[Ndca-l] Issues concerning the high school community

Robb Gray firstpacific
Wed Dec 18 16:26:28 EST 2013


This is unfortunate. If we all had an email list and the ability to only
send it directly to the people on that list this would be less likely. I
propose that the NDCA set up a list where all communications by design are
supposed to stay purely among the people on the list. If anyone wants to opt
out they can but if you communicate to the people on the list you should
have a reasonable expectation that your communication stays only with the
people on the list. Certainly if I sent a private, or 100 private emails
(all the same) I could have a reasonable expectation that it would stay that
way. Best Regards, Robb Gray

-----Original Message-----
From: ndca-l-bounces at lists.debatecoaches.org
[mailto:ndca-l-bounces at lists.debatecoaches.org] On Behalf Of Chris Palmer
Sent: Wednesday, December 18, 2013 9:47 AM
To: Jim Menick
Cc: ndca-l at lists.debatecoaches.org
Subject: Re: [Ndca-l] Issues concerning the high school community


Yes, the emails posted to this list are archived publicly here:

http://lists.debatecoaches.org/pipermail/ndca-l-debatecoaches.org/

So please do not post anything to this list you wouldn't want on the web
anyway; it's going to land there one way or another.

Cheers,
-Chris

---
Free Tournament Management software from IDEA:  http://www.tabroom.com
Asst Coach, Lexington Debate: http://www.lexdebate.org
LD & Congress tournament director, NDCA:  http://www.debatecoaches.org


On 18/12/13, Jim Menick wrote:
> I've been porting it over the the website. I'm pretty sure this list is
> open to anyone. I don't know about how or when folks will speak their
> minds, but I do find emails have a tendency to disappear. Plus I'm seeing
> listserv responses in a number of different gmail windows rather
> arbitrarily (which is, as gmail people know, the bane of the latest
> iteration), making it hard to follow.
> 
> jimmenick.com: Debate, books, and various nonsense
> 
> 
> On Wed, Dec 18, 2013 at 11:06 AM, Stefan Bauschard <
> stefan.bauschard at gmail.com> wrote:
> 
> > I like the fact that this conversation is occurring on email because
this
> > listserv is, I believe, limited to debate coaches. I think people are
more
> > likely to speak what is on their minds than if this discussion is moved
to
> > a public message board.
> >
> > Also, I'm a bit sensitive to coaches airing all of their disagreements
> > (which is important to do) in front of all of the students.
> >
> > I'm curious as to what others think.
> >
> >
> > On Wed, Dec 18, 2013 at 9:48 AM, John M. Masslon II
<johnmasslon at gmail.com
> > > wrote:
> >
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> *I think this is by far the most pressing issue facing HS debate at the
> >> moment and am glad to see that a discussion has begun regarding our
> >> community's response.  I wish I could be as eloquent and thorough as
> >> Manuel, Stefan, Aaron, Tara, et al, but I know that will not happen.  I
> >> would, however, like to add a few of my thoughts on the subject.
First,
> >> I think we need to begin is by looking in the mirror.  I believe that
many
> >> of the problems that have occurred in college debate are the result of
> >> coaches pushing the unethical, and in some cases illegal, behavior by
their
> >> students.  We only need to look as far as the CEDA quarterfinal round a
few
> >> years ago to see that we, as coaches, are the ones that act in a manner
> >> that makes debate a hostile environment for fellow coaches and our
> >> students.  This is unacceptable.  I believe that the first step we
should
> >> take in ensuring that there is no bullying, harassment, etc. by our
> >> students is to take forceful action against coaches that promote such
> >> behavior.   I know this will not be a popular sentiment, but I think we
> >> need to ban coaches who promote such behavior.  I run the tab room at
the
> >> biggest HS tournament in Western Pennsylvania, and I would never allow
> >> Shanara Reid-Brinkley to step foot in a debate at my tournament.  If
she
> >> chose to coach a HS team, I would not allow that team to be entered in
the
> >> tournament.  The same would hold true for Bill Shanahan.  By
eliminating
> >> coaches that act in such a manner from our activity, we ensure that
these
> >> our students are not being influenced by such bad examples.  We set a
> >> precedent for our students that if you act in a manner that is
inconsistent
> >> with the behavioral norms of debate, you are gone.  Thus, let us begin
by
> >> looking in the mirror. I also think that it is important that we ensure
> >> that students who violate the norms of acceptable behavior at debate
> >> tournaments are punished accordingly.  For example, if a student tells
> >> his/her opponent in a round that they should kill themselves . that
student
> >> should be done with HS debate.  That student's coach should be the one
to
> >> enforce such a rule, however, that is probably unrealistic.  Instead, I
> >> think that if a student behaves in such a manner at a tournament, the
> >> tournament director should inform all other tournament directors to not
> >> accept that student into future tournaments.  That way, a student knows
> >> that if their actions fall so far outside the bounds of acceptable
> >> behavior, they will no longer be permitted to participate in this great
> >> activity.   Finally, I think that the tabula rasa paradigm has gone to
far.
> >>  I have traditionally been a fan of "anything goes" debate and have
voted
> >> for "performance" teams more than I have voted against such teams.
> >>  However, after what we have seen in college debate recently, I have
> >> decided that enough is enough.  I have decided that I will no longer
vote
> >> for such a team and will give them 0 speaks.  I hope that this stops
the
> >> spread of what has killed college debate into the HS realm.  I'm not
naive
> >> enough to think that my one person stand will have such an impact, but
I
> >> hope that after the inevitable collapse of college debate, more people
will
> >> realize we need to return to a more traditional style of debate.  This
does
> >> not mean that we need to get rid of critical arguments, it just means
that
> >> such arguments need to be made in the context of the resolution.   *
The
> >> views expressed above are my own and do not reflect the views of Bethel
> >> Parks SD, Bethel Park SHS, or my employer.   John M. Masslon II, Esq.
> >> Policy Debate Coach, Bethel Park SHS *
> >>
> >> phone: 703-791-9483
> >> fax: 866-241-5219
> >> e-mail: johnmasslon at gmail.com
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> _______________________________________________
> >> Ndca-l mailing list
> >> Ndca-l at lists.debatecoaches.org
> >> http://lists.debatecoaches.org/listinfo.cgi/ndca-l-debatecoaches.org
> >>
> >>
> >
> >
> > --
> > Stefan Bauschard
> >
> > Debate Coach, Harvard Debate
> > Debate Coach, Lakeland Schools
> > International Programs Consultant, National Forensic League (US)
> > Consultant, National Forensic League of Korea (ROK)
> > Consultant, Dipont Education Management (China)
> >
> > (C) 781-775-0433
> > (F) 617-588-0283
> >
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > Ndca-l mailing list
> > Ndca-l at lists.debatecoaches.org
> > http://lists.debatecoaches.org/listinfo.cgi/ndca-l-debatecoaches.org
> >
> >

> _______________________________________________
> Ndca-l mailing list
> Ndca-l at lists.debatecoaches.org
> http://lists.debatecoaches.org/listinfo.cgi/ndca-l-debatecoaches.org


_______________________________________________
Ndca-l mailing list
Ndca-l at lists.debatecoaches.org
http://lists.debatecoaches.org/listinfo.cgi/ndca-l-debatecoaches.org





More information about the Ndca-l mailing list