Ask Jim about Debate
|
Breaking Down Barriers: Ask Jim about Debate |
You can submit questions too, just email Jim at hansonjb@whitman.edu
Do you think there is any hope for oncase debate in CX?
well, it
depends; its up to the negative team to determine this; there are
two main reasons that negatives don't go "oncase."
first, affirmatives run cases that the negative doesn't know
about, so the negative can't prepare case specific responses;
second, negatives become concerned about attacking the case as a
strategy because 1) the affirmative case advantage is pretty much
true or 2) a different negative strategy will "throw
off" the affirmative so that it isn't prepared (as they
would be if the negative attacked the case with typical kinds of
arguments). that said, if you are well researched or if you can
"outspread" the affirmative, a lot of responses to the
aff. case can be a very good strategy because it will bog the
affirmative down on what they want to use to win the
debatetheir advantages; our top team, for example, had
researched webster's affirmative case; so, our strategy in
tripleoctafinals at ceda nationals was one topicality argument,
one disadvantage, and over 5 minutes of answers to the case in
the 1nc; we won on a 30, so this strategy can work.
And secondly, what can be done to combat the surge of coaches and judges that believe that the "only way" a good round ensues is when debaters speak at Mach 5 and do linebyline refutation on Policyonly issues?
I'm not sure what you
mean by "policyonly" issues (do you mean they won't
touch on topicality or inherency or ?) but the speed issue has
been around for years and yearsat least back into the
mid1960s. It often makes debate hard to understand (I've
started telling debaters if they are going to go hyperspeed, I
won't really understand them, and then I will read cards at the
end of the round and put the debate together however I see it).
Yet, even slower debaters can keep up. Andy Backlund, who
graduated from our squad last year, was not fastbut he was
the 21st speaker in the nation; I've seen many good slower
speakers do very well (do you ever see David Bloom on NBC
News?he was an amazing debater who won over 30 rounds in a
row at national NDT tournaments and who was not fast at all). The
key is 1)practicing flowing and listening skills 2)good word
economy 3)attacking the key issue on an argument rather every
little response. Will Debate slow down? I doubt itthat
depends on judges demanding and reinforcing slower debates.
Debaters, unfortunately, don't have an incentive to slow down as
going slower might mean dropping an argument or putting less
pressure on opponents.
Also, you asked when will they debate the resolution?
well, the debates
are about the planand since the plan only needs to reduce
juvenile crime, the affirmative can also point out other
advantages to such a planhence, you get debates that aren't
about juvenile crime very much. next year, the renewable energy
topic will probably do the same thingfor example, watch for
the otec energy case whose main advantage is that it will help us
to colonize space.
Overall, what I'm saying is that
champ division in hs debate (and college for that matter) does
involve faster speaking and strategic choices in arguments that
might seem odd/off topicbut that is how debate is practiced.
You can make an imprint on it by debating a certain way, trying
to setup your case and negative strategies to give your opponents
less opportunity to run weird stuff, encouraging others in
meetings and just conversation to alter their debating
practicesbut I wouldn't count on making a major alteration in
the way debate is practiced.