Issuu on Google+

Rostrum A PUBLICATION OF THE NATIONAL SPEECH & DEBATE ASSOCIATION

The Power of Speech & Debate INSIDE THIS ISSUE Changing School Culture Through Speech and Debate Buzz Bingo: The Art of Oracy 2015-16 Policy Debate Topic Overview

PLUS

#NATS15 PREVIEW

VOLUME 89 ISSUE 4 SPRING 2015


July 5 - 16, 2015

WKU team members, and former National Speech & Debate Tournament finalists, Austin Groves, Mark Allseits, Blake Knapp, Brent O’Connor, Lily Nellans, Jamaque Newberry, Carolyn Evans, Ian Dowty, Sam Moore, John Reynolds, Lyric Davis, Lataya Williams, and Darius Wilson.

THE NEW WKU SUMMER FORENSIC INSTITUTE We are excited to announce that WKU Forensics is expanding the SFI camp experience, offering 5 additional days of instruction to our traditional week of intensive study. We provide instruction in all major interpretation and limited preparation events, original oratory, public forum and congressional debate. Tuition includes all meals, dorm fees, and instructional material. WKU’s SFI challenges students to become the very best and then gives them the tools needed to be champions. If you want to compete like a champion, you need to work with the champions at WKU’s SFI !

Resident Commuter

full session (July 5 - 16) one-week intensive (July 5 - 11) $1200 $700 $600 $300 Application Deadline: June 29, 2015

Take advatange of early registration! Discounted rates if you register by June 1! Sending five or more students from the same school? Contact us for info on discounts for schools sending multiple students!

For more information, contact Ganer Newman - ganer.newman@wku.edu - 270-745-6340 WKU Forensics; 1906 College Heights Blvd. #51084; Bowling Green, KY 42101-1084 www.wkuforensics.com | Follow us on Twitter: @wkuforensics


The University of Texas National Institute in Forensics is one of the largest and most successful summer The University of Texas National Institute in Forensics is one of the largest and most successful summer speech and debate workshops in the country. UTNIF has a reputation for engaging students from across the speech and debate workshops in the country. UTNIF has a reputation for engaging students from across the nation in the kind of training that leads rather than follows performative and argumentative trends. Once nation in the kind of training that leads rather than follows performative and argumentative trends. Once again, UTNIF our 2015 2015 students students the the opportunity opportunity to to learn learn from fromand andwith withaatop-notch, top-notch,nationally nationally again, UTNIF will will offer offer our acclaimed teaching staff. UTNIF students have won championships and final rounds at the National acclaimed teaching staff. UTNIF students have won championships and final rounds at the National Speech Extemp,tournament HumorousinInterp, Dramatic Interp, Poetry, the House, thePoetry, Senate, Speech & andDebate DebateTournament Associationinnational Extemp, Humorous Interp, Dramatic Interp, Policy Debate, Public Forum, and more. Join us this summer and see for yourself why UTNIF has made the House, the Senate, Policy Debate, Public Forum, and more. Our students consistently excel at the TOC such an impact Join on speech debate education for overwhy 20 years. and NIETOC. us thisand summer and see for yourself UTNIF has made such an impact on speech and debate education for over 20 years.

2015 UTNIF Program Dates Individual Events

June 27 – July 11

Individual Events with extension

June 27 – July 15

CX 6 Week Summer Survivors

June 25 – August 6

CX Session 1 (Skills Intensive, Advanced Topic Intensive, Sophomore Select) CX Session 2 (Skills Intensive, Advanced Topic Intensive, Novice) Public Forum (all skill levels accommodated)

June 25 – July 15 July 17 – August 6 June 26 – July 11

Lincoln-Douglas (all skill levels accommodated)

July 18 – August 1

Lincoln-Douglas with extension

July 18 – August 5

For complete information on UTNIF Individual Events workshops, please visit www.utspeech.net For complete UTNIF debate camp information, please visit www.utdebatecamp.com UTNIF Contact: jvreed@austin.utexas.edu


T h e S p i r i T o f e n g ag e d e xc e l l e n c e

I want real world experience. The Honors College is helping Sierra reach her professional goals. With a major in Communication Disorders and a minor in American Sign Language, coupled with a sincere desire to help others, she demonstrates what is possible at WKU. Sierra FieldS Morgantown, KY

www.wku.edu/honors facebook.com/wkuhonors @wkuhonors @wkuhonors


In this Issue

www.speechanddebate.org

: Volume 89 : Issue 4 : SPRING 2015

Features

Inside

26

Building Community: Success Stories

4

From the Editor

30

Changing School Culture through Speech and Debate: Measuring the Impact on Academic Achievement by Kurt Fifelski, M.P.A.

5

2014-15 Topics

40

From Our Community

40

What We’re Reading

Buzz Bingo: The Art of Oracy

70

Alumni Spotlight: Vikrum Dave Aiyer

74

District in Detail: Colorado Grande

78

Diamond Coach Recognition

34

by Pam McComas and Gail Naylor 41

To the Class of 2015 by Josh Gellers, Ph.D.

42

Before You Quit Teaching, Please Reconsider by Melissa Witt

44

Get With the Program: Popular Webinars of 2014-15

85

Donus D. Roberts Quad Ruby Coach Recognition

45

Making Memories with USA Debate

88

46

2015-16 Policy Debate Topic Overview

Coach Profile: Rep. Susan B. McLain

92

Academic All Americans

94

Student Service Citations

by Stefan Bauschard

National Tournament Preview 8

Overview of High School Tournament Logistics

10

Dallas Hotel Guide

12

Dallas Transportation Guide

16

National Tournament FAQ Sheet

18

Overview of Middle School Tournament Logistics

21

Tips for Taking Your Middle School Students to Nationals by Rachel Warnecke

103 Welcome New Schools 111

Top 50 Districts

Like us on Facebook /speechanddebate Share with us on Instagram /speechanddebate Follow us on Twitter @speechanddebate

Rostrum | SPRING 2015 3


From the Editor

Board of Directors

Whether your team is winding down from months of competition, or you are busy ramping up to attend the National Speech & Debate Tournament in a few short weeks—this issue is packed with insightful articles to round out the current school year and kick off a great summer. For anyone involved in our activity, you know first-hand the power of speech and debate. This month, we celebrate some of the countless leaders who have made a huge impact in your local communities through speech and debate activities. From dedicated alumni and communicators to principals and volunteers, you have shown that community-building at the district level is robust and thriving!

Pam Cady Wycoff, Vice President Apple Valley High School 14450 Hayes Road Apple Valley, MN 55124-6796 (952) 431-8200 Pam.Wycoff@district196.org

Renowned Kansas coaches Pam McComas and Gail Naylor walk us through the importance of oracy, and encourage each and every one of us to move beyond the “buzz” of academic jargon in order to make a meaningful impact in our classrooms and beyond. In addition, following a membership survey this winter, we take a closer look at high school graduation rates in order to measure the impact speech and debate has on academic achievement.

Polly Reikowski, Ph.D., Admin Rep Eagan High School 4185 Braddock Trail Eagan, MN 55123 (651) 683-6902 polly.reikowski@district196.org

You’ll hear from an impassioned Texas coach who pleads with other educators to remain in the teaching profession, even in the face of doubt or adversity. And Stefan Bauschard provides an excellent overview of the 2015-16 Policy Debate topic. His essay will be sure to get you and your students primed for another competitive debate season this fall.

Kandi King 6058 Gaelic San Antonio, TX 78240 (210) 641-6761 mamakjking@yahoo.com

On behalf of everyone at the National Speech & Debate Association, I want to thank you for another memorable year! We are honored to work alongside you as we fulfill our mission of giving youth a voice. Together, we are honoring the past and and creating bright futures. Sincerely,

Rostrum A PUBLICATION OF THE NATIONAL SPEECH & DEBATE ASSOCIATION 125 Watson Street | PO Box 38 | Ripon, WI 54971-0038 | Phone (920) 748-6206 | Fax (920) 748-9478

J. Scott Wunn, Editor and Publisher Vicki Pape, Assistant Editor Emily Bratton, Graphic Design Assistant

SUBSCRIPTION PRICES Individuals: $10 for one year | $15 for two years Member Schools: $15 for each additional subscription

(USPS 471-180) (ISSN 1073-5526) Rostrum is published quarterly (Summer, Fall, Winter, and Spring) by the National Speech & Debate Association, 125 Watson Street, PO Box 38, Ripon, WI 54971. Periodical postage paid at Ripon, WI 54971. POSTMASTER: Send address changes to National Speech & Debate Association, 125 Watson Street, PO Box 38, Ripon, WI 54971. Rostrum provides a forum for the speech and debate community. The opinions expressed by contributors are their own and not necessarily the opinions of the Association, its officers, or its members. The National Speech & Debate Association does not guarantee advertised products and services unless sold directly by the Association.

Rostrum | SPRING 2015

Tommie Lindsey, Jr. James Logan High School 1800 H Street Union City, CA 94587 (510) 471-2520, Ext. 4408 tlindsey@nhusd.k12.ca.us Pamela K. McComas PO Box 5078 Topeka, KS 66605 (785) 231-7414 pmcco@cox.net

J. Scott Wunn Executive Director National Speech & Debate Association

4

Don Crabtree, President Park Hill High School 1909 6th Avenue St. Joseph, MO 64505 (816) 261-2661 crabnfl@gmail.com

David Huston Colleyville Heritage High School 5401 Heritage Avenue Colleyville, TX 76034 (817) 305-4700, Ext. 214 david.huston@gcisd.net James W. “Jay” Rye, III The Montgomery Academy 3240 Vaughn Road Montgomery, AL 36106 (334) 272-8210 jay_rye@montgomeryacademy.org Jennifer Jerome Millard West High School 5710 S. 176th Avenue Omaha, NE 68135 (402) 715-6000 (school office) (402) 715-6092 (classroom) jjerome1984@gmail.com


www.speechanddebate.org

2014–2015

Current topics and resources are available at:

Topics

www.speechanddebate.org/topics

2015 National tournament

Public Forum Debate

2015 National tournament

Resolution will be released May 1, 2015 at www.speechanddebate.org/topics.

Congressional Debate Legislation The national office will release a docket on May 10, 2015, which contains 25 preliminary legislation, 12 semifinal legislation, and 6 final legislation. There will be no Alpha or Omega dockets; chambers will set their agenda (order of business) prior to debating.

2015 National tournament

Lincoln-Douglas Debate Resolution will be released May 1, 2015 at www.speechanddebate.org/topics.

2015 National tournament

2014–2015

Extemp Areas for IX, USX, Commentary

Policy Debate

Topic areas will be released May 1, 2015 at www.speechanddebate.org/topics.

Resolved: The United States federal government should substantially increase its non-military exploration and/or development of the Earth’s oceans.

2015 USA INVITATIONAL

World Schools Debate Prepared motions will be released May 1, 2015 at www.speechanddebate.org/topics.

2015 National tournament

Storytelling Any Theme

Coaches and Students: We need your input! The PF and LD Topic Wording Committees are seeking PF topic areas and LD resolutions for the 2015-16 school year. Access the online submission forms by visiting our website: www.speechanddebate.org/topics.

Submission deadline is May 15.

Rostrum | SPRING 2015 5


Logo Pin/Key

National Qualifier Pin

Honor Cords Graduation Pin

SHOW YOUR ACHIEVEMENT! With graduation just around the corner, there has never been a better time to buy insignia items from the National Speech & Debate Association Online Store!

store.speechanddebate.org


**Check out our amazing 2014 Patriot Games Classic Tournament**

Camp Information : Regular Session:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s9Gd1TPqeUY

George Mason Institute of Forensics

July 12-25th, 2015

Extension Session: July 25-28th, 2015

For More Information about GMIF or The Mason Team gmif.gmuforensics.org team.gmuforensics.org or Assistant Director of Forensics

Jeremy Hodgson jhodgso1@gmu.edu

GMIF ALUMNI DOING AMAZING THINGS: GMIF students have traveled across the country competing at large tournaments that include: NSDA, NCFL, NIETOC, Extemp TOC, Wake Forest, Yale, St. Marks, Villiger, Blue Key, Glenbrooks, New York City Invitational, and The Patriot Games Classic resulting in:

18 Champions 77 Finalists 91 Semifinalists 108 Quarterfinalists

GMU- YOU KNOW!!!


National Speech & Debate Tournament

JUNE 14-19, 2015 • DALLAS, TEXAS OVERVIEW OF HIGH SCHOOL TOURNAMENT LOGISTICS

SUNDay • JUNE 14 (Registration) Tournament registration and the expo will take place Sunday, June 14, from 8:00 a.m. to 4:00 p.m. in the Lone Star Ballroom of the Sheraton Dallas Hotel. The Sheraton also serves as the host hotel for the tournament. MONDAY and tuesday • JUNE 15-16 (Prelim Rounds/Early Elims/Local Host Posting Party) All preliminary competition of Policy Debate, Public Forum Debate, Lincoln-Douglas Debate, Congressional Debate, Humorous Interp, Dramatic Interp, Duo Interp, Original Oratory, United States Extemp, and International Extemp will be held at the Sheraton Dallas Hotel. Preliminary rounds of World Schools Debate will be held at the Crowne Plaza Hotel nearby. All preliminary competition and early elimination competition will occur between 7:30 a.m. and 8:00 p.m. on Monday and Tuesday. The local host posting party will take place Tuesday evening at Gilley’s Dallas downtown. Gilley’s is accessible by DART rail from any of the Association block hotels. Students eliminated from main event competition on Tuesday will re-register for the Wednesday supplemental events at the local host posting party. WEDNESDAY • JUNE 17 (Elim Rounds/Supplemental Events) All main event elimination and supplemental speech event rounds will be held at the Sheraton Dallas Hotel between 7:30 a.m. and 8:00 p.m. Extemporaneous Debate rounds will be held at the Crowne Plaza Hotel nearby. Those students eliminated from main event competition or supplemental events will be allowed to re-register for Thursday consolation events throughout the day at the Sheraton (if pre-registered.) THURSDAY • JUNE 18 (Elim Rounds/Supp-Cons Events/Interp Finals/Diamond Awards) Thursday morning, all elimination competition will continue at the Sheraton Dallas Hotel with the addition of consolation events. Extemporaneous Debate will continue at the Crowne Plaza Hotel nearby. Congress finals will be held throughout the day. Thursday evening, attendees will enjoy the national final rounds of Humorous, Dramatic, and Duo Interpretation, as well as the Donus D. Roberts Diamond Assembly, in the Lone Star Ballroom of the Sheraton Dallas Hotel. FRIDAY • JUNE 19 (Supp-Cons/Main Event Finals and National Awards Assembly) The remaining main event final rounds (Original Oratory, United States Extemp, International Extemp, Lincoln-Douglas Debate, Policy Debate, and Public Forum Debate), as well as supplemental and consolation event finals, will be held throughout the day on Friday at the Sheraton Dallas Hotel.

The National Speech & Debate Association (National Forensic League) has appeared on the approved list of the National Association of Secondary School Principals (NASSP) National Advisory List of Contests and Activities since origination of the list. 8

Rostrum | SPRING 2015


www.speechanddebate.org

Downtown Dallas will be an excellent location for the 2015 National Speech & Debate Tournament. To make planning easier, we have provided an overview of key logistics. Please refer to the following pages for essential venue and lodging information. Keep in mind that all details are tentative and subject to change.

IMPORTANT CONSIDERATIONS WHEN SELECTING AND RESERVING HOTELS

Please read before selecting lodging. Tournament Hotel » The official tournament hotel is the Sheraton Dallas Hotel. All schools should attempt to book rooms at this property first. Staying at this property will be the most convenient and cost effective way to enjoy the 2015 National Tournament. Do not delay in booking this property, as space is limited! Additional Block Hotels » We anticipate that the Sheraton Dallas Hotel block will fill quickly. Although the Sheraton is the best option, the Association has negotiated other excellent hotel options for schools that book after the Sheraton fills. It is essential that schools stay downtown at the Sheraton or one of the other recommended hotel properties. Morning and afternoon traffic jams will make commuting from non-recommended properties a very difficult task and could result in major issues for your team. In addition, the Association only has contracts with those properties listed and will not be able to assist you with issues in hotels outside the block. DO NOT STAY OUTSIDE THE HOTEL BLOCK. Benefits of Staying in the Block of Hotels » Schools will find several major benefits to staying in the Association’s recommended block of hotel rooms. Avoid the Cost of Vehicle Rental: All competition is being held at the Sheraton Dallas Hotel. The Sheraton can be accessed by DART rail from all recommended hotel properties and Love Field. A discounted rate has been negotiated with SuperShuttle, making transportation from DFW easy and affordable, rendering a rental vehicle unnecessary. Free Internet Access at Sheraton: All attendees who are lodging in an Association block hotel will receive free access to the Internet at the Sheraton Dallas Hotel. Easy Tournament Accessibility: Staying in the tournament hotel or within the Association block will avoid the risk of delays or major inconveniences related to traffic and morning parking. Easy Access to Meal Options and Special Events: The tournament hotel is the site of registration, all competition, the final rounds, and awards. There is a food court adjacent to the Sheraton and Marriott. There is a DART stop on site providing the best possible access to the opening ceremony, and the local host posting party. All Association block hotels sit near DART stops to provide access to all events and restaurants. Note » When calling hotels, all coaches must mention the “National Speech & Debate Association and/or National Forensic League block.” All room reservations within the Association block are subject to an automatic nonrefundable two-night deposit per room at the time of booking or upon cancellation, depending on the property. This avoids double booking and allows all attendees equal opportunity to book in the best available properties.

Additional tournament information will be available at www.speechanddebate.org/nationals. Rostrum | SPRING 2015 9


Sheraton

Crowne Plaza

Marriott

SpringHill Suites

Fairmont

Hotel Indigo

Holiday Inn

DoubleTree

For our interactive Google map, visit www.speechanddebate.org/nationals. 10

Rostrum | SPRING 2015

Aloft


www.speechanddebate.org

HOTEL GUIDE • DALLAS NATIONALS Booking Tip – For prompt service, mention the "National Speech & Debate Association and/or National Forensic League block" (or the Group Code noted below) when reserving your rooms to receive the advertised rate for the National Speech & Debate Tournament. All room reservations within the block are subject to an automatic non-refundable two-night deposit per room at the time of booking or upon cancellation, depending on the property.

AMENITIES LEGEND

CB = Complimentary Breakfast | CI = Complimentary Internet | GL = Guest Laundry | IP = Indoor Pool | OP = Outdoor Pool

Sheraton Dallas Hotel 400 North Olive Street, Dallas, TX 75201 Phone: (214) 922-8000 DART Station: PEARL Amenities: FC, OP, R

SpringHill Suites Dallas Downtown/West End Rate: $119

www.starwoodmeeting.com/StarGroupsWeb/ res?id=1501305740&key=23A7D12F NOTE: The Sheraton Dallas Hotel requires a minimum five-night stay. If you cancel your reservation, the two-night, non-refundable fee per room will be charged at the time of cancellation.

Dallas Marriott Suites Medical/Market Center * Best Availability * 2493 North Stemmons Freeway, Dallas, TX 75207 Phone: (214) 905-0050 DART Station: MARKET CENTER Amenities: CI, FC, OP, R

Rate: $139

Rate: $110

Hotel Indigo Dallas 1933 Main Street, Dallas, TX 75201 Phone: (877) 846-3446 DART Station: ST. PAUL Amenities: CI, FC, GL Group Code: NFL

Rate: $120

www.hotelindigo.com/dallastx

www.starwoodhotels.com/alofthotels

Crowne Plaza Hotel Dallas Downtown

Group Code: NS5 www.dallasparkcitieshotel.com

DoubleTree by Hilton Hotel Dallas - Campbell Centre

www.dallascampbellcentre.doubletree.com

www.marriott.com/hotels/travel/dalwe-springhill-suites-dallasdowntown-west-end

1033 Young Street, Dallas, TX 75202 Phone: (214) 761-0000 Rate: $119 king/$109 queen DART Station: AKARD Amenities: CI, FC, OP, R

Holiday Inn Dallas Central - Park Cities

* Best Availability * 8250 North Central Expy, Dallas, TX 75206 Phone: (214) 691-8700 DART Station: PARK LANE or LOVERS LANE Amenities: Free shuttle from DART, FC, OP, R Group Code: NDT

1907 North Lamar Street, Dallas, TX 75202 Phone: (214) 999-0500 Rate: $124 DART Station: WEST END Amenities: Shuttle service (not on weekends), CB, CI, FC, OP Group Code: NFLN

Aloft Dallas Downtown

http://goo.gl/g942Xk

* Best Availability * 6070 North Central Expy, Dallas, TX 75206 Phone: (888) 983-5012 DART Station: MOCKINGBIRD Amenities: CI, FC, OP

FC = Fitness Center | R = Restaurant

Rate: $100

1015 Elm Street, Dallas, TX 75202 Rate: $119 Phone: (214) 742-5678 DART Station: WEST END Amenities: Free shuttle to Sheraton, CI, FC, GL, OP www.ichotelsgroup.com

The Fairmont Dallas 1717 North Akard Street, Dallas, TX 75201 Phone: (214) 720-2020 DART Station: AKARD Amenities: CI, FC, OP, R

Rate: $119

https://resweb.passkey.com/go/natforleague

For our interactive Google map, visit www.speechanddebate.org/nationals. Rostrum | SPRING 2015 11


TRANSPORTATION GUIDE • DALLAS NATIONALS

Hertz is the Association's official rental car company. Whether you make reservations through hertz.com, a travel agency, or global online travel sites such as Orbitz, Travelocity, etc., use the Association account code below. Some restrictions may apply. For more information, call 1-800-654-2240 or visit hertz.com today.

CV # 04JZ0006

See you in June! Additional tournament information will be available at www.speechanddebate.org/nationals. 12

Rostrum | SPRING 2015


www.speechanddebate.org

TRANSPORTATION GUIDE • DALLAS NATIONALS

Receive discounts off your flight when you book online with recommended carriers. Some restrictions may apply.

www.Delta.com Meeting Event Code:

NMLBX

www.swabiz.com Company ID:

99564651

Dallas/Fort Worth International Airport

3200 E. Airfield Drive, DFW Airport, TX 75261

8008 Cedar Springs Road, Dallas, TX 75235

www.United.com Offer Code:

ZUS8620976

Dallas Love Field Airport

Additional tournament information will be available at www.speechanddebate.org/nationals. Rostrum | SPRING 2015 13


WORLD SCHOOLS DEBATE • TOURNAMENT LOGISTICS Entries • World Schools teams are comprised of three to five students. The cost of entry is $50 per student. • Each National Speech & Debate Association district may automatically enter one team to the National Tournament. • Each Association district may enter a second team to a wait list to be considered for a spot, space permitting. (Note: The second team may have the same coach as the first team, but you will need to provide a second judge.) • Guest nations may enter teams, as well. Judges • Each team must furnish one judge. The judge may not be entered into any other judging pool at the National Speech & Debate Tournament. • There are no hired judges available. • Judges must attend judge training on Sunday! Motions • There will be a mixture of prepared and impromptu motions for the competition. • Prepared motions will be announced by May 1, 2015. Tentative Schedule Sunday

Training/Workshops

Monday

A Practice Round and Preliminary Rounds (3)

Tuesday

Preliminary Rounds (3)

Wednesday

Begin Single-Elimination (Doubles/Octos/Quarters)

Thursday

Semifinals and Finals

Friday

Additional educational sessions on World Schools Debate

Supplemental and Consolation Events • Teams who do not advance to the single-elimination rounds are eligible to enter in supplemental events if pre-registered. Teams must re-register during the local host posting party Tuesday evening. • Teams who do not advance to Thursday’s rounds may enter in consolation events if pre-registered. Teams must re-register Wednesday evening.

Additional tournament information will be available at www.speechanddebate.org/nationals. 14

Rostrum | SPRING 2015


Nationals Tees! Available for Pre-Order

Pre-Order your 2015 National Speech & Debate Tournament T-shirt during online registration OR at store.speechanddebate.org.

Order by May 1, 2015 • $14 (S-XL) • $16 (2XL-3XL) *Limited quantities will be available at the tournament. Pre-order to make sure you get the size you need!


FAQ SHEET What is the Sheraton room rate, and is quad occupancy allowed? The Association has negotiated a flat rate of $119 per room per night with up to quad occupancy. The majority of the room block is made up of double-double rooms. Does the room rate include tax? No. All Dallas area hotels will include a 15% tax. What is the cost of parking at the Sheraton complex? The parking rate for all Sheraton hotel guests is $7 per day. Non-hotel guests will be charged $15 per day. All parking fees at the Sheraton include in and out privileges. The other Association block hotel properties are within either walking distance or a short DART rail ride to and from the Sheraton. These properties are also providing some discounted parking rates for guests. Are there any upgraded rooms available? Yes. A limited number of suites are available in the block. The rate for these rooms is slightly higher. How will airport transportation work? The Association has arranged reduced rates with SuperShuttle Vans from the DFW airport to all downtown Dallas area hotels. Attendees will receive $2 off one-way tickets or $5 off round-trip tickets. Visit www.supershuttle.com/default.aspx?GC=NNAXB to reserve your reservation online. Be sure to use group code “NNAXB.” In addition, the DART can be taken from DFW or Love Field (Southwest Airline hub) for $2.50 per person. How will the public transit system(s) work? DART (Dallas Area Rail Transport) is the “above ground” subway system in Dallas. It is clean and secure. There is a stop outside the Sheraton and it connects participants to all of the tournament properties, special event venues, and other downtown and regional establishments. Will you be providing free WiFi for all of your guests during this event? Free WiFi is available to all guests of Association block hotels in the National Tournament Internet Café.

16

Rostrum | SPRING 2015

Will pre-purchased meal options be available? Yes. Affordable, pre-purchased meals are available during the online tournament registration process. Students and coaches with pre-purchased meals will receive fast and convenient meal service during very busy competition time periods. Are there ample restaurants available in the area to accommodate large crowds of people? The prepurchased meal options will be the most convenient and timely option for lunch. The Sheraton and surrounding food establishments have accommodated crowds of this magnitude in the past. In addition to the on-site eating options, there is a 15-restaurant food court adjacent to the hotel in the Plaza of Americas and a variety of eating establishments in the West End, which are accessible within two stops on the DART. Other restaurants are within walking distance of the hotel. Will the elevators be able to accommodate such a large group of people? The hotel routinely accommodates this type of hotel use for large groups. Several banks of elevators are targeted to specific floors, making the process easier for guests. In addition, the hotel is equipped with a backup elevator system in case of emergencies. Finally, all of the competitors will have their schedules well in advance and will have plenty of time to get to their rounds, especially if they are hotel guests. Adult volunteers will help monitor elevator use during competition. Will there be a location to store tubs in the evenings? Yes. Overnight tub storage will be arranged at the Sheraton Dallas Hotel. Specific instructions will be provided at registration. Just how hot is it in Texas in June? Texas does get hot in the summer, but June is the mildest month. Dallas highs are typically in the mid-90s. Most natives don’t feel too much of the heat though buildings are cooled most of the year. Public buildings, like hotels, can actually be chilly; it’s not unusual to see someone carrying a light sweater or jacket into a hotel, theater, or restaurant.


Student Party

And Supplemental Re-registration

Tuesday, June 16, 2015 Karaoke

Dj s

Line Dancing

Pool Tables

Games and More!

Food and Fun for all!


MIDDLE SCHOOL TOURNAMENT LOGISTICS

Middle School Details!

Please Read Before Selecting Lodging!

Tentative Schedule TUESDAY • JUNE 16

Please read the information for

Registration will be held from 6:00 p.m. to 9:00 p.m. at the Sheraton Dallas Hotel.

high school coaches, relative to

Wednesday • June 17 Middle school competition will take place at the Sheraton Dallas Hotel. Rounds begin at 8:00 a.m. and last until 6:00 p.m. Time has been built in for lunch.

Please mention the “National

Thursday • June 18 Middle school competition continues at the Sheraton Dallas Hotel. Rounds begin at 8:00 a.m. and last until 7:00 p.m.

League block” when booking

Friday • June 19 Starting at 8:00 a.m., final rounds of Speech, Policy, and Congress, as well as semifinal and final rounds of Lincoln-Douglas and Public Forum, will be held at the Sheraton Dallas Hotel. The awards assembly will commence at 3:00 p.m., followed by the high school awards assembly at 6:00 p.m., where middle school champions will be recognized.

Important Middle School Dates • Coaches can register online at www.joyoftournaments.com. Entries are due April 24. • Congressional Debate legislation is due April 24. • The national office will begin sending out wait list notices by May 1. • Title, author, and ISBN information for Interpretation events must be posted on the registration website by May 1.

lodging (p. 8-13).

Speech & Debate Association and/or National Forensic rooms, and only book with recommended hotels for the reasons listed. All room reservations within the block are subject to an automatic non-refundable two-night deposit per room at the time of booking or upon cancellation, depending on the property. This avoids double booking and allows all attendees equal opportunity to book in the best available properties.

• Media release forms, signed by each student’s parent/guardian, must be submitted by May 13.

The host hotel (Sheraton Dallas

• All fees, including judge bond, must be received in the national office by May 13.

five-night stay. Middle school

• A late fee of $200 will be assessed for fees and forms received after May 13. A school/ club risks forfeiting participation if fees and media release forms are not received by May 20.

programs needing reservations

Hotel) requires a minimum

of less than five days should book at properties other than the Sheraton Dallas Hotel.

Other Details • Coaches are asked to carefully review all tournament information at www.speechanddebate.org/nationals. • Please note that each school is limited to five entries per event. • We will continue to rigorously train high school student judges. We are requiring middle schools to bring judges for each division in which they have students (Policy, LD, or PF, Speech, and Congress) as a condition for registering. More details are available on the website.

Sheraton

Additional tournament information will be available at www.speechanddebate.org/nationals. 18

Rostrum | SPRING 2015


Learn from Championship Coaches at the

Summer Online Institute! The Summer Online Institute is an affordable and convenient enrichment opportunity for high school students and coaches. Save the expense of traveling to camps by participating online! You will receive individual instruction and guidance from renowned coaches across the country committed to helping you succeed.

Summer 2015 Sessions: ff FREE Coach Clinic* Wendi Brandenburg *Eligible for graduate credit through Drake University! Session 1:

June 29–July 3 • Session 2: July 27–31

ff Congressional Debate Jason Warren Dates: July 27–31

ff Extemporaneous Speaking Jason Warren Dates: June 22–26

ff Interpretation Travis Kiger Dates: June 22–26

The Online Institute was a worthwhile experience! I gained insights on new ideas and techniques to be successful. The dedication and willingness of the instructors to help were beyond my expectations, and the environment was very engaging. I had a lot of fun!”

— Anne Lheem, Student

ff Lincoln-Douglas Debate Megan West Dates: July 20–24

ff Original Oratory Jacoby Cochran Dates: June 22–26

ff Policy Debate Brian Rubaie Dates: June 8–12

ff Public Forum Debate Glenn Prince Dates: July 6–10

Students:

Coaches:

Regular Price

Member

Resource Package

Regular Price

Member

$300

$250

$200

$175

$125

www.speechanddebate.org/institute


www.speechanddebate.org

NATS15

Tips for Taking Your Middle School Students to Nationals by Rachel Warnecke

“Wondering how in the world you could take a bunch of 11- to 13-year-olds on a big trip? Give me a page or two to ease your fears.”

I

remember the first time I decided to take my middle school team to Nationals. It was in West Des Moines, Iowa—a city and state I’d never been to in my many years of coaching and traveling. I was a little anxious and nervous. I wasn’t sure quite how to plan for what seemed like such a large endeavor. However, I also knew that if I didn’t just jump in and do it, the students would never have the experience of competing at the National Tournament. So, I put my chin up, rolled my shoulders back, and did it. And, while, yes, it was a lot of work, the experience was incredible—and we’ve been going to the Middle School National Speech & Debate Tournament ever since. Coaches, this is the year to take the leap! After our long winter, why not head to sunny Dallas? The weather is warm and beautiful, the food is fantastic, the people are incredibly hospitable, and who doesn’t want to go to Texas?

Before you start second-guessing yourself, wondering how in the world you could take a bunch of 11- to 13-year-olds on a big trip, give me a page or two to ease your fears. I’ve been traveling to the National Tournament for six years, and I’ve figured out a few things—a few things that might make taking your team to Nationals a little easier and a lot less stressful. Packing So, what does everyone wear—the students? the coaches? The first thing I tell my team is to remember this is a three-day tournament. So, be sure to pack the appropriate amount of tournament attire. Clothing. The students, both our boys and girls, generally wear suits. Does this mean that they must invest in three suits? Absolutely not. I tell our young men to bring several button down shirts, and our young ladies to bring several camis or short sleeve blouses. They simply wear a

different shirt under the same suit for each competition day. Shoes. Our young men wear dress shoes, and our young ladies either wear a low, closed-toe (1- or 2-inch) heel, or a ballet flat. In addition, I always advise my young ladies to wear tights or stockings; covered legs add an air of professionalism to the tournament experience. Coaches. While we are always concerned about our students, we coaches also want to look good! Each year, I see a wide range of attire—everything from jeans and shorts to slacks and suits for the men; and sundresses, jeans, shorts, and suits for the ladies. My best advice: wear what makes you feel comfortable and confident! Food Middle School Nationals is fun and exciting, but it is also comprised of long days that require endurance and constant energy in order for the students to remain “on” in each

Rostrum | SPRING 2015 21


round. So, my rule is eat well and eat to sustain—meaning, no pizza and no burgers. Now I know what you’re thinking. These are pre-teens and young teenagers; if you don’t feed them pizza and burgers, what in the world will they eat? Well, we’ve come up with a menu and system that allows the students to eat well and enjoy what they are eating. We’ll start with breakfast and work our way up to dinner. We begin by designating a parent or two to be our “Food Moms.” As soon as we get to the hotel, our Food Moms run off to the grocery store to purchase items that the kids will be eating throughout the week. We make a list ahead of time so that we’re not running back and forth to the grocery store each day. Breakfast. If your hotel offers breakfast, you’re set. However, if it doesn’t, it’s easy to set up a breakfast that tastes good and is filling and nutritious. Items such as individual instant oatmeal cups, dry breakfast cereal cups, bagels, granola bars, mini muffins, clementines, grapes, bananas, and juice boxes all make a good breakfast. We also purchase yogurt, milk, and cream cheese. We make a breakfast spread on the counters in one of our hotel rooms and the kids come in and out and take what they want. Lunch. We’ve always prepared brown bag lunches. Several years ago, Miss Kellie Crump, the head coach of Kentucky powerhouse Rowan County Middle School, gave me a bit of priceless information that she had been using for her team at the National Tournament. She told me to create a document that allows the kids to pick the sandwich, drink, fruit, and snacks they would like in their lunches. After the kids go to bed, the parents and coaches form an assembly line, get the lunches packed, and put them in a cooler with a big bag of ice. When the kids get their breakfast in the morning, they open the cooler and

22

Rostrum | SPRING 2015

pick up their lunches. Over the years, Miss Crump’s suggestion has fed and fueled many, many of our kids! Dinner. Tournament days are pretty long and intense, so we like to get the kids back to the hotel and into their sweats or pajamas; which means we have dinner at the hotel. We set up our dinners either in a prearranged conference room, or in the breakfast/deli area, usually near the lobby of the hotel. Again, because I have a “no pizza, no burgers” rule, we’ve come up with some really satisfying options. We do a Pasta Night, Fried Chicken Night, Sub Night, and a Chinese, Mediterranean, or Greek Night. We go out to dinner the final night and relax! All of this may sound difficult to pull off, but we make it really easy on ourselves. For Pasta Night, we order trays of pasta, meatballs, salad, and bread from a local pasta restaurant and have it delivered to the hotel. Fried Chicken Night is even simpler: Our Food Moms call a local grocery store and order fried chicken, biscuits, mashed potatoes, mac ‘n cheese, cole slaw, pasta salad, and fruit salad. Then they go pick it up. Chinese Night: You guessed it, we order from a Chinese restaurant. Greek Night: Our Food Moms go to the grocery store and pick up pita bread, feta cheese, olives, precooked chicken strips, hummus, baby carrots, pre-cut celery, cucumbers, cherry tomatoes, and deli-prepared rice dishes. Sub Sandwich Night: This one is easy. The kids tell the Food Moms what sub they would like; the Moms call in the order and pick it up. This also is a good way to finish any leftover side dishes from Fried Chicken Night. Finally, we bring lots of snacks to the tournament itself: granola bars, peanut butter and cheese crackers, apples, clementines, bananas, PopTarts, mini boxes of dry cereal, and bottles of water.

I know that this looks like a lot, but it actually is easy with a little bit of planning. It’s one or two trips to the grocery store and a few phone calls. Plus, it’s much less expensive than eating out for every meal. Logistics Hotel. Although Dallas makes life easier as all of the hotels are fairly close by (or within a short trip on public transportation), most Nationals require more planning. The hotels fill quickly, so be sure to make your reservations early. I tend to Mapquest the venue(s) we’ll be competing at in order to figure out the hotels that are within a reasonable driving distance. The first thing you will want to do is send out an email to your students and parents, giving them a deadline for letting you know who will be attending the tournament. This includes any parents who are coming. Book all hotel rooms in order to make sure everyone is staying in the same hotel. With all of the hotel options, it can be confusing. I book everything on my credit card, and when the parents who are traveling with us check in, they charge the room to their own credit card. Car/van rental. I also recommend that you reserve a vehicle quickly if you will need one. They also are booked early. If you wait too long, it can be difficult to find a vehicle. Flights. The dilemma is, do you book your flights now, or wait for a better price, knowing that the price could actually increase? It’s better to be safe than sorry, so book your flights right away. I start this process by sending an email letting the team and parents know the day and time I will be checking out flights. On that specific day, as soon as I’ve found the flight I’d like us to be on, I send out an email to my team with a “READ AND RESPOND ASAP” subject line. This email lets them know that I’ve booked my flight. I give them all


www.speechanddebate.org

of the flight information, including my seat number, and then have them book their flights immediately. This has worked well for us in the past. If you have a large group, you can try group sales with the airlines. Please be aware that while group sales have perks, the cost per ticket can be significantly higher. Preparation And now, the real question, “How do I prepare my team for Nationals?” Obviously, the students need to practice, practice, practice! Starting in May, we extend our coaching hours and also have a few weekend workshops. However, extending coaching hours at the end of the school year can be hard on the students. They have end of the year school projects, spring sports, dance recitals, and finals. For the past several years, we’ve flown to Nationals two to three days prior to the start of the tournament in order to be able to coach the team without all of the distractions that they have at home. We call it “mini-camp.” By the time our minicamp is over, the team is focused and ready for Nationals to begin!

Sample Brown Bag Lunch Choices for Students

Name _______________________________________________________ (please circle choices) SANDWICH peanut butter and jelly

turkey

ham

veggie

FRUIT AND VEGGIES banana

apple

clementine

carrots

celery

DRINK bottled water

juice box

SNACKS (pick 3) peanut butter/celery

fruit snacks

peanut butter/crackers

Nutella/crackers

granola bars

chips

Cheez-its

pudding cups

jello cups

string cheese

Pop-Tarts

yogurt

cheese and crackers

fruit

Sample Grocery List for “Food Moms”

Making the Decision Deciding to head out to Des Moines those years ago was not an easy decision. The unknown can be a scary thing. However, it was easily the right decision—we haven’t missed a Middle School National Speech & Debate Tournament since. So, make this year your year to round up your middle schoolers and take the leap. We’ll see you in Dallas! Rachel Warnecke is the middle school advisor for Midwest Speech & Debate in West Bloomfield, Michigan. In the past five years, Rachel’s middle school teams have had more than 170 breaks into quarterfinals, semifinals, and finals. In addition, she has coached 10 individual middle school national champions and has been awarded the prestigious School of Excellence Award for the past three years.

lunch meat bread mayonnaise mustard ketchup ranch dressing bagged salad apples clementines bananas carrots celery Cheez-its cherry tomatoes cucumbers knife cheese string cheese

milk yogurt cereal (mini boxes) instant oatmeal cups cereal cups Pop-Tarts granola bars peanut butter jelly cheese and crackers peanut butter and crackers snack size variety chips bottled water hummus pita bread pre-cooked chicken strips pre-cooked steak strips feta cheese

cream cheese mac n’ cheese bowls trash bags baggies (every size) napkins paper plates plasticware plastic wrap aluminum foil ziploc containers fruit snacks juice boxes mini peanut butter mini Nutella cookies fun size candy bars pudding cups jello cups

Rostrum | SPRING 2015 23


SQUIRREL-KILLERS 2015-2016 ORDER FORM PRINTED COPY CD E-MAIL POLICY DEBATE (CROSS-X): Choose one of three subscriptions: Basic Subscription ___ copies ($96) ___ $85 ___ $74 OR Basic + 6-mo. Updates ___ copies ($146) ___ $128 ___ $110 OR Basic + 4-mo. Updates ___ copies ($130) ___ $114 ___ $98 NOTE: same items available individually: Aff. Casebook (May 15) ___ copies ($16) ___ $13 ___ $10 1st Negative Briefs (Jul 15) ___ copies ($40) ___ $36 ___ $32 2nd Negative Briefs (Jul 15) ___ copies ($40) ___ $36 ___ $32 Update Briefs (print & CD published MONTHLY, e-mail version published WEEKLY) 6-month option (Sep-Feb) ___ copies ($50) ___ $43 ___ $36 4-month option (Sep-Dec) ___ copies ($34) ___ $29 ___ $24 LINCOLN-DOUGLAS DEBATE (NSDA TOPICS ONLY) Basic Subscription (all 4) ___ copies ($104) OR same items available individually: Sep-Oct L-D topic ___ copies ($26) Nov-Dec L-D topic ___ copies ($26) Jan-Feb L-D topic ___ copies ($26) Mar-Apr L-D topic ___ copies ($26) PUBLIC FORUM DEBATE (NSDA TOPICS) Basic Subscription (all 7) ___ copies ($182) OR same items available individually: Sep-Oct PF topic ___ copies ($26) Nov PF topic ___ copies ($26) Dec PF topic ___ copies ($26) Jan PF topic ___ copies ($26) Feb PF topic ___ copies ($26) Mar PF topic ___ copies ($26) Apr PF topic ___ copies ($26)

PRINT/CD COMBO

PRINT/E-MAIL COMBO

___ $133 ___ $201 ___ $179

___ $122 ___ $183 ___ $163

$______ $______ $______

___ $21 ___ $56 ___ $56

___ $18 ___ $52 ___ $52

$______ $______ $______

___ $68 ___ $46

___ $61 ___ $41

$______ $______

___ $88

___ $72

___ $140

___ $124

$______

___ $22 ___ $22 ___ $22 ___ $22

___ $18 ___ $18 ___ $18 ___ $18

___ $35 ___ $35 ___ $35 ___ $35

___ $31 ___ $31 ___ $31 ___ $31

$______ $______ $______ $______

___ $154

___ $126

___ $245

___ $217

$______

___ $22 ___ $22 ___ $22 ___ $22 ___ $22 ___ $22 ___ $22

___ $18 ___ $18 ___ $18 ___ $18 ___ $18 ___ $18 ___ $18

___ $35 ___ $35 ___ $35 ___ $35 ___ $35 ___ $35 ___ $35

___ $31 ___ $31 ___ $31 ___ $31 ___ $31 ___ $31 ___ $31

$______ $______ $______ $______ $______ $______ $______

TOTAL**

$______

NAME ADDRESS CITY, STATE, ZIP E-MAIL ADDRESS

** Plus 10% shipping and handling costs up to a maximum of $25, IF PAYMENT DOES NOT ACCOMPANY ORDER (but no shipping or handling costs on e-mail orders). Credit extended to schools/ coaches only.

___ Charge to Visa/MasterCard # ________________________________ Exp Date

S-K PUBLICATIONS PO Box 8173 Wichita KS 67208-0173

PHONE 316-685-3201 FAX 316-260-4976 debate@squirrelkillers.com http://www.squirrelkillers.com


T W O - T H O U S A N D A N D F IF T E E N

M I S S O U R I S TAT E

POLICY DEBATE CAMPS

D E B AT E I N S T I T U T E

WHY ATTEND DEBATE CAMP AT M I S S O U R I S TAT E ?

• Learn how to move to the next level in your debate career • Learn the strategies that DEBATE CHAMPIONS use to win tournaments • It’s a BLAST! Although you work hard and learn alot, it will be a fun-filled camp with many lasting memories

Listen to what Nick Ramsey said about the MSU Debate Camp “MSU Debate Camp offers the best possible camp experience. After having gone to a big national camp, I came to truly appreciate what makes Missouri State’s camp special. The lab leaders are really knowledgeable. The camp is small enough that you get plenty of personal attention. They proved willing and able to work with debaters from all backgrounds and experience levels.” Nick reached semifinals in the NSDA National Tournament.

REGISTRATION DEADLINE

FRIDAY, JUNE 5, 2015 Space is limited. To register go to

debate.missouristate.edu and select MSDI

For more information contact EricMorris@MissouriState.edu for more information.

417.496.7141

College Credit!

Public Speaking $200 extra (2&3 week camps only)

2 Week Policy

(June 28 - July 11) $600 Commuters • $1,200 Dorm

3 Week Policy

(June 28 - July 18) $800 Commuters • $1,700 Dorm

3rd Wk Options

(July 11 - July 18) Lay Judge, Event Camps, K Debate

Event Camp Week

(July 12-18) Lincoln-Douglas • Public Forum Novice CX • Extemp • Congress

MORE REASONS WHY MSU IS YOUR BEST CHOICE FOR DEBATE CAMP Missouri State produces Top Debaters:

MSU debaters have been in elims of all major national tournaments, including NDT semifinals. Recent MSDI alumni have been offered over $300k in college debate scholarships.

New 2015 options: Third week students can select from a lay judge, kritik, or event track. Either two or three week students can add COM 115 (Public Speaking) credit, which will meet core requirements at most universities. Focus is on skill development: Skill focus is the most

effective means to rapid debater development. You will be in more practice rounds (about 20 over 2 weeks) and speeches at the MSDI debate camp. You will be in practice rounds and speeches by day 2 of camp, far faster than most camps.

Practice techniques for working with lay judges:

One of the unknowns in debate tournaments are the variety of judges for your debates. MSDI will prepare you debate successfully across all types of judges. Our instructors have college debate experience, but understand and respect both lay judges and differences between circuits.

Affordable: MSU Debate Camp is about half the expense of many debate institutes, despite staff comparable to top labs in other camps. Adding the college credit option could save an amount comparable to full camp tuition. Many MSDI alumni have received college debate scholarships dramatically larger than their tuition.


IN FOCUS

Building Community: Success Stories

A

great way to build community locally is by thanking your local champions. By giving awards to those who often perform thankless acts of kindness and support, you will build even more long-term support. In addition to the District Student of the Year Award, the National Speech & Debate Association piloted four new local district awards during the 2014-15 school year: District Alumni Achievement Award, District Communicator of the Year Award, District Principal of the Year Award, and District Volunteer of the Year Award. District leaders were given the autonomy to choose which awards would work best in their local area. They created rubrics for the awards, collected nominations, and selected deserving recipients. Below are a few of the many highlights shared with us from across the country!

New Mexico District Honors Local Professionals (compiled by Trey Smith)

On March 14, the New Mexico District recognized several outstanding professionals for significant achievements and contributions to the

26

Rostrum | SPRING 2015

speech and debate community. This year’s honorees include: New Mexico District Alumni Achievement Award – State Senator Jacob Candelaria » A 2005 graduate of St. Pius X High School, Sen. Candelaria was the last national speech champion to represent New Mexico. Currently, he serves in the New Mexico Legislature, representing the 26th District. He champions important legislation that benefits New Mexico youth. New Mexico District Communicator of the Year Award – Kristelle Siarza, Siarza Social Digital » Kristelle Siarza is the CEO of Siarza Social Digital, an online communications agency that specializes in social media and website development. She also serves as a part-time instructor in the Communications and Journalism Dept at the University of New Mexico. Kristelle is a 2005 graduate of the La Cueva speech and debate team.

New Mexico District Principal of the Year Award – Rex Kilburn, Los Alamos Middle School » Mr. Kilburn has fostered the growth and expansion of New Mexico’s largest middle school speech and debate program at Los Alamos Middle School. Through financial and curricular support, Mr. Kilburn’s efforts in Los Alamos are serving as a model for other middle schools throughout the state. New Mexico District Volunteer of the Year Award – Georgia Will, Albuquerque Academy » Georgia Will has gone above and beyond what is typically expected of a speech and debate parent. The New Mexico district has been able to recruit the hundreds of necessary volunteer judges for its prestigious tournament because of Georgia’s commitment to creating the best judges’ lounge. v

Kentucky District Names Communicator of the Year, Alumni Achievement Award (compiled by Steve Meadows)

Governor Steve Beshear was named the Kentucky District Communicator of the Year in recognition for his


www.speechanddebate.org

support of the Kentucky Common Core, which has given recognition to speaking and listening as language arts as important as reading and writing. Additionally, Beshear was recognized for his past participation in debate and student government activities at the University of Kentucky and for building on those skills in his professional life. Accepting on behalf of the Governor was his Executive Assistant, Colmon Elridge (shown right), a 1999 graduate of Harrison County High School. Elridge is a past participant of district tournaments and was awarded many times for his speaking skills at the state and national level while in high school. Elridge was awarded the Kentucky District Alumni Achievement Award at the awards ceremony, held March 21 at Centre College, the host of the contest along with the Danville campus of Bluegrass Community and Technical College. v

Florida Sunshine District Commends Local Principal (compiled by Terri St. John)

In the first year of selecting a District Principal of the Year, the Florida Sunshine District selected David Jones, Principal of North Port High School in

North Port, Florida. Mr. Jones is one of the most enthusiastic principals in the area when it comes to doing what is in the best interest of all students. He not only supports the various athletic teams, but he truly understands and promotes the academic teams. As an Assistant Principal at Sarasota High School, Mr. Jones attended tournaments when hosted by the school, taking time to talk to students and coaches, as well as sitting in on competitive rounds. When he became principal at North Port High, his enthusiasm for hosting a tournament on his campus was laudable. In fact, he told his coach, Kelly McWilliams, to make the tournament a yearly event and has held to that commitment. He not only approves the hosting of tournaments on his campus, but he attends them from start to finish. Mr. David Jones truly exemplifies excellence as an educator and an administrator, and we are fortunate to have him in our district. v

Northern Ohio District Offers Trio of Local Awards (compiled by Eric Simione)

Northern Ohio District Alumni Achievement Award – Henry J. Gomez, Political Reporter » A four-time state qualifier and twotime state runner-up in United States Extemporaneous Speaking, as well as a three-time national qualifier (twice in USX and once in Congress), Mr. Gomez is now a nationally recognized reporter and political correspondent for The Plain Dealer and Cleveland.com. He is a 1999 alumnus of Boardman High School in Youngstown, Ohio. Northern Ohio District Communicator of the Year Award – James Tressel, President, Youngstown State University » As a former coach and athletic director at YSU, then coach at Ohio State, and now the President of Youngstown State University, Mr. Tressel has always communicated the positive aspects of our community on a local and national stage.

Rostrum | SPRING 2015 27


Northern Ohio District Administrator of the Year Award – Douglas Hiscox, Deputy Superintendent of Academic Affairs, Youngstown City Schools » Mr. Hiscox was instrumental in seeing that speech and debate returned to the Youngstown Schools. v

California Coast District Honors Inaugural Award Winners (compiled by Kim Jones)

California Coast Alumni Achievement Award – Miki Heller, Homestead High School » Our speech and debate team has modest beginnings. Homestead’s team used to be extremely popular, but slowly dwindled until it died out all together. Five or six years later, two motivated students took the initiative to bring the program back. When no one at Homestead expressed interest in serving as the team advisor, we were told to look into a Homestead alumnus, Miki Heller, and her husband Jake. After talking to her and asking her to be our coach, she accepted. The school district formally hired her and our program at Homestead grew exponentially after that. Miki graduated from Homestead in 2003. She did Policy Debate throughout her entire high school career. After graduating from Cal Poly in San Luis Obispo, where she majored in Aerospace Engineering, she graduated from

28

Rostrum | SPRING 2015

Harvard Business School and Harvard Kennedy School of Government. She has worked as a middle school teacher, at San Francisco City Hall, and at the White House. In addition, she worked as a Director of Strategy at a large education nonprofit. Miki Heller is one of the most benevolent, smart, and caring people we know. She works a full-time job in San Francisco yet still makes the time to talk to us, coach our club, and advise us in every way possible. She deserves the District Alumni Achievement Award because along with being extremely accomplished in her professional life, she has also given back to the community in so many ways, including coaching the Homestead speakers and debaters. She’s an individual that truly embodies the values of the National Speech & Debate Association. She’s achieved success with her skills in the real world and inspires us to do better every day. — Nomination written by Homestead Speech and Debate Officers

California Coast District Principal of the Year Award – Chris Meyercord, Bellarmine College Prep » Principal Chris Meyercord, a former competitive speaker, gets what we do. He creates an environment that honors the kids who participate in the activity. He protects our national qualifying weekend when other bodies on campus want the facility. When he vacated his old principal offices, he gave them to speech and debate so we could have a place to call our own and rooms in which to practice. His allocation

of staff and financing has always been beyond generous, equal to or surpassing that of various athletic teams on campus. When a parent has questioned the rules or ways of the program, he has been absolutely visible and consistent in his support of what we do and how we do it. He congratulates speakers and debaters in just the same way as he does athletes and others who succeed. We are always treated as an important and valued part of the scheme of things at Bellarmine. I don’t think I overstate the case that, without the complete and constant support of the administration at Bellarmine, we would not be the team we have been and hope to be. And that administration starts with the boss. ­­— Nomination written by Kim Jones

California Coast District Volunteer of the Year Award – Barbara Heil, Presentation High School » Before and as Barbara Heil’s five kids entered high school, she was a constant presence at St. John Vianney. When they needed a new classroom building, as an architect, she designed/helped build it. She also ran the speech and debate parent group (a powerful and busy group themselves). Barbara Heil is the reason there is a speech and debate program at Presentation High School. In 2003, she began to pressure the administration to find someone who could create a program and actually coach the students. A dozen years later, she is no longer the mother of a student in the program, though she had three students graduate, but


www.speechanddebate.org

instead is well into her tenure as the Oral Interp and Expos coach. Never, over the course of these dozen years, has Barbara received compensation; on several occasions, she has refused it. Nonetheless, every week (and some weeks more frequently) she is at school to work with students; every week she is exchanging countless emails with her students; and every week she is working on new ideas to help kids find their voice and success in this activity. Barbara is far more than a “volunteer” and is remarkably deserving of recognition for what she has given back to this community over 20 years of service. — Nomination written by Dan Meyers and Kim Jones

This ad space could be yours!

Have a speech or debate coaching position to fill? As a service to member schools, the Association offers complimentary employment listings on our website and also in Rostrum. For $100, you may reserve a custom, third-page print ad with larger font, optional logo, and more. We’ll even help you design your ad! Contact us at editor@speechanddebate.org or call (920) 748-6206 to reserve your employment ad today. www.speechanddebate.org/careers

Help Us Share Your Stories!

T

he National Speech & Debate Association is excited to take part in an effort to establish an online National Forensics Oral History Archive (NFOHA). The goal of the archive is to become a resource and repository for use by anyone— educators, current students, alumni, and parents—interested in and supportive of speech and debate. This joint venture is proudly co-sponsored by Pi Kappa Delta and administered by MediaLab at Pacific Lutheran University. The site will contain videos, photographs, and other artifacts that celebrate the rich history of speech and debate in the United States. We currently are accepting submissions of documents, photos, film, and audio that offer some perspective on the history of speech and debate at your school, in your city, in your state/ district, at the National Tournament, and beyond. Your experience need not be specific to membership in our Association. We want to capture the historical highlights of our activity in general! If you have content you believe is suitable for this site, please contact info@nfoha.org with a brief description of the content you wish to submit. You’ll receive further instructions on delivering the content to us from there!

Want to write for Rostrum?

8

Email editor@speechanddebate.org with your ideas or comments!

Rostrum | SPRING 2015 29


Changing School Culture through Speech and Debate: Measuring the Impact on Academic Achievement by Kurt Fifelski, M.P.A.

“Graduation rates offer powerful insight into the quality and attractiveness of a school. Because students involved in speech and debate are more likely to graduate than most, if not all, other groups of students, schools should have a firm commitment to these programs.�

N

umerous studies have

graduation rates at their school and

of Adolescence found that at-risk

examined the impact

of their debate and speech students.

debaters in Chicago were 3.1 times

speech and debate

Of the schools sampled, only one said

more likely to graduate from high

has on high school students, and,

the graduation rate of Association

school than their peers (Anderson &

unsurprisingly, they have found these

member students was less than 100%.

Mezuk). The findings of the National

activities correlate with increased

The most recent graduation rate data

Speech & Debate Association survey

academic achievement.

available from schools in the sample

provide a narrative as to why at-

After polling 45 high schools

ranged from 63% to 100% of the

risk kids are more likely to succeed

across the country in December

whole student body graduating, with

because of speech and debate.

2014 and January 2015, the National

a mean graduation rate just over 93%,

One coach told the story of

Speech & Debate Association can

and a median of 98%.

further confirm speech and debate

The schools with the lowest

students are more likely to graduate

aggregate graduation rates seem to

school because she felt she had no

than their peers. Beyond this, speech

be the most impacted by speech and

future; speech not only provided her

and debate creates the opportunity

debate. At the school with a 63%

the chance to develop her speaking

for students to attend more

graduation rate, for instance, 100% of

skills and critical thinking, it also has

rigorous colleges. Moreover, these

speech and debate students graduate;

given her the opportunity to meet

activities provide students with the

and, over the last five years, either

the President and work on Capitol

advocacy skills necessary to make an

the valedictorian or salutatorian have

Hill promoting immigration reform.

immediate impact on those around

been speech and debate students.

them. For this research, coaches responded to a survey about the

30

an undocumented student who

Rostrum | SPRING 2015

It is well known that extra-

considered dropping out of high

Another coach told of a student who was a refugee from China. While

curricular activities help at-risk

he was successful in many other

students. A 2012 study in the Journal

academic areas, he struggled mightily


www.speechanddebate.org

with public speaking. At his first

of Original Oratory, “Speech has

competition among schools because

tournament, he was humiliated by

changed the culture of our school.

of school choice, offering accessible

the results. Those results, however,

What used to be a school that

extra-curricular activities like speech

gave the student the impetus to

remained reserved and conforming

and debate can be more fruitful than

work hard and develop his English

about beliefs and attitudes rapidly

previously imagined.

skills; two tournaments later, he took

became a school that promotes and

first.

celebrates diversity and equality of

A number of coaches responded that speech and debate likely

human treatment.� Offering speech and debate to

Many of the benefits of speech and debate have yet to be quantified. Regardless, graduation rates offer powerful insight into the quality and attractiveness of a school. Because

had no impact on the number of

students also can act as an indicator

students who graduated, but that it

for schools that are willing to

made students yearn for increased

offer students activities that will

achievement. Going to tournaments

contribute to their development.

on college campuses and networking

A 2006 study conducted by the

with college coaches incentivized

Department of Education found that

students to work harder in all of their

schools that provide extra-curricular

classes because those interactions

programs also have students who

becoming involved with organizations

gave disillusioned kids the idea

are more likely to graduate and

like the National Speech & Debate

that college could be part of their

attend college (Fink). However, not

Association because the material

future. Prior to having speech and

all extra-curricular activities are

and non-material benefits vastly

debate, most students at a school

equal; for instance, being on a sports

outweigh the costs.

in New Mexico attended the local

team does not reinforce language

community college; since offering

skills, academic writing, and critical

these activities, there has been an

thinking, all of which are necessary

increase in the number of students

to succeed on standardized tests,

attending four year schools, including

and are made available by speech

some of the most prestigious in the

and debate. In an era of heightened

students involved in speech and debate are more likely to graduate than most, if not all, other groups of students, schools should have a firm commitment to those programs. Furthermore, schools without these programs should seriously consider

Kurt Fifelski, M.P.A. is the Assistant Director of Debate at the University of Michigan.

country. Students who are academically successful and college bound still benefit from speech and debate in ways that other studies have not

References

acknowledged. LGBT students, as one

Anderson, S., & Mezuk, B. (2012). Participating in a policy debate program and academic

coach writes, are often depressed in a state of self-exploration but have used speech as a means of expressing themselves and changing the perspectives of others at the school. The coach writes that because

achievement among at-risk adolescents in an urban public school district: 1997– 2007. Journal of Adolescence, 35(5), 1225-1235. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j. adolescence.2012.04.005 Fink, J. D. (2006). The adult lives of at risk students: The roles of attainment and engagement in high school. Washington, D.C.: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics.

Rostrum | SPRING 2015 31


Cameron University’s 41 ST Annual

Forensics Institute J U L Y

2014 National TOURNAMENT

12Th-17Th 2015

!

Register Before

June 1St For ! Early Bird Special

Nationally Recognized Staff

Available Sessions: Individual Events ( Beginning & Advanced Divisions) Lincoln Douglas Debate ( Beginning, Intermediate & Advanced Divisions) Public Forum Debate Cx Team Policy Debate ( Beginning, Intermediate & Advanced Divisions)

Register Today: Www.Cuforensics.Com


Buzz Bingo: The Art of Oracy

by Pam McComas and Gail Naylor

I

f you have not downloaded an app on your iPhone or Android (BYOT/BYOD) at a recent professional development session, perhaps you can check out something on the blogosphere that will help you recognize the latest educational buzzwords. If not, a few were inserted into the last sentence. Buzzwords are jargon statements or phrases that “become very popular, especially a word relating to a particular subject. We heard a speech full of buzzwords and empty promises; the buzzword of the moment is accountability” (MacMillanDictionary. com). So devise or individualize your edu-speak bingo card, print it, and sit through a presentation. The goal is to tick off a predetermined number of words in a row and then yell “Bingo!” Identify words and phrases such as these: College and Career Readiness. Rigor and Relevance. Curriculum and Instruction. Best Practices. Accountability. Literacy. Regardless of the current buzz, speaking and listening skills need to become

34

Rostrum | SPRING 2015

mainstays of educational progress and infused across the curriculum at all levels. It is doubtful teachers would interrupt a presentation or professional meeting to do this, but the buzzwords swarming around in our brain definitely need attention. We are asked to do more with less in hopes of making our hive of buzzwords a more productive community for student learning and, at the same time, making those students college- and career-ready. As in any profession, educational jargon is abundant. However, as practitioners in the rhetorical arts, we can no longer ignore the buzz, or we will be stung by not knowing pedagogical content and researched teaching practices. These two veteran educators will examine why we need to focus on the buzz and create our own, how we can better build our hive with professional leadership, and what resources should be used to keep the educational hive sustained for accountability through rhetorical arts. The plethora of educational buzzwords is in flux. There are some

key terms that remain constant. Terminology such as curriculum and instruction and best practices are fundamental in preparing good teacher candidates and maintaining excellent veteran educators. This delivery system of content must be research-based (best practices), as well as innovative to enhance student engagement (Curriculum and Instruction). The emphasis unquestionably includes communication. Dr. Tony Wagner, founder and co-director of Change Leadership Group at Harvard, advocates for educational reform: “...work, learning, and citizenship in the twenty-first century demand that we all know how to think—to reason, analyze, weigh evidence, problem-solve—and to communicate effectively” (Wagner, 2008, p. xxiii). Furthermore, Kelly Gallagher, language arts instructor, author, and consultant, concurs with Wagner, but extends the statement: Veering away from teaching students how to speak effectively does not bode well for our children. Students… today will soon enter a


www.speechanddebate.org

world where virtually every business survey emphasized the importance of verbal communication skills—a world where one’s ability to present, perform, and persuade will prove more important than ever. Clearly, for the next generation of students speaking well is a foundational skill (Palmer, 2011, Foreword, p. viii). So why, as practitioners of the rhetorical arts, do we need to care about this latest buzz in speaking and listening? Erik Palmer, author, successful businessman, teacher, and consultant, argues in his book, Well Spoken: Teaching Speaking to All Students: Speaking well really is an art... Carefully choosing our words, organizing our ideas…, captivating an audience, ...employing effective gestures, or pacing our speech for emphasis—these are the building blocks of good public speaking. Every student can learn them, practice them, and perform them. But first, they need conscientious teachers who will show them how (2011, Part 1, n.p.). Speaking, writing, and logical reasoning should be school-wide in all content areas and not just limited to the communication arts’ classrooms. Speaking and listening have not been included or are just now emerging on state assessments. Beth Anne Burke, veteran educator and administrator, writes in her EduBlog:

...[E]ven if you aren’t administering a specific Speaking & Listening test, listening skills figure prominently in the English Language Arts and Mathematics assessments. Students will be asked to view videos, podcasts, and other media and respond to it, so it is essential to ensure that they have the skills necessary to hear and comprehend the material (2014). Hence, speaking and listening are anchor standards of the College and Career Readiness movement. There is a tendency to see the test scores as the ultimate buzz of our instruction. As a result, critical aspects of a well-rounded education become sacrificed in the curriculum—speaking is certainly one of those (Palmer, 2011, p. 4). Many of us come from different content areas, such as math, social sciences, and language arts, but we are asked to teach and coach speech and debate. Often we come to the classroom with only our own competitive high school and/or college experiences and without any formal pedagogical training. Now, more than ever, speaking skills are on display. That translates into a need for the speech teacher to be a better resource for his or her school. As schools incorporate final projects, exit resumes, e-portfolios, and high level presentations (digital storytelling, podcasts, and TED talks), effective oral communication explaining these sources becomes “something

more important and is not an old skill at all” (Palmer, 2011, p. 143). Palmer continues with his urgent call for teaching oral communication skills when citing a 2011 survey by the National Association of Colleges and Employers (NACE): “New college graduates looking to crack the still-tight job market need to hone their verbal communication skills,” and “…if students master speaking, their chances of success increase dramatically” (p. 5). Soft skills continually top lists of most wanted assets in new employees. In a February 2015 article of Creative Education, Dr. Charles Kivunja, Senior Lecturer at University of New England, Australia, re-affirms the urgency of teaching communication: ...[T]he instantaneous mix of people of different cultures that has been enabled by 21st century information… has made the need for effective communication more apparent and more vital than in previous generations… [There is a] call for a deeper and broader set of communication skills for graduates to be able to be effective participants... (p. 228) Thomas L. Friedman, in a New York Times interview with Tony Wagner, asks pertinent questions about current students in the future marketplace. Besides the need for communication mastery, Wagner responds that every person should possess a portfolio which evidences skills in critical thinking, and “teachers need to

“As in any profession, educational jargon is abundant. However, as practitioners in the rhetorical arts, we can no longer ignore the buzz, or we will be stung by not knowing pedagogical content and researched teaching practices.”

Rostrum | SPRING 2015 35


coach performance excellence” (2013). We, as rhetorical arts educators, should provide this instruction beyond our classrooms and advocate implementation for school-wide public speaking. Buzzing about our art, though, is not enough. As subject matter experts, we must build this hive of resources for fellow teachers to use in their curriculum. Teachers of speech and debate are easily persuaded by the critical elements of rhetorical education—benefits are evident daily, weekly, and yearly. Students of our craft grow, broaden, and virtually enhance their social and public speaking abilities before our eyes. Do other teachers see this transcendence of growth? Instructors in our schools include oral reports, presentations, group discussions, and stand-anddeliver activities as part of buzzword teaching techniques. But they are not always willing or able to see students improve their public speaking skills by issuing constructive critiques. Every educator is doing the best they can, given their means and capability, making the presence of a qualified and knowledgeable speech teacher on staff an unmatched resource. Fortunately, just as we provide guidance for nervous and fearful students at the beginning of each school year, we can supply valuable support to fellow educators to facilitate constructive student critiques of performance. For students and teachers alike, public speaking is the number one fear in America, surpassing death, flying, and spiders. Comedian Jerry Seinfeld quips in one of his bits that “this means the average person would rather be in the casket than doing the eulogy” (Massengale, 2014). We need to require more public speaking across the curriculum and execute the

exact speaking techniques in a way that improves student success rather than simply grading a presentation with single letter grades. Instead, we need to change the mindset toward oracy—the ability to use spoken language—to become an integral part of “educational progress, for work and for full participation in democracy... [R]esearch is beginning to show that children, who are taught these skills, perform better in math, science and reasoning tests” (Mercer, Ahmed, & Warwick, 2014). Our communication technology is abundant—Facebook, Twitter, electronic communication of all sorts. We, as good educators, are incorporating a greater number of these channels into our classrooms. All of this new technology is a vital part of dynamic education. As mentioned, public speaking is less prevalent now as technology becomes more prominent. “While oratory was considered one of the greatest essentials in the Greek and Roman cultures, today’s modern era is bedazzled by the glut of communication technology and fails to recognize the enormous advantages public speaking can provide” (Catapano, n.d.). Oracy will be more important to students in their adult life than some other content areas, but “as yet Apple has not invented a speechmaker and discussion generator” (Mercer, Ahmed, & Warwick, 2014). Public communication is live and in the moment. It is a “practical skill to master in that it combines thoughtful writing with talented social interaction” (Catapano, n.d.). As speech and debate coaches, we were always excited for students to perform, and just a bit nervous for them, too. Most students argue they will not need public speaking when they grow older. Of course, they may not become politicians, CEOs, or

standup comedians, but we have had any number of students say exactly those words to us who are now our peers in education. While not everyone will be speaking to large audiences, it is doubtful this generation will go without speaking at all. Parents will have a report or argument to make at local school board meetings; citizens will have complaints to make at city council meetings; and congregants will have input in churches or community organizations. Giving students repeated practice in schools before their adult life is the key. Beware that group discussion activities should not be done only occasionally, in isolation, or exclusively in speech classes. In every classroom, all teachers should instruct with knowledge and confidence across the entire curriculum and expect more with each student performance. The Yale Teaching Center points out two myths commonly held about public speaking: great speakers have innate skill and are fearless (“Public Speaking,” 2008). Myth or misconception, great speakers have practiced and have learned to manage fear. Requiring more speaking means we need to assist our colleagues. At the risk of comparison about buzz, we are the “queen bees” of communication arts, and we should tend the hive well. This is where your efforts begin. Helping instructors become guided teachers who can instruct, assess, and evaluate public speaking will make students more likely to engage in speech in their adult lives. Erik Palmer points out, “Very few teachers specifically teach the skills needed to make a presentation more successful. After the speech, we might give some comments and feedback, but where are the specific lessons about making a presentation with specific

“The buzz in our schools should be about training, consulting, and helping fellow educators do service to the speaking exercises they are currently incorporating in lessons and expanding them.” 36

Rostrum | SPRING 2015


www.speechanddebate.org

skills?” (2011, p. 7). He likens this situation to the misconception that we know everyone can speak. But in public speaking situations, students tend to shy away or become overly nervous. This is why we need to keep up the practice of assigning graded elements of public speaking. Palmer continues to explain that we know everyone can write, but no one would go so far as to enter a 9th grade English class expecting the instructor to ignore concentrating on writing skills this year, “since students can all write (text, email, type, chat, summer essays, write stories, and diaries)” (2011, p. 7). Furthermore, teachers of science or history would not exclude writing in curricula or study because we believe students know how to do it well enough already. This lack of instruction for any oral activity in the classroom must change in order to meet discipline literacy requirements, form a collaborative community of educators who care deeply about rhetorical literacy, and prepare our students for adult life. Elements of the public speech process need highlighting in each classroom. “If teachers are to help their students develop their talking skills, then they need to be able to monitor that development and provide feedback which will help it progress” (Mercer, Ahmed, & Warwick, 2014). Simple exercises for talking aloud do not meet the standards of best practices or outcomes. Often teachers believe they are aiding their students’ speaking ability by simply allowing the opportunity. This is somewhat helpful, but falls short in three ways: (1) the lack of instruction in performing a speech, (2) the lack of confidence in critiquing the speech, and (3) the lack of continued progress of public speaking growth. The buzz in our schools should be about training, consulting, and helping fellow educators do service to the speaking exercises they are currently incorporating in lessons and expanding them.

Buzz Bingo Best Practices

Groups Discussions

Assessment

College and Career Readiness

Accountabilty

Soft Skills

Curriculum and Instruction

Literacy

Test Scores

Communication

Listening and Speaking

Public Speaking

Rigor and Relevance

Standand-Deliver Activities

Group Discussions

Standand-Deliver Activities

Oral Reports

Comprehension

College and Career Readiness

Rigor and Relevance

Literacy

Assessment

Listening and Speaking

Best Practices

Of course, teachers may be afraid to assess performances. But as Palmer contends, “no one has to be a master orator to teach speaking. You [teachers] do have to be willing to commit to improving oral communication skills of your students” (2011, p. 9). All public speakers have a learning curve, and students in our programs and classes get an early start with this activity. Good public speakers and those who receive quality practice learn to manage fears, not exhibit them. New teachers or even veteran teachers may moan in teaching one more thing, although Palmer reminds us “teaching speaking reinforces teaching writing”; therefore, the reinforcement of separate skills blend into a perfect final product (2011, p. 17). In fact, he advocates scripting the speech because it allows students to verify required elements of a speech and the assignment. Students improvising, relying on notes, or speaking with little rehearsal are rarely successful. Of course, no teacher would expect a student to stand and deliver the written manuscript, but

having the complete written speech for the student allows for confidence in studying it and also allows the instructor to provide a separate grade for writing, if desired (Palmer, 2011, p. 53). Speeches are not readings or reiterating PowerPoint or video presentations. They are so much more. Teachers need to provide students the opportunity to connect with peers and to persuade or motivate others. That is relevance. We know it, and we need to share it with professionals and educational leaders. The how of teaching speaking skills comes to us. Debate and speech coaches are abuzz about the art we know and love. Willingly, despite competition, we are anxious to share and incorporate other ideas from coaches we respect, so we now must direct fellow instructors how to prepare students for authentic oral assignments. You will need to create the buzz in the teachers’ lounge, faculty meetings, department symposiums, and in-service days. Integrating speaking requirements into lesson plans is not enough. Actual instruction must be shared about how

Rostrum | SPRING 2015 37


the performance will be assessed and which techniques are important. The teacher decides if eye contact is more important than vocal inflection for a science presentation. The teacher determines if appearance will be more important than attention-getting devices during the oral book review. The teacher chooses if content weighs more heavily than delivery in a history group discussion. Delivery aspects cannot go without evaluation. “How a speech is performed may be more important than how it is built” (Palmer, 2011, p. 55). Knowledge must be communicated and executed well. Actually, Palmer prefers the word “performance” and contends that it should be equal to an assessment. This is a “performance art, and speakers are on stage and in the spotlight” (2011, p. 57). While occasionally allowing a small poster, picture, or PowerPoint slide in speeches allows for visual aids, the entire purpose is for the student to be “front and center” and a credible person sharing with an audience (Palmer, 2011, p. 47). Undeniably, having teachers instruct on how to give a speech in other classrooms may make us a bit nervous, but it should not. Speech teachers are experts and authorities. Students benefit if we can build a connection with every educator to require rigor, relevance, and high expectations of all students in public speaking. Help teachers, guide the instructional coach, explain concepts, and exemplify how every educational professional can become an asset in developing public speaking skills for all students. Do not be surprised if there is resistance. Teachers in other classrooms are going to complain about taking valuable time from their own curriculum and content areas to talk about delivery and pauses and eye contact. Palmer advises, “It won’t take as much as you think. A couple of days to set the stage of essential elements, and a couple of extra minutes for mini-lessons specific to certain assignments” (2011, p. 104) can continue to build speaking skills all year long. That is why he scorns teachers

38

Rostrum | SPRING 2015

who do a public speaking unit in isolation. He claims speaking “should be a part of every unit and every subject” (2011, p. 95). This kind of instruction is not just preparing for the public speech in front of a massive audience. It is focusing on the communication essentials that often get overlooked. “Eye contact, tone, volume, speed, inflection, and nervous tendencies are all part of the performance package” (Catapano, n.d.). Even though it seems that public speaking may take away from learning other important skills, it is essential that students practice and obtain experience in many classrooms—not just ours (Catapano, n.d.). Speaking is not the only useful tool, either. Besides oracy, listening is a lost art as well. Public speaking does teach us to become better listeners and note takers. USA Today reiterates: “...listening to public speakers about a wide variety of topics from people who may be very different from you can be a beautiful thing” (Massengale, 2014). Listening requires great skill, and we are expected to do more listening than speaking, but students receive the least instruction in this area. Asking students to critique one another during performance in written form is a foundation toward better listening skills, and commenting with constructive advice leads to better social interaction. “Students need to know how an audience sees them. They need to become comfortable with the idea that in the real world, the listener’s opinion matters” (Palmer, 2011, p. 108). Consider where meaningful relationships would be without quality listening skills. Public speaking and listening combine to make us better at relations in all forms in life. That is why your collaborative relationship is important with others who want and need to incorporate public speaking in their classrooms. No buzzword bingo card should exist for classroom performances, but instead detailed rubrics that focus on speaking and listening skills for teachers and students alike.

We believe teachers and students desire to be more confident in what they do. The most important benefit of teaching public speaking in all classes is confidence and facing fear. Read education blogs, do an advanced search of the Internet, or find chat rooms of teachers who are excited about helping students through such a traumatic experience as public speaking to make experiences better. One such teacher shares her story on the Stenhouse education blog: I teach bright students who can learn just about anything I put in front of them quickly and with ease; however, public speaking is something the majority of my students struggle with getting up in front of their peers. Over the past few years, I have started forcing students to do things like sharing their writing, narratives, and speeches with their classmates. Last year, one student would do a great job sharing only to put his head down and cry as soon as he sat in his chair. My students NEED to develop these skills because many of them will have jobs where they will be presenting to groups of all sizes. I want them to be confident in their own ideas and abilities. This year, I found out about TED Ed Clubs and have just started using them with my advanced classes. Students are getting release forms signed, I will send them in, and we will start working through the process that will lead to students having written and presented their own TED style talk about a subject they are passionate about. I can’t wait! (“Quick Tip Tuesday,” 2008). Speaking skills may be under taught and the value underestimated, but there is no denying the emphasis in the real world. Multiple books are published, a million websites exist about the errors of public speaking, and YouTube is full of Apple presenters doing exactly as they have been instructed. If these sources are good, then we, as speech teachers,


www.speechanddebate.org

debate coaches, and public speaking instructors in the communication arts, are even better. Email your colleagues a rubric for assessing oral presentations. Offer notable websites that can provide some specific skills. Peruse Palmer’s book about evaluating in the later chapters and pass along the information. Devise and deliver a mini-unit for a faculty meeting about attention-getting techniques. Encourage instructors to reward eye contact and vocal inflection. Demonstrate the difference between natural gestures and distracting ones. In other words, teach exactly what you already do so well, but, this time, do it for your peers. They may grumble a bit, but colleagues will appreciate your support for something instructors must do, but may not know exactly how to accomplish. The National Speech & Debate Association will be calling for curriculum resources from our membership to build and sustain a hive of best practices in rhetorical arts. All of us in our activity have learned from each other. Now you, as the trained professional, need to submit appropriate contributions in the process of sharing best practices. This can become a marketing tool for nonmember schools and other educational professionals. We are the professional organization for all teachers engaged in rhetorical performance, and we can build and sustain a bigger hive with your help. Have you shouted BINGO yet? If not, research those buzzwords unfamiliar to you and continue to keep up with the current rhetoric. Erik Palmer articulates it best: “If you have students talk in your classroom, or students present information in front of the class, or have your students leave school and compete in the global marketplace, then speaking skills are part of your teaching responsibility” (2011, p. 144). It is our obligation to shout out the BUZZ in the art of oracy.

References Burke, B.A. (2014, July 28). Listening & speaking: Top skills for college & career readiness. The Write Fix. Retrieved 02/23/15 from Baburke.edublogs.org Catapano, J. (n.d.). Why we still need public speaking. TeachHUB. Retrieved 02/18/15 from http://www.teachhub.com/why-we-still-need-public-speaking Curriculum and instruction. (n.d.) Retrieved 02/19/15 from Partnership for 21st Century Learning website: www.p21.org Developing oracy skills. (2013, May 9). Retrieved 02/23/15 from Class Teaching website: https://classteaching.wordpress.com/2013/05/09/developing-oracyskills/ Friedman, T.L. (2013, March 30). Need a job? Invent it. The New York Times. Retrieved 02/20/15 from http://www.nytimes.com/2013/03/31/opinion/sunday/friedmanneed-a-job-invent-it.html?_r=0 Kivunja, C. (2015). Exploring the pedagogical meaning and implications of the 4Cs “super skills” for the 21st century through Bruner’s 5E lenses of knowledge construction to improve pedagogies of the new learning paradigm. Creative Education, 6.2: Scientific Research Publishing Inc. Retrieved 02/16/15 from http:// dx.doi.org/10.4236/ce.2015.62021 MacMillan Dictionary Free Online Dictionary and Thesaurus. (n.d.). Retrieved 02/02/15 from www.macmillandictionary.com Massengale, J. (2014, January 16). 5 reasons everyone should take a public speaking course. College and Campus Life Section, USA Today. Retrieved 02/18/15 from http://college.usatoday.com/2014/01/16/5-reasons-everyone-should-take-apublic-speaking-course/ Mercer, N., Ahmed, A., & Warwick, P. (2014, October 4). We should be teaching kids public speaking in school. Washington Post. Retrieved 02/08/15 from http:// www.washingtonpost.com/posteverything/wp/2014/10/04/we-should-beteaching-kids-public-speaking-in-school Palmer, E. (2011). Well spoken: Teaching speaking to all students. Portland, ME: Stenhouse. Public speaking for teachers I: Lecturing without fear. (2008). Retrieved 02/09/15 from the Yale University Teaching Center website: http://teaching.yale.edu/ public-speaking-teachers-i-lecturing-without-fear Quick Tip Tuesday: Why is public speaking important? [Web log post]. (2011, April 5). Retrieved 02/08/15 from The Stonehouse Blog website: http://blog.stenhouse. com/archives/2011/04/05/quick-tip-tuesday-why-is-public-speaking-important/ Wagner, T. (2008). The global achievement gap: Why even our best schools don’t teach the new survival skills our children need—and what we can do about it. New York: Basic.

In May 2014, Pam McComas retired as a 40-year secondary instructor of rhetorical arts and English in Topeka Public Schools. She is the former director of forensics at Topeka High School. She is a seven-diamond coach, a member of the National Speech & Debate Association Hall of Fame, and a member of the Association’s Board of Directors. Currently, Pam is an education supervisor for Emporia State University overseeing secondary student teachers. She received the National Federation of High Schools Region 5 Citation for speech, debate, and theatre in 2015.

Gail Naylor retired in May 2013 after 40 years as director of forensics at Silver Lake High School in Kansas. She is a former rhetorical arts and English instructor. Gail taught college level speech and composition for a local community college. She is a six-diamond coach and a member of the National Speech & Debate Association Hall of Fame. She received the National Federation of High Schools Region 5 Citation for speech, debate, and theatre in 2014.

Rostrum | SPRING 2015 39


FROM OUR COMMUNITY

RECIPE IDEA Congratulations to the winner of the Denver Urban Debate League’s First Annual Coaches’ Crockpot Challenge—Anna Farnsworth, Speech & Debate Coach at Rangeview High School in Colorado. Ms. Farnsworth is a first year coach and slow cooker enthusiast. During the spring semester, DUDL’s coaches competed in three categories, bringing slow cooker meals to help feed volunteers in the judges’ lounge. Anna’s breakfast recipe earned her the blue ribbon!

Blue Ribbon Slow Cooker Breakfast From Anna Farnsworth (CO) Ingredients                      • 12 eggs • 1 (32 oz.) bag frozen hash brown potatoes • 1 lb. bacon, cut into small pieces, cooked and drained • 1⁄2 cup onion, diced • 3⁄4 lb. shredded cheddar cheese • 1 cup milk • 1⁄2 tsp. dry mustard • Salt and pepper to taste Directions Layer the ingredients in your crock pot, in this order: • half of the potatoes, on the bottom • half of the bacon • half of the onions • half of the cheese • remaining half of the potatoes • remaining half of the bacon • remaining half of the onions • remaining half of the cheese Beat the eggs, milk, mustard, salt and pepper together. Pour this over the entire mixture. Cook on low for 10 to 12 hours.

Do you have a sweet or savory recipe to share? Email us at editor@speechanddebate.org and your ideas might appear in our next issue!

40

Rostrum | SPRING 2015

What We're Reading THE CASE FOR SERVANT LEADERSHIP by Kent Keith One of the most popular books on leadership, The Case of Servant Leadership explores the idea of service and leadership and how communicating and listening lead to more productive and successful ventures. This quick read is meant to explain how being a servant and being a leader are inextricably linked and gives real life examples of how each of us can develop our own leadership while cultivating and communicating a vision to others. This book brings to life the challenge of speaking truth and trusting others to listen to it.

THIS I BELIEVE Edited by Jay Allison and Dan Gediman This I Believe is a collection of essays written by everyday people (and some celebrities, too) about their struggles with leadership, addiction, family, health, and life. Based on the NPR series of the same name, these essays delve into how individuals establish their own ways of living, learning, and dealing with events that have shaped who they are. This is a terrific read for every person who wonders about the intersection of engaging in life, building a moral/ethical code, and communicating how life works. Part of learning how to communicate with others is developing a strong sense of self.


www.speechanddebate.org

To the Class of 2015 Thirteen years ago, I was right where you are, graduating from high school, ready to take on all of the challenges and opportunities that would come my way in college and beyond. As a proud alum of the Nova High School debate team, class of 2002, I just wanted to express the idea that whether you realize it or not, your time spent in high school debate will be among the most important and rewarding times of your life. When you get to college, you’ll understand that you have a confidence to tackle new issues and speak before your peers in a manner that is simply unmatched. Debate helped me become smarter, quicker on my feet, and more articulate. It was an honor to reflect on debate’s contribution to my life as I prepared to deliver the commencement speech at my graduation from the University of Florida in 2005. Even in graduate school, I have been shocked at how many people (students and professors!) can’t muster the strength to get up in front of a class without quivering in fear, or are simply poor communicators. The skills and friends acquired in debate will last you a lifetime, and all of you will go on to do great things. (I know, I’ve seen it first-hand!) Last spring, following a speech from President Barack Obama, I graduated from the University of California, Irvine with a Ph.D. in Political Science, and in August, I started as Assistant Professor of Political Science at the University of North Florida. I am where I am today in large part because of my time in Nova Debate, and I hope you will cherish your debate memories now and into the future. You are all better people for having taken part in such an important activity. Congrats to all who are graduating, all who will in years ahead, and on an excellent performance at Nationals! Best,

Josh Gellers Josh Gellers, Ph.D., LEED Green Associate Assistant Professor, Dept. of Political Science and Public Administration University of North Florida

Rostrum | SPRING 2015 41


Before You Quit Teaching, Please Reconsider by Melissa Witt

This excerpt was adapted from a response to a recent Education Week Teacher article entitled, “Why I’m Calling It Quits After Six Years as a Teacher.” 1 Moved by Rosa Nam’s honesty, the author wanted to encourage Rosa and other educators like her feeling the same way.

L

et me tell you from the outset, I’m not a better person than you are. I, too, have stood before my students woefully underprepared, prepared, over-prepared, expectant, disappointed, frustrated, overwhelmed, dazed, and confused. What so many people not in teaching don’t understand, and too many within the education profession seem to forget, is that teaching is as much an emotional investment as it is a mental one. Teachers are human. We have good days and bad days. We love our jobs when things are going well, and we hate our jobs when they are not. We are, every single day, humans on display. We carry the burden of not only disseminating the academic curriculum for our courses but reinforcing the hidden curriculum of social grace, nurture, community, etc. We are held to the standard of our community

1

42

whenever we are in view of our students—in the classroom, at the grocery store, at houses of worship. It is not realistic to expect yourself to be 100% all of the time. What is fair is to expect that we take measures to protect our mental health. Many teachers take much longer to realize that they are “losing the fire.” Some don’t figure it out until it is gone, and others never do. If you will allow me, I may have some helpful suggestions. Whether or not you ultimately decide to leave the teaching profession, perhaps this will help you, regardless of the context. The following comes from my own experience, both inside and outside of the classroom. I hope you will find it helpful. 1. Be real. We are not super-human; don’t try to be. Be your best as often as possible, and be patient with yourself. Be honest with your

students. It’s okay to admit when you are “off your game.” It’s okay to apologize, authentically. Doing so shows your students more than a good lesson; it shows them a life lesson and the appropriate response when you make a mistake. 2. Be fair. Be fair to yourself as an educator and realize that, like any other profession, you don’t master the art without time, dedication, and learning from your mistakes. That last one implies that you will make mistakes. One of the best life lessons I ever learned from competitive activities: When you lose, don’t lose the lesson. You’ve clearly had a rough year in the classroom. Maybe you lost the battle, but don’t lose the lesson. Working through this time can make you a stronger teacher and, more importantly a stronger mentor for new teachers.

Nam, R. (2015, April 6). Why I’m calling it quits after six years as a teacher. Education Week Teacher. Retrieved from http://www.edweek.org/tm/articles/2015/04/06/why-im-calling-it-quits-after-six.html

Rostrum | SPRING 2015


www.speechanddebate.org

3. Be encouraged. Surround yourself with good teachers. They may be on your campus, they may be on other campuses in your district, they may even be on an online blog. But they are out there! Young and old, first year and 31st year! They have energy, enthusiasm, fresh ideas, tried and true tricks of the game, and war stories. A night out with good food and good wine and you’ll find out that you’re not alone— that those master teachers you met had good days and bad days, and some had bad years, classes they failed, students they failed. But they didn’t quit; they learned. The desire to teach was strong enough to motivate them to figure out how to do better. 4. Be committed. Good teaching requires relationship-building with your students. And like any relationship, sometimes it’s easy and sometimes it’s hard. The key is to go into it knowing you’re willing to fight to maintain that relationship. Let your guiding star be what’s best for you and your students. Will that ensure never having a bad day or a poor attitude? No. (Remember, you’re human.) But it will help you make the difficult choices. 5. Be moving. Never let yourself stop growing as a teacher. Professional development comes in all shapes and sizes. Always pursue growth in your specific content area, teaching methods, etc. I think in terms of vertical and horizontal career paths in

“Teachers are human. We have good days and bad days. We love our jobs when things are going well, and we hate our jobs when they are not. We are, every single day, humans on display.” education. I see many who are looking to go vertical— promotions, more pay, more prestige, affecting opportunities in the classroom from positions that can help provide more support for teachers and students. I think of myself on a horizontal path—I have no desire to leave the classroom. I feel privileged to work with students every day. It is taxing, to be sure, but it is so much fun! 6. Be successful. I know, right?! But seriously, my go-to support is Steven Covey’s 7 Habits of Highly Effective People. Covey talks about articulating your personal values and then letting those guide your choices, behaviors, and habits. Again, it’s a daily thing. You have to consciously take control of your life. Find your inspiration. Maybe it’s a book, a song, a spiritual text, even a movie. But find your center, get back to it, and let this career choice be the one you want to make, not the one you feel forced to make. Conclusion Teachers are much like parents— when we fail, we feel like we have let a child down. And that feels awful.

There is guilt, there is heartache, there is sorrow. But there is also redemption. There is also grace. And there is great need for teachers who love teaching, care about kids, and recognize their flaws so that they can work to correct them. Ultimately, in my experience, teaching is not a depressing profession. It inspires me. Being around kids learning inspires me! Laughing and sharing and growing inspires me. I hope you’ll stay. I hope you’ll find renewed vision and energy in the coming weeks. Perhaps a student, or two, will share how you’ve made a difference for them. But perhaps you don’t. Perhaps you go into another line of work. Just remember—days of failure are going to happen. Believe in yourself and in your calling and give yourself time to grow.

Melissa Witt is currently teaching Speech, Debate, Sociology, and Student Leadership at Hallsville High School in Hallsville, Texas. She sponsors the campus Peer Mentor association and coaches the competitive speech and debate team. She is in her 15th year teaching and could NOT have done it without the support of great, honest, amazing teachers and administrators she has had the privilege to meet along the way.

Rostrum | SPRING 2015 43


SPARK INSIGHT

Get With the Program:

Popular Webinars of 2014-15

A

s the school year comes to a close, we want to express our gratitude and appreciation to you for being a member of the National Speech & Debate Association. You are one of more than 3,400 schools giving youth a voice through speech and debate. You know first-hand how this activity can change lives. Thank you for your time, dedication, commitment, and passion to our future leaders! We want to ensure you have the tools and resources you need to provide your students the best learning experience. As a small way of saying thank you, we’ve created a playlist of the best webinars from the 2014-15 school year. Visit our site (www.speechanddebate.org/ thankyou) to access some of the most popular speech and debate webinars we’ve offered to date! We hope you’ll find this helpful in your classroom, practices, tournament prep, and planning for the 2015-16 school year. Thank you for making a difference in the lives of young people. You are a true inspiration, and we are proud that you are a member of our speech and debate family! Thank you for being a member of the National Speech & Debate Association.

44

Rostrum | SPRING 2015

Interpretation - Ethics in Performing Interpretation Featuring: Robert Shepard and Grant Hahn Learn more about common ethical dilemmas interpers may face cutting a piece.

Original Oratory - Ballot Analysis and Revising Your Speech Featuring: Bob Ickes Ballot analysis is an important step in revising your Oratory. Learn helpful tips on how to ‘keep it fresh.’

Extemporaneous Speaking - The Art of Extemp Filing Featuring: Robert Sheard Learn strategies on gathering and organizing Extemp research from a championship coach.

Debate - How to Find, Tag, and Cut Evidence AND How it Secretly Helps on the ACT Featuring: Chris Riffer Learn how to find, tag, and cut evidence for all forms of debate. See how these skills can help you prepare for the ACT.

Debate - Applied Preparation: Using Argumentation in Debate Featuring: Stefan Bauschard and Dr. P. Anand Rao Gain valuable insights on how to use core argumentation skills to tackle any debate topic.

Links to these recordings are available to all members. Vist our website to get started!

www.speechanddebate.org/thankyou


MAKING MEMORIES with USA Debate

life friends for

ATM! a cupcake

family meal

Slovenia doughnu ts rep y s s a b m E . S . with U we l ove i ce cr eam!


2015-16 POLICY DEBATE TOPIC OVERVIEW

Resolved: The United States federal government should substantially curtail its domestic surveillance. by Stefan Bauschard “By the time you finish reading the essay, you should have a good idea as to how most of the main arguments on the topic will play out as well as some strategic considerations you should consider when selecting arguments on both sides of the resolution.”

Introduction The controversy related to issues surrounding surveillance became a hot topic for debate when it was disclosed in June of 2013 by former defense contractor Edward Snowden that the U.S. National Security Agency (NSA) and other federal agencies are engaging in extensive surveillance to fight crime and reduce the threat of terrorism. The magnitude of the disclosure shocked many people, including elected representatives who were unaware of the extent of the surveillance. Civil rights advocates view the surveillance as an assault on privacy and liberty, while law enforcement and national security officials see these mass surveillance programs, and other targeted surveillance programs based on individual suspicion, as essential weapons in the war on terror, the fight against nuclear weapons proliferation, the general protection of U.S. national security, and even efforts to reduce conventional crime. Since the release of the original story, the controversy has become front page news around the world, with more and more arguably problematic programs described in the leaked trove of Snowden

46

Rostrum | SPRING 2015

documents coming to light. New stories appear on a daily basis, making it very easy to research and update. The federal mass surveillance programs that had been revealed through the spring of 2014 are catalogued in former debater Glenn Greenwald’s most recent book, No Place to Hide: Edward Snowden, the NSA, and the U.S. Surveillance State, which also offers a page-turning read into Greenwald’s initial meetings with Snowden and documentary filmmaker Laura Poitras in Hong Kong, as well as his access to the documents. The initial meetings are also documented in Poitras’ CitizenFour. Curtailing any of these and other mass surveillance programs will make for arguably strong affirmative cases.

Although I think the recent controversy over these relatively new federal mass surveillance programs aimed at preventing terrorism will make up some of the core cases on the topic, the resolution extends beyond these programs to include any surveillance programs conducted by federal law enforcement agencies, even if they are geared toward preventing more traditional crimes and are targeted in nature rather than based on mass surveillance. There will be many interesting cases related to drug surveillance, border surveillance, and surveillance based on race. In this essay, I will examine some key terms in the resolution, discuss some important aspects of its wording for the strategic development of arguments on both the affirmative and the negative, and then introduce the main advantages, some of the likely affirmative cases, key disadvantages, main counterplans, and likely kritiks. By the time you finish reading the essay, you should have a good idea as to how most of the main arguments on the topic will play out as well as some strategic considerations you should consider when selecting arguments on both sides of the resolution.


www.speechanddebate.org

The Resolution In this section, I will discuss the terms of the resolution and share some strategic implications of the meaning of the terms. It is widely accepted that the United States federal government refers to the central government body in Washington D.C. This governing body is made up of the executive, legislative, and judicial branches. Any of these branches can act in specific, relevant instances to curtail domestic surveillance, though affirmative teams are unlikely to specify which branch would “pass the plan” in order to avoid having to answer agent counterplans. If the affirmative team does choose an agent, it would likely be a court agent (one of the federal district courts or the U.S. Supreme Court). The plan would likely have one or more of these federal courts rule that a particular surveillance practice or program is unconstitutional. The resolution calls on this actor to essentially lessen its domestic surveillance. (We will discuss curtail shortly.) Surveillance generally means “to keep close watch over someone or something” (Merriam Webster). It is understood to consist of many activities, including physical observation, interception of personal communications, the use of undercover agents, subpoenaing records, audio and video recordings, and the collection of banking and other personal information (definitions & citations). It is important to understand there are two general types of surveillance: mass surveillance and targeted surveillance. Mass surveillance occurs when an entity (in the case of the resolution, the U.S. federal government) engages in the general surveillance of potentially everyone in a particular way. As the section on specific cases and plans will discuss, anyone who uses email, browses the Internet, or uses a phone to text or make calls could be subject to government surveillance. This type of mass surveillance does not attempt to distinguish between who is innocent and who may be guilty when the surveillance is conducted; it simply engages in the surveillance of everyone in a particular way.

The second type of surveillance is targeted surveillance. This surveillance occurs when the government suspects an individual is guilty of a crime and the government engages in surveillance for the purpose of discovering evidence of the crime. In many instances, the government must obtain a warrant to conduct the surveillance or at least have some reasonable justification for doing so. Although issues related to mass surveillance provided the impetus for Snowden’s disclosure, Greenwald’s book, and a substantial amount of other material currently published on the topic, plans that address issues related to surveillance based on individualized suspicion are certainly topical. While (nearly) everyone agrees surveillance based on individual suspicion is legitimate, there is controversy over what standards should govern surveillance in particular instances. This leaves plenty of room to make arguments that surveillance should be curtailed in specific instances of individual suspicion by establishing standards that make it legally more difficult to conduct. For example, affirmative teams may argue police need to establish “probable cause” before conducting surveillance in a specific instance, rather than “reasonable suspicion,” which is a lower standard. It is also important to note that, while surveillance is usually conducted for the purpose of preventing crime and stopping terrorism, the government engages in other types of surveillance, such as public health surveillance to prevent the spread of diseases. While this has obvious potential benefits, it can be critiqued as being biopolitical, a popular kritik argument in debate: According to the Foucauldian problematic of biopoliticized security, surveillance can be understood as the very form of liberal govemmentality seeking maximum efficiency for the regulation of bodies and species. It is an activity undertaken both by governments and institutions and even by the subjects themselves against each other. 1

There will be an important topicality debate as to whether or not topical cases can address more than the surveillance of people. Limiting curtailments of surveillance to those involving people may produce the best balance of affirmative and negative ground while still producing a reasonable topic to debate. Curtail means “to reduce in extent or quantity; impose a restriction on” (Google Definitions). There are two important parts of this definition. First, the surveillance can be directly reduced. In other words, the U.S. federal government could just decide to reduce surveillance in a particular way by eliminating a certain surveillance program or programs. Second, curtail means to “impose a restriction on.” This means that the affirmative plan could also impose a restriction or type of regulation on how the surveillance is conducted to make it more difficult to execute. For example, the plan might require a warrant for surveillance in instances where no warrant is currently required. Both direct reductions and restrictions are advocated in the literature. Its means “of or relating to it or itself especially as possessor, agent, or object of an action” (Merriam Webster). The presence of “its” in the resolution is significant because the only directly topical advocacy is for the U.S. federal government to reduce its surveillance, not to act to reduce the surveillance of other entities. This is significant because state and local police forces engage in surveillance, especially surveillance that occurs as a result of individual suspicion; most policing is conducted by state and local authorities, not federal authorities. Under the resolution, however, the federal government can’t restrict state or local surveillance, only its own surveillance. In turn, the federal government could restrict surveillance conducted by any federal authority—such as the NSA, the Immigration and Naturalization Service (INS), the Drug Enforcement Agency (DEA), or any other federal agency.

Rostrum | SPRING 2015 47


One exception to this would be the indirect effect of restricting state/ local police surveillance as a result of a plan that argues a certain type of surveillance conducted by the federal government was unconstitutional. If it was unconstitutional for the federal government to engage in it (which is what the plan would say), then it would be unconstitutional for state/local governments to engage in it, as well. So, the plan would topically curtail federal government surveillance, and then curtail state government surveillance by effect. A second exception to this is any program that involves federal and state surveillance cooperation. For example, the DEA supports local and state drug enforcement operations. 2 If federal support is curtailed, these local and state operations may cease to function, or at least cease to work well. Domestic means “existing or occurring inside a particular country; not foreign or international” (Google Definitions). Although the NSA engages in surveillance outside the U.S., and that surveillance is very controversial, it was necessary to add the term “domestic” to the resolution. Otherwise, topical affirmative cases would have included actions like reducing spying in particular countries or preventing the collection of intelligence by drones that support military operations against the Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant (ISIL, aka ISIS). Since this would have expanded the topic way beyond what it was intended to include, it was essential to add the word “domestic” to the topic. Although the term “domestic” does seem rather straight-forward, it is complicated in the context of certain affirmative cases. First, it is complicated because surveillance of foreign targets often occurs by monitoring calls and emails as they pass through U.S. domestic servers. The report also filled in a gap about the evolving legality of the warrantless wiretapping program… to direct the NSA to collect Americans’ international phone calls and emails, from network locations on domestic soil, without the individual warrants required by the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act, or FISA... Judge Vinson’s resistance led Congress to

48

Rostrum | SPRING 2015

enact, in August 2007, the Protect America Act, a temporary law permitting warrantless surveillance of foreigners from domestic network locations. 3 Although the temporary Protect America Act was replaced with the more permanent Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act of 2008, this provision remains. Second, in the context of surveillance legislation, foreign and domestic often refers to the target rather than the location. So, foreigners can be monitored in the U.S. without any legal restraints. While this creates more potential to blur the domestic/foreign distinction, negative teams should use definitions like that above to argue domestic refers to “inside a particular country.” It is very important for the negative to hold this line to prevent a radical expansion of the topic. Substantially is usually defined as “in the main” or as “real worth or importance.” Other definitions that are drawn from Words & Phrases and deal with examples from specific court cases offer percentages—5% is substantial, 10% is substantial, 50% is substantial, etc. The point here is not to rehearse all of the different meanings of substantial or to discuss all possible violations, but merely to point out that the curtailment the affirmative proposes will need to be significant; certainly more than very small. Ensuring that the reduction is substantial and non-trivial sustains negative ground by making sure there are realistic links to disadvantages such as Terrorism and Executive Power. The wording of the resolution does capture the heart of the controversy related to the expansion of government authority and activity in the area of mass surveillance. As written, the resolution does not allow the affirmative to access most foreign surveillance elements, but since there is some overlap between domestic and foreign surveillance in some areas, affirmative cases will be able to access it to a limited degree. Although the topic does capture the heart of the current mass surveillance controversy, it also opens topical discussion to standards that govern surveillance based on individual suspicion.

The standards governing targeted surveillance of suspicious individuals is largely a separate body of literature, but it overlaps the mass surveillance literature to some degree. Often the same standards that are advocated for mass surveillance argue the government should shift back toward more suspicion-based surveillance of individuals, based on certain standards that are already debated in the individual suspicion literature. Although there is a lot of potential distinct affirmative ground in the area of targeted surveillance, the practical size of the topic is limited by the fact that most of this surveillance is conducted at the state and local levels. Affirmatives who primarily target state and local police surveillance policies by issuing court rulings against federal action that would effectually apply to state and local law enforcement will have a lot of their affirmative harms solved by state and local action counterplans. These cases, while available, are not especially strategic, which means that most of the cases will focus back on the question of mass surveillance, something in which the federal government is heavily involved. Before moving on to the Advantage section of this essay, I do want to highlight a couple of important points about the nature of the resolution and the issue of whether or not topicality is a voting issue. Recently, a growing number of teams have been challenging the claim that topicality is a voting issue with two basic arguments—(a) they shouldn’t have to defend the United States federal government, which they consider to be an “inherently racist” actor, and (b) the topic is not of any interest or relevance to them. These two arguments seem especially weak in the context of this resolution. First, the affirmative can argue for a net reduction in U.S. government action. They do not have to topically defend U.S. government action at all; their curtailment can simply reduce surveillance conducted by the federal government without issuing a new standard to govern it. Any alternative advocated by the negative of zero government would necessarily include the federal government reducing its surveillance powers in the way advocated by the affirmative. Second,


www.speechanddebate.org

the U.S. government is engaging in mass surveillance—conducting call metadata on every cell phone in the U.S., for example, and arguably also collecting metadata on Internet browsing and email communication. This topic is relevant to the life of anyone who has a phone, has an email account, and/or browses the Internet. The Advantages In this section, I will discuss the advantages that commonly stem from action to reduce surveillance. I think it is important to discuss these first, both because they contextualize the value of the plans that will be discussed in the next section and also because, while there are many different plans, there are only so many advantages. Teams who are prepared to debate the advantages and win a disadvantage can usually win on “DA outweighs,” even if they don’t have arguments against the specific solvency mechanism. Privacy. There are many different ways to understand “privacy,” an idea originally articulated by Samuel D. Warren and Louis D. Brandeis in 1890. 4 These include the right to be left alone, the right to be secure in one’s person, the right to have certain information about one kept secret, the right to be free from interference, the right to make personal (including intimate) decisions, and the right to associate with who one wishes without interference. 5 The threat to privacy from any type of surveillance is significant because it involves monitoring of individuals, meaning that certain information about them will not be kept secret. The continuous and indiscriminate surveillance they accomplish is damaging because it violates reasonable expectations of quantitative privacy, by which we mean privacy interests in large aggregations of information that are independent from particular interests in constituent parts of that whole... But rather than being a function of the kind of information gathered, we think that the true threats to projects of self-development and democratic culture lie in the capacity of new and developing technologies to facilitate

a surveillance state... [B]y “making available at a relatively low cost such a substantial quantum of intimate information about any person whom the government, in its unfettered discretion, chooses to track,” programs of broad and indiscriminate surveillance will “chill associational and expressive freedoms,” and “alter the relationship between citizen and government in a way that is inimical to a democratic society.” Privacy is just beginning to receive recognition because it is only now under threat of extinction by technologies like Virtual Alabama and fusion centers. 6 Beyond the harms caused by individual privacy violations, including the loss of human dignity, surveillance laws lay the foundations for totalitarianism. Surveillance makes totalitarianism possible by discouraging intellectual exploration of controversial ideas and creating a power relationship between the government and the person who is subject to surveillance. From the Fourth Amendment to George Orwell’s Nineteen EightyFour, and from the Electronic Communications Privacy Act to films like Minority Report and The Lives of Others, our law and culture are full of warnings about state scrutiny of our lives… But these warnings are no longer science fiction. The digital technologies that have revolutionized our daily lives have also created minutely detailed records of those lives… [W]e recently learned that the National Security Agency (NSA) has been building a massive data and supercomputing center in Utah, apparently with the goal of intercepting and storing much of the world’s Internet communications for decryption and analysis… [O]ur law of surveillance provides only minimal protections. Courts frequently dismiss challenges to such programs for lack of standing, under the theory that mere surveillance creates no harms… First, surveillance is harmful because it can chill the exercise of our civil liberties. With respect to civil liberties, consider surveillance of people when they are thinking,

reading, and communicating with others in order to make up their minds about political and social issues. Such intellectual surveillance is especially dangerous because it can cause people not to experiment with new, controversial, or deviant ideas… A second special harm that surveillance poses is its effect on the power dynamic between the watcher and the watched. This disparity creates the risk of a variety of harms, such as discrimination, coercion, and the threat of selective enforcement, where critics of the government can be prosecuted or blackmailed for wrongdoing unrelated to the purpose of the surveillance... Government surveillance of the Internet is a power with the potential for massive abuse... Surveillance menaces intellectual privacy and increases the risk of blackmail, coercion, and discrimination; accordingly, we must recognize surveillance as a harm in constitutional standing doctrine. 7 Heidi Boghosian reaches similar conclusions. 8 The NSA doesn’t have a great track record when it comes to limiting abuse of its authority. During the Vietnam War, the NSA spied on Mohammed Ali, Martin Luther King, and Senator Howard Baker. Arab American lawyer Abdeen Jabara was also spied on. In March 2013, the NSA program, Boundless Informant, collected 97 billion pieces of metadata. From 1940 to 1973, the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) and Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) engaged in a covert mail opening program. The Army intercepted domestic radio communications, placing more than 100 people under surveillance. Freedom of association/expression. Surveillance discourages individuals from freely associating and expressing their opinions, because the opinions may be being monitored by authorities. Osborn v. United States, 385 U.S. 323, 341 (1966) (Douglas, J., dissenting); see also United States v. Jones, 132 S. Ct. 945, 956 (2012) (Sotomayor, J., concurring) (“Awareness that the government may be watching chills associational and expressive

Rostrum | SPRING 2015 49


freedoms. And the government’s unrestrained power to assemble data that reveal private aspects of identity is susceptible to abuse)... (“Official surveillance...risks infringement of constitutionally protected privacy of speech. Security surveillances are especially sensitive because of the inherent vagueness of the domestic security concept, the necessarily broad and continuing nature of intelligence gathering, and the temptation to utilize such surveillances to oversee political dissent.”) 9 Racism. Racism is a very complex issue that has been the subject of extensive debating, particularly in the Policy and Lincoln-Douglas Debate formats, and this topic lends itself to extensive debates about race, as different types of surveillance are often directly or indirectly targeted at minorities. In the area of mass surveillance, many argue that NSA surveillance is illegitimately targeted at minorities, particularly Arab and Muslim minorities. In July of 2014, the Intercept, Glenn Greenwald’s new magazine/website, published the email addresses of more than 7,000 Muslim-Americans who are under warrantless surveillance. The NSA and FBI have covertly monitored the emails of prominent Muslim-Americans—including a political candidate and several civil rights activists, academics, and lawyers—under secretive procedures intended to target terrorists and foreign spies. According to documents provided by NSA whistleblower Edward Snowden, the list of Americans monitored by their own government includes: • Faisal Gill, a longtime Republican Party operative and one-time candidate for public office who held a top-secret security clearance and served in the Department of Homeland Security under President George W. Bush; • Asim Ghafoor, a prominent attorney who has represented clients in terrorism-related cases; • Hooshang Amirahmadi, an IranianAmerican professor of international relations at Rutgers University… The individuals appear on an NSA spreadsheet in the Snowden archives

50

Rostrum | SPRING 2015

called “FISA recap”—short for the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act. Under that law, the Justice Department must convince a judge with the top-secret Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court that there is probable cause to believe that American targets are not only agents of an international terrorist organization or other foreign power, but also “are or may be” engaged in or abetting espionage, sabotage, or terrorism. The authorizations must be renewed by the court, usually every 90 days for U.S. citizens. The spreadsheet shows 7,485 email addresses listed as monitored between 2002 and 2008. Many of the email addresses on the list appear to belong to foreigners whom the government believes are linked to Al Qaeda, Hamas, and Hezbollah. 10 Other articles reach similar conclusions. 11 Monitoring based on race and ethnicity is not limited to NSA programs. Picture this: you live in a society in which the government is allowed to partake in intrusive surveillance measures without the institutionalized checks and balances upon which the government was founded. In this society, the government pursues citizens who belong to a particular race or ethnicity, practice a certain religion, or have affiliations with specific interest groups. Individuals who have these characteristics are subject to surreptitious monitoring, which includes undercover government officials disguising themselves as community members in order to attend various community events and programs. The government may also place these individuals on watch lists, even where there is no evidence of wrongdoing... This “hypothetical” society is not hypothetical at all; in fact, it is the current state of American surveillance... This fear has resulted in governmental intelligence efforts that are focused on political activists, racial and religious minorities, and immigrants. The government’s domestic surveillance efforts are not only geared toward suspected

terrorists and those partaking in criminal activity, but reach any innocent, non-criminal, non-terrorist national, all in the name of national security. The government’s power to engage in suspicionless surveillance and track innocent citizens’ sensitive information has been granted through the creation and revision of the National Counterterrorism Center and the FBI’s Domestic Investigations and Operations Guide. The grant of surveillance power has resulted in many opponents, including those within the current presidential administration, who challenge the order for numerous reasons... Surveillance practices, such as posing as members of the community and placing individuals on watch lists without suspicion of terrorist activity, result in the impermissible monitoring of individuals on the basis of their race or ethnicity. These practices, although done in the name of national security, an established compelling government interest, violate the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment because they are not narrowly tailored to the stated interest. 12 Arun Kudnani 13 and Trevor Aaronson 14 argue the FBI uses thousands of informants to spy on Muslim communities, looking for radical elements. At the local level (in New York), police are engaging in surveillance practices targeted at gangs now that they cannot engage in stop-and-frisk practices. After a federal judge ruled stop-andfrisk unconstitutional, and Bill de Blasio triumphed in the Democratic mayoral primary in part by running against Mayor Bloomberg’s favorite police tactic, the NYPD was forced to come up with a new plan. The New York Times is reporting that the NYPD has apparently pumped up their social media monitoring as a tactic to essentially replace stopand-frisk... The NYPD reported claims that people involved in gang activity often threaten people or boast about their various illicit activities on the social media platform, which gave the department the ability to thwart a potentially violent incident earlier this year... This is sure to prompt the already loaded questions regarding


www.speechanddebate.org

Internet privacy and government surveillance, and it would seem to run the risk of ensnaring harmless teenagers who just might post something dumb, but not truly threatening. But for now, the NYPD is going full tilt on the new surveillance technique. 15 Internet freedom. U.S. surveillance practices undermine U.S. credibility on promoting freedom of the Internet. This will result in even greater restrictions in countries like Russia and China. In the court of global public opinion, America may have tarnished its moral authority to question the surveillance practices of other nations—whether it be Russia on monitoring journalists, or China on conducting cyber espionage. Declarations by the State Department that were once statements of principle now ring hollow and hypocritical to some. No nation can rival the American surveillance state, but they no longer need support to build their own massive systems of espionage and oppression... Diplomatic pressures and legal barriers that had also once served as major deterrents will soon fade away. The goal has been to promote Internet freedom around the world, but we may have also potentially created a blueprint for how authoritarian governments can store, track, and mine their citizens’ digital lives. 16 Other evidence does tie the loss of Internet freedom to the loss of freedom and democracy generally. Economy. The link to this advantage stems from mass surveillance activities by the U.S. federal government. The argument is that foreign companies and countries no longer want to do business with U.S. Internet companies because information on their citizens is turned over to and held by the NSA. Arvind Ganesan of Human Rights Watch wrote in 2013: But the impact on U.S. technology companies and a fragile American economy may be even greater. Every new revelation suggests far more surveillance than imagined and more involvement by telephone

and Internet companies, with much still unknown. One of the most troubling aspects of this spying is that foreign nationals abroad have no privacy rights under U.S. law. Foreigners using the services of global companies are fair game... A July 1 report by Der Spiegel on the NSA spying on European officials infuriated governments a week before negotiations started on a massive U.S.-European Union trade agreement that could be worth almost $272 billion for their economies and two million new jobs... For the Internet companies named in reports on NSA surveillance, their bottom line is at risk because European markets are crucial for them… Europe was primed for a backlash against NSA spying because people care deeply about privacy after their experience of state intrusion in Nazi Germany and Communist Eastern Europe. And U.S. spying on Europeans via companies had been a simmering problem since at least 2011. In June 2011, Microsoft admitted that the United States could bypass E.U. privacy regulations to get vast amounts of cloud data from their European customers. Six months later, BAE Systems, based in the United Kingdom, stopped using the company’s cloud services because of this issue. 17 Executive power abuse. Current federal surveillance practices arguably exceed the authority of the Commander-inChief and affirmative teams can argue that this assertion of executive power is tyrannical. But warrantless surveillance of Americans inside the United States, who may have nothing to do with al-Qaeda, does not qualify as incidental wartime authority. The President’s war powers are broad, but not boundless… But third, where the president takes measures incompatible with the express or implied will of Congress—such as the NSA program, which violates an express provision of the FISA statute—“his power is at its lowest”... belongs in the third category, in which the President has acted in the face of an express statutory prohibition…, but Congress, exercising its own

concurrent wartime powers, has limited the scope of that authority by excluding warrantless surveillance intentionally targeted at a U.S. person in the United States. 18 Soft power and hegemony. Some affirmative teams may argue reducing mass surveillance will improve the U.S. image in the world—its “soft power.” Many of those who are optimistic about the ability of the U.S. to pull off this project of declining power without declining influence place emphasis on two things: the extent to which the U.S. has soft power due to widespread admiration for its political and cultural values, and the extent to which it has locked in influence through the extent of its existing networks of friends and allies... It will be difficult to maintain the allure of soft power if global opinion settles on the view that American political discord has rendered its democracy dysfunctional at home, or that its surveillance practices have given rein to the mores of a police state. 19 U.S. soft power can be valuable in facilitating global diplomacy necessary to arrest environmental problems, slow nuclear proliferation, and mediate global disputes. By strengthening allied relationships, it can also support U.S. hard power. Infopolitics. Infopolitics is a relatively new concept; I don’t think it has been run as an advantage in debate yet, so I’m not sure how it will play out, but the basic idea is that people are being defined by the data they represent and that is bad. Restricting the collection of the data would restrict the development of this identity. We are in the midst of a flood of alarming revelations about information sweeps conducted by government agencies and private corporations concerning the activities and habits of ordinary Americans... We do not like to think of ourselves as bits and bytes. But if we don’t, we leave it to others to do it for us... What we need is a concept of infopolitics that would help us understand the increasingly dense ties between politics and information. Infopolitics encompasses not only

Rostrum | SPRING 2015 51


traditional state surveillance and data surveillance, but also “data analytics”... Surveying this iceberg is crucial because atop it sits a new kind of person: the informational person. Politically and culturally, we are increasingly defined through an array of information architectures: highly designed environments of data, like our social media profiles, into which we often have to squeeze ourselves... Our minds are represented by psychological evaluations, education records, credit scores. Our bodies are characterized via medical dossiers, fitness and nutrition tracking regimens, airport security apparatuses. We have become what the privacy theorist Daniel Solove calls “digital persons.” As such we are subject to infopolitics... When all that paper ultimately went digital, the reams of data about us became radically more accessible and subject to manipulation, which has made us even more informational... What would be left of you if someone took away all your numbers, cards, accounts, dossiers, and other informational prostheses? Information is not just about you—it also constitutes who you are... They understand that information is a site for the call of justice today, alongside more quintessential battlefields like liberty of thought and equality of opportunity. 20 Biopower/biopolitics. Biopower is power of the state over individuals that is achieved through the regulation of everyday life. Public health surveillance for the purpose of preventing the spread of disease and generally improving health is a manifestation of such biopower. With the increasing uncertainties of a post-September 11 world, the issue of surveillance is given renewed importance through the discourses surrounding the proliferation of “control” technologies and the rhetoric of (in)security pervading contemporary politics. Electronic technologies are seen to be intensifying the “capacity” and ubiquity of surveillance creating “new” forms of social control... Examples of these technologies include DNA fingerprinting, electronic tagging, drug testing, health scans, biometric

52

Rostrum | SPRING 2015

ID cards and passports, smart closed circuit television, etc., all of which rely on algorithmic techniques as well as “body parts” in order to perform their function of surveillance... [T]his paper will be mainly concerned with one specific aspect of surveillance and its relation to biopolitics and the ways in which surveillance stands as the emblem of the magnitude and dimension of that which constitutes the management of life and death. 21 Securitization. Securitization is a popular kritik that argues it is bad to justify action based on the logic of security because that can lead to the hyping of threats, military intervention, war, and the displacement of democracy as the trumped security threat squeezes out rational debate on any security issue. Rationales for surveillance are embedded in this securitization logic, and if the affirmative wins this advantage, it automatically challenges (and turns) the impact claim of the disadvantage. Threat inflation is a concept in political science whereby elites will create concern for a threat which goes way beyond what is required. “When a threat is inflated, the marketplace of ideas on which a democracy relies to make sound judgements—in particular, the media and popular debate—can become overwhelmed by fallacious information” (Brito & Watkins, 2011, p. 2). In the article by Brito & Watkins parallels are made between the threat inflation of the cyber debate and the Iraq war. The Bush administration sought popular support for war by providing information that was later proved completely baseless... and the most vocal proponents of a threat engage in rhetoric that can only be characterized as alarmist (Brito & Watkins, 2011, p. 7). Censorship and surveillance has increased greatly in recent years. Many forms of surveillance are now common practice across many states. Following the September 11th terrorist attacks in the United States, countries have drafted bills which have included different surveillance-related proposals. “These Bills contained a host of proposals designed to address future terrorist threats through changes to policing, the military and public administration”

(Haggery & Ericson, 2000, p. 175)... The shift toward censorship, surveillance, and the securitization of cyberspace is very well connected. “Internet filtering is increasingly accepted worldwide, companies have imposed heavy-handed copyright controls, and surveillance in both the public and private sectors is widespread” (Deibert, 2012). Tethered appliances have the potential to be used as great sources of surveillance and control. “Apple doesn’t monitor emails sent over your iPhone, but could; TiVo, the television-recording device, routinely inform headquarters of what you’ve been watching” (Burkeman, 2008). Securitization of cyberspace is a threat to the modern liberal democracy. Any major change to the control of the Internet away from the laissezfaire approach would be particularly damaging. 22 Plans/Cases In this section, I will review some ideas for plans/proposals that reduce mass surveillance. There is a greater emphasis on mass surveillance conducted by the federal government because I have done more work in that area to date. Federal mass surveillance. Some of the proposals for curtailing mass surveillance focus on limits that would apply to (nearly all) federal programs. Other suggested curtailments are program specific. Some of both types will be reviewed. Anderson (2014) recommends “amending FISA” (the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act) in order to “narrow the scope of surveillance discretion granted to intelligence agencies,” “strengthen(ing) the ability of courts, Congress, and the American public to check abuses in surveillance authority exercised by the executive branch” and “codify[ing] some of the President’s promises that offer to expand civil liberties protections, particularly the newly announced minimization procedures and the promise not to use the NSA to target domestic racial minorities or political dissidents... Additionally, Congress should narrow the type of activity that constitutes reasonable suspicion by an intelligence agency that a U.S. person is an “agent of a foreign power… Third, Congress should modify Section 1881a so that it explicitly states that any collateral data on U.S.


www.speechanddebate.org

persons collected by intelligence agencies cannot be used for intelligence purposes without specific FISC authorization.” 23 Rushin (2013) supports Supreme Court Justice Samuel Alito’s proposal that “the Court should look at surveillance techniques on a case-by-case basis and judge whether the electronic surveillance used ‘involved a degree of intrusion that a reasonable person would not have anticipated.’ The Alito recommendation is similar to the proposal I made two years ago. His solution would involve the judiciary limiting the length of data retention for surveillance technologies. He would permit longer retention in cases where police are investigating serious criminal offenses. And he emphasizes that the legislature may be the most appropriate branch to regulate these technologies long-term… Both my recommended solution and Alito’s represent a limited acceptance of the so-called mosaic theory that recognizes that the aggregation of long-term electronic surveillance data can be so revealing of personal details as to become an unreasonable search or seizure. Both my recommended solution and Alito’s represent a limited acceptance of the socalled mosaic theory that recognizes that the aggregation of long-term electronic surveillance data can be so revealing of personal details as to become an unreasonable search or seizure.” 24 Reidenberg (2014) offers similar suggests for limiting the extent of mass private records access by law enforcement: “Red line boundaries should include (1) retention limits that, without a compelling justification specific to a target, do not go beyond a duration required for billing; (2) a ban on access without independent, public judicial oversight; and (3) no cross sharing between intelligence and law enforcement or between law enforcement and economic rights enforcement. These boundaries will need to be established in both national law and international agreements.” 25 Shaina Kalanges (2014) notes, “Congress proposed nearly 30 pieces of legislation to tackle the exposed NSA program issues with the surveillance process, lack of transparency, and interaction with the FISC [Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court]” and argues for enhanced role of an intelligence Inspector General of the Intelligence Community “who will assess

the NSA’s programs and system rules with security of domestic privacy rights in mind. This includes evaluating the boundaries set out in subsections (b), (d), (e), and (f) of the law pertaining to surveillance of United States citizens and the application of those boundaries.” 26 Daniel Byman (2014) argues for greater transparency and some increase restrictions. 27 He also references Sensenbrenner’s proposal—the USA Freedom Act—to end metadata collection, publicize any policy changes, and allow phone companies to publicly state how many government requests are received for information. He argues the Freedom Act “allows FISC judges to evaluate fulfillment of minimization requirements by examining the conditions surrounding the acquisition, storage, or distribution of data pertaining to U.S. citizens, either prior to or after approval or ‘extension’ of a ‘pen register or trap and trace device’ and calls for ‘comprehensive audits of the effectiveness and use, including any improper or illegal use, of pen registers and trap and trace devices under title IV of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act of 1978.’” 28 See also: Time Magazine, 29 Center for Democracy & Technology. 30 Orin Kerr (2014) argues, “Congress should improve the surveillance laws by making sure the FISC will not act as a lawmaking court. Congress should enact an interpretive rule directing that government powers granted under the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (“FISA”) should be narrowly construed. I will call this rule of narrow construction a “rule of lenity...” When the government’s power under existing law is ambiguous, the FISC should adopt the narrower construction that favors the individual instead of the State… Adopting a rule of narrow interpretation for national security surveillance law would have three important benefits. First, it would promote democratic accountability and transparency... Second, a narrow interpretive approach would shift power to the branch of government best suited to balance privacy and security in changing technologies... Finally, a rule of narrow interpretation would avoid the difficult conceptual and constitutional issues raised by existing proposals that try to make the FISC more like a regular court. 31

Butler (2013) references a proposal by Senators Wyden and Udal that would prohibit the government “from searching the contents of the communications of U.S. persons without a search warrant.” 32 Kirill Levashov (2013) supports a proposal by Senator Al Franken that “called on Facebook and the FBI to change the way they use facial recognition technology... Franken asked the U.S. Federal Trade Commission ‘to require private companies to get permission before identifying a person with facial recognition… Only when a faceprint is the sole biometric identifier by which the stated goal can be achieved should collection be permitted… The sources from which a faceprint can be collected could be restricted. In most cases, faceprints should be collected directly from the individual, and collection from social networks, government agencies, or other third parties should be treated with extreme skepticism. Further, each faceprint should have an established ‘shelf life’—a length of time for which it may be kept.’” 33 There are some different proposals for dealing with federal access to the business records program, especially the cell phone records under Section 215. The Privacy & Civil Liberties Oversight Board (2014) argues the program should be eliminated. 34 Monu Bedi (2014) argues “the information [should be left] in the hands of the private companies and obtaining court orders to conduct metadata surveillance. President Obama went along with this suggestion and ordered the NSA and the attorney general to work toward figuring out a way to continue the dragnet telephony metadata program without the government storing all of the domestic and foreign data.” 35 [Note: Obama recently backed off this suggestion.] Matthatias Schwartz (2015) references more than 40 different proposed changes, 36 including some unrelated to Section 215. Although a warrant is not required to collect the information, at least a warrant is required to search it. The one exception to this is National Security Letters (NSL), which is authorized (continued on page 60)

Rostrum | SPRING 2015 53


!!E GET G D E THE E H T EDGE! T E G EGDE EHT TEG dTFE na seSpeech, hcaoC Proudly htiW gniPartnering rent raP yldWith uorP ,Coaches hceepS Eand FT dna sehcaoC htiW gnirent raP ylduorP ,hceepS EFT yStudents tilauQ hgfor iH hGreater guorhT sSuccess seccuS Through retaerG rHigh of stnQuality edutS ytilauQ hgiH hguorhT sseccuS retaerG rof stnedutS gWeb-based nihcaoC desCoaching ab-beW gnihcaoC desab-beW Hilari Weinstein, Director Hilari@TFESpeech.com www.TFESpeech.com

sNational ehcaoc dchampions ehsilpmoccA Accomplished snoipmahc lacoaches noitaN sehcaoc dehsilpmoccA snoipmahc lanoitaN ssecCommitted cus ruoy rofeducators srentraP sPartners rotacudefor deyour ttimmsuccess oC sseccus ruoy rof srentraP srotacude dettimmoC !eCounselors rom dna yeldatarrespected B ,YKW ,FIcamps MG ,FINlike TUUTNIF, ekil spm GMIF, ac deWKY, tcepseBradley r ta sroand lesnmore! uoC !erom dna yeldarB ,YKW ,FIMG ,FINTU ekil spmac detcepser ta srolesnuoC

Contact

Counselors at respected camps like UTNIF, GMIF, WKY, Bradley and more!

tcatnoC t c,naiettnsnoieCW iraliH rotceriD National champions

Partners for your success Accomplished coaches

Hilari Weinstein, Director Hilari@TFESpeech.com www.TFESpeech.com

Committed educators

Contact

rotceriD ,nietsnieW iraliH moc.hceepSEFT@iraliH moc.hceepSEFT@iraliH moc.hceepSEFT.www moc.hceepSEFT.www

TFE Speech, Proudly Partnering With Coaches and Students for Greater Success Through High Quality Web-based Coaching

GET THE EDGE!


EMORY NATIONAL DEBATE INSTITUTE INFORMATION AND APPLICATION AT: http://www.emory.edu/BF/institutes/

BARKLEY FORUM CENTER FOR DEBATE EDUCATION

In the last fifty years the Barkley Forum has taught policy debate to over 5000 students from diverse debate backgrounds.

UNIQUENESS of ENDI Atlanta is the Cradle of the Civil Rights Movement. Students will have an opportunity to explore the Center

IMPACT for YOUNG

POLICY DEBATE WORKSHOP

for Civil and Human Rights as we discuss

the relationship between debate and social justice.

An optional college information session with representatives from Emory Admissions.

LEARN with the BEST! ENDI staff are diverse: college coaches, high school teachers and trained college student assistants. ENDI focuses debate skills for competitive success, academic enhancement, and community engagement.

Two Sessions Available June 7-20, 2015: 2-Week Residential $1700 June 7-27, 2015: 3-Week Residential $2550 Discounts Available for: early registration, four or more students from one school, and commuters.

