Review of Anvil: What I thought of Anvil

After participating in forensics and debate for ten years, Anvil had a unique connection with me. For many coaches, Debate and Forensics is a job, but it’s also a labor of love. There’s a certain disconnect from reality that comes with it. We (coaches) give up our weekends to travel long distances to instruct high school students in an abstract competition. Many of our friends don’t understand it. Many of parents didn’t understand why we were involved. And many of our spouses/significant others don’t understand it either. And in some way, we are always pursuing an unobtainable goal – qualifying for state, winning state, qualifying for nationals, winning nationals, making the college team, qualifying for college nationals… and so on.

Playing Metal music into your 50’s is a strikingly similar. These guys love to play, but the shows are not their real jobs. They have to travel to the shows and there’s a set of unique individuals who are religious to metal concerts. The quest to “make it” in the music business (whatever that success may be), is relatively undefined and hard to obtain. There is a greater goal in entertaining, as there is in educating students in debate and forensics, but sometimes it’s hard to see the big picture.

Lips and Reiner face similar challenges. To persevere for thirty years, and see the toll that it extracts on one’s family was quite revealing. I do hope they “make it” in the end, what ever that may mean. The alternative is that they become a modern day Sisyphus, always trying to roll the ball up the hill. And I’d fear for the destruction that ball would wreak on their families.

On the same note, I felt the first question asked to the UW-Madion alum editor who was at the show, was quite apt: how do you react to people laughing at sad moments? I was quite frustrated that people would laugh at the sad realization that one may not live up to their dreams. After all, these were real people puring their hearts out, and you think it’s funny? Yes, I know, their choice of words may not be poetic. They are, nonetheless, their words and they are real. Perhaps these individuals didn’t get the film. It was  only clear to me until after doing further research that this was not a Christopher Guest film and that this was not a mockumentary. Maybe they were just mislead. I hope so, because I wouldn’t want to live in a society without empathy.

High School Debate Lacking in Madison

Last week’s Isthmus reminded me that school board elections are happening this April. The lack of discussion this time around stands in stark contrast to the amount of discussion that occurred in 2007. Some of the 2007 issues stick out in my memory, because many of the candidates chose to highlight the value of speech and debate. Two year’s later, I wonder if the rhetoric of praising the value of speech and debate has translated into supporting the activity.

In the Spring of 2007, as an assistant forensics coach preparing for the state championship, it was nice to hear that members of the community had taken notice of James Madison Memorial’s success. (Memorial won state forensics championships in 2002, 2003, 2004, and 2006. JMM also won last year and they’ve taken individual championships each year). Back then, we were just about the only game in town. Since then, Madison West, Sun Prairie, and Middleton have developed quality forensic teams. At last year’s state forensics tournament, Memorial went home with the championship, West placed eighth, and Sun Praire placed fourth.

Debate, however, is a different story. Madison West has lost most of their debate team; while Middleton has developed one. Madison East and LaFollette, are no where to be found for either debate or forensics. Sure, they have teams. But their teams do not compete in the same way that Memorial/West/Sun Prairie/Middleton do.

Since becoming the President-elect of the Wisconsin Debate Coaches Association, I’ve tried to facilitate the development of high school debate in Dane County. The Madison area is sitting on a virtual goldmine of talent that has largely gone untapped. The Dane County area has enough schools to support local debate tournaments at virtually no cost. If the four Madison schools participated in a competition with Middleton, Verona, and Sun Prairie – one could almost hold an entire season of competitions without ever traveling outside of the county. Since only Memorial and Middleton competed in debate this year, those schools were forced to travel two hours or more on some weekends just to attend a competition. With a limited budget, this makes it very costly and very difficult for students to participate in an activity that many school board members have said is important.

What have members of the school board said about debate and extracurriculars? Let’s review:

In 2007 Candidate’s Questionaire, Johnny Winston Jr. specifically mentioned debate and forensics as one of the critical extracurricular activities important for Madison area students.

“Extracurricular programs can be linked to the curriculum as a way of extending and enhancing the district’s educational programs. Madison Metropolitan School District students are fortunate to have a multitude of activities to become involved in. They include but are not limited to: sports, fine arts, debate, forensics, literary, newspaper, yearbook, science Olympiad, Distributive Education Clubs of America, foreign language and math competitions and Madison School & Community Recreation.”

Maya Cole made a similar response in 2007.

Extracurricular activities provide students with opportunities to learn more about their community, other cultures and themselves. They provide opportunities for self-expression and creativity while easing the stress of school. I’ve been lucky enough to participate in competitive rowing, recreational skiing, rock climbing and solo hiking in the wilderness. I’ve tried everything from forensics club to newspaper writing to photography to piano lessons.

While not defending, speech or debate, Majorie Passman defined herself as an advocate for all extracurricular activities.

Madison is fortunate that its schools have a rich extracurricular structure. As a board member, I will do everything I can to guarantee that students continue to have equal access to as many of these activities as they find interesting and have the spare time to pursue.

and in a different article, advocated for expanding speech and debate:

We must support programs such as strings, expand foreign language classes, and more extracurricular experiences (debate, forensics, drama) which are important for every child.

Moss has expressed interest in using the population size of Madison to reduce costs and provide a better product for students.

The district and Madison School & Community Recreation are working to increase access to extracurricular activities for all students by removing barriers to participation such as transportation, costs and location. I support continuing and expanding these efforts.

Despite all of this outpouring of support for debate and forensics from the school board (and this is just from the candidates that won – the losing candidates also spoke highly of the value of speech and debate), there has been no administrative action supporting these activities. Any work that has been done to expand these activities is solely the product of committed coaches and educators.

Strangely, no one in MMSD seems concerned that only Memorial participates in debate – but yet full head and assistant coaches are paid at each of the schools. I sent an email to the athletic directors in September asking each of them for the email address of their debate coach, so that I could set them up with materials and help them in their debate planning. Not surprisingly, I received no response. If the school board is really concerned about this issue – the administrators from each school should be finding active and supportive coaches, so that East/West/LaFollette can at least compete. Right now, students at those schools do not have an option. The experience difference in extracurriculars between Memorial and East or Memorial and LaFollette is drastic. To make the comparison in sports terms; it’s like East and LaFollette don’t even offer soccer.

While East/West/LaFollette are one extreme for debate, Memorial is on the other for forensics. The James Madison Memorial forensics team averages about 120 students – that doesn’t count students who participate in drama. No other forensics team in the state is that large. And yet, the salary level for JMM’s head coach is the equivalent of a basketball assistant – despite the fact that the Memorial head coach deals with more students and takes on much more responsibility (and has been more successful). What incentive is the district offering to teachers who want to offer this all-agreed upon worthy activity? Additionally, it fails common sense to expect JMM’s coach to continue what he does, when other schools in the district do relatively nothing.

If the school board is serious in its commitment towards debate and forensics, then it should strengthn those activities across the district. All students in the Madison Metro School District should be able to recieve the benefits of debate – not just the students who are fortunate to attend a school with a willing coach. Merely talking about debate when elections are around is ridiculuous. I hope the board is held accountable and that these individuals make good on their promises to improve speech and debate for all members of the MMSD.

In Defense of Speed

Georgia Forensics Daily recently linked to an article in the Boston Globe about policy debate. The article discusses the role of speaking fast in high school policy debate. (There’s even a video clip of some excerpts of some fast reading- and pretty clearly – and the drills to develop that skill). The reaction in the Boston Globe’s comment section for the article is largