[eDebate] the good old days?
Tue Oct 16 14:09:56 CDT 2007
I support the Chief in this endeavor. He is absolutely right, the novice and JV divisions do get leftovers. I'm on of those that roughed it through and learned to debate in college and believe me, I debated in front of a lot of "leftovers." Don't get me wrong, I debated in front of a lot of people that I, supposedly, wasn't supposed to (read GOOD JUDGES), but a lot of the times I ended up with people that I now question as being good judges.....at tournaments where the Varsity/Open division had MPJ.
I also think it's important to support Novice/JV Nationals. I don't know who is scheduled to host this year (Towson, WVU, Georgetown???), but I believe that it is a good and well-deserved endeavor. Novice and JV competitors are often made to feel like second-class citizens of the debate community and supporting THEIR national championship really (in my own experience) boosts the want/need/drive to participate in the activity.
I'm always blown away at the outpouring of novice debate from D7, D1, Rochester, Liberty, Vermont....the list goes on and on of the programs and districts/regions that put emphasis on novice/jv participation, however, we also lose site of the fact that these debaters 1) want to be in the community and 2) want to feel like their efforts are every bit important as the team that clears at CEDA.
Yes, NDT qualifiers and debaters of that caliber do "harder" work, make better arguments, and generally have a better overall performance. However, the only thing separating an NDT finalist and a novice debater is a few years of experience.
Note, I'm not making "elitist" arguments. I think the NDT is a great institution and I'm jacked up about going again. I just think that the Chief is right in that novice/jv debaters get forgotten about in the area of "fair play."
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the Mailman