DEBATERS The Barkley Forum is a pioneer in creating debate opportunities for middle schools. Our staff has taught middle school students and helped them transition to high school and college debate since 1995. Emory continues to support and teach young high school students as they grow into successful varsity debaters.


www.capitoldebate.com

1

5 5 5 1 1

TOP FACULTY

2

WE PRODUCE CHAMPIONS

TO ATTEND CAPITOL DEBATE SUMMER CAMP

REASONS REASONS TO ATTEND CAPITOL DEBATE SUMMER CAMP REASONS TO ATTEND CAPITOL DEBATE SUMMER CAMP

TOP FACULTY TOP FACULTY

2 2

WE PRODUCE CHAMPIONS WE PRODUCE CHAMPIONS

www.capitoldebate.com www.capitoldebate.com


3

INCREDIBLE CURRICULUM

SUMMER 2015 PUBLIC FORUM

DEBATE C

A

M

P

MASSACHUSETTS capitoldebate.com enroll@capitoldebate.com

800.450.5012

The University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill June 28 - July 10

MARYLAND University of San Diego June 21 - July 3

CALIFORNIA

University of Houston June 7 - June 19

Loyola University Maryland July 12 - July 24

TEXAS

NORTH CAROLINA

The Lawrenceville School July 25 - August 6

NEW JERSEY

ILLINOIS

MARYLAND

Babson College July 26 - August 7

Loyola University Chicago June 27 - July 9

LIFELONG FRIENDSHIPS

Loyola University Maryland July 12 - July 24

MASSACHUSETTS

4

Babson College July 26 - August 7

ILLINOIS

Loyola University Chicago June 27 - July 9

NEW JERSEY

The Lawrenceville School July 25 - August 6

NORTH CAROLINA

5

The University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill June 28 - July 10

INSPIRING ADVENTURES

TEXAS

University of San Diego June 21 - July 3

or EMAIL US

CALIFORNIA

CALL TODAY!

or EMAIL US

INSPIRING ADVENTURES

CALL TODAY!

5

4

LIFELONG FRIENDSHIPS

University of Houston June 7 - June 19

800.450.5012 capitoldebate.com enroll@capitoldebate.com


Attention Policy Debate Coaches:

 

A  Brand  New  Textbook  Resource  Designed  and  Developed  By  a  Winning  Coach!                  

debatevideos.org

Chapter   Topic  

   

1  

Introduction  to  Policy  Debate  

2  

The  Value  of  Embracing  Confusion  

3  

The  Essentials  of  Argumentation  

4  

Introduction  to  the  Surveillance  Resolution  

5  

Structure  of  a  Debate  Round  

6  

Speaker  Duties  for  Each  Speech  

7  

Introduction  to  Stock  Issues  

8  

Inherency  and  the  Status  Quo  

9  

Harms:  Quantitative  and  Qualitative  

10  

Solvency  Concepts  and  Strategies  

11  

Evidence:  Cutting,  Formatting,  and  Reading  

12  

Responding  to  Arguments  

13  

Cross  Examination  Strategies  

14  

Introduction  to  the  1AC  

15  

The  Power  of  Affirmative  Fiat  

16  

Flowing  and  Roadmaps  

17  

Introduction  to  the  1NC  

18  

Topicality  

19  

Effects  and  Extra  Topicality  

20  

Disadvantages  

21  

Counterplans  

22  

Kritiks  

23  

Answering  Topicality  

24  

Answering  Disadvantages  and  Impact  Calc  

25  

Answering  Counterplans  

26  

Answering  Kritiks  

27  

Rebuttals  

28  

Splitting  the  Block  

29  

Styles  of  Debate  and  Judge  Paradigms  

30  

How  Tournaments  Work  

  Learn  Better.  Debate  Better. 30  chapters.  30  videos.  HD  1080p.  Multiple  Subscription  Packages.   Your  students  can  log  in  and  watch  24/7  from  any  device.   All  based  on  the  2015-­‐2016  Policy  Debate  Resolution.     The  Best  Debate  Strategies  +  The  Best  Teaching  Strategies   Whether  you’re  a  veteran  coach  or  a  brand  new  teacher,  your  students   deserve  a  professional  textbook  with  updated  information  that  reflects  the   current  state  of  Policy  Debate.  Each  video  reflects  outstanding,  proven   strategies  that  work.       Featuring  Dr.  Josh  Anderson   Coach  of  the  2014  Policy  Debate  Top  Speaker  at  the        National  Speech  &  Debate  Association  National  Tournament   2007  Kansas  Teacher  of  the  Year     2007  National  Teacher  of  the  Year  Runner-­‐Up    

  Ask  your  administrator  if  textbook  funds  are  available  today!  

                     

 

 

 

 

 

 

                 

                                                                 Free Samples!

!  

 


(continued from page 53) under Section 505 of the PATRIOT Act. If the government uses an NSL, a demonstration of probable cause necessary to obtain a warrant is not required. Advocates such as Jaffer (2013, cited next) argue for the abolition of the NSL. Section 702 of the PATRIOT Act is less controversial than Section 215 because it targets foreigners, but “the content of communication” of Americans is “swept up” when communication of foreigners is monitored. This information is collected without a warrant. 37 This information is stored in a database called PRISM. Jaffer (2013) argues that this surveillance should be at least subject to a warrant requirement. 38 Information about Americans is “inadvertently” swept up when targeting foreigners not only under Section 702 authority, but under Executive Order 12333. This order, titled United States Intelligence Activities, gives the Attorney General the power to approve the use of surveillance techniques so long as he or she determines those techniques are “directed against a foreign power or an agent of a foreign power.” 39 Although a warrant is required to gain access to information on Americans, this indiscriminate mass surveillance often occurs. Undoubtedly, the NSA’s mass surveillance conducted under 12333 captures huge amounts of data unrelated to the mission of national security, including information on millions of Americans. Although 12333 requires a court order to target a United States Person, this is of little comfort. Given the global nature of communications, the indiscriminate mass surveillance the NSA conducts overseas captures the information of United States persons. Furthermore, the government can use and share this information without any order from a judge or oversight from Congress. 40 The MYSTIC and RETRO programs allow for the collection of all of a foreign country’s phone calls and emails, and some claim the NSA has directly tapped into companies such as Yahoo and Google data centers located around the world to collect this data. Data

60

Rostrum | SPRING 2015

on Americans is at least inadvertently captured through this process. One interesting and especially strategic case deals with encryption. Encryption technology is designed to provide a secure method of communication between individuals. In order to protect its surveillance capabilities, the federal government often attempts to crack encryption. Although this supports surveillance efforts, it also weakens Internet security. The NSA has done serious damage to Internet security through its weakening of key encryption standards, insertion of surveillance backdoors into widelyused hardware and software products, stockpiling rather than responsibly disclosing information about software security vulnerabilities and a variety of offensive hacking operations undermining the overall security of the global Internet. 41 Other sources reach similar conclusions. 42 Plans that apply to all criminal law enforcement. There are many advocates for plans that apply to all law enforcement (local, state, federal). Olivier Sylvain (2014) argues for a strengthened role of the courts in enforcing a new, stronger privacy standard 43 to guard against problematic surveillance. Monu Bedi (2014) argues that the protection of “associational rights” should be incorporated into this privacy standard. 44 Susan Freiwald and Sylvain Metille (2013) argue the U.S. should adopt a law modeled on the Swiss CrimPC that “prohibits the use of surveillance without authorization and treats any information gathered by such surveillance as illegally obtained and subject to the exclusionary rule when challenged by the subject. In addition, officials who conduct surveillance in violation of CrimPC risk disciplinary measures and prosecution.” 45 The use of drone surveillance for law enforcement is growing and is likely to rapidly expand. 46 Victoria T. San Pedro (2014) contends, “Congress should enact legislation that prescribes a time limit on the duration of [drone] surveillance… A statutory, bright-line rule requiring a warrant for long-term drone surveillance—defining an acceptable period for such surveillance—removes law enforcement’s discretion from

the equation and ensures that law enforcement receives the proper guidance to determine situations requiring a warrant. Further, such rules limit law enforcement’s ability to conduct longterm surveillance at the expense of an individual’s privacy rights.” 47 Yang (2014) argues for similar rules. 48 The FBI maintains a CODIS database designed to store all of the DNA profiles that have been collected through participating laboratories. Kelly Ferrell (2013) states, “Congress should amend the federal legislation by: (1) explicitly requiring the automatic deletion of the sample upon dismissal of charges; (2) postponing the creation of the DNA profile from the DNA sample until the arrestee is convicted; and (3) mandating that DNA samples be immediately deleted following the creation of the DNA profile. By passing the aforementioned amendments, Congress will safeguard the genetic privacy rights of unconvicted citizens and reduce the workload of forensic laboratories to a manageable level.” 49 Stone (2015) argues for requiring a warrant before law enforcement engages in geolocation tracking. 50 While these standards can be topically applied to federal law enforcement activities, it is probably not topical, or at least it would be extra topical, for Congress to apply these standards to all law enforcement. The reason is that it is only topical under the resolution for the federal government to curtail its domestic surveillance, and if Congress passes legislation that applies to nonfederal actors, that isn’t topical. As discussed above, the one exception to this is court rules; if the courts require the application of a particular standard to a federal policing program for constitutional purposes, that same standard would effectually apply to state and local police practices. Federal law enforcement practices. There are some suggestions for reforms of surveillance practices conducted by federal law enforcement in the area of targeted law enforcement. These include changes in airport screening 51 and border security: 52 A major aspect of the Secure Border Initiative is SBInet, which consists of a network of surveillance towers with radar and cameras. In September 2006 the Boeing Corporation won the $70


www.speechanddebate.org

million Department of Homeland Security contract to develop and build the towers and monitor its subcontractors. Putting these into practice involves Boeing personnel in the actual monitoring of the border. As the various surveillance mechanisms, from agents to hightech equipment, have been put into place, they have collectively contributed to the increase in migrant deaths. 53 The federal government is also actively involved in surveillance in the war on drugs. The U.S. Department of Justice has begun reviewing a controversial unit inside the Drug Enforcement Administration that uses secret domestic surveillance tactics— including intelligence gathered by the National Security Agency—to target Americans for drug offenses. According to a series of articles published by Reuters, agents are instructed to recreate the investigative trail in order to conceal the origins of the evidence, not only from defense lawyers, but also sometimes from prosecutors and judges. “We are talking about ordinary crime: drug dealing, organized crime, money laundering. We are not talking about national security crimes,” says Reuters reporter John Shiffman. Ethan Nadelmann, executive director of the Drug Policy Alliance, says this is just the latest scandal at the DEA. “I hope it is a sort of wake-up call for people in Congress to say now is the time, finally, after 40 years, to say this agency really needs a close examination.” 54

it more difficult for the police to fight crime. Due to the fear of terrorism, there has always been at least some substantial opposition to efforts to reform surveillance. This political opposition has just increased in light of the attacks in Paris. The push to reform the National Security Agency isn’t getting any easier. [A] reform bill was narrowly blocked on the Senate floor late last year… But the attacks in Paris last week, where gunmen killed 12 at a satirical newspaper and four at a kosher market, is making that job harder, and strengthening the resolve of the NSA’s backers. “I hope the effect of that is that people realize... the pendulum has swung way too far after [leaker Edward Snowden],” Senate Foreign Relations Chairman Bob Corker (R-Tenn.) told reporters on Thursday. “...Yet the more time that passes since Snowden’s leaks, the more the public’s anger over the spy agency’s operations has dimmed. Incidents like the Paris attacks make any attempt to rein in the agency a harder political sell. “...The Paris attacks are only the latest foreign events to interject itself in the congressional debate over the NSA…News about ISIS hurt the effort to reform the NSA last autumn… 55

The war on drugs is a very controversial issue and curtailing it has always been a strong case. Given the strength of these cases and that they directly access debates about race, these are likely to be quite popular.

Reducing surveillance of non-terrorist criminals would be perceived as softon-crime and politically suicidal. Furthermore, state correctional budgets do not appear to have been affected by recent budget shortfalls. Despite anecdotal evidence to the contrary, the political climate created by lawand-order politics—where being perceived as “soft on crime” is the equivalent of political suicide—is alive and well. 56

Disadvantages There are a number of common disadvantages that link to many (if not all) of the affirmatives plans on this topic. Presidential politics. There is substantial political opposition to both reforming surveillance and to making

Election politics. With the 2016 election around the corner in the fall of 2016, Presidential election disadvantages will certainly be popular on the topic. Negative teams will argue the plan makes either the Democratic or Republican candidate more or less

likely to win the election and they will argue why it is good for that candidate to win. Terrorism. The primary objection to restricting government surveillance, especially mass surveillance, is that surveillance is necessary to prevent terrorism (and the largest, “nuclear terrorist attack” impacts are often referenced). There are people who say a strong intelligence capability (that is enhanced through mass surveillance) is also necessary to prevent nuclear proliferation (the spread of nuclear weapons), position military forces, and conduct effective negotiations. The real problem with FISA, and even the PATRIOT Act, as they existed before the 2008 Amendments, is that they remained rooted in a law enforcement approach to electronic surveillance... Searches and wiretaps had to target a specific individual already believed to be involved in harmful activity. But detecting al Qaeda members who have no previous criminal record in the United States, and who are undeterred by the possibility of criminal sanctions, requires the use of more sweeping methods. To prevent attacks successfully, the government has to devote surveillance resources where there is a reasonable chance that terrorists will appear or communicate, even if their specific identities remain unknown... An approach based on individualized suspicion would prevent computers from searching through that channel for the keywords or names that might suggest terrorist communications because there are no specific al Qaeda suspects and thus no probable cause. Searching for terrorists depends on playing the probabilities rather than individualized suspicion, just as roadblocks or airport screenings do... Armies do not meet a “probable cause” requirement when they attack a position, fire on enemy troops, or intercept enemy communications...The primary objective of the NSA program is to “detect and prevent” possible al Qaeda attacks on the

Rostrum | SPRING 2015 61


United States, whether another attack like September 11; a bomb in apartment buildings, bridges, or transportation hubs such as airports; or a nuclear, biological, or chemical attack. These are not hypotheticals; they are all al Qaeda plots, some of which U.S. intelligence and law enforcement agencies have already stopped. A President will want to use information gathered by the NSA to deploy military, intelligence, and law enforcement personnel to stop the next attack... Al Qaeda has launched a variety of efforts to attack the United States, and it intends to continue them. The primary way to stop those attacks is to find and stop al Qaeda operatives, and the best way to find them is to intercept their electronic communications. 57 Cyberterrorism. Surveillance of the Internet is arguably necessary to prevent cyber attacks, either from terrorists or other governments. Rich Edwards, writing in Forensic Quarterly, explains; James Comey, the current director of the FBI, reports that surveillance capabilities are necessary in order to prevent cyber crime: “We want to predict and prevent attacks, rather than reacting after the fact. FBI agents, analysts, and computer scientists are using technical capabilities and traditional investigative techniques—such as sources and wires, surveillance and forensics—to fight cyber crime” (Comey, 2014, p. 14). Similarly, NSA Director Keith Alexander says that surveillance is necessary to prevent cyber terrorism: “Our analytic tools are effective at finding terrorist communications in time to make a difference. This global system and analytic tools are also what we need for cybersecurity. This is how we see in cyberspace, identify threats there and defend networks.” 58 Plans that make Internet surveillance more difficult will link to this cybersecurity disadvantage. Executive authority. Presidential power over foreign affairs, which includes the collection of intelligence, is considered to be a primary. Any Congressional or court imposed

62

Rostrum | SPRING 2015

restrictions on such authority arguably undermine executive leadership. The need for executive authority over electronic intelligence gathering becomes apparent when we consider the facts of the war against al Qaeda... But because the United States is in a state of war, the military can intercept the communications of the plane to see if it poses a threat, and target the enemy if necessary, without a judicial warrant because the purpose is not arrest and trial, but to prevent an attack... As Commander-in-Chief, the President has the constitutional power and the responsibility to wage war in response to a direct attack against the United States... In the wake of the September 11 attacks, Congress agreed that “the President has authority under the Constitution to take action to deter and prevent acts of international terrorism against the United States,” which recognizes the President’s authority to use force to respond to al Qaeda, and any powers necessary and proper to that end. Even legal scholars who argue against this historical practice concede that once the United States has been attacked, the President can respond immediately with force. The ability to collect intelligence is intrinsic to the use of military force... Presidents have long ordered electronic surveillance without any judicial or congressional participation... Courts have never opposed a President’s authority to engage in warrantless electronic surveillance to protect national security... Congress also implicitly authorized the President to carry out electronic surveillance to prevent further attacks on the United States. Congress’s September 18, 2001, Authorization to Use Military Force is sweeping; it has no limitation on time or place—its only limitation is that the President is to pursue al Qaeda... The choice between FISA or his constitutional authority gives the President the discretion to use the best method to protect the United States, whether through the military or by relying on law enforcement. It also means warrantless surveillance will not be introduced into the criminal justice system; the judiciary is only needed to enforce this legal distinction. 59

Although some affirmative teams will say they do not restrain the collection of foreign intelligence, domestic surveillance also exists for foreign intelligence collection purposes, so a restraint on domestic surveillance also creates a restraint on foreign surveillance. Recent debate about foreign intelligence surveillance relates to two key FISA provisions that were added and amended in the decade following the attacks of September 11, 2001. The first is the business records provision which was established by Congress in the USA PATRIOT Act, Section 215. The second provision governs the targeting of non-U.S. persons reasonably believed to be outside the United States, which was added by Section 702 of the FAA. Both of these provisions expanded the scope of foreign intelligence surveillance that can be conducted within the United States. 60 There is a lot of impact evidence that indicates strong executive authority is critical to U.S. global leadership, military readiness, and global diplomacy. It is important to note this disadvantage probably only links to cases in the mass surveillance area of the topic. Domestic police crime fighting authority is not related to Presidential power. Federalism. Federalism concerns the balance of power between the state governments and the federal government. Just as the founders put in checks and balances amongst the three branches of government—legislative, executive, and judicial—they also established checks between the federal and state governments in order to ensure one level of government did not get too much power. These checks are reinforced by the Tenth Amendment to the Constitution, which states that powers not explicitly given to the federal government are reserved to the states. One of the powers largely reserved to the states is policing. Nevertheless, the falsification of federalism’s design premises has not resulted in a catastrophic implosion of the U.S. into a unitary state. Although the balance of power no doubt has shifted over time, the American states have not been wiped off the constitutional map, nor have they


www.speechanddebate.org

been reduced to administrative satrapies of the national government. States continue to exercise significant and indeed primary authority over many areas of law, including those fields that most affect the lives of ordinary citizens—tort law, criminal law, contract law, property law, estate law, commercial law, and many others. States and localities today employ more than 87% of all government workers. The fields of criminal law enforcement and transportation, to name two prominent examples, are dominated by the states: 86% of all law enforcement officers and more than 99% of transportation workers are employed by a state or locality. The single largest government function in the United States, the provision of public education, is a state function; only ten thousand out of ten million teachers in the country are employed at the national level. 62 Although cases that deal with state and local policing powers are unlikely to link to the executive power disadvantage, they are likely to link to the federalism disadvantage. This is because the only way to make these plans topical is to have the courts rule that a particular federal policing practice in the area of domestic surveillance is unconstitutional, meaning that the state practice would also be unconstitutional. This is an argued usurpation of state authority. A strong respect for federalism is necessary to prevent the concentration of power in one level of government, which makes tyranny more likely. A diffusion of authority among levels of government also works to support the geographic diversification of value systems, which some argue is necessary to prevent cultural conflict, even civil war, both in the U.S. and abroad. There are internal links to federalism for countries such as Iraq, based on the claim that those countries model the U.S. federal system. Since cases that restrict state power are not especially strategic, as they can easily be solved by a states counterplan (discussed in the counterplans section), I do not think many affirmative cases will link to this disadvantage, but it is good to have it prepared because a states counterplan with a federalism

disadvantage as a net-benefit would be a great strategy. It is worth noting that federalism may also be run as an advantage on this topic. Some teams may claim that certain federal surveillance practices threaten state and local policing, undermining federalism. Impact turn disadvantages. Some teams will argue impact turns against certain advantages. For example, if the affirmative team reads a soft power advantage, they may say that U.S. soft power is bad because it undermines Chinese soft power, which is better. If the affirmative claims to increase U.S. hegemony, they might argue that U.S. hegemony is bad because it makes U.S. aggression more likely and triggers counterbalancing by other powers. These arguments are discussed in more detail in other essays. There are also a number of disadvantages that link to plans that specify court action, particularly action by the U.S. Supreme Court. Court politics. This disadvantage argues that court justices, particularly Supreme Court justices, are conscious of their own internal politics and that conservative justices are unlikely to make too many liberal decisions. The disadvantage argues that the liberal decision of the plan means that the justices will not make a liberal decision in a case that is pending and the negative will then argue that liberal decision is good. Court activism/judicial minimalism. This disadvantage argues that it is bad for the courts to read new rights into the Constitution because that usurps the power of the legislative branch, whose job it is to legislatively establish new rights. It argues that the role of justices should be strictly to interpret the law, and that if the law does not explicitly establish a right, that it is bad to read it into the Constitution. Privacy, since it is not explicitly in the Constitution and is based on the reading of the right into the Constitution by looking at the values of a number of Amendments, is often criticized as being an activist right. Impacts to the disadvantage include tyranny that results from a violation of the separation of powers and a loss of court legitimacy.

Court legitimacy. While court legitimacy can be an impact to the activism disadvantage, it can also function independently as an argument that says unpopular decisions undermine the legitimacy of the court, making it more difficult for the court to enforce its rulings. Case and controversy. This disadvantage says the affirmative cannot fiat a court decision without there being a case (and controversy that leads to the case) for the court to rule on. Teams argue that without a case and controversy, the court would be activist and lose its legitimacy. Given the nature of fiat, there is a highly contested link to this argument, but the more important issue is there are a lot of cases and controversies related to surveillance now, so while I’m sure this argument will be run, it does seem like a weak argument on this topic. All of these disadvantages are inherently weak, but if the affirmative specifies the court, the negative can always counterplan with the legislature (see the next section), and argue that any risk of these disadvantages warrants a negative ballot. Standard politics. Although the standard politics disadvantage was discussed at the beginning of this essay, I want to highlight that it also can be run against cases that rely on court decisions in the plan text. The link is that Congress will attempt to reverse the decision by passing legislation that voids or effectively modifies the decision, that it would be politically controversial in Congress, or that Obama’s Supreme Court appointments would be blamed for the decision. Counterplans The one thing I especially like about this topic and resolution is that the role of typical generic agent counterplans is significantly limited. States. The states counterplan is a regular on nearly every domestic topic, but there is no way for the states to reduce federal surveillance, so I don’t imagine it coming into significant play on this topic. If the affirmative plan has the courts rule that a particular surveillance practice is unconstitutional and argues that same ruling would apply to state surveillance/policing practices,

Rostrum | SPRING 2015 63


negative teams could counterplan to have the states enact the curtailment of surveillance at the state level, reading politics, federalism, and disadvantages to court action as the net-benefits. Finally, states have passed their own laws to regulate the surveillance practices of state and local law enforcement agents as well as private actors. Those laws, which must respect the floor set by federal law, may be more restrictive of law enforcement practices and therefore more protective of privacy interests. To avoid undue complexity, this article will focus on federal statutes and federal constitutional law. 61 They could even have the states amend their constitutions to provide the same protection the affirmative establishes but at the state level. Agent counterplans. If the affirmative specifies their agent (courts, legislative, executive), the negative could counterplan to use a different agent and read disadvantages that the affirmative. For example, if the affirmative uses the courts (usually the Supreme Court) as the actor, the negative could counterplan to have Congress amend the constitution and then read court disadvantages (court politics, court legitimacy, deference, activism). But, since the affirmative has the option of specifying or not specifying their agent, it really is the affirmative’s choice as to whether or not they wish to invite the agent counterplan debate. Advantage counterplans. Teams will read counterplans to solve the advantages through other means, such as strengthening the economy to promote hegemony and closing Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, to boost U.S. soft power. They will then read disadvantages that are specific to the surveillance curtailment in the plan as net-benefits. Other reforms. Negative teams will likely counterplan with other surveillance reforms and argue those reforms are less politically controversial or present smaller risks of terrorism. Since many affirmative teams may rely on plans that are direct reductions in order to get out of state action links to kritiks, a strong negative strategy will be to counterplan with some type of reform-oriented approach that avoids disadvantages (likely terrorism and politics) to completely eliminating the program.

64

Rostrum | SPRING 2015

Kritiks There is always plenty of kritik ground on most topics, and many of the generic kritiks always apply. There are also some specific kritiks that can be run. One thing that is important to note at the outset is that it is topical for the affirmative’s plan to only include negative state action—to just reduce surveillance. If the plan attempts a regulatory curtailment, then there would still be state action in the plan/as part of the affirmative’s advocacy, and there would still be state action links, but it will be hard to win them against any permutation if the plan just includes negative state action. Legalism. This kritik argues legal reforms are bad and end up sanitizing dominant power structures that support intervention and conflict. Within this framework, Western law has constantly enjoyed a dominant position during the past centuries and today, thus being in the position to shape and bend the evolution of other legal systems… [T]he United States have been dominating the international arena as the most powerful economic power, exporting their own legal system to the “periphery”… The theory of “lack” and the rhetoric of the rule of law have justified aggressive interventions from Western countries into non-Western ones... [L]aw played a major role in legalizing such practices of powerful actors against the powerless. This use of power is scarcely explored in the study of Western law. 63 Racism. The demand for objectivity and rationality in the law supports racism. Law is the exemplary countenance of the conscious and calculated rationality of modern life, it is the emblematic face of liberal civilization. Law and legal rules symbolize the spirit of science, the march of human progress. As Max Weber, the reluctant liberal theorist of the ethic of rationalization, asserted: judicial formalism enables the legal system to operate like a technically rational machine... Subjugation of the Other races in the colonial empires was motivated by power and rapacity, but it was justified and indeed rationalized, by an appeal to the civilizing influence of religion and law: western Christianity and liberal law… By

contrast, liberal ideology and modernity were abrasively unmythic, rational and controlled… In his Mythology of Modern Law, Fitzpatrick has shown that the enabling claims of liberalism, specifically of liberal law, are not only untenable but implicated in canvassing a racist justification of its colonial past and in eliding the racist basis of the structure of liberal jurisprudence. Liberal law is mythic in its presumption of its neutral, objective status. Specifically, the liberal legal story of its immaculate, analytically pure origin obscures and veils not just law’s own ruthless, violent, even savage and disorderly trajectory, but also its constitutive association with imperialism and racism… For liberal law carries on its back the payload of “progressive,” pragmatic, instrumental modernity, its ideals of order and rule of law, its articulation of human rights and freedom, its ethic of procedural justice, its hostility to the sacred, to transcendence or spiritual complexity, its recasting of politics as the handmaiden of the nomos, its valorization of scientism and rationalization in all spheres of modern life. Liberal law is not synonymous with modernity tout court, but it is the exemplary voice of its rational spirit, the custodian of its civilizational ambitions... Liberal law’s constitutive bias is in a sense incidental: the real problem is racism or the racist basis of liberal ideology and culture. The internal racial other is not the juridical equal in the mind of liberal law but the juridically and humanly inferior Other, the perpetual foreigner. 64 Critical Legal Studies scholars argue that the law is not above the political and that it can be, and is, easily manipulated to protect the interests of the dominant groups in society. For example, what is a “pervasively regulated industry,” “probable cause,” or “reasonable suspicion”? Since these are evaluated on a case-by-case basis (really no other way to do it), it wouldn’t be too difficult to say that the government needs “probable cause” to engage in surveillance of a white person (in a given situation), but that surveillance of public housing in a particular instance (where many minorities live) can be justified without probable cause.


www.speechanddebate.org

Critics argue that rights alienate people from each other, undermine an ethic of care, are indeterminate and hence difficult to enforce, discourage other means to protect peoples’ interests, and are really designed to protect the interests of the dominant class. One author “trashes” claims of objectivity in legal argument. Another claims that existing patterns of legal argumentation “freeze social reality” and make alternative visions impossible. This is obviously very similar to the critique of the law mentioned above, but I mention it separately because it is a separate body of literature and there are great cards in this literature that explain the law is indeterminate—that legal standards can be manipulated in different instances to justify different outcomes. These are great generic solvency arguments against any cases that rely on curtailing surveillance by instituting new legal standards. Feminism. There are a number of authors who challenge protecting privacy on the grounds that it supports spousal abuse—the privacy makes it easier for men to abuse women in the home. More generally, MacKinnon, Carol Pateman, and other feminist critics look at the history of the distinction between public and private, and see in it a stratagem through which men have claimed for themselves an unlimited exercise of power, among whose primary uses has been to subordinate women. The Greek distinction between the polis and the oikos, one of the most foundational sources for our modern ideas of public and private, functioned exactly this way. As Aristotle articulates, it is the distinction between a sphere in which a man is an equal among equals, constrained by demanding norms of reciprocity and justice, and a sphere in which he rules as king. Aristotle subtly distinguishes the rule of a man over a wife from his rule over slaves: the kindly husband is supposed to take his wife’s views into account in some way. And yet both forms of royal rule are even more strongly distinguished from the rule practiced among citizens, which is not kingly rule at all, but rather a “ruling and being ruled by turns.” The private domain is thus defined as a domain in which

the powerful have a sway unlimited by considerations of equality and reciprocity. This history tells us that even when appeals to privacy appear to protect the interests of women (or children), we should be skeptical, and be sure to ask whose interests really are advanced. 65 Capitalism. Debaters always find a way to make the capitalism kritik link, and while it may be difficult to get a state action link against cases that do not involve regulatory curtailments, cases that claim to strengthen industry, strengthen the economy, and make it easier for U.S. companies to do business abroad will still link. These links are obvious, and I suspect that people will become even more creative. Conclusion The resolution grew out of a recent and ongoing controversy related to surveillance, especially mass surveillance. Although the surveillance controversy extends beyond the shores of the United States, the resolution does limit topical plan action to curtailing domestic surveillance. The fact that Americans are frequently caught-up in the surveillance of foreigners, and that most Internet traffic flows through the U.S., means that there will be topical cases in the “foreign” area, though these will be limited and always contestable with topicality. It is topical for affirmative cases to act beyond the area of mass surveillance and address reductions in suspicionbased surveillance, but many of these cases address issues related to policing, and it will be difficult for the affirmative to both topically and strategically access many of these cases because most policing occurs at the state and local levels. Given this, I suspect that most affirmative cases will deal with mass surveillance, though some cases will focus on more limited, at least in terms of quantity, federal police surveillance. Very popular cases in this area will deal with the federal surveillance of racial minorities, surveillance at the border, and DNA surveillance. These cases will be popular because they are topical, they are focused on issues people like to debate about, and they offer an opportunity for the affirmative to stake out some relatively unique ground.

Some teams may be creative and extend surveillance reductions outside the areas of counter-terrorism and policing to focus on areas such as biomedical surveillance. These creative cases will likely make excellent kritik affirmative cases. There are many different advantages that can potentially be claimed from curtailing surveillance, including the protection of privacy, strengthening free speech, the reduction of racism, Internet freedom, economic growth, and an improvement in U.S. global status. These advantage areas will make interesting debates onto themselves. Although the cases will be very strong, there are a number of strong disadvantages with significant consequentialist impacts that can outweigh many of these cases. The terrorism disadvantage is the core “topic DA,” and teams should be prepared to debate it. As always, politics will be popular and can outweigh many advantages. Negative teams can also place affirmative teams in a basic counterplankritik double bind. Affirmative teams that advocate direct reductions rather than regulatory approaches will be vulnerable to counterplans that establish such standards. Terrorism and politics disadvantages are likely to be netbenefits to such counterplans. Affirmative teams that rely on such standards will be vulnerable to many different kritiks of legal approaches. Counterplans to eliminate the practices the affirmative criticizes in the 1AC will solve many (or all) affirmative advantages and will make the kritiks excellent net-benefits. The combination of strong arguments for both the affirmative and the negative that intersect the current issues of mass and targeted surveillance should make for excellent debates on both sides. I look forward to helping debaters prepare for this important topic. (For article end notes, see next page.)

Stefan Bauschard is the Debate Coach for the Lakeland School District and an assistant coach for Harvard Debate. He blogs at bauscharddebate.com. He would like to thank Dr. Rich Edwards for his comments and argument suggestions made available in Forensic Quarterly.

Rostrum | SPRING 2015 65


End Notes Ball, K., Haggerty, K., & Lyon, D. (Eds.) (2012). Routledge handbook of surveillance studies. London: Routledge.

1

DEA programs: State and local task forces. (n.d.) Retrieved 03/19/15 from Drug Enforcement Agency website: http://www.dea.gov/ops/ taskforces.shtml

Quinn, A. (2013, October 28). Obama’s soft power a hard sell after NSA revelations. The Conversationalist. Retrieved 03/11/15 from http://theconversation.com/obamas-soft-power-a-hard-sell-afternsa-revelations-19572

19

2

Savage, C. (2015, January 11). FBI is broadening its surveillance role, report shows. New York Times. Retrieved 01/12/15 from http:// www.nytimes.com/2015/01/12/us/politics/beyond-nsa-fbi-isassuming-a-larger-surveillance-role-report-shows.html?_r=0

Koopman, C. (2014, January 26). InfoPolitics [Web log post]. Retrieved 03/06/15 from http://opinionator.blogs.nytimes. com/2014/01/26/the-age-of-infopolitics/?_r=0

20

3

Warren, S.D., & Louis D. Brandeis, L.D. (1890). The right to privacy. Harvard Law Review, 4(5), 193-220.

