[eDebate] Awards Amendment on the CEDA Ballot
Fri Jul 3 02:38:54 CDT 2009
I respectfully agree with justin.
scholastic all-american is what it should be called (for the reasons justin
notes below--not to mention continuity--they are something I advertise).
further, the current criteria is better than the suggested new one (the new
one requires junior standing instead of sophomore--cutting out community
college debaters; personally, I would have it say "competed at least two
years counting the current year"--as it should reward students who are
committed to the activity--not who just make it to their junior or even
sophomore year in school).
public advocate award good idea. separating it out, I would support
that--but not with the change in the scholastic all-american.
hansonjb at whitman.edu
From: "Justin Green" <jmgreen at ksu.edu>
Sent: Thursday, July 02, 2009 8:45 PM
To: <edebate at ndtceda.com>
Subject: [eDebate] Awards Amendment on the CEDA Ballot
After reading the new amendment on the ballot, there appear to be two
major changes. Let me preface the rest of this post with a note that
it is highly likely that I am missing other changes. To intentionally
sound like a broken record, I would appreciate the advocate(s) of this
amendment to speak-out on its behalf.
First, the addition of the Public Advocate Award. While somewhat
vague, I think this is a good idea. I am not sure who we would
nominate and it could bring some marginal notoriety to CEDA as well as
honoring someone who might be worthwhile.
Second, the change from "Scholastic All-Americans" to "National Debate
Scholar". I am vehemently opposed to this amendment. To say that any
debater is a "National Debate Scholar" appears redundant. After
winning the award, we would have to explain "this is the equivalent of
being an Academic All American".This change undermines the ability of
our squad to go to our administration and publicize the combination of
competitive and academic successes. Our Department Chair, Dean,
President, School Paper, and numerous professors picked up on the fact
that we had 6 debaters of various Scholastic All-American
distinctions. I hope that other squads were able to do the same. As
a Director who requires their squad members maintain a 3.0 GPA or else
face probation, this was both re-assuring and valuable to the
political capital of our squad. While I agree with the change in the
amendment that increases the GPA to achieve the highest rank, the name
change hinders our efforts in on-campus lobbying.
As of now, KSU will vote no to this amendment. The addition of a
Public Advocate Award will unfortunately not overwhelm the advocacy
benefits our squad derives from the label "Scholastic All-American".
As an aside...Rather than lump all of the changes in the awards into
one amendment, it might better allow the community to express their
interest and more readily see the changes, if the different decisions
within the amendment were separated as separate votes.
Looking forward to further discussion,
eDebate mailing list
eDebate at www.ndtceda.com
More information about the Mailman