[eDebate] On reforming the CEDA All American Awards

Morris, Eric R EricMorris
Wed May 31 13:08:20 CDT 2006


As with Jim's prior elim points amendment, this proposal is sweet
because it acknowledges the hard working debaters who might be in the
middle of the pack in competitive success, but are vital to the health
and expansion of the activity. 

I agree with everything here (including shifting from trophies to
certificates if cost is an issue), but I wonder if an exceptional
Academic All American shouldn't be more exceptional academically,
instead of (or in addition to) competitively - perhaps a 3.8/3.9 GPA or
equivalent?

We might also want to define the first criterion with respect to the
changed eligibility rules (two years of debate, 3 tournaments each - or
perhaps increase to 3 years - including the current - and 3 tournaments
each). 

Dr. Eric Morris
Asst Prof of Communication
Director of Forensics
Craig Hall 366A
Missouri State University
Springfield, MO 65897
(O) 417-836-7636
(H) 417-865-6866
(C) 417-496-7141

-----Original Message-----
From: edebate-bounces at ndtceda.com [mailto:edebate-bounces at ndtceda.com]
On Behalf Of Jim Hanson
Sent: Wednesday, May 31, 2006 10:54 AM
To: edebate at ndtceda.com
Subject: Re: [eDebate] On reforming the CEDA All American Awards


i agree with sam but have a different take on the solution. here's what
i 
proposed to the exec committee:

the process is unnecessarily time consuming for coaches who have to fill
out 
a recommendation form and then for the committee who has to read all of 
them. it is also arbitrary. there is not a set criteria for each
committee 
member to pick their top 30. further, there are questions about how many

students from one team can receive an award, whether someone can receive
an 
all-american plus a baby jo, etc. further, limiting the awards to just
30 
restricts our recognition of some great kids.

here's my suggested solution, give all-american recognition to any
student 
who meets the following criteria:

1. has competed in ceda debate for at least 4 semesters with at least 2 
tournaments during each of those semesters.
2. for all american, has a minimum gpa of a 2.0 and has been in
elimination 
rounds at 5 or more tournaments.
3. for exceptional all american, has a minimum gpa of 2.0 and has been
in 
elimination rounds in senior division at 10 or more tournaments.
4. for academic all american, has a minimum gpa of a 3.5 and has been in

elimination rounds at 5 or more tournaments.
5. for exceptional academic all american, has a minimum gpa of a 3.5 and
has 
been in elimination rounds in senior division at 10 or more tournaments.

when submitting, the coach would state which award the student is
seeking, 
would state the student's gpa and list the tournaments where the student

advanced to elims and in what division.

allow students to receive baby jo awards in addition to all american.

have no caps on the number of students receiving recognition from any
single 
program.

use nice certificates instead of awards to save money and provide more 
flexibility since the number of recipients is going to vary more (maybe
we 
already use certificates--sorry, i'm forgetting).

jim :)
hansonjb at whitman.edu
----- Original Message ----- 
From: <Samnelson4 at aol.com>
To: <edebate at ndtceda.com>
Sent: Wednesday, May 31, 2006 6:39 AM
Subject: [eDebate] On reforming the CEDA All American Awards


My understanding is that the issue of reforming the Academic All
American
(Scholastic) Award and the All American Award will be discussed at the
CEDA
summer meeting. I have served on many committees charged with giving
these 
awards
(including last year's) and have a historical perspective I want to
share as
well as some thoughts about how to move to the future.

First the history: In the 80s and 90s, when someone was nominated for
All
American or Academic All American status they pretty much got it. The 
committee
would meet at CEDA Nationals (we usually got a round off from judging)
and 
the
CEDA Second VP would pass everyone a folder with the letters for each
category. We would take a few minutes looking it over and approve the 
nominees. This
was not difficult because we usually had less than or slightly more than
30
nominees in each category. If some school got greedy and nominated more
than 
one
person to each category and we had to make a cut we would usually take
one 
of
their nominees off the list. The idea behind the whole thing was that
this 
was
something to give (usually to seniors) to let them know that they were
appreciated. It was also used by coaches (like me) to make a big deal to
the
administration and alums that we got an "All American." I also know of
more 
than one
person who got a job because they had CEDA debate All American on their
resume. The idea was that it was "nurturing" act. It was nurturing for
the 
debater,
for the up and coming debate program, director in need of some positive 
spin,
etc. One thing that separated the NDT from CEDA, back in the day, was
that
CEDA did a lot more of this kind of nurturing thing whereas the NDT just
ran 
an
ultracompetitive tournament with ultracompetitive awards (Copeland,
etc.)

    I have been disappointed with the way the awards have went down
these
past few years. As a result of the good works of the likes of Will Baker
and 
Dave
Steinberg applicants are way up for each award. One is no longer assured
of
getting the award just by being nominated. Also, the committee no longer

meets
face to face to discuss individual cases that may be falling through the
cracks. They just vote after reading the letters online. As a committee 
member I
did not know who made the cut until after the awards ceremony. I have
seen
students that started out as true novices as first year college students

working
their way up to qualifying for the NDT as seniors and carrying a 3.9 GPA
not 
get
selected for Scholastic All American. At the same time some schools are
getting three Academic All Americans even though their GPA is
significantly 
lower.
I know of one student that literally saved her program from extinction
that
missed out on the award for who knows what reason. I think we need to 
reevaluate
the process and instill the nurturing back in it.

My recommendations:

1) Move up the deadline for submission of nominees: It was a rush this
past
year to read all the excellent letters.

2) Reestablish the face to face meeting of the committee at CEDA
Nationals 
to
stop individuals from falling through the cracks and embrace the worthy
concepts of discussion and deliberation.

3) Clarify the criteria for each award with "the spirit of nurturing" as
a
guiding principle. I reject the idea that we should have different
"classes 
or
divisions" for the award. I think an All American is an All American.
These 
are
not awards that recognize competitive success only. Whitman has plenty
of
those. I am hoping that the novice debater that starts his or her
program as 
a
student club can be recognized as an All American in the same way as
someone 
who
wins CEDA Nationals. This requires a more wholistic view of what All 
American
means.

4) Limit the number of nominees for each award to one per school. Why
get
greedy? Lets spread the wealth and good karma.

Best,

Sam Nelson,
DOF
Cornell University

_______________________________________________
eDebate mailing list
eDebate at ndtceda.com
http://www.ndtceda.com/mailman/listinfo/edebate

_______________________________________________
eDebate mailing list
eDebate at ndtceda.com
http://www.ndtceda.com/mailman/listinfo/edebate





More information about the Mailman mailing list