Ana, B. (2005). Surveillance and biopolitics. Electronic Journal of Sociology. Retrieved from http://www.sociology.org/ content/2005/tier1/ajana_biopolitics.pdf

21

4

Pickin, M. (2014). What is the securitization of cyberspace? Is it a problem? Retrieved 03/06/15 from https://www.academia. edu/3100313/What_is_the_securitization_of_cyberspace_Is_it_a_ problem

22

Prosser, W.L. (1960). Privacy. California Law Review, 48, 338-423.

5

Citron, D.K. (2013). Addressing the harm of total surveillance: A reply to professor Neil Richards. Harvard Law Review, 126, 270. Retrieved from http://harvardlawreview.org/2013/06/addressing-the-harmof-total-surveillance-a-reply-to-professor-neil-richards/

23

Richards, N.M. (2013). Privacy and technology: The dangers of surveillance. Harvard Law Review, 126(7), 1934.

24

6

Anderson, T.C. (Summer 2014). Toward institutional reform of intelligence surveillance: A proposal to amend the foreign intelligence surveillance act. Harvard Law & Policy Review, 427

7

Boghosian, H. (2013). Spying on democracy: Government surveillance, corporate power, and public resistance. San Francisco, CA: City Lights Publishers.

Rushin, S. (Fall 2013). The legislative response to mass police surveillance. Brooklyn Law Review, 39-40. Retrieved from http:// papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2344805

8

Joh, E.E. (2013). Privacy protests: Surveillance evasion and fourth amendment suspicion. Arizona Law Review, 55(4), 34. Retrieved from http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2285095

Reidenberg, J.R. (Summer 2014). The data surveillance state in the United States and Europe. Wake Forest Law Review. Retrieved from http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2349269

25

9

Kalanges, S. (2014) Modern private data collection and national security agency surveillance: A comprehensive package of solutions addressing domestic surveillance concerns. Northern Illinois University Law Review, 34(3). Retrieved from http://www.niu.edu/ law/organizations/law_review/pdfs/full_issues/34_3/Kalanges_ FINAL%206.pdf

26

Greenwald, G. (2014). Meet the Muslim leaders the FBI has under surveillance. First Look. Retrieved 03/05/15 from https://firstlook. org/theintercept/2014/07/09/under-surveillance/

10

Lennard, L. (2014). The NSA’s racist targeting of individuals is as troubling as indiscriminate surveillance. Vice News. Retrieved 03/05/15 from https://news.vice.com/article/the-nsas-racisttargeting-of-individuals-is-as-troubling-as-indiscriminatesurveillance

11

Unegbu, C.C. (2013). National security surveillance on the basis of race, ethnicity, and religion: A constitutional misstep [note and comment]. Howard Law Journal, 57(1), 433-466. Retrieved from http://heinonline.org/HOL/Page?handle=hein.journals/ howlj57&div=15&g_sent=1 (access is restricted but available to National Speech & Debate Association members)

12

Byman, D. (2014, May). Reforming the NSA: How to stop spying after Snowden. Foreign Affairs. Retrieved from http://www.foreignaffairs. com/articles/141215/daniel-byman-and-benjamin-wittes/reformingthe-nsa

27

Ibid.

28

Nicks, D. (2014). Privacy advocates call for FISA court reform. Time. Retrieved from http://time.com/2970766/privacy-freedom-actreform-secret-nsa-oversight-fisa/

29

Laperruque, J. (2014, June 26). Key changes needed to the U.S. freedom act [Web log post]. Center for Democracy & Technology. Retrieved 03/08/15 from https://cdt.org/blog/key-changesneeded-to-the-usa-freedom-act-h-r-3361/

30

Kundnani, A. (2014). The Muslims are coming!: Islamophobia, extremism, and the domestic war on terrorism. London: Verso Books.

13

Aaronson, T. (2013). The terror factory: Inside the FBI’s manufactured war on terrorism. New York: Ig Publishing.

14

Bastanmehr, R. (2013, September 20). Stop-and-frisk replacement? NYPD using social media surveillance. Alternet. Retrieved 03/05/15 from http://www.alternet.org/civil-liberties/stop-and-friskreplacement-nypd-using-social-media-surveillance

15

Schwartz, M. (2015, January 26). The whole haystack. The New Yorker. Retrieved 01/23/15 from http://www.newyorker.com/ magazine/2015/01/26/whole-haystack

Kerr, O.S. (2014). A rule of lenity for national security surveillance law. Virginia Law Review, 100, 1513-43. Retrieved from http://www. virginialawreview.org/sites/virginialawreview.org/files/Kerr_Book. pdf

31

Butler, A. (2013). Standing up to Clapper: How to increase transparency and oversight of FISA surveillance. New England Law Review, 48, 57-9. Retrieved from http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/ papers.cfm?abstract_id=2397949

32

16

How the NSA scandal hurts the economy. (2013, July 15). Human Rights Watch. Retrieved 12/01/13 from http://www.hrw.org/ news/2013/07/15/how-nsa-scandal-hurts-economy

17

Levy, R. (2006). Wartime executive power and the NSA’s surveillance authority II. Retrieved 03/05/15 from http://www.cato.org/ publications/congressional-testimony/wartime-executive-powernsas-surveillance-authority-ii

18

66

Rostrum | SPRING 2015

Levashov, K. (2013). The rise of a new type of surveillance for which the law wasn’t ready. Columbia Science and Technology Law Review, 15, 164. Retrieved from http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers. cfm?abstract_id=2398045

33

Privacy and civil liberties oversight board. (2014, January 23). Report on the telephone records program. Retrieved 09/01/14 from https:// www.eff.org/files/2014/01/23/final_report_1-23-14.pdf

34


www.speechanddebate.org

Bedi, M. (2014). Social networks, government surveillance, and the fourth amendment mosaic theory. Boston University Law Review, 94(6). Retrieved from http://www.bu.edu/bulawreview/ files/2014/12/BEDI.pdf

35

Schwartz, M. (2015, January 26). The whole haystack. The New Yorker. Retrieved 01/23/15 from http://www.newyorker.com/ magazine/2015/01/26/whole-haystack

36

Kayyali, N. (2014, May 7). Why the way the NSA uses section 702 is deeply troubling. Electronic Frontier Foundation. Retrieved 03/18/15 from https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2014/05/way-nsa-usessection-702-deeply-troubling-heres-why

37

Jaffer, J. (2013, July 17). The administration’s use of FISA authorities. Hearing No. 113-45. Retrieved 12/15/15 from http://www.gpo.gov/ fdsys/pkg/CHRG-113hhrg81982/pdf/CHRG-113hhrg81982.pdf

38

Edwards, R. (2015). Forensic Quarterly, 88(1). National Federation of State High School Associations.

39

Scott, J. (2014, July 23). Prepared statement for the record of Jeramie D. Scott, National Security Counsel. Electronic Privacy Information Center. Retrieved 03/18/15 from https://epic.org/news/privacy/ surveillance_1/EPIC-Statement-PCLOB-Review-12333.pdf

Abini, D. (2014). Traveling transgender: How airport screening procedures threaten the right to informational privacy. Southern California Law Review Postscript, 78, 120-155. See also Hudson, R. (2013, November 14). TSA’s SPOT program and initial lessons from the LAX shooting. Hearing No. 113-43. Retrieved 03/18/15 from http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/CHRG-113hhrg87373/pdf/CHRG113hhrg87373.pdf

51

ACLU. (2013, July 23). A study in contrasts: House and Senate approaches to border security. Hearing No. 113-28. Retrieved 03/18/15 from http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/CHRG-113hhrg86033/ pdf/CHRG-113hhrg86033.pdf

52

Dowling, J.A. & Inda, J.X. (Eds.) (2013). Governing immigration through crime: A reader. Redwood City, CA: Stanford University Press.

53

Goodman, A. (2013, August 6). A domestic surveillance scandal at the DEA? Democracy Now! Retrieved 03/18/15 from http://www. democracynow.org/2013/8/6/a_domestic_surveillance_scandal_at_ the

54

40

Kehl, D. (2014, July 28). Surveillance costs: The NSA’s impact on the economy, internet freedom, and cybersecurity. New America Foundation. Retrieved 03/18/15 from http://newamerica.net/ node/119337

Hattem, J. (2015, January 11). NSA reform facing hard sell after Paris attacks. The Hill. Retrieved 01/14/15 from http://thehill.com/policy/ technology/229096-nsa-reform-faces-hard-sell-after-paris-attack

55

41

Issue brief: A “backdoor” to encryption for government surveillance. (2014, November 10). Center for Democracy & Technology. Retrieved from https://cdt.org/insight/issue-brief-a-backdoor-toencryption-for-government-surveillance/

42

Sylvain, O. Failing expectations: Fourth amendment doctrine in the era of total surveillance. Wake Forest Law Review. Retrieved from http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2473101

43

Bedi, M. (2014). Social networks, government surveillance, and the fourth amendment mosaic theory. Boston University Law Review, 94(6). Retrieved from http://www.bu.edu/bulawreview/ files/2014/12/BEDI.pdf

Soss, J., Hacker, J.S., & Mettler, S. (Eds.). (2007). Remaking America: Democracy and public policy in the age of inequality. New York: Russel Sage Foundation.

56

Yoo, J. (2014). The legality of the National Security Agency’s bulk data surveillance programs. Harvard Journal of Law & Public Policy, 37(3), 929-30. Retrieved from http://moritzlaw.osu.edu/students/ groups/is/files/2013/11/Yoo1.pdf

57

Edwards, R. (2015). Forensic Quarterly, 88(1), 34. National Federation of State High School Associations.

58

Yoo, J. (2014). The legality of the National Security Agency’s bulk data surveillance programs. Harvard Journal of Law & Public Policy, 37(3), 929-30. Retrieved from http://moritzlaw.osu.edu/students/ groups/is/files/2013/11/Yoo1.pdf

59

44

Freiwald, S., & Métille, S. (2013). Reforming surveillance law: The Swiss model. Berkeley Technology Law Journal, 28(2), 1275-6. Retrieved from http://scholarship.law.berkeley.edu/btlj/vol28/iss2/5/

Butler, A. (2013). Standing up to Clapper: How to increase transparency and oversight of FISA surveillance. New England Law Review, 48, 57-9. Retrieved from http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/ papers.cfm?abstract_id=2397949

60

45

Payton, T., & Claypoole, T. (2014). Privacy in the age of big data: Recognizing threats, defending your rights, and protecting your family. Lanham, MD: Rowman and Littlefield Publishers.

46

San Pedro, V.T. (2014). Drone legislation: Keeping an eye on law enforcement’s latest surveillance technology, Stetson Law Review, 715-7.

47

Yang, D. (2014). Note: Big brother’s grown wings: The domestic proliferation of drone surveillance and the law’s response. The Boston University Public Interest Law Journal, 43(3), 373-6.

48

Ferrell, K. (2013). Twenty-first century surveillance: DNA “datamining” and the erosion of the fourth amendment [comment]. Houston Law Review, 51(1), 263-4. Retrieved from http://www. houstonlawreview.org/wp-content/uploads/2013/10/4-Ferrell.pdf

49

Stone, J. (2015, January 23). GPS act would restrict cops’ “use of stingrays” and other phone surveillance technology. International Business Times. Retrieved 03/18/15 from http://www.ibtimes. com/gps-act-would-restrict-cops-use-stingrays-other-phonesurveillance-tech-1793278

50

Gardner, J.A. (2013). The myth of state autonomy: Federalism, political parties, and the national colonization of state politics. Journal of Law and Politics, 29(1), 11-12.

61

Freiwald, S., & Métille, S. (2013). Reforming surveillance law: The Swiss model. Berkeley Technology Law Journal, 28(2), 1275-6. Retrieved from http://scholarship.law.berkeley.edu/btlj/vol28/iss2/5/

62

Mattei, U. (2009, January). Global law and plunder: The dark side of the rule of law. Bocconi Legal Papers. Retrieved 03/18/15 from http://works.bepress.com/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1014&contex t=bocconi_legal_papers

63

Dossa, S. Liberal legalism: Law, culture and identity. The European Legacy, 4(3), 73-87.

64

Nussbaum, M. (2000, April 1). Is privacy bad for women? Boston Review. Retrieved from http://bostonreview.net/world/martha-cnussbaum-privacy-bad-women

65

Rostrum | SPRING 2015 67



ALUMNI SPOTLIGHT

Vikrum Dave Aiyer First off, where did you compete, in what events, and when did you graduate? I graduated from Mission San Jose High School in Fremont, CA in 2003. I competed mostly in Lincoln-Douglas Debate, while flirting a bit with speech events like International Extemp and Impromptu when tournaments offered them. Why did you join your speech and debate team? On one of the first days of school, there was a winding maze of clubs and extracurricular groups vying for freshmen attention to join. There was yearbook, the school newspaper, a Spanish honors society; a chess club, the track and field team; drama; and several other usual suspects. But as soon as I saw the table for the speech and debate team—advertising an upcoming meeting—there was an instant gravitational pull. I’m not sure why. I didn’t have any older brothers or family friends who had done much debate. But the prospects of refining a silver-tongue and harnessing one’s wit—whether it was to win an argument about nuclear weapons, or just persuade my mom to buy us Lunchables—that concept was instantly compelling to me. To have peers coaching fellow peers as to the best way to construct arguments, unpack broad topics, and

be listened to by large audiences at the age of 12 or 13—that prospect was a no-brainer to me. And it turned out to be one of the best decisions I ever made. How has speech and debate helped you become successful in your career? Given that the politics and policies which prevail in government live or die by how an argument is framed and communicated—I couldn’t imagine a better form of preparation than joining a high school debate team. The ability to pivot from judge to judge and adapt one’s message to the audience; the ability to rebut a whole range of arguments while still remaining focused on the bigger picture; and the ability to empathize with a wide range of opposing views, but reconcile them with the prevailing values that crystallize as paramount to society—all of that matters when trying to persuade a community on policies of change. And all of that stems from cross-ex skills, a well tailored 2AR, a pithy 1NC, good friends from camp, and a voracious appetite to ponder and reconsider new arguments. What advice would you give to students who are joining speech and debate? Don’t be set back

"As soon as I saw the table for the speech and debate team, there was an instant gravitational pull." 70

Rostrum | SPRING 2015

Vikrum Dave Aiyer, Senior Policy Advisor at the White House

by a first loss, or not qualifying to state, or not getting your parents or principal to sign the permission slip to send you to Emory. The debate community is so extraordinary that, within it, you’ll find much more knowledge if you stick with it and try your hand at another round or another tournament, regardless of the wins. Stick with it, and you’ll meet a student who also didn’t have the financial resources to travel, but came up with some creative means to enlist his or her community’s or school district’s support. Stick with it, and you’ll find yourself wise beyond your years when you’re a freshman in college. I cannot spot a day since I first started a career in Washington, D.C., where the assets of having done LD, Extemp, or Impromptu do not help me in a meeting, a memo, a speech, or even a healthy debate among friends.


APPLY FOR THE COACH SCHOLARSHIP PROGRAM The National Speech & Debate Association’s Coach Scholarship Program partners with speech and debate institutes across the country to offer eligible coaches a variety of waivers and discounts: • Coverage of tuition, plus lodging and meals

• Coverage of tuition only

www.capitoldebate.com

http://gustavus.edu/camps/sci

• Discount off tuition rates

www.ddidebate.org

www.meangreenworkshops.com

www.nebraskadebateinstitute.com

Education First Nationally Recognized Staff Proven Student Success SWSDI 2015 Faculty Includes: • Coaches from nationally recognized programs • Locally and nationally successful lab leaders • Top competitors from the college circuit

www.swsdi.org

2015 Summer Institute www.bfi.utah.edu

July 5-19, 2015

Barrett Honors College Arizona State University Find out More and Register at www.swsdi.org

What our students think Check SWSDI does best: out our partner websites Access, not Profit

above for more information and to register with the institute of your choice! Coaches are also invited to attend the Association’s FREE Coach Clinic (eligible for graduate credit through Drake University!) during the Summer Online Institute. Visit www.speechanddebate.org/institute for details.

“The close knit environment of the lab, and the consistent effort of the lab leaders”

“The mix of instructors. We had people with a lot of experience, as well as the perspectives of judges, coaches, and competitors.” “There was a lot of communication and help among everyone. There was a very comfortable feeling that I really liked & hope to feel again next year.”

SWSDI is a not-for-profit camp. That means we’re not concerned about making money, we’re interested in making sure that everybody has access to the tools that improve performance.

Cost: $1095 for two weeks, $780 for one week. Room and board included. Commuter pricing offered. We believe that the camp experience is the best tool for levelingup your debate skills, and for building strong teams and communities. Come join us in July.

Questions? Email steve.schappaugh@speechanddebate.org.

“SWSDI sparked a passion for forensics in our daughter. They strike the perfect balance between rigor and fun.”


EVENTS

Beehive Forensics Institute July 5-19, 2015 bfi.utah.edu Our regionally diverse and nationally recognized staff offer students insights that have helped them win over a dozen national championships in high school and collegiate forensics. Winners of the camp tournament receive partial scholarships to the University of Utah

Public Forum Policy Debate Lincoln-Douglas Debate Extemporaneous Speaking Congress (One Week Only) Interp—HI, DI, DUO (One Week Only) Coaches’ Clinic (One Week Only)

TUITION

ONE or TWO week options Resident or commuter July 5-12 or July 5-19 Tuition as low as $350 Discounts for early registration/ Utah students

BENEFITS

College Credit Personalized Instruction 5:1 Student to Faculty Ratio A focus on critiqued practice Customizable curriculum Social events

STAFF Century of combined coaching experience All staff members have coached state, regional and national champions

Mario Herrera - Grady HS, Atlanta, GA Jason Jordan - University of Utah Kyle Cheesewright – College of Idaho Carol Shackelford - Bingham HS, UT Nicholas Russell - California State, Long Beach


District in Detail Colorado Grande

District Committee Renee C. Motter, Chair Air Academy High School – USAFA, CO

William Allen Brown Woodland Park High School – Divide, CO

Pauline J. Carochi Canon City High School – Canon City, CO

Nancy Groves East High School – Pueblo, CO

David M. Montera Centennial High School – Pueblo, CO

compiled by Renee Motter

Tell us a little about your district and what makes it unique. The Colorado Grande district was started in 1979 by a group of coaches who had, for years, traveled far and wide for competition. Until just a few years ago, our district encompassed all of Southern Colorado as well as most of the Western Slope of the Colorado Rockies. So for years, many of our schools had to brave mountain passes in the dead of winter to make it to competition. However, despite our geographical distance, my favorite thing about our district is that we are more family than competitors. When I first joined the district as a coach, that was the first thing I noticed. Our coaches and kids are competitive and always push each other to be better, but we also love one another. Our kids hang out outside of tournaments, and one of their favorite things about Nationals is that their school team becomes everyone in the Colorado Grande district. Come visit one of our tournaments and

74

Rostrum | SPRING 2015

the first thing you’ll probably hear as you walk into the tab room is laughter as coaches catch up with each other and poke fun at our idiosyncrasies. What challenges do you face as a district? As with most districts these days, falling numbers is our biggest concern. While we’ve had a few new schools start programs, we have a lot of coach turnover among new coaches, and most programs in our district are experiencing fewer numbers of kids. While we have some very healthy programs, the decreasing number of programs and kids is a definite concern. What are some best practices you would like to share with other district leaders? I think two of my favorite things we do that are unique to our district concern honoring our coaches and kids. At our last district tournament of the year, before we start awards, we have the seniors line up beginning with those who have been involved

in forensics for one year and ending with those who have been involved all four years. Those seniors come to the mic, announce their name and event, how long they’ve been in forensics, and what their future plans are. For coaches, a few years ago, we started doing district coach awards for coaches as they earn their quad ruby and diamond awards. At that last awards ceremony, we present each coach who has earned a new degree with a Colorado Grande gavel. It’s a way for us as a district to honor the work they’ve done and celebrate them. How do you promote your program to administrators, school board members, parents, and/ or alumni? Every couple of years, we send out speech and debate program letters to all principals and superintendents with information about the benefits of speech and debate. Rather than send a blanket one to all administrators, we have different versions that fit different levels of programs (active, partially


www.speechanddebate.org

active, not active, no program). We’ve seen some good results with this, particularly with our schools and coaches who currently have programs, as it brings awareness to some of the fantastic things those coaches are doing with kids. What tips do you have for new coaches joining the Association? Stick it out. Don’t give up. If I had given up in my first few years (and, trust me, I wanted to), I wouldn’t have the friends—both coaches and former students—who have all had such an impact on my life. It’s worth the time, energy, and sacrifice. Are there particular resources or services that we offer that you want to highlight for new students or coaches? Our district coaches have been very pleased with the Resource Package. Once one of our coaches was able to sit down

“While the big successes of kids are exciting, the best thing about speech and debate is that it transforms the lives of every kid, every day.” and spend some time with it, she came back to show us the fantastic activities and information available. She did a demo for us, and it has been fantastic! In fact, we are hopeful that we’ll be able to offer the Resource Package and training to some of our new coaches as a way to help them get started. Do you have personal anecdotes of how speech and debate has transformed the lives of your students? Over the years, it has become pretty apparent that one of the biggest benefits of speech and debate is that it prepares

kids for lots of different things. Constantly, in emails and visits, kids say, “My interview was great because of speech and debate,” or “I could answer their question about something I’ve never heard of because of my training in speech and debate,” or “I gave a 15-minute presentation, and when I was done, my professor told the class they could look at my presentation as an example of ‘A’ work because of speech and debate.” While the big successes of kids are exciting, the best thing about speech and debate is that it transforms the lives of every kid, every day.

Rostrum | SPRING 2015 75


Diamond Coach Recognition Gregg Hartney’s high school coaching career has spanned 39 years, five schools, and two states. Known primarily as a Policy Debate coach, he has nevertheless qualified students for the National Tournament in every event as well as multiple Policy teams to the Tournament of Champions. He has served as a member of the District Committee and on Oklahoma’s Speech and Debate Advisory Board. In 2001, he was named the Outstanding Speech and Debate Instructor for the State of Oklahoma, and in 2007, he received the Outstanding Educator Award from the National Federation of High School Associations. In addition to teaching the competition debate classes at his school, Gregg has also taught Public Speaking, U.S. Government, Economics, Drama, World Affairs, and College Test Preparation. Early in his career, he served as the Assistant Track Coach at his school and more recently coached the Academic Team. Gregg met his wife Kathryn in the coaches’ lounge of a local speech tournament; she now teaches middle school speech and debate at Gregg’s feeder school. Nearly 28 years later, they have a shelf full of speech and debate awards won by their two daughters. Like most coaches, Gregg takes great pride in his graduated debaters and keeps up with their lives and careers as much as possible. In addition to the numerous attorneys, judges, doctors, professors, ministers, government officials, social service professionals, and educators, Gregg is particularly proud of the fact that at least 24 of his alums have gone on to coach speech and debate at the high school level.

Sixth Diamond u Sixth DIAMOND u Gail Naylor Silver Lake HS, KS February 23, 2015 16,997 points

78

Rostrum | SPRING 2015

Sixth Diamond u Sixth DIAMOND u Gregg C. Hartney Jenks HS, OK February 14, 2015 17,412 points

Gail Naylor began her 40-year teaching career in a small school in north central Kansas, but later moved to continue her career at Silver Lake High School. Here, Gail started a Chapter in 1981. Since this time, 78 of her students have qualified for the National Tournament with outstanding performances in CX, IX, USX, OO, DI, HI, Duo, LD, and Congress. She accrued four All Americans with more than 30 students reaching elimination rounds. She has qualified a debate team to the prestigious Bickel & Brewer IPPF quarterfinals. Under her direction, Silver Lake High School has won seven state speech championships with 46 individual state champions in various events, 14 state Lincoln-Douglas Debate champions, and seven Policy Debate championships. Gail has a 28-year history of service to the Flint-Hills district. Her colleagues have nominated Gail three times as Kansas Master Teacher of the Year. She received the Kansas State High School Activities Association Distinguished Service Award for leadership and dedication to coaching youth and service as the KSCA Liaison Speech Committee member for 10 years. The Kansas Speech Communications Association recognized Gail’s contributions by naming her Speech Teacher of the Year in 1990-91 and inducted her into their Hall of Fame in 2007. The Kansas Debate Coaches’ Association named her Coach of the Year in 2002-03 and inducted her into their Hall of Fame in 2004-05. She was inducted into the National Speech & Debate Association Hall of Fame in 2012 and most recently received the National Federation of High Schools Region 5 Citation for speech, debate, and theatre in 2014.


www.speechanddebate.org

Nick Panopoulos began his speech and debate experience by doing his student teaching in the spring of 1975 at Cheyenne East High School. After graduation, he was hired as a communication and theatre instructor at Laramie County Community College. During his tenure at the college, he assisted for several years with the Wyoming High School State Speech and Debate Tournaments. On several occasions, he coordinated all the judges for these tournaments. During these years, he had the opportunity to meet and work with Frank Sferra, who was brought in from Colorado as the state tournament director. Nick assisted with judges when the Wyoming schools separated from the Rocky Mountain-North district and formed their own Association district. Nick started teaching speech, debate, and theatre at Cheyenne Central High School in 1987. During his years at Central High, the chapter received the National Award for Excellence in Speech in 1990, 1997, and 2002. On numerous occasions, the school made the 300 Club. Nick qualified more than 40 students to Nationals with at least one in every event. The most students qualified were in Lincoln-Douglas Debate (11). At the 1998 Pattonville tournament, his LDer placed 4th. Over the years, several of the students have placed in the top 30 in their respective events. In 2005 and 2007, Nick was awarded the Wyoming High School Forensics Coach of the Season. He served on the Wyoming Hole In The Wall District Committee for 12 years. Nick took early retirement from Laramie County School District #1 in 2007. Nick has worked in Policy Debate tab at Nationals since the CharlotteMecklenburg North Carolina Tournament. In 2007, Nick started working with the Cherry Creek High School speech and debate team. He travels to Denver, CO each weekend of the season. He has found it very rewarding to work with such a large and diverse team as well as a great coaching team.

Fifth Diamond u Fifth DIAMOND u Mary T. Gormley Montville HS, NJ February 18, 2015 15,941 points

Fifth Diamond u Fifth DIAMOND u Nick Panopoulos Cherry Creek HS, CO October 20, 2014 15,380 points

Mary Gormley began her coaching career at Montville Township High School, NJ in 1988. Within the first four months of her first year, she was expected to take students on an overnight in Philadelphia and host a tournament of enormous proportions with the help of two juniors, two sophomores, and six fledgling freshmen. Given the initial whirlwind, she was ready for whatever came her way during the next 27 years. Since 1989, Mary has served in some capacity in New Jersey, beginning on the New Jersey Executive Board, then as Secretary and Treasurer, Vice President of Speech, and eventually serving as President of the New Jersey Forensics League for 14 years. Concurrently, Mary has served on the New Jersey District Committee, becoming District Chair in 2003, a position she still holds. As a coach, Mary has had countless state champions, national qualifiers, and many students who have advanced to out rounds in speech, debate, congress, and supplemental and consolation events, including finalists in Dramatic Interpretation and Congress, and a semifinalist in Lincoln-Douglas Debate. Mary’s greatest joy comes from the building of community within the speech and debate world, both in Montville and the New Jersey district. Utilizing the communication skills learned in competition, her students have grown into successful individuals in business, theater, medicine, law, finance, and education. Their legacy lives on in the halls of Montville, often coming back as judges and mentors, or from the distance as Facebook friends to the team. When asked by family and friends why she has essentially given up a Saturday life, the response is simple: “I see the best we can be in victory and defeat each week, assuring me that our future will be in good hands. There is no place else I’d rather be.”

Rostrum | SPRING 2015 79


Diamond Coach Recognition

80

u Fourth DIAMOND u Jane G. Boyd Grapevine HS, TX November 20, 2014 10,001 points

u Fourth DIAMOND u Anita Boyd Laurel Christian School, MN September 7, 2014 10,001 points

u Fourth DIAMOND u Arianne G. Fortune Blue Valley West HS, KS January 13, 2015 18,348 points

u Third DIAMOND u Scott C. Johnstone St. Thomas More HS, LA January 11, 2015 6,001 points

u Third DIAMOND u Matt Heimes Lincoln Southwest HS, NE January 17, 2015 8,856 points

u Third DIAMOND u Martha Anne Pierson Clear Springs HS, TX January 19, 2015 6,121 points

u Third DIAMOND u Herby Kojima Eagle HS, ID February 4, 2015 10,374 points

u Third DIAMOND u Ashley G. Bowser Broken Arrow HS, OK February 8, 2015 7,645 points

u Third DIAMOND u Jenny Cook University School, FL February 8, 2015 6,001 points

Rostrum | SPRING 2015


Diamond Coach Recognition

www.speechanddebate.org

u Second DIAMOND u Delta Fajardo-Norton Hastings Senior HS, NE November 10, 2014 3,000 points

u Second DIAMOND u Michele Lamons-Raiford Pinole Valley HS, CA November 23, 2014 3,402 points

u Second DIAMOND u Ryan Ray Henry Clay HS, KY December 4, 2014 7,253 points

u Second DIAMOND u Eric Emerson The Kinkaid School, TX January 6, 2015 3,000 points

u Second DIAMOND u Chris Sheldon Bancroft School, MA January 11, 2015 3,078 points

u Second DIAMOND u Nate Smith Lee’s Summit HS, MO January 19, 2015 4,250 points

u Second DIAMOND u Beth Eskin Timber Creek HS, FL January 26, 2015 5,127 points

u Second DIAMOND u Jamelle M. Brown Sumner Academy, KS January 26, 2015 8,341 points

u Second DIAMOND u Richard J. Kawolics Laurel School, OH February 2, 2015 3,001 points Rostrum | SPRING 2015 81


Diamond Coach Recognition

82

u Second DIAMOND u Patrick Daniels Baltimore City College HS, MD February 10, 2015 3,838 points

u First DIAMOND u Shyller McGuire Granbury HS, TX October 23, 2014 1,507 points

u First DIAMOND u Douglas Moore Center HS, TX November 3, 2014 1,501 points

u First DIAMOND u Tammi Raley Cypress Springs HS, TX November 13, 2014 1,632 points

u First DIAMOND u Stacie Gardner Elko HS, NV December 7, 2014 1,581 points

u First DIAMOND u Traci Dunn Marion C Early R5 HS, MO December 12, 2014 1,501 points

u First DIAMOND u Robert C. Carroll Munster HS, IN December 15, 2014 1,500 points

u First DIAMOND u Jennifer Manion Hoover HS, OH December 21, 2014 1,500 points

u First DIAMOND u Rodney Wren Wichita Collegiate Upper School, KS January 5, 2015 2,926 points

Rostrum | SPRING 2015


Diamond Coach Recognition

www.speechanddebate.org

u First DIAMOND u Jody Batie Haskell HS, OK January 6, 2015 2,121 points

u First DIAMOND u Christian Jones Union HS, OK January 7, 2015 2,059 points

u First DIAMOND u Kristin Carbone Martin County HS, FL January 20, 2015 1,502 points

u First DIAMOND u Cathy M. Strate Southeast HS, FL January 24, 2015 1,500 points

u First DIAMOND u Scott Moore Deer Lakes HS, PA January 26, 2015 1,501 points

u First DIAMOND u Michael L. Shaffer West Allegheny HS, PA January 28, 2015 2,872 points

u First DIAMOND u Nancy H. Green The McCallie School, TN January 31, 2015 1,501 points

u First DIAMOND u Oliver Nordlund Hellgate HS, MT January 31, 2015 2,482 points

u First DIAMOND u Daniel Baxter Bellarmine College Prep, CA February 2, 2015 1,500 points Rostrum | SPRING 2015 83


Diamond Coach Recognition

u First DIAMOND u Jason Newhouser Jefferson HS, IN February 9, 205 1,500 points

u First DIAMOND u Kristi Bogy Midlothian HS, TX February 16, 2015 1,500 points

u First DIAMOND u Patrick Johnson Westview HS, OR February 19, 2015 4,522 points

u First DIAMOND u Kellie Pfaff Perkins Terry Sanford HS, NC February 21, 2015 1,500 points

u First DIAMOND u Martin M. Zacharia William Fremd HS, IL February 21, 2015 1,500 points

u First DIAMOND u Suzette Burtoft Highland HS, OH March 11, 2015 1,502 points

Want to write for Rostrum? Email editor@speechanddebate.org with your ideas or comments!

8

84

Rostrum | SPRING 2015


www.speechanddebate.org

Donus D. Roberts Quad Ruby Coach Recognition The Association is proud to honor coaches who have earned their first 1,000 points.

