Provided by David Berube, University of Southern Carolina
Debate is excellent training for young men and women who
anticipate professional careers in law and business.
Former Sen. Milton Young of North Dakota implied that debate
training "might be a sine qua non to those who choose a career in law or
politics" (Huseman & Goodman, 1976, p. 228). And Former Representative Lawrence J. Hogan of Maryland felt
similarly. "Debate and forensic
activities in school are a necessary part of the curriculum of any individual
who intends to be an attorney. One must
be able to think objectively, talk persuasively, and extemporaneously in
today's legal and political arena. It
one has not cultivated his talents for public speaking by the time he is in
public life it is too late." (Huseman & Goodman, 1976, p. 228)
Quantitative support verifies these testimonials. Arnold
found that "of 94 Pennsylvania lawyers ... 62% of the respondents with
debate experience and 53% of the respondents without debate experience believed
that debate should be recommended for all pre-legal students. In a study of 98 law school deans, Swanson
(1970) found that 69.9% would advise pre-law students to take courses in
argumentation, and 70.3% recommended participation in intercollegiate
debate. The support from lawyers and
law school administrators ranges from strong endorsement for all pre-law
students to a suggestion that it be required.
D. B. Center reported his findings: "The result of a
recent survey of those responsible for hiring, for a variety of Midwest
businesses, listed debating first among twenty other activities and academic
specializations that an applicant might present on a resume. Debate was the overwhelming first choice of
those responsible for recruiting and hiring for law firms. Moreover, debating was ranked very high by a
wide variety of businesses" (1982, p. 5).
Consequently, in pre-law and pre-business, intercollegiate
debating functions as a co-curricular activity.
REFERENCES
Arnold, W. (1974). "Debate and the lawyer."
JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN FORENSIC ASSOCIATION. 10. 139.
Center. D. B. (1982). "Debate and the job market."
DEBATE ISSUES. 15. 4-6.
Huseman, R. C. & Goodman, D. M. (1976). "Editor's
corner: BYD Congressional questionnaire." JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN FORENSIC
ASSOCIATION. 12. 225-228.
Swanson, D. R. (1970). "Debate as preparation for the
law: Law deans' reactions." Paper presented at the annual meeting of the
Western Speech Communication Association.
DEBATE AND THE UNIVERSITY
Intercollegiate
debate serves many functions in a university community. Colbert and Biggers wrote that "debate
may allow a university to develop a reputation for competitive excellence, to
recruit outstanding high school students and to be active in community
life" (1985, p. 237).
Beyond its
role as a co-curricular activity and its laboratory training in communication
skills, university support of intercollegiate debate programs has a long and
rich history. Periodically, directors
are asked to justify their programs -- justify the per student financial
investment.
First,
debate can establish a university reputation as a academically directed
institution. Every university activity
has a purpose. Intercollegiate debate
is an outstanding tool to raise the academic visibility of a university not
only among other debaters and their faculty from other universities but also
among the community who periodically see debate competition results reported in
the local media. Some schools have gone
further. Southern Utah State University
has resorted to hailing its competitive forensics program in state-wide
television advertisements. Debaters can
function as a public relations device.
They are talk jocks! The
advantage they may have over most athletes, however, is their ability to speak
before an audience commanding their interest and their attention.
Second,
debate enables recruitment of the best and the brightest. Most university campuses have special
programs: residential colleges, honors colleges, and accelerated
curriculum. What intercollegiate debate
helps to do is the recruitment of high school students who have chosen to
bolster their scholastic records with an activity which is fundamentally
academic in nature. Their presence on
campuses serves to improve in-classroom discussion. Pollack's research suggests that "persons with oral
communication skills honed by varied forensic events were regarded highly by
their colleagues on group discussion activity" (1982, p. 17). Furthermore, Pollack interviewed legislators
who were ranked as strong interpersonal people. "Virtually every legislator accorded high rankings in the
basic category of interpersonal communication listed forensic or debate
experience as a student" (p. 17).
This is primarily due to their ability to use fundamental communication
skills. Semlak and Shields concluded
that "students with debate experience were significantly better at
employing the three communication skills (analysis, delivery, and organization)
utilized in this study than students without the experience." (1977, p.
194).
