[eDebate] Graduation Amendment with a Caveat

Michael Souders micksouders
Thu Apr 30 10:26:08 CDT 2009


Phil is obviously right about this.  The current structure punishes those
who perform well academically and create a disincentive for graduation  And,
of course, "graduate school" should be interpreted to also include any
professional schools (medical school, law school, business school) or
accredited certificate programs (women's or gender studies certificates, for
example) that are not necessarily attached to the university graduate
school.


However, I do think some of the wording might need changing.  The current
wording would seem to allow graduate students to begin debating in graduate
school and functionally debate for five years, unless I am mistaken--or,
more commonly, to graduate after three years (having attended only two CEDA
Nationals) and then compete for two more years in graduate school.  I tend
to think that graduate students should be limited to one year of additional
competition after receiving an undergraduate degree.  No one wants fifth
year Ph.D students competing against 18 year old undergraduates.  And
perhaps more realistically, debate should not be competing with students's
abilities to work on MA theses, L2 studies, etc.  We all know debate can be
all-consuming, let's not make a system that gets our students more
undergraduate degrees (a good thing) but torpedoes their graduate work (a
bad thing).

Students need to make choices for themselves, but we shouldn't incentivize
them not working on their thesis or graduate course work.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://www.ndtceda.com/pipermail/edebate/attachments/20090430/f577afcc/attachment.htm 



More information about the Mailman mailing list