have grown fond of framework debates or theory analysis will find entertainment in the questions discussed above, while those who rely more on empirical numbers and statistics will also get their fair share of debate by analyzing the impact of Stand Your Ground legislation on communities, death rates, violence escalation, etc.   The front-page reality of this topic is that during the NFL National tournament developments in the Trayvon Martin case or Florida’s investigation into their Stand Your Ground laws could fundamentally change the dialogue that is occurring in the rounds in Indianapolis. Debaters must be ready to analyze and debate new studies or articles on a rolling basis. As such, and with the high degree of sensitivity that surrounds this topic, source integrity is going to be an important consideration for debaters. While authors and their qualifications are often ignored in Public Forum due to time constraints and other barriers, this specific topic will require that debaters understand not only the content that it is put forth by an author, but also why that author presented such content and how that author developed their analysis or statistical conclusions.   As for research areas, I believe that students are going to have to spend a fair amount of time analyzing legal publications including court decisions and minority opinions, law journal analyses and other legal resources. It is important for students to recognize that just because a legal text may be older or have later publications that challenge it’s conclusions, that does not necessarily make it less valid for this topic. Remember, legal literature and the conclusions that are reached in legal publications are constantly evolving or being expanded upon – much like our constitution, other legal documents never lose their ability to influence the direction of this debate. The legal questions posed by the “doctrine of self defense” and “legitimate” will best be answered in a legal context – so this is where you will be finding much of your framework and definition analysis. Expanding beyond the legal realm, it will be important for debaters to embrace psychological analysis and understand what occurs with the existence of Stand Your Ground legislation and how these laws impact an individuals actions and reactions in various situations. Be careful not to be sucked into one specific case study – but rather analyze a wide array of analyses to develop a general consensus of the impact of the legislation. Finally, it will be important to gather statistics on the specific impact of Stand Your Ground legislation on a variety of variables. These variables will vary from state to state as well as based on the severity of the Stand Your Ground law, but will give an important frame of reference for your judge who will need some tangible impacts to weigh against a broad theory discussion that will likely be happening at the top of the flow.   I am excited to see what creative approaches teams take on this “ripped from the headlines” topic and look forward to judging some great rounds. I have faith that the work that you, your teammates and your coaches put in will produce a far better discussion of this important issue than that of the talking heads on 24-hour cable news networks.

]]> <rss@debatecoaches.org> (Carol Green) /2012/05/nfl-2012-topic-analysis /2012/05/nfl-2012-topic-analysis Wed, 09 May 2012 10:05:00 EDT Brother Kevin Tidd, Director of Forensics at Delbarton School in New Jersey, shares his thoughts on the NCFL 2012 Public Forum topic. Resolved: Increasing US energy production should take precedence over protecting the environment.  

]]> <rss@debatecoaches.org> (Carol Green) /2012/05/ncfl /2012/05/ncfl Mon, 07 May 2012 23:48:00 EDT Check out the Boston Debate League's summer grad school offering on Evidence Base Argument, previously known as Debate Across the Curriculum.

]]> <rss@debatecoaches.org> (Nicole Serrano) /2012/03/evidence-based-argument-grad-summer-class /2012/03/evidence-based-argument-grad-summer-class Thu, 08 Mar 2012 17:36:00 EST The NDCA has approved its slate of awards that will be given at the 2012 NDCA National Championship in Las Vegas, NV.   Please make sure you are a member so you can be eligible for all four awards. 1.      Educator of the Year – We are now accepting nominations. Please fill out the form at http://tinyurl.com/2012EOYNomination The NDCA will accept nominations until Tuesday, March 20th.  Anyone may nominate an individual. 2.      Rising Star – The NDCA has instituted a new award. The honoree must a full-time employee of a school and be in their first three years of coaching debate in a full-time capacity. The honoree must further be a current NDCA member. Although the NDCA Board will decide this winner the first year, please feel free to send suggestions to Nicole.Serrano@gmail.com. Congratulations to last year’s winner - Abigail Schirmer from Stratford Academy (GA). 3.      Tournament Host of the Year The NDCA Board will again recognize a tournament that provides the kind of quality experience in terms of competition and hospitality that the debate community supports. In order to be eligible, at lease one affiliated coach must be a NDCA member.    Congratulations to last year’s winner – Malcolm A. Bump Memorial Debate Tournament Hendrick Hudson HS 4.      Service Award The NDCA Board will again recognize an individual who has provided outstanding service to the NDCA. Congratulations to last year’s winner – Dr. Rich Edwards from Baylor University (TX).

]]> <rss@debatecoaches.org> (Nicole Serrano) /2012/03/ndca-award-nominations-now-open /2012/03/ndca-award-nominations-now-open Sun, 04 Mar 2012 20:57:00 EST