Third,
debate is a program that generates a strong alumni base from which to draw for
development campaigns. Keele and Matlon
(1984) concluded that "90% of debaters have attained at least one graduate
degree. 30% of their sample are university
educators while 15% are top ranking corporate executives." Furthermore, they observed that the ratios
do not vary between those who graduated 25 years ago and those who finished in
the last five years. Colbert and
Biggers claimed "it is doubtful that many other activities can boast of so
many successful alumni." (1985, p. 239).
Fourth,
debate produces leaders. According to
Matlon and Keele, "10% of debaters are now working in the executive and
legislative branches of government."
In Huseman and Goodman's study "51% of members of Congress
responding to their survey had participated in college debate." and of
that amount, "eighty-seven percent of the respondents saw debate as
ranging from helpful to very helpful in the performance of their legislative
duties" (1976, pp. 225-226). In
Pollack's study of Florida state legislators, he reported that "the
correlation ran high in this survey that the very top debaters and floor
speaker in the Florida House of Representatives were also those who have
previous experience in scholastic debate or public speaking-type forensic
activity" (1982, p. 17). Former
debaters, now legislators, speak highly of their experience.
Former
Representative Claude Pepper:
"Throughout
my public life I have been very grateful for my early experience in formal
debates. I believe these encounters are
a valuable means of developing in our leaders of the future the ability to
express themselves clearly and forcefully on the pressing issues of the
time." (Huseman & Goodman, 1976, p.226)
Rep.
William Ketcham of California agreed.
"Through
this medium, they (the students) will learn one of America's greatest gifts:
the freedom to express oneself" (Huseman & Goodman, 1976, p.
226). Finally, "a survey of 160
senators, congressmen, governors, Supreme Court justices, and Cabinet members,
and other leaders revealed that 100 of the leaders said high school or college
debate experience was helpful in their careers and 90 classified the experience
as `greatly helpful' or `invaluable.`
Of the 60 who did not have debate experience, 26 expressed regret that
they had not gone out for the debating teams while in high school or
college" (Freedom and Union, 1960, p. 6).
Debate
enables young men and women to passionately advocate important issues in most
any forum. They may be our future and
what better investment can there be of university funds when the goal of a
university is to produce minds capable of visions of a better world.
Debate
functions on at least four levels: it helps a university's academic reputation,
it bolsters recruitment, it assists in development, and it produces tomorrow's
leaders.
REFERENCES
Colbert,
K. & Biggers, T. (1985). "Why should we support debate?" JOURNAL
OF THE AMERICAN FORENSIC ASSOCIATION. 21. Spring. 237-240.
Freedom
and Union. (1960). "100 of 160 leaders began careers as student
debaters." FREEDOM AND UNION. 6-7.
Huseman,
R. & Goodman, D. (1976). "BYD Congressional questionnaire."
JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN FORENSIC ASSOCIATION. 12. Spring. 225-228.
Keele, L.
M. & Matlon, R. J. (1984). "A survey of participants in the national
debate tournament, 1947-1980." JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN FORENSIC
ASSOCIATION. 20. 194-205.
Pollock,
A. (1982). "The relationship of a background in scholastic forensics to
effective communication in the legislative assembly." SPEAKER AND GAVEL.
19. 17.
Semlak, W.
D. & Shields, D. (1977). "The effect of debate training on students
participation in the bicentennial youth debates." JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN
FORENSIC ASSOCIATION. 13. 194-196.
DEBATE AND THE UNIVERSITY
Intercollegiate
debate serves many functions in a university community. Colbert and Biggers wrote that "debate
may allow a university to develop a reputation for competitive excellence, to
recruit outstanding high school students and to be active in community
life" (1985, p. 237).
Beyond its
role as a co-curricular activity and its laboratory training in communication
skills, university support of intercollegiate debate programs has a long and
rich history. Periodically, directors
are asked to justify their programs -- justify the per student financial
investment.
First,
debate can establish a university reputation as a academically directed
institution. Every university activity
has a purpose. Intercollegiate debate
is an outstanding tool to raise the academic visibility of a university not
only among other debaters and their faculty from other universities but also
among the community who periodically see debate competition results reported in
the local media. Some schools have gone
further. Southern Utah State University
has resorted to hailing its competitive forensics program in state-wide
television advertisements. Debaters can
function as a public relations device.
They are talk jocks! The
advantage they may have over most athletes, however, is their ability to speak
before an audience commanding their interest and their attention.