(January 15, 2015 through March 15, 2015)

Brent T. Strom

New Trier Township High School, IL

1,458

Chris Harrow

Ardrey Kell High School, NC

1,061

Mike Alexander Harris

Kapaun Mount Carmel High School, KS

1,299

Malyssa Gabrielson

Sheboygan South High School, WI

1,057

Aleisha Readye

Dougherty Valley High School, CA

1,287

Mick Turpin

Liberty Sr. High School, MO

1,057

Kelly Schwab

Pembroke Pines Charter High School, FL

1,248

Zachary Calhoun

Pflugerville High School, TX

1,056

Peggy Belt

Norfolk High School, NE

1,245

Spencer P. Sheaff

Dowling Catholic High School, IA

1,052

Zach C. Pogany

Washington High School, SD

1,236

Brian Gibson

Northwest High School, NE

1,051

Kattie Leito

Plano West Sr. High School, TX

1,200

Kristen White

Olathe South High School, KS

1,050

Joseph Muller

Saint Mary’s Hall High School, TX

1,176

Kari Hagman

Grandview High School, CO

1,048

Shannon Jean Maney

University High School, IL

1,172

Kenneth A. Carter

Glenwood High School, IL

1,048

Cheryl Finley

South Lakes High School, VA

1,170

Mary A. Morales

Charlotte Catholic High School, NC

1,043

Ryan Roseen

Eastview High School, MN

1,169

Kathleen Dillon

Foothill High School, NV

1,040

Kelsey Johnson

LaMoure High School, ND

1,145

Patrick Jessee

Cary High School, NC

1,040

Natalie Hastings

West High School - Torrance, CA

1,145

Sean Hickey

Starrs Mill High School, GA

1,040

Laura Swenson

Jerome High School, ID

1,139

Mark Joseph McCandless

Brecksville Broadview Hts. High School, OH

1,037

Maria Skala

South Anchorage High School, AK

1,135

Yvonne Eype

Lamar Consolidated High School, TX

1,036

Bo Pons

Yankton High School, SD

1,127

Amy Middlebrooks

Calloway County High School, KY

1,036

Adam Hess

Syracuse High School, UT

1,121

Brent Decracker

Cedar Park Christian Schools, WA

1,033

Patrick Mesisca

Maranatha High School, CA

1,119

Charlie Betancourt

Gabrielino High School, CA

1,032

Billy Elles

Muldrow High School, OK

1,112

Trisha Nord

Columbiana High School, OH

1,030

Robin Jensen

Highland High School, ID

1,108

Stacy Dawson

Leland High School, CA

1,030

A. Scott Johnson

Paradise Valley High School, AZ

1,103

Naomi Bell

North Mesquite High School, TX

1,027

Justin Lee Tidwell

Robert E. Lee High School- San Antonio, TX

1,103

Diane Wagener

Battle Mountain High School, CO

1,027

Christina Calaluca

Royal Palm Beach High School, FL

1,098

Alex Kuch

Blaine High School, MN

1,027

Joanna Hickey

Boling High School, TX

1,096

Linda King

St. Joseph Catholic School, MS

1,026

Chris Flowers

Cabot High School, AR

1,093

Steve Hsing

Gabrielino High School, CA

1,025

Ryan C. Peoples

Berea-Midpark High School, OH

1,089

Brandon Garrett

Presentation High School, CA

1,022

Eric Johnson

Sturgis Brown High School, SD

1,088

Zachary Cohn

Solon High School, OH

1,022

Lyndsey Hinckley

Columbus High School, GA

1,087

Kerry Gruizenga

Skyview High School, MT

1,021

Greg Jones

Duluth East High School, MN

1,086

Ernie Leland

Mountain View High School, WA

1,018

Katrina Snell

Andover High School, MN

1,077

Joe Trainor

La Junta High School, CO

1,016

Anthony Banto

Rancho High School, NV

1,075

Karen Wolf

Falmouth High School, ME

1,014

Kathleen Johnson

Apple Valley High School, MN

1,075

Amanda Ford

Spring Hill High School, KS

1,008

Amy M. Zuccaro

Trinity High School, KY

1,073

Kevin Lok

Gabrielino High School, CA

1,006

Eric J. Schaefer

Chesterton High School, IN

1,072

Jared Chandler

Evanston High School, WY

1,005

Joseph Curry

Austintown Fitch High School, OH

1,068

Ruthie W. Metcalfe

Michael Krop High School, FL

1,003

Adriel Ezra Shearer

Sentinel High School, MT

1,067

Diane King

Fresta Valley Christian School, VA

1,001

Yatesh Singh

Lakeville North High School, MN

1,065

Eric Wong

Gabrielino High School, CA

1,001

Wendy King

Summit High School, CO

1,063

Rostrum | SPRING 2015 85


CLAREMONT  SUMMER  

EXCEPTIONAL  NATIONAL   AND  INTERNATIONAL   DEBATE  &  LEADERSHIP   COMMUNICATION   INSTRUCTION   2015  SUMMER  PROGRAMS      

3  sessions  for  middle  school  debate;  3   high  school  programs  for  national  and   international  debate,  leadership  and   professional  communication.  Join   more  than  500  students  in  residential   and  commuter  programs  this  summer.    

INFORMATION  AND  APPLICATION  FORMS   CLAREMONTSUMMER.ORG  

 

 

National  Middle  School  Debate  –  Middle  School  Public  Debate  Program  (MSPDP)     The   Public   Debate   Program   is   the   fastest   growing   educational/competitive   debate   outreach   network,   with   class   and   tournament   programming   in   20   countries.   More   than   200,000   teachers   and   students   will   participate   this   year;   the   program   expansion   plan   is   designed   to   reach   more   than   50,000   students   within   the   next   2   years.   Public   Debate   Program   secondary   school   instructional   materials  are  integrated  in  national  and  international  curricula.  Major  non-­‐profit  organizations  and   universities  use  PDP  resources  to  teach  professional  communication,  civil  rights,  girl’s  and  women’s   empowerment,   business   law,   finance,   political   science,   international   relations,   psychology,   literature,  and  argumentation.       The   Middle   School   Public   Debate   Program   (MSPDP)   proprietary   competitive   debate   format   was   developed   to   maximize   student   educational   outcomes,   accelerating   standards-­‐based   learning   and   promoting   sophisticated   public   speaking,   critical   thinking,   research,   argumentation,   and   refutation   skills.   The   format   was   designed   from   the   ground-­‐up   and   specifically   tailored   to   meet   the   needs   of   middle   school   students   –   it   is   based   on   a   comprehensive   review   of   educational   literatures   and   collaborations   with   graduate   educational   school   faculty,   educational   assessment   experts,   school   district   administrators,   teachers,   and   students.   Summer   instruction   offers   appropriate   training   for   elite   debating,   including   MSPDP   league   competition.   MSPDP   training   also   prepares   students   for   National   Speech   and   Debate   Association   events   (for   example,   PDP   debaters   have   won   NSDA   LD   and   TOC   Policy   championships,   9   of   the   21   students   qualifying   for   the   NSDA’s   international   debate   team   had  a  background  in  MSPDP  debating).       Three   summer   sessions   are   directed   to   MSPDP   instruction.   The   third   session,   a   SuperSession,   includes  a  summer  debate  tournament.  Instructors  and  judges  are  MSPDP-­‐certified.    

National  High  School  Debate  –  High  School  Public  Debate  Program  (HSPDP)   California  High  School  Debate  –  CHSSA  Parliamentary  Debate     Claremont   Summer   features   instruction   in   HSPDP   debating.   The   HSPDP   format   includes   many   features   of   the   middle   school   model   –   3-­‐person   teams,   Points   of   Information,   argumentative   heckling,  required  judge  disclosure  and  constructive  feedback  from  HSPDP-­‐certified  judges.  Speaking   times  are  longer.  The  HSPDP  adds  impromptu  argumentation  to  competition  –  select  topics  are  only   known   to   students   30   minutes   prior   to   the   beginning   of   a   debate.   All   features   of   the   MS/HSPDP   formats   are   carefully   selected   for   participant   professional   skills   development.     Summer   institute   students   learn   to   identify   and   apply   these   skills   to   classroom   discussions,   interviews,   social   networking,  and  professional  communication  in  the  workplace.     There   is   also   training   for   students   in   the   California   High   School   Speech   Association   (CHSSA)   parliamentary  debate  format,  a  sophisticated  impromptu  debating  model  developed  at  Claremont.   Students  will  learn  advanced  argument  theory  and  practice  to  succeed  in  one  of  the  most  popular   speech  and  debate  events  in  California.          

 

 

MIDDLE  SCHOOL  DEBATE   Three  sessions  featuring  instruction  in   the  MSPDP  format,  the  largest  and   fastest  growing  debate  model  for  5th-­‐ 8th  grade  students  –  the  SuperSession   includes  the  MSPDP  summer   championship  tournament    

Session  1  –  June  26-­‐July  1     Session  2  –  July  6-­‐11    

SuperSession  –  July  26-­‐August  2      

HIGH  SCHOOL  DEBATE   One  session  featuring  instruction  in   the  HSPDP  &  CHSSA  parliamentary   debate  formats    

July  17-­‐24      

PROGRAM  DIRECTOR   John  Meany   Director  of  Forensics   Claremont  McKenna  College   Claremont  Colleges  Debate  Union   john.meany@cmc.edu      


CLAREMONT  SUMMER  

 

2015  INTERNATIONAL   DEBATE  AND  LEADERSHIP   COMMUNICATION   PROGRAMS    

INTERNATIONAL  HIGH  SCHOOL   DEBATE  &  AUDITION  FOR  US   INTERNATIONAL  DEBATE   PROGRAM    

Training  for  US  students  interested  in   participating  in  international  debate   competition  and  educational  debate   exchanges  in  multiple  formats;   integrated  tournament  and  audition   for  US  team  tournament  travel    

International  High  School  Debate  (Multiple  Formats)     The   summer   program   prepares   students   to  join   the  International   Public  Debate   Program   (IPDP)  or   participate  in  other  international  debate  opportunities.  The  IPDP  is  the  nation’s  largest  program  for   international   debating   for   high   school   students.   Summer   instruction   includes   preparation   for   international   debating   in   4   debate   formats.   The   summer   program   includes   a   multi-­‐format   tournament.   Instructors   have   experience   at   more   than   40   major   international   high   school   debate   competitions,  including  more  than  a  dozen  world  championships.     Programming  includes  an  audition   for   2015-­‐16   US   international   traveling   teams.   In   the   past   3   years,   more   than   100   students   have   successfully   auditioned   for   international   debate   travel   during   the   summer   session.   Nine   award-­‐   winning   IPDP   students   have   been   selected   for   the   NSDA   international   debate   team   in   the   past   2   years.  2014  summer  students  are  now  planning  for  upcoming  2015  events  in  Mexico,  Korea,  Czech   Republic,  China,  Peru,  Morocco,  and  Barbados.      

Leadership  and  Professional  Communication  Program   Using  the  curricular  materials,  methods,  and  individual  and  group  presentation  exercises  developed   for  businesses,  non-­‐profit  organizations,  and  higher  education  faculty  and  students,  the  Leadership   and   Professional   Communication   Program   provides   training   in   extemporaneous   speaking,   roundtable  discussion  and  negotiation,  multimedia  presentation,  project  management,  interviewing   and   resume   writing,   and   social   professional   networking.   Students   prepare   school   and   community   projects  for  evaluation  by  field  professionals,  including  university  faculty,  lawyers,  financial  analysts,   and   non-­‐profit   organization   staff   from   the   nation’s   leading   academic   institutions,   businesses,   and   social   support   organizations.   Students   are   eligible   to   audition   for   the   2015-­‐16   Civics   in   Action   program,  a  social  and  political  advocacy  group  promoting  innovative  ideas  and  workable,  sustainable   educational   and   community   policies.   Ongoing   civics   programming   includes   national   and   international  photojournalism,  financial  literacy,  healthy  eating,  and  international  relations  projects.        

The  Claremont  Difference   Format  certification  required  for  all  institute  faculty  and  judges  –  the  Public  Debate  Program  is  the   world’s  only  debate  network/format  requiring  certification  of  all  trainers  and  judges  •  Staff  includes   founders  of  MS/HSPDP  and  CHSSA  Parliamentary  Debate  formats,  authors  of  16  debate  textbooks,   coaches   of   a   score   of   national   and   international   debate   champions   •   4-­‐1   student-­‐faculty   ratio   •   Integration   of   professional   communication   practice   in   all   debate/competition   training   for   future   student  academic  and  career  skills  development  •  Small  group  instruction  with  elective  options  for   high  school  students  (student-­‐directed  learning)  •  Individual  assessment  portfolios  for  each  student,   based  on  a  rigorous  evaluation  rubric  •  Cutting-­‐edge  theory  and  practice  •  Coaches  of  US  teams  for   more  than  40  major  international  tournaments  •  Ancillary  instruction  opportunities  –  Essay-­‐writing   sessions  with  college  writing  consultants  and  meetings  with  college  admission   and  financial  aid  staff;   guest  lecture  series  featuring  prominent  leaders  and  communication  consulting  professionals.  

 

June  25-­‐July  1    

  LEADERSHIP  AND   PROFESSIONAL   COMMUNICATION      

Public  speaking,  interviewing,   roundtable  discussion,  team  building,   resume  design,  program   management,  and  leadership  skill   development  –  Students  complete   civic  action  projects.  Leadership  and   professional  communication  program   is  adapted  from  successful  CCDU   leadership  training  models  for  higher   education,  non-­‐profit  organizations,   and  businesses.    

July  9-­‐16    

Apply  Early  and  Save   Discount  for  Early  Application   Information  Available  at   claremontsummer.org  

 


COACH PROFILE

Rep. Susan B. McLain “Speech and debate teams help extend classroom learning. They contribute to students having a passion to help and be active in policy making for public safety, education, business, and other service issues.” What was your first experience in speech and debate? I started speech and debate as a freshman at Canby High School. I debated Policy and did Extemp and Impromptu at my first tournament at Pacific University. How did you decide to become a coach? After competing four years in high school and four years in college, it was a very large part of my life. I wanted other students to experience it! Do you have any speech and debate mentors? If so, who were they, and what did they teach you? My high school coach Wilma Hicks and college coach Marion Rossi gave me so much support. They taught me to continue to read, research, and look at all sides of an issue. Mrs. Hicks was strong on organization and critical thinking. Mr. Rossi

88

Rostrum | SPRING 2015

worked more on message and persuasion attitudes and delivery. They both taught me to keep working on personal skills and improvement, and we can always do better! There is a place for many types of students on a speech and debate team, and it helps with all academic growth. Tell us a little about your school and the features that make your program unique. I have taught at three high schools in my career. Glencoe and Hillsboro High were both member schools. I have many excellent students with many personal and educational experiences. Glencoe High School’s team is very wellrounded. We do at least three types of debate, congress, and 12 individual events. I encourage all students to do debate and individual speeches.

How does participation in speech and debate activities change your students? Active students gain confidence, better reading, research, and critical thinking skills with participation in speech and debate activities. They are more capable of being active citizens and leaders. They have passion for current events, policy, and problem solving. In what ways has the National Speech & Debate Association helped you as a coach? As a leader? The Association has been an anchor for my coaching and personal experience. I took my first student to Nationals in 1975-76. The national experience gave me an organization and group of peers that have provided growth, events to share, and work opportunities to help students. The National Speech & Debate Association just keeps getting


www.speechanddebate.org

You recently joined the Oregon House of Representatives. Congratulations on this outstanding accomplishment! What impact does your involvement in speech and debate have on this new phase of your life and career? My 50 years of speech and debate activities prepared me for all the policy conversations, negotiations, and building partnerships. It really was exciting to be able to use the skills I have been using in classroom and debate activities as a coach. Citizen participation is so important. This is a way to have an active voice in community and state issues. When you think about the future of speech and debate as an activity, what excites you? What challenges do you foresee? Speech and debate teams help extend classroom learning. They contribute to students having a passion to help and be active in policy making for public safety,

education, business, and other service issues. It is a wonderful development and skill building activity. Leaders for our future are made here! What is your fondest memory from teaching and coaching speech and debate for more than 40 years? Watching a student find their way is what coaching is all about. Students and their growth and success stories are the best. I find so much joy in connecting with former students later in life, who share a special moment they have that started with their time with our team. Things like jobs, families, service, and awards were all part of their stories. Is there anything else you’d like to add? I have former students in all walks of life. They became engineers, teachers, authors, service and medical personnel, firemen, part of the CIA, scientists, and people who play music for fun and work. There are too many different paths to list. Currently, two of my students are active coaches!

coach profile

better and better at providing support to schools, coaches, and young people. I have enjoyed helping in the Extemp preparation area, working in National tab rooms, and attending summer work groups.

Rep. McLain is a fifth generation Oregonian, raised on farms in the Willamette Valley. A graduate of Western Oregon University (formerly O.C.E), Susan spent more than 40 years teaching and coaching speech and debate in Hillsboro. She was recently elected to serve as the Oregon State Representative to House District 29. She is currently serving on the House Committees of Agriculture and Natural Resources, Consumer Protection, Transportation, and Education.

Rostrum | SPRING 2015 89


SHOW YOUR ACHIEVEMENT ORDER YOUR OFFICIAL PINS & KEYS! National Speech & Debate Association official pins and keys are a classic and stylish way to show off your degree of achievement and will become a treasured keepsake for years to come! Gold coach keys and silver student keys are available in both 1-inch and 1.5-inch styles. Jewel accents can be ordered to indicate your level of achievement. Visit our online store for additional honor society insignia items.

DALLAS 2015 National Tournament Qualifier Pins are now available!

ORDER ONLINE:

store.speechanddebate.org


®

Mean Green Workshops • • • • • • • • • •

Student-Centered Learning. UNT is a pioneer in applying Best Teaching Practices in debate. Cutting Edge Innovation. Our workshops integrate major changes happening right now! Comfort and Safety are the primary concerns for Residential Life Director Kandi King Improve Debate Skills. We want you to leave as a better debater! We prioritize process over product. Spend time with instructors and in practice sessions learning skills to move to the next level! Directed by Coaches. The institute and workshops are directed by career high school teachers with years of classroom management experience. High School students are our first priority! Diversity of Staff and Students. We pride ourselves on diverse participation and arguments. Attention to Geography. We want you to leave with what’s most valuable for your situation. We prepare you to perform in your region and circuit, and we are committed to adapting to you. Unbelievable Staff & Cost. Why pay thousands more? Work with some of the Best Minds in debate. Commuter Option. Save more and stay at home with a discount of $100 per week! Squad Discounts & Financial Aid. We’ve awarded over $600,000 in aid and discounts in 11 years.

Policy Debate Director: Dr. Brian Lain (UNT) *Launching our Student-Centered model! Three Weeks: June 28 – July 18, $2500 Two Weeks: July 12 – July 25, $1800 *With guaranteed practice rounds and top-notch Policy & Kritik Instruction! Lincoln-Douglas Debate Director: Aaron Timmons (Greenhill School) Three Weeks: June 28 – July 18, $2500 Three Weeks: June 28 – July 11, $1800 Congressional Debate Faculty: Barbara Garner, Kevin Eaton, Daniella Cohen, Azhar Hussain Two Weeks: July 12 – July 25, $1500 Public Forum Debate Director: Cheryl Potts (Plano Senior) Two Weeks: July 5 – July 18, $1800 One Week: July 5 – July 11, $1000 Individual Events (Oral Interpretation or Public Speaking) Directors: Kristy Thomas, Bruce Garner, Chris Agee Session One: July 5 – July 11, $1000 Session Two: July 12 – July 18, $1000 Middle School Speech & Debate Beginners: July 5 – July 11, $750-1000 Experienced: July 6 – July 12, $750-1000 Teacher Workshop Director: Glenda Ferguson (Coppell) Two Weeks: June 28 – July 11, $800 *Fellowships Available!

Visit our website:

www.meangreenworkshops.com

Quesions? Contact Workshop Director Jason Sykes

director@meangreenworkshops.com ®

h r! 12tm e m u S


ACADEMIC ALL AMERICANS The Academic All American award recognizes students who have earned the degree of Superior Distinction (750 points); earned a GPA of 3.7 on a 4.0 scale (or its equivalent); received an ACT score of 27 or higher, or SAT score of 2000 or higher; completed at least 5 semesters of high school; and demonstrated outstanding character and leadership.

92

ALASKA Garrett Barron Rutherford

South Anchorage High School

ARIZONA Grant Knight

Chandler Preparatory Academy

CALIFORNIA Madeline Collins Ethan Dodd Matthew Hollander Stacy Liu Lesly Silva

Flintridge Sacred Heart Academy Ponderosa High School Corona Del Mar High School Leland High School Granada Hills Charter High School

FLORIDA B. Kwadjo N. Walker

Wellington High School

GEORGIA Brandon Fountain

Marist School

IDAHO Savannah Bair Conner Corbridge Bryce Jones Franklyn Stumbo Christian Weinrich

Hillcrest High School Hillcrest High School Hillcrest High School Shelley High School Hillcrest High School

ILLINOIS Gracie McCall Mia Temkin

Glenwood High School Niles North High School

INDIANA Shelby Hartzell Nicholas W. Pearish Kylee Elizabeth Rippy Erin Tupman

Concord High School La Porte High School Plymouth High School Cathedral High School

IOWA David Ehmcke Josh Kinyon Rebecca Owens

Sioux City East High School Bettendorf High School Spirit Lake High School

KANSAS Logan Gossett Jaya Mantovani Madeleine Swall

Mulvane High School Wichita Collegiate Upper School Bishop Miege High School

KENTUCKY Julia Gensheimer Jorge Rojas-Ortega

Gatton Academy Trinity High School

MASSACHUSETTS Erin Phillips

Chelmsford High School

MISSISSIPPI Eli Cummins Joseph Hasbrouck Abby Nguyen Lucy Pruitt

Oak Grove High School Pascagoula High School Oak Grove High School Oak Grove High School

Rostrum | SPRING 2015

(January 15, 2015 through March 15, 2015)

MISSISSIPPI (continued) Hattie Sumrow Jermaine Van Buren Jillian Walters Evan Woods

Oak Grove High School Oak Grove High School Oak Grove High School Oak Grove High School

MISSOURI Bailey Cordonnier Wyatt Gregory Zoe Lawson Garrett John Sauer

Central High School - St. Joseph Willard High School Howell North High School Blue Springs South High School

MONTANA Karissa Chouinard Emily Heitmann Siriana Lundgren

Hamilton High School Hamilton High School Skyview High School

NEBRASKA Austin Ahlman Allison Lambert Caleb Martin Drew Steinhauser

Norfolk High School Norfolk High School Lincoln High School Norfolk High School

NEW JERSEY Craig Chikis Ananya Joshi Mark Rinder

Freehold Township High School Matawan Regional High School Freehold Township High School

NEW MEXICO Sudeep Dasari Ani Nadiga

Los Alamos High School Los Alamos High School

OHIO Zack Buchholz Nick Downey Mary Grace Gorman Brooke Hemphill Brianna Schmidt

Wooster High School Mount Vernon High School Wooster High School Wooster High School Wooster High School

OREGON Lukas Schwab Brian Yang

Lincoln High School Lincoln High School

SOUTH CAROLINA Stephen H. Chen Stephanie Hong Carol Lee Elliot X. Lin

Riverside High School Riverside High School Riverside High School Riverside High School

SOUTH DAKOTA Seth Gerberding

Sturgis Brown High School

TENNESSEE Brendan Gaffney

The McCallie School

TEXAS Maranda Bailey Bryce Christopher Brady Eric Gagliano William H. Gatlin Summer Gregurek William Hale John Kinsella Amanda Sass Rakesh Vijayakumar

Leon High School Oak Ridge High School Magnolia High School Magnolia High School Victoria East High School Magnolia High School Lamar High School - Houston Magnolia High School Clear Brook High School

UTAH Madison Russell

Morgan High School


Attention Policy Debate Coaches:

 

A  Brand  New  Textbook  Resource  Designed  and  Developed  By  a  Winning  Coach!                  

debatevideos.org

Chapter   Topic  

   

1  

Introduction  to  Policy  Debate  

2  

The  Value  of  Embracing  Confusion  

3  

The  Essentials  of  Argumentation  

4  

Introduction  to  the  Surveillance  Resolution  

5  

Structure  of  a  Debate  Round  

6  

Speaker  Duties  for  Each  Speech  

7  

Introduction  to  Stock  Issues  

8  

Inherency  and  the  Status  Quo  

9  

Harms:  Quantitative  and  Qualitative  

10  

Solvency  Concepts  and  Strategies  

11  

Evidence:  Cutting,  Formatting,  and  Reading  

12  

Responding  to  Arguments  

13  

Cross  Examination  Strategies  

14  

Introduction  to  the  1AC  

15  

The  Power  of  Affirmative  Fiat  

16  

Flowing  and  Roadmaps  

17  

Introduction  to  the  1NC  

18  

Topicality  

19  

Effects  and  Extra  Topicality  

20  

Disadvantages  

21  

Counterplans  

22  

Kritiks  

23  

Answering  Topicality  

24  

Answering  Disadvantages  and  Impact  Calc  

25  

Answering  Counterplans  

26  

Answering  Kritiks  

27  

Rebuttals  

28  

Splitting  the  Block  

29  

Styles  of  Debate  and  Judge  Paradigms  

30  

How  Tournaments  Work  

  Learn  Better.  Debate  Better. 30  chapters.  30  videos.  HD  1080p.  Multiple  Subscription  Packages.   Your  students  can  log  in  and  watch  24/7  from  any  device.   All  based  on  the  2015-­‐2016  Policy  Debate  Resolution.     The  Best  Debate  Strategies  +  The  Best  Teaching  Strategies   Whether  you’re  a  veteran  coach  or  a  brand  new  teacher,  your  students   deserve  a  professional  textbook  with  updated  information  that  reflects  the   current  state  of  Policy  Debate.  Each  video  reflects  outstanding,  proven   strategies  that  work.       Featuring  Dr.  Josh  Anderson   Coach  of  the  2014  Policy  Debate  Top  Speaker  at  the        National  Speech  &  Debate  Association  National  Tournament   2007  Kansas  Teacher  of  the  Year     2007  National  Teacher  of  the  Year  Runner-­‐Up    

  Ask  your  administrator  if  textbook  funds  are  available  today!  

                     

 

 

 

 

 

 

                 

                                                                 Free Samples!

!  

 


rvice e C S i t t n a e t i d ons u t S The following students have received new Student Service Citations from the National Speech & Debate Association in recognition of outstanding service to speech and debate education. Students receive a citation for every 100 service points earned through activities such as community speaking or outreach. A single act of service usually garners between two and five service points. These citations were earned between January 15, 2015 and March 15, 2015.

94

Student Service Citation, 6th Degree (600+ points) Jesse Payan Arroyo High School

CA

601

Student Service Citation, 5th Degree (500+ points) Alex Giolito Brophy College Prep Bixby High School Brook Becker

AZ OK

520 501

Student Service Citation, 4th Degree (400+ points) Jacky Ye Arroyo High School Truman High School Olivia Wright Max Cline Skyline High School Chaminade High School Julian Mancini Hunter Miller Home Educator’s Outsourcing Solutions

CA PA UT NY TX

420 415 400 400 400

Student Service Citation, 3rd Degree (300+ points) Chad Jurado Rio Grande High School George Sawyer Truman High School Marshall High School Madison Woolsey Sunjay Venkatraman Matawan Regional High School Bailey Macejak Pine View School Naba Rahman Pine View School Jonathon Shapiro Beachwood High School Barrett Young Nixa High School Micaela Murphy Truman High School Ashley M. Otken Marshall High School Sam Schimek Pine View School Neena Patel Pine View School Chris Winton-Burnette Pine View School Andres Vazquez Arroyo High School Trinity Valley School Timothy Baker Caleb Hoffman Muscatine High School Kathryn Nagle Bangor High School Autumn Jocas Hoover High School Anna Masengarb Muscatine High School

NM PA MO NJ FL FL OH MO PA MO FL FL FL CA TX IA ME OH IA

398 375 370 355 347 347 343 343 340 330 327 324 322 316 310 309 309 307 304

Rostrum | SPRING 2015


www.speechanddebate.org

Student Service Citation, 3rd Degree (300+ points) Blakely Watkins Towanda Jr-Sr High School Valeria Perez Buffalo Grove High School Buffalo Grove High School Kevin Angeliu Elan Friedland Los Gatos High School

PA IL IL CA

304 302 301 300

Student Service Citation, 2nd Degree (200+ points) Tracey Ermer Gwynedd Mercy Academy Riley Poynter Noblesville High School Mulvane High School Bradi Allen Michaela Sabbah Yucaipa High School Jackson Dockery Hinsdale Central High School Alhambra High School Kristie Sham Ivan Syritsyn Westminster School - Augusta Servite High School Nick Crosson Micheal Hassel Paducah Tilghman High School Seymour High School David McConnell Hayley Fatzinger Hoover High School Carl Sandburg High School Robert Kelly Sara Quintana Rio Grande High School Matawan Regional High School Vanessa Ruiz Landon Mays El Dorado Springs High School Mulvane High School Taylor Bradley Telyse S. Masaoay Central High School - Springfield Norman High School Brennan Canon Caroline Vana Towanda Jr-Sr High School Mulvane High School Levi Long Blake Robinson Noblesville High School North Hall High School Riley Smith Richard L. Naffziger Jemez Mountain Home School Home Educator’s Outsourcing Solutions Hannah Bryant Elyssa Albaugh Princeton High School Nathan Ferrell Norman High School Truman High School Elizabeth McGoldrick Shaloni Pinto Brophy College Prep Bishop McGuinness High School Christopher G. Allen Tyler Sheets Towanda Jr-Sr High School Michael Tarasovich Cardinal Wuerl North Catholic High School Sean Bloomer Truman High School Delaney Gagliano Downers Grove North High School Katie Hopkins Lebanon High School Ryan Kirby Wheaton Warrenville South High School Katy Preston Lebanon High School Chris Castagnetti Elko High School Jenna Pletcher Norton High School Tiana Menon Palisade High School Kelly Young Los Gatos High School Bridgette Anderson Kimball Area High School Irvin Noe Gonzalez Rio Grande High School Lily Schwab Noblesville High School Caelan R. Mangan Sioux Falls Lincoln High School Noah W. Thompson East Grand Forks Sr High School Bixby High School Keith Oler Madison Smith Yucaipa High School Cassady Coffman Yucaipa High School

PA IN KS CA IL CA GA CA KY TN OH IL NM NJ MO KS MO OK PA KS IN GA NM TX TX OK PA AZ OK PA PA PA IL MO IL MO NV OH CO CA MN NM IN SD MN OK CA CA

293 285 270 270 257 257 250 248 248 245 241 240 240 240 236 235 235 234 233 230 230 230 229 228 227 225 225 225 222 222 221 220 219 215 215 215 212 210 206 206 205 205 205 203 202 201 201 200

Rostrum | SPRING 2015 95


96

Student Service Citation, 2nd Degree (200+ points) Rachel Cruz Palisade High School Miles Eichenhorn Midwest Speech & Debate Conway High School Tarek Esaw Carolina Garcia Yucaipa High School Sarthak Garg Little Rock Central High School Abby Grisez Hoover High School Connor Lichtenwalter Conway High School Marshall High School Charlotte Lines Josh May Palisade High School University High School Misa Nagase Mary Nail Conway High School Ravenwood High School Reilly O’Connell Dean Patterson Little Rock Central High School Hoover High School Kathryn Poe Sophia Schick College Prep Conway High School Yessica Serrano Trey Smith Conway High School Mulvane High School Karsan Turner Chinmay Vaidya Los Gatos High School

CO MI AR CA AR OH AR MO CO IL AR TN AR OH CA AR AR KS CA

200 200 200 200 200 200 200 200 200 200 200 200 200 200 200 200 200 200 200

Student Service Citation, 1st Degree (100+ points) Kate Farwell Valley International Prep Jessica Kane Atlantic Community High School Little Rock Central High School Jacob Sutter Trish Bhattacharyya Little Rock Central High School Yucaipa High School Karen Ruiz Ariadna Lubinus Home Educator’s Outsourcing Solutions Mulvane High School Lauren Runquist Stewart Aslan Palisade High School Palisade High School Anna Blackford Robyn Butts Rio Grande High School Max Kowalezyk Palisade High School Conway High School Wayd Risner Shaun Arhelger Palisade High School Palisade High School Leslie Castenada Carsyn Endres San Juan High School Isabelle Haderlie Palisade High School Palisade High School Austin Magura Malaia Martinez Palisade High School Matthew May Palisade High School Emad Shahnoushi Palisade High School Jay Shearrow Palisade High School Kambrie Smith Palisade High School Griffin Bodhi Molinary-Kopelman Valley International Prep Grace Carruth The Bear Creek School Antonio Perez Marshall High School Kalyn Nichole Reading Marshall High School Lucas Campos Hood River Valley High School Elaine Huang Arroyo High School Margo Rometo Pine View School Alexis Quintana Yucaipa High School Yucaipa High School Emily Corn Isabelle Daigle Bangor High School Nicole Labun Hinsdale Central High School Hannah Shields Thompson Downers Grove North High School Olivia Paige Nickell Rowan County Sr High School

CA FL AR AR CA TX KS CO CO NM CO AR CO CO UT CO CO CO CO CO CO CO CA WA MO MO OR CA FL CA CA ME IL IL KY

199 199 199 198 196 190 189 186 185 185 185 185 180 180 180 180 180 180 180 180 180 180 174 170 170 170 165 165 165 156 155 155 155 155 153

