[eDebate] 5 years/Grad school debate

Richard A. Garner richardgarner
Wed May 6 21:29:33 CDT 2009

What Liz said.

On Wed, May 6, 2009 at 10:26 AM, Liz Kim <ekim711 at gmail.com> wrote:

> I don't really care about whether or not students get to debate for five
> years, but frankly I'm a little surprised that the movement to allow
> debaters a fifth year has become the focus of how to best encourage more
> participation, or perhaps better participation in debate. This is even worse
> if the grad school amendment is meant to be purely a question of fairness.
> If we're going to allow grad students to debate, and even debate at a
> different school than they attended undergrad for, we should repeal or at
> least significantly amend the hybrid rule first. There isn't much excuse for
> saying "oh it's ok for a grad student to debate at a different program
> because his/her undergrad school doesn't have a graduate program" but then
> saying that "debaters who attend colleges without established debate
> programs have no right to go to the NDT with another team." By the hybrid
> rule logic, grad students should be excluded from debating another year if
> they "choose" to go to an undergrad institution without graduate
> programs.The student first, debater second argument also supports
> significant changes to the hybrid rule. Yes, I chose to go to a college that
> hasn't had a debate team since the '60s and despite my best attempts to find
> a partner and restart a program, the only way I could participate was to
> debate with Harvard. The choice that I make in my academic interest however,
> shouldn't deny me the opportunity to compete at the NDT. Yes, every choice
> that I make, including where I go to college, will trade off with something
> else - but that trade off can occur in the extra time it takes me to commute
> to debate meetings at a different university, or even the inherent
> difficulty in debating with another school rather than denying hybrid
> debaters a chance to compete at the NDT.  Unlike the grad school amendment
> which would only extend a debaters' time to compete, changing the hybrid
> rule would encourage new students to debate, even if they couldn't find a
> partner at their own school. Obviously there are a variety of arguments for
> and against amending the hybrid rule, but there isn't much justification for
> allowing grad students to debate and have another NDT when some undergrad
> students don't even get the chance to qualify.
> How about the community deals with a discriminatory rule that discourages
> participation and team-building before trying to make sure debaters who
> already had multiple opportunities to attend the NDT get one more shot.
> _______________________________________________
> eDebate mailing list
> eDebate at www.ndtceda.com
> http://www.ndtceda.com/mailman/listinfo/edebate
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://www.ndtceda.com/pipermail/edebate/attachments/20090506/cb0d9fac/attachment.htm 

More information about the Mailman mailing list