Second,
debate enables recruitment of the best and the brightest. Most university campuses have special
programs: residential colleges, honors colleges, and accelerated
curriculum. What intercollegiate debate
helps to do is the recruitment of high school students who have chosen to
bolster their scholastic records with an activity which is fundamentally
academic in nature. Their presence on
campuses serves to improve in-classroom discussion. Pollack's research suggests that "persons with oral communication
skills honed by varied forensic events were regarded highly by their colleagues
on group discussion activity" (1982, p. 17). Furthermore, Pollack interviewed legislators who were ranked as
strong interpersonal people.
"Virtually every legislator accorded high rankings in the basic
category of interpersonal communication listed forensic or debate experience as
a student" (p. 17). This is
primarily due to their ability to use fundamental communication skills. Semlak and Shields concluded that "students
with debate experience were significantly better at employing the three communication
skills (analysis, delivery, and organization) utilized in this study than
students without the experience." (1977, p. 194).
Third,
debate is a program that generates a strong alumni base from which to draw for
development campaigns. Keele and Matlon
(1984) concluded that "90% of debaters have attained at least one graduate
degree. 30% of their sample are
university educators while 15% are top ranking corporate executives." Furthermore, they observed that the ratios
do not vary between those who graduated 25 years ago and those who finished in
the last five years. Colbert and
Biggers claimed "it is doubtful that many other activities can boast of so
many successful alumni." (1985, p. 239).
Fourth,
debate produces leaders. According to
Matlon and Keele, "10% of debaters are now working in the executive and
legislative branches of government."
In Huseman and Goodman's study "51% of members of Congress
responding to their survey had participated in college debate." and of
that amount, "eighty-seven percent of the respondents saw debate as
ranging from helpful to very helpful in the performance of their legislative
duties" (1976, pp. 225-226). In
Pollack's study of Florida state legislators, he reported that "the
correlation ran high in this survey that the very top debaters and floor
speaker in the Florida House of Representatives were also those who have
previous experience in scholastic debate or public speaking-type forensic
activity" (1982, p. 17). Former
debaters, now legislators, speak highly of their experience.
Former
Representative Claude Pepper:
"Throughout
my public life I have been very grateful for my early experience in formal
debates. I believe these encounters are
a valuable means of developing in our leaders of the future the ability to
express themselves clearly and forcefully on the pressing issues of the
time." (Huseman & Goodman, 1976, p.226)
Rep.
William Ketcham of California agreed.
"Through
this medium, they (the students) will learn one of America's greatest gifts:
the freedom to express oneself" (Huseman & Goodman, 1976, p.
226). Finally, "a survey of 160
senators, congressmen, governors, Supreme Court justices, and Cabinet members,
and other leaders revealed that 100 of the leaders said high school or college
debate experience was helpful in their careers and 90 classified the experience
as `greatly helpful' or `invaluable.`
Of the 60 who did not have debate experience, 26 expressed regret that
they had not gone out for the debating teams while in high school or
college" (Freedom and Union, 1960, p. 6).
Debate
enables young men and women to passionately advocate important issues in most
any forum. They may be our future and
what better investment can there be of university funds when the goal of a
university is to produce minds capable of visions of a better world.
Debate
functions on at least four levels: it helps a university's academic reputation,
it bolsters recruitment, it assists in development, and it produces tomorrow's
leaders.
REFERENCES
Colbert,
K. & Biggers, T. (1985). "Why should we support debate?" JOURNAL
OF THE AMERICAN FORENSIC ASSOCIATION. 21. Spring. 237-240.
Freedom
and Union. (1960). "100 of 160 leaders began careers as student
debaters." FREEDOM AND UNION. 6-7.
Huseman,
R. & Goodman, D. (1976). "BYD Congressional questionnaire."
JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN FORENSIC ASSOCIATION. 12. Spring. 225-228.
Keele, L.
M. & Matlon, R. J. (1984). "A survey of participants in the national debate
tournament, 1947-1980." JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN FORENSIC ASSOCIATION. 20.
194-205.
Pollock,
A. (1982). "The relationship of a background in scholastic forensics to
effective communication in the legislative assembly." SPEAKER AND GAVEL.
19. 17.
Semlak, W.
D. & Shields, D. (1977). "The effect of debate training on students
participation in the bicentennial youth debates." JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN
FORENSIC ASSOCIATION. 13. 194-196.