[eDebate] MPJ and Comments

Morris, Eric R EricMorris
Tue Nov 21 17:28:09 CST 2006


"Policy debate is becoming more obscure, more exclusionary and more
elitist with every passing year."

I suppose that's one way to describe this year, although there's
probably a good case for the opposite when you look at who's doing well.

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 www.ndtceda.com
[mailto:edebate-bounces at www.ndtceda.com] On Behalf Of
scottelliott at grandecom.net
Sent: Tuesday, November 21, 2006 2:01 PM
To: edebate at ndtceda.com
Subject: [eDebate] MPJ and Comments

I have been opposed to MPJ for years. the primary reason is that MPJ
allows
those who know the least to make the decisions at debate tournaments. My
reasonable guess is that debaters chose judges in the following order
(1)
judges witha  "reputation"  that fits their style (2) people they hang
out with
or debated against the previous year who are "cool," and (3) point
fairies.
Heaven forbid someone a 20 year old kid has never heard of shows up to
judge a
tournament--even if that person was a great debater in his or her own
right, or
was a good coach.

If we accept the premise that a person with a college degree and an open
mind
should be able to evaluate a debate round, then we should be willing to
get rid
of mpj. But, unfortuantely, the same forces that merged NDT and CEDA--to
the
demise of many regional debate programs, control the major tournmaments,
and
the judging assignments. Its a self-perpetuating cycle that sucks.
Policy
debate is becoming more obscure, more exclusionary and more elitist with
every
passing year. And, I do not think it is a good thing.

Scott


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



More information about the Mailman mailing list