Rostrum | SPRING 2015


www.speechanddebate.org

Student Service Citation, 1st Degree (100+ points) Seth Latiolais Cecilia High School Andrea Martinez University High School Mulvane High School Chase Penka William Wang Pine View School Sasha Rabich Valley International Prep Patrick Aimone Servite High School Jacob Glick Breckenridge High School Marist School Liam Kirchner Kaelani Kose Marshall High School Lebanon High School Alexis Nelson Steven E. Rastrelli Centennial High School North Broward Preparatory School Katelin Scolaro Anna R. Huntsman Perry High School Pine View School Aravind Byju Julia Gensheimer Gatton Academy Bob Jones Academy Ranna Harley Haley Marie Harris Marshall High School Wimberley High School Madison Houser Trevor Martin Smith Van Vleck High School Valley International Prep Gift Riley-Norman Daniel Rojek Hoover High School Hendrickson High School Christina Bui William L. DeMarce Luther Preparatory School Jemez Mountain Home School Michael Thomas Booton Kiana Hughley Middletown High School Hinsdale Central High School Roshni Lavelle Shawn Haq El Camino Real Charter High School Maicy Vossen Kimball Area High School Noblesville High School Zachary Baker Madeline Boyd Yucaipa High School Rachel Dexter Jefferson High School Pine View School Alexandra Knapp Callee Olivier Yucaipa High School Wooster High School Matt Friedhoff Rem Aitbouchireb Kerr High School Ashtonn Thompson Muskogee High School Mulvane High School Holly Carter Dorothy Clark Blaine High School Wimberley High School Cody Claussen Rebecca Gray Campbell County High School Jade Jakubowski Harrisonville High School Kendra Patch Wimberley High School Maddie Paul Sioux Falls Lincoln High School Torri Spencer Mulvane High School Pine View School Ellie Tsuchiya Desmond Williamson Mulvane High School Charles Winston Needham High School Isy Pacini Spring Creek High School Tessa K. Polen Perry High School Hannah Bailey Maconaquah High School Sally Goldman Little Rock Central High School Logan Gossett Mulvane High School Christen Massouras Hinsdale Central High School Cindy Aguilar Marshall High School Sophia Hernandez Yucaipa High School Brett W. Hund Centennial High School

LA IL KS FL CA CA TX GA MO MO CO FL OH FL KY SC MO TX TX CA OH TX WI NM OH IL CA MN IN CA IN FL CA OH TX OK KS MN TX WY MO TX SD KS FL KS MA NV OH IN AR KS IL MO CA CO

150 150 150 150 149 148 147 145 145 145 145 142 141 140 140 140 140 140 140 139 139 138 138 137 137 137 136 136 135 135 135 135 135 134 132 132 130 130 130 130 130 130 130 130 130 130 130 129 129 128 127 127 127 125 125 125

Rostrum | SPRING 2015 97


Student Service Citation, 1st Degree (100+ points) Rockdale Magnet School For Science And Technology Morgan Riemersma Janae Robinson Belleville West High School Ruthie Satchell Jefferson High School Wauseon High School Cole Stiriz Neal Bhandari Clark High School Linea Nicole Dalzell Mountain Home High School Gabrielle Fox Marshfield High School Annie Herbster Shikellamy High School Ana Bakke West Springfield High School Fishers High School Natalie Jacobs Sam Colwell Lincoln Southeast High School Bishop McGuinness High School Cheyenne Rose Martin Emily Ives Angelotti Centreville High School Gresham-Barlow High School Robbie Cantrell Annika Nicole Davenport Jemez Mountain Home School Salem Hills High School Sierra Draper Mario Garduno Mountain Home High School East Ridge High School Garrett Hildebrandt Kjersti Hodgson Sky View High School Comeaux High School Parker Leblanc Mark May East Ridge High School Gabrielino High School Matthew Munoz Soojin Park Central High School - Springfield Valley International Prep Chris Rubin Victor J. Sanchez Wellington High School Shikellamy High School Aaron Schaffer-Neitz Will Sera Home Educator’s Outsourcing Solutions Pine View School Amelia Stern Rebekah Sterrett Jefferson High School Harrisonville High School Mark Tanner Cody Townsend Mulvane High School Madison P. Whittaker Muscatine High School Oak Grove High School Jillian Walters Loqman Adnane William Tennent High School Haskell High School Cheyann Benn Deborah K. Lee Alhambra High School Sabrina Orsman Mulvane High School William Tennent High School Cameron Zurmuhl Josephine O’Connor-Miller Lincoln High School Cameron Rademacher Marshfield High School Liel S. Dolev Newton South High School Molly Dunn River Valley High School Rahul Gosain Scarsdale High School Connor R. Shea Natick High School Matalyn Aldridge Jefferson High School Jayson Alvarado Harlingen High School Deborah Colimon Wellington High School Brenna Crow Bixby High School Hannah Ehmcke Sioux City East High School Jacob Flekier Blue Valley North High School Cyrus Ghavami Bixby High School Caroline Green Oak Grove High School Tyler Herron Belleville West High School Caroline Kieffer East Ridge High School Erin Milligan Hoover High School Lily Rogers Yucaipa High School Lauren Savoy Truman High School

98

Rostrum | SPRING 2015

GA IL IN OH NV ID MO PA VA IN NE OK VA OR NM UT ID MN UT LA MN CA MO CA FL PA TX FL IN MO KS IA MS PA OK CA KS PA IA MO MA MN NY MA IN TX FL OK IA KS OK MS IL MN OH CA PA

125 125 125 125 124 123 123 123 122 122 121 121 120 120 120 120 120 120 120 120 120 120 120 120 120 120 120 120 120 120 120 120 119 118 118 118 118 118 117 117 116 116 116 116 115 115 115 115 115 115 115 115 115 115 115 115 115


www.speechanddebate.org

Student Service Citation, 1st Degree (100+ points) Ashton Taber Harrisonville High School Marina Tallman Nixa High School Jefferson County High School Keegan Tucker Bryce Yoder Penn High School Clinton Bradford Exeter R-6 High School Madeleine B. Landau Milton Academy Torin Siegel Servite High School Rancho Bernardo High School Ishan Timalsina Conor Lanning Brookings High School LaMoure High School Riley Loeks Maya Origel Gabrielino High School Milton Academy Marshall M. Sloane Justin Dean Burton Independence Truman High School LaMoure High School Carson Good Leeanne Hart Lebanon High School Hinsdale Central High School Caity Tirakian Brittney Muske LaMoure High School Cinco Ranch High School Rachel Nathalie Rios Timothy Burger Chaminade High School Glenbrook South High School Anna Busch Justin Chen Hanover High School Salina High Central Grace Claman Loie Greenwood Gahanna-Lincoln High School Kimball Area High School Kaylee Hechtel Eli Jardell Kickapoo High School Kingston High School Gillian McCormick Marcus M. Mills Muscatine High School Tess Owens Brookings High School Williams High School Shray Tapiawala Josiah Taylor Home Educator’s Outsourcing Solutions Nate Wilton Wimberley High School Carlsbad High School Milanka Trang Nicholas Aranda Hereford High School Rancho Bernardo High School Roya Eskandar Sydney Michelle Oppenhein Mountain Home High School Blake Weston Exeter R-6 High School Lincoln Southeast High School Sam Bates Ari Jacobson Glenbrook South High School Sumner Academy Jonathan Perez Benjamin T. Rankin Central High School - Springfield Eshani Chakrabarti Milton Academy Nevia Martinez Galena Park High School Matthew Mellies Western High School William Barker William Tennent High School Belleville West High School Donnie Bland Taylor Cozort Eaglecrest High School Jake Crain Connersville Sr High School Mathew Cusson Mountain View High School Samuel S. Fidler Newton South High School Joseph Gennaro Gagliano Rowan County Sr High School Anya E. K. Graubard Newton South High School Nicholas Griffin William Tennent High School Elizabeth Kingaby Central Cabarrus High School Joseph Lettieri Chaminade High School Celeste McCabe Yucaipa High School Bekah O’Reilly Central Cabarrus High School Round Rock Christian Academy Phillip Pergande

MO MO TN IN MO MA CA CA SD ND CA MA MO ND MO IL ND TX NY IL NH KS OH MN MO WA IA SD TX TX TX CA TX CA ID MO NE IL KS MO MA TX FL PA IL CO IN AZ MA KY MA PA NC NY CA NC TX

115 115 115 115 114 114 114 114 113 113 113 113 112 112 112 112 111 111 110 110 110 110 110 110 110 110 110 110 110 110 110 109 108 108 108 108 107 107 107 107 106 106 106 105 105 105 105 105 105 105 105 105 105 105 105 105 105

Rostrum | SPRING 2015 99


Student Service Citation, 1st Degree (100+ points) Chuck Quinn Glenbrook South High School Levi Rees Wauseon High School Brennan Dale Rilea Wrenshall School ISD #100 Julia Rosenstengel Belleville West High School Asad Sayani Hebron High School Tyler Thompson Morristown West High School Ryan Vaughn Norton High School Jackson Veazie New York Mills High School Quintin Walker East Ridge High School Donovan Watts Bishop Ward High School Zaki Alattar James E Taylor High School Sara Daley Klein High School Bailey Lane Carrollton High School Destinee Thornton Ben Davis High School John King El Dorado Springs High School Parker Samuel Noyce Mountain Home High School Olivia Copsey Bethany Christian High School Sara Maria DeClue Ritenour High School Nicholas Magda Sky View High School Harrisonville High School Andrew Tarter Lindsey Young Mars Hill Bible School Michaela Canella Kickapoo High School Peter Mann Bancroft School Scottsdale Preparatory Academy Annie Mazzarella Brian McCormack Cathedral Prep Seminary Colin Tighe Hutchinson High School Matt Acosta Gabrielino High School Kelvin Amarty Bronx Preparatory Charter School Lakeville North High School Alex Anderson Cody Bishop Douglas MacArthur High School Payton Black Wauseon High School Sam Bruner Marshall High School Daniel Casanova Gabrielino High School Tehreem Chaudhry Lawrence High School Evan Michael Culligan Downers Grove North High School Andrew Harrington Cape Elizabeth High School Anna Lee Hawkins Jefferson County High School Jillian Hebert Glenbrook South High School Canon City High School Brianna Heifner Erik Hernandez Buffalo Grove High School Jazmine Huertas Cozad High School Yucaipa High School Noah Hurtado Nixa High School Lexi Jackson Rachel Kazee Rowan County Sr High School Erich Kump Bishop Ward High School Flavia Lima Trinity Valley School Benjamin T. Makishima Milton Academy Monica Middleton John Paul II High School Brendan Morey Brophy College Prep Maria N. Potratz Harrisburg High School Beth Revelo Cozad High School Caeley Riorden Central Cabarrus High School Ellie Schob Gabrielino High School Zach Tvrdy Cozad High School Jessica Viehman Bethel Park High School Veronica Marie Watts North Hall High School Dakota Wood Columbus Community High School Johnathan Zach Prospect High School

100

Rostrum | SPRING 2015

IL OH MN IL TX TN OH MN MN KS TX TX OH IN MO ID IN MO UT MO AL MO MA AZ NY KS CA NY MN TX OH MO CA KS IL ME TN IL CO IL NE CA MO KY KS TX MA TX AZ SD NE NC CA NE PA GA IA IL

105 105 105 105 105 105 105 105 105 105 104 104 104 104 103 103 102 102 102 102 102 101 101 101 101 101 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100


Education First Nationally Recognized Staff Proven Student Success SWSDI 2015 Faculty Includes: • Coaches from nationally recognized programs • Locally and nationally successful lab leaders • Top competitors from the college circuit

2015 Summer Institute

July 5-19, 2015

Barrett Honors College Arizona State University What our students think SWSDI does best: “The close knit environment of the lab, and the consistent effort of the lab leaders” “The mix of instructors. We had people with a lot of experience, as well as the perspectives of judges, coaches, and competitors.” “There was a lot of communication and help among everyone. There was a very comfortable feeling that I really liked & hope to feel again next year.” “SWSDI sparked a passion for forensics in our daughter. They strike the perfect balance between rigor and fun.”

Find out More and Register at www.swsdi.org

Access, not Profit SWSDI is a not-for-profit camp. That means we’re not concerned about making money, we’re interested in making sure that everybody has access to the tools that improve performance. Cost: $1095 for two weeks, $780 for one week. Room and board included. Commuter pricing offered. We believe that the camp experience is the best tool for levelingup your debate skills, and for building strong teams and communities. Come join us in July.


National Federation of State High School Associations

®

NFHS Speech, Debate and Theatre Association Member Benefits:

• Insurance coverage, including excess general liability • Subscription to High School Today, the newest NFHS publication • Training Materials and Resources • Access to Online Publications • Professional Development • Network of Communication All of these benefits and more for a $20 annual membership fee! To join, go to www.nfhs.org and click on “NFHS for You”

Join Today NFHS

SPEECH, DEBATE & THEATRE ASSOCIATION

NFHS Publications Available for Purchase Forensic Quarterly

The Forensic Quarterly (FQ) has remained one of the most credible and valuable resources for policy debaters and coaches across the country. Four issues are published each year: FQ1, an overview of the current policy debate topic area; FQ2, a bibliography of available research materials; FQ3, potential affirmative cases; and FQ4, possible negative cases.

NFHS Coach’s Manual for Speech and Debate

The NFHS Coach’s Manual for Speech and Debate is designed specifically for novice coaches. The manual contains information on a number of elements of coaching, including contest descriptions, finances, travel, judging, attending tournaments, and building and developing a team. The loose-leaf notebook format makes it easy to add information specific to your state.

Training DVDs

Videos are available on a variety of topics including Public Forum Debate, Lincoln Douglas Debate and Original Oration.

To order any of these materials, call NFHS customer service toll free at 1-800-776-3462 or order online at www.nfhs.com.


www.speechanddebate.org

THE EARLIEST BIRD SUMMER DEBATE WORKSHOP June 14-21, 2015

One week intensive camp focused on in round performance: Receive evidence in advance Ÿ 3 debates/day Ÿ 3 rebuttal redos/day Qualified, Experienced Judges Dr. Jarrod Atchison- DOD WFU Terrell Taylor- University of Mary Washington Justin Green- Head Coach WFU Christina Vitolo-Hadad- WFU Coach Val Macintosh- Niles West High School Junior Faculty: Calum Matheson- Harvard/DOD Pittsburgh Maddie Langr (2015 NDT 1st Rd) Rayvon Dean (1st speaker 2014 TOC) Brian Rubaie- Barstow School/UC Berkeley Corinne Sugino (1st place 2014 Weber RR) Rebecca Steiner- WFU Coach earliestbird.org Ÿ facebook.com/EarliestBird Ÿ ebird@wfu.edu

Welcome New Schools Spanish Fort High School

AL

(January 15, 2015 through March 15, 2015)

Ascension Episcopal School

LA

Atanas Borov School

Bulgaria

International High School Of New Orleans

Dr. Ivan Bogorov FLS

Bulgaria

George Washington Academy

LA

Nikola Yonkov Vaptsarov FLS

Bulgaria

Gould Academy

ME

University High School Academy-Southfield

MI

Morocco

ACL Academy

CA

Christopher High School

CA

Clinton High School

Dublin High School

CA

Agape Christian School

Saipan

Pacific Ridge School

CA

Bottineau High School

ND

Village Academy High School

CA

Fayetteville-Manlius High School

NY

MO

Brentwood College School

Canada

Garnet Valley High School

PA

Gordon Graydon Memorial Secondary School

Canada

West Brook High School

TX

Shanghai Foreign Language School

China

Providence Hall High School

UT

BioTech @ Richmond Heights 9-12

FL

Roanoke Catholic School

VA

North White High School

IN

Washington High School Of Information Technology

Medicine Lodge High School

KS

GEMS World Academy

USD 355, Ellinwood Public Schools

KS

WI Zimbabwe

Rostrum | SPRING 2015 103


Careers Employment Opportunities at the National Speech & Debate Association Membership and Development Intern (Des Moines, IA) The Membership & Development Intern is a recent high school graduate or college student who serves in a direct support role to members and donors, performing administrative and correspondence work with Development colleagues and research, writing, and customer support for the Membership Department. To apply, contact amy.seidelman@ speechanddebate.org and indicate if you are interested in a summer internship (on-site in Des Moines) or a school-year internship (on-site or remote).

Programs and Marketing Intern (Des Moines, IA) The Programs & Marketing Intern is a recent high school graduate or college student who demonstrates exceptional communication and customer service skills, lending support to content generation, graphic design efforts, sales and store management, program coordination, and resource generation.  To apply, contact amy.seidelman@speechanddebate.org and indicate if you are interested in a summer internship (on-site in Des Moines) or a school-year internship (on-site or remote).

Employment Opportunities in the Speech and Debate Community Director of Debate Opening (Apple Valley High School, MN) Apple Valley High School (MN) is seeking an experienced coach to lead the debate program in coaching responsibilities and work directly with the current Director of Forensics in administrative duties for the debate program. Expertise in debate (Lincoln-Douglas, Public Forum, and Congressional) along with the willingness and ability to facilitate the debate program is desired. Apple Valley is an established speech and debate program with a supportive administration and strong parent support. Teaching positions in several core disciplines are available for applicants. All teaching positions require licensure. Contact Bryan Hagg, Director of Forensics, at Bryan.Hagg@ district196.org or Pam Cady Wycoff at Pam.Wycoff@district196. org regarding your questions and application procedures.

Berkeley Preparatory School Seeks Policy Coach/Teacher (Tampa, FL) Berkeley Preparatory School in Tampa is seeking qualified applicants for the position of History teacher and Policy Debate coach. Berkeley has a growing and very dedicated young debate

104

Rostrum | SPRING 2015

team. The team travels an extensive national schedule and competes exclusively in Policy Debate. I (Mike Speer) expect to remain involved with the team organizing travel, overseeing the budget, looking after administrivia, and participating in practices, meeting, and travel so that our new coach has maximum opportunity to work with students. Berkeley’s entire administrative team is thoroughly committed to having a nationally successful debate team. Berkeley debate parents are enthusiastic and positive in their support for the team. At the moment, Berkeley does not have a formal debate class but there is administrative support to create one in the future. We do offer two sections of a course called “Reasoning, Research, and Rhetoric” which offers a flexible curriculum and could be reshaped as a debate class. Interested candidates should submit a letter of interest, a resume, and contact information for two debate-related references to Mike Speer at Speermik@ berkeleyprep.org.

Boston Debate League (Boston, MA) Director of Operations: As the BDL begins the implementation of its ambitious 5-year strategic plan, it seeks a Director of Operations (DOO) who will strengthen and manage the human, financial and other operational resources fundamental to the Boston Debate League’s continued success and growth in the Boston community.  This is a great opportunity for a motivated leader who is committed to sustainably growing an organization’s internal capacity during a period of expansion. After-School Program Manager: The Boston Debate League seeks a dynamic urban educator to serve as an After-School Program Manager to support a cohort of BPS schools competing in the Boston Debate League. The After-School Program Manager will train and support the teacher debate coaches from their schools as they build a growing team and strengthen the experience of their students in debate. After-School Spanish Program Manager: The Boston Debate League seeks a dynamic urban educator to serve as an AfterSchool Spanish Program Manager to support a cohort of BPS schools competing in the Boston Debate League.  The AfterSchool Program Manager will train and support the teacher debate coaches from their schools as they build a growing team and strengthen the experience of their students in debate. For more information about the Boston Debate League, please visit www.bostondebate.org. To Apply: Confidential inquiries, nominations, referrals, and/ or resumes with a detailed cover letter outlining how skills and experience demonstrate an ability to meet the challenges and opportunities of this position, should be forwarded in Word or PDF format to: Veronica Switzer, Talent Manager, Boston Debate League, 225 Friend St. Ste 401, Boston, Massachusetts 02114, careers@bostondebate.org. Electronic submission of materials is strongly preferred.


www.speechanddebate.org

More Employment Opportunities Available Online:

www.speechanddebate.org/careers Greenhill School Seeks Educator(s) with Speech and Debate Experience (Addision, TX) Greenhill School in Addison (a suburb of Dallas) has openings in History, Spanish, upper level Math, and English for the 20152016 school year and is looking for someone with speech and debate experience to help to grow the middle school program, in addition to assisting the upper school speech and debate team as well. Greenhill has two full time coaches currently (a Director of Debate and an Associate Director of Debate) who currently teach all of the speech and debate classes. The growth of the program provides an opportunity to add additional staff if the right person came along. For more information about the school, please visit the website at www.greenhill.org/Page/ About-Us/Welcome-to-Greenhill. For information about the speech and debate portion of the position, please contact Aaron Timmons at timmonsa@greenhill.org.

HOYAH Academy (Irvine, CA) Seeks Speech and Debate Instructors Debate Instructor Applicant Requirements: 1. Has acquired a B.A. or B.S. 2. Knowledge and mastery of debate, especially Parliamentary, Lincoln-Douglas, Public Forum, etc. 3. Experience with teaching debate students. 4. Is available for judge training and participate as a judge in all tournament events. Speech Instructor Applicant Requirements: 1. Has acquired a B.A. or B.S. 2. Knowledge and experience teaching speech, particularly Impromptu, Expository, Dramatic Interpretation, etc. 3. Experience with teaching students. *Must be able to do a demo teaching class if asked to come back for a second interview. **Class times are Monday through Friday, 3:00 p.m. to 9:00 p.m. Please email resume or any questions to hoyahusa@gmail.com. Reference “Speech and Debate Instructor Position” in the subject line.

Idaho Falls High School Seeks Speech and Debate Coach (Idaho Falls, ID) Idaho Falls High School in Idaho Falls, ID is seeking a speech and debate coach for the 2015-2016 school year. All coaching positions require a current Idaho Department of Education teacher certificate. Experience coaching the activity is a plus. Candidate must work effectively with students, parents, and staff. Check with Idaho Falls School District 91 at http://www. generalasp.com/d91/onlineapp/default.aspx for more specific information regarding schedule, duties, etc.

John F. Kennedy High School is actively seeking a full time head Debate Coach (Cedar Rapids, IA) John F. Kennedy High School in Cedar Rapids, IA is actively seeing a full time head Debate Coach. We are looking for an individual with speech and debate experience to grow our new forensics program. The coaching position is paid in addition to the teaching position. Currently looking to add Science, Chinese language, and possibly Math teachers next year. Additional teaching openings may occur during the summer. Visit www.cr.k12.ia.us to review all current openings under the employment tab. Cedar Rapids Community School District is one of the highest paying school districts in Iowa and has an outstanding education and co-curricular track record. Kennedy High School has been ranked #1 in Iowa two years in a row by U.S. News and World Report. The current principal, Jason Kline, is a two-diamond coach and served as a member and chair of the Public Forum Resolution Wording Committee. He is highly motivated to see a strong national program develop at Kennedy. Contact principal Jason Kline at jkline@cr.k12.ia.us for more information.

Magnet Debate Academy Seeks Head Debate Coach for South Korea Branch Magnet Debate Academy is seeking a head debate coach for its South Korea branch. Magnet Debate Academy is located near Seoul and has been one of the top debate academies in South Korea. Magnet Academy offers debate coaching and professional level competition preparation for students in elementary, middle, and high school. For more information, please visit our web page at www.magnetacademy. com. Applicants should send a cover letter and resume to magnetacademy@gmail.com.

North Broward Preparatory School Seeks Speech and Debate Teacher and Coach (Coconut Creek, FL) North Broward Preparatory School is seeking a high school speech and debate teacher/coach with expertise teaching and coaching high school students.  Preferred but not required qualities include intimate knowledge of FFL and/or National Speech & Debate Association competitive debate, ESOL certification, experience coaching novice and advanced levels and multiple styles/events, and a willingness to travel. Visit www.speechanddebate.org/careers for more information and to apply.

Rostrum | SPRING 2015 105


Careers

More Employment Opportunities Available Online:

www.speechanddebate.org/careers

Okoboji High School (IA) Seeks Debate Coach Due to retirement, Okoboji High School in Iowa seeks a debate coach for the 2015-2016 school year. The Okoboji debate program has a very strong tradition of competitiveness on the state and national level with multiple state and national team and individual championships in the past 20 years. The successful candidate will be one who is able to carry on and enhance this tradition of excellence. Interested candidates should submit a letter of application, resume, and letters of reference via email in one electronic document. No paper copies, please. Email address for questions or to submit materials is bdowning@okoboji.k12.ia.us.

Pinecrest Academy Seeks Debate Coach (Cumming, GA) Pinecrest Academy in interested in starting a debate team. Pinecrest Academy is a Catholic school in Cumming, GA (about 30 minutes north of Atlanta) with approximately 300 students in grades 9-12, and have several job openings for the 2015-2016 academic year. Pinecrest Academy is seeking an experienced, talented, and energetic high school Social Studies teacher for the 2015-2016 academic year. This teacher must be able to teach a broad range and multiple levels of Social Studies classes, up to and including Advanced Placement. A minimum of a Bachelor’s degree is required. The ideal candidate will have 2-5 years of teaching experience, a Masters degree, teaching certification, and will be a practicing Catholic. Strong preference will be given to candidates with coaching experience in a major sport and/ or with experience as a Debate team coach. Pinecrest Academy (Cumming, GA) is currently seeking positive, enthusiastic, and

engaging teacher applicants to fill the position of High School Math Teacher. At a minimum, candidates must hold a Bachelors degree in Math and be certified to teach college prep, honors, and AP levels of Math ranging from Algebra 1 through Calculus BC. The ideal candidate will have a Masters degree in Math with five to ten years experience at the secondary or college level, with a proven track record of success in teaching. The ideal candidate will also be a practicing Catholic, with experience coaching a major sport and/or a Debate coach. A competitive salary/benefit package is available. Please email resume and cover letter to Mrs. Laura Nix at lnix@pinecrestacademy.org.

Scottsdale Preparatory Academy (Scottsdale, AZ) Scottsdale Preparatory Academy is accepting applications for a variety of middle school and high school teaching positions. Should interested candidates have speech and debate experience, Scottsdale Prep would like to offer stipendpositions for individuals to also be Assistant Coaches for our middle school and high school competitive speech and debate teams. Speech and debate is not offered as a class, but is a popular and growing extra-curricular activity before and after school. Administration support for the program is strong. To apply for teaching positions within Scottsdale Prep, start by sending a resume to our Headmaster, Alison Chaney: AChaney@ScottsdalePrep.org. Mention you are responding to this speech and debate ad. She will guide you through the application process. For more information about speech and debate at Scottsdale Prep, contact Travis Clement, Director of Forensics: TClement@ScottsdalePrep.org.

Powering the voice of our future.

CONNECT. SUPPORT. INSPIRE. 106

Rostrum | SPRING 2015


Public Forum, Lincoln-Douglas, and Congressional Debate

ChampionBriefsInstitute.com


www.speechanddebate.org

Top 50 Districts (Ranked by average number of charter chapter degrees as of April 1, 2015) Rank Change District

1 2 2 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 12 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 24 26 27 28 29 30 30 32 33 34 34 34 37 38 38 40 41 41 43 44 45 45 47 47 47 50

-- 1 2 7 -3 1 -1 -- -4 -- -- 3 -3 2 6 -3 -3 -2 11 -2 -- -2 -- 1 5 -1 -3 -1 5 -11 9 -5 5 -3 2 -3 -- 1 10 -6 4 6 -12 1 -3 4 -6 -4 -4 --

East Kansas Three Trails (KS) Florida Manatee Kansas Flint-Hills Northern South Dakota Eastern Ohio Rushmore (SD) Show Me (MO) Nebraska Northwest Indiana Ozark (MO) East Los Angeles (CA) Idaho Mountain River California Coast Rocky Mountain-South (CO) New York City Northern Illinois Northern Ohio West Kansas Montana Sunflower (KS) East Texas Heart Of America (MO) Carver-Truman (MO) New Jersey San Fran Bay (CA) North Coast (OH) Colorado Central Minnesota Greater Illinois Golden Desert (NV) West Iowa Southern Minnesota Western Ohio Southern California Eastern Missouri South Kansas Northeast Indiana New Mexico South Florida Utah-Wasatch Wind River (WY) South Texas New England (MA & NH) Florida Oceanfront Pittsburgh (PA) Illini (IL) Colorado Grande Tarheel East (NC) Lone Star (TX)

No. of Degrees

Average Leading Chapter No. of Degrees 229 181 181 179 176 169 166 165 160 155 153 151 151 148 147 141 138 136 133 132 129 127 124 120 120 119 117 116 115 113 113 112 110 105 105 105 104 102 102 101 99 99 98 96 95 95 93 93 93 92

Olathe Northwest High School Blue Valley North High School Nova High School Washburn Rural High School Aberdeen Central High School Perry High School Sioux Falls Lincoln High School Lee’s Summit West High School Millard North High School Munster High School Central High School - Springfield Gabrielino High School Highland High School Leland High School George Washington High School The Bronx High School Of Science Glenbrook North High School Canfield High School Hutchinson High School Bozeman High School Valley Center High School William P. Clements High School Liberty Sr. High School Neosho High School Ridge High School James Logan High School Solon High School Cherry Creek High School Apple Valley High School Belleville West High School Palo Verde High School Dowling Catholic High School Eagan High School Mason High School Carlsbad High School Clayton High School Pittsburg High School Chesterton High School Los Alamos High School Braddock High School Sky View High School Green River High School Bellaire High School Newton South High School Boca Raton Community High School North Allegheny Sr. High School Downers Grove South High School Pueblo West High School Cary Academy Grapevine High School

508 769 949 381 378 380 396 401 598 345 691 881 502 927 526 970 473 370 317 313 433 520 600 382 473 396 298 653 380 188 367 317 447 258 480 209 235 429 224 263 284 391 507 394 275 577 383 229 366 293

View complete rankings online at www.speechanddebate.org. Rostrum | SPRING 2015 111


WESTERN KENTUCKY UNIVERSITY The academic experience of a highly selective private institution with the educational and research opportunities available at a major public university…

COLLEGE

The The Honors College at WKU is home to over 1,300 scholars with the 2014 entering freshman class average ACT/SAT ranking among the top 5% in the nation. • Recognized by the Chronicle of Higher Education as one of the nation’s top producers of J. William Fulbright grants • Recognized for excellence in science, mathematics, and engineering by the prestigious Barry Goldwater Scholarship program • More than $2 million in renewable scholarships awarded annually to the Honors freshman class • One of eleven institutions in the nation home to a Chinese Language Flagship Program

at

Applications for Fall 2015 now available. Minimum application requirements for Incoming Freshmen include any one of the following: • 27 ACT composite or combined verbal and math SAT of 1210 • 3.8 unweighted high school GPA • Top 15% of graduating high school class Honors College applications are considered for competitive admission in the incoming freshman class of 300 students on a rolling basis. Applications available online at www.wku.edu/honors.

• Less than half the cost of most private institutions For more information on the application process, or to schedule a visit with the Honors College at WKU, please contact: honors.admissions@wku.edu

Chicago

St. Louis

Louisville Bowling Green, Kentucky Nashville Atlanta

Kristina Medero Ft. Lauderdale, Florida 2015 Honors College Class of New Voices” ave “Br O’s HB on ed Featur

Located in Bowling Green, Kentucky – home to downtown arts and theatre events, Fortune 500 companies, the Bowling Green Hot Rods minor league baseball team, and historic, natural beauty.


le Schednu a n! auditio Western Kentucky University

Austin Groves, class of 2015 and Lily Nellans, class of 2018.

THIS IS WKU FORENSICS To the University, Forensics is an opportunity to demonstrate academic excellence, to excel in competition of the intellect, and to extend the academic atmosphere. To the student, Forensics is an opportunity to cultivate life-long friendships, travel the country, and do what you love.

PASSION • HUMILIT Y • UNIT Y • SERVICE • GR ATITUDE SAVE THE DATE! The WKU SUMMER FORENSIC INSTITUTE will be held July 5-16, 2015! Check our website for details on our new intensive summer camp experience.

WKU Forensics; Ganer Newman 1906 College Heights Blvd. #51084 Bowling Green, KY 42101-1084 phone: 270-745-6340

email: ganer.newman@wku.edu www.wkuforensics.com Follow us on Twitter: @wkuforensics


National Speech & Debate Association

ONLINE INSTITUTE

REGISTER FOR THE SUMMER ONLINE INSTITUTE! The Online Institute is an affordable and convenient enrichment opportunity for high school students and coaches. Save the expense of traveling to camps by participating online! You will receive individual instruction and guidance from renowned coaches across the country committed to helping you succeed.

www.speechanddebate.org/institute

Summer 2015 Sessions: ff FREE Coach Clinic*

WENDI BRANDENBURG * Eligible for graduate credit through Drake University! SESSION 1: JUNE SESSION 2: JULY

29–JULY 3 27–31

ff Congressional Debate

JASON WARREN DATES: JULY 27–31

ff Extemporaneous Speaking

JASON WARREN DATES: JUNE 22–26

ff Interpretation

TRAVIS KIGER

DATES: JUNE 22–26

ff Lincoln-Douglas Debate

MEGAN WEST

DATES: JULY 20–24

ff Original Oratory

JACOBY COCHRAN DATES: JUNE 22–26

ff Policy Debate

BRIAN RUBAIE DATES: JUNE 8–12

ff Public Forum Debate

GLENN PRINCE DATES: JULY 6–10

STUDENTS: Regular Price

Member

$300

$250

Resource Package

COACHES: Regular Price

Member

$200

$175

$125


2015 Spring Rostrum