[eDebate] Graduation Amendment with a Caveat
Sat May 2 14:05:01 CDT 2009
I don?t what happens on the CEDA-L, so I can?t speak to any of that
Students who graduate ?early? should not be punished. Perhaps it is the
case that students graduate in four years should not be considered
graduating early and therefore eligible an additional year.
Consider the following wording (which is just an example, not meant to be
the actual wording):
?Students enrolled in graduate or professional schools associated with an
accredited university or college are permitted to participate for one full
year if, upon receipt of a bachelor?s degree from an accredited college of
university, the student has used seven or less semesters as an
undergraduate. Graduate student eligibility applies to only the first two
semesters a student is enrolled in graduate school and must occur in the two
semesters immediately following the receipt of the undergraduate degree.?
Poaching is a major danger, agreed. Generally, I believe students should
have to compete at the same university they did as an undergraduate. An
exception could be made for colleges that do not have appropriate graduate
programs. Eligibility might be determined by application for an exception
to the policy. Consider the following wording (again, just an example):
?Extended graduate student eligibility will generally only available to
students enrolled in a graduate school within the same university the
student competed with as an undergraduate. If the student?s undergraduate
institution lacks relevant graduate school opportunities the student may
receive an additional year of eligibility via one of the following methods:
a. Signed letter of release from the Director of the prior
institution delivered to the CEDA Secretary 14 days before first competition
of the next season.
b. Application for exception is made to the <Insert Relevant CEDA
committee>. The Director of the prior institution may recommend for or
against an exception.?
I like this version of the rule because it puts an onus on the Director of
the program to make the call. I know that in debate there is a lot passive
aggressiveness about this sort of thing, but I think that Director?s should
be able to say (as schools and ADs do the NCAA), ?Yes, I will give you this
release? or ?No, I will not.?
I also think that graduate students should have the limitation of competing
in a certain graduate school made clear them. At KU, my guess is, it would
not be considered appropriate for a graduate student to compete while in
enrolled in the program. It is, at least partially, the privilege of
graduate programs to outline the responsibilities of students in relation to
competition. Some of the graduate programs won?t like it or will prohibit
it. That?s the graduate programs call.
Re: Graduate student judging graduate students.
If you choose to debate is graduate school, you are choosing to let graduate
students and even potentially ineligible or retired undergraduate students
judge you. In our community is normal and necessary for those without a BA
to judge. This isn?t must different from that. Choose to debate and choose
to submit yourself to the judgment of the audience that exists.
By the way, I find some of this discussion about graduate student
eligibility a bit silly in a world where we rarely enforce undergraduate
eligibility rules. Every single person on the list knows that ineligible
undergraduate (a) gain CEDA and NDT point for their squad, (b) prevent
eligible students from earning points for their squads or advancing in
tournaments by defeating them competition, (c) sometimes even manage to
compete at national tournaments, I wonder whether rule-making of this sort
really matters in a world where we don?t do much to enforce the rules as
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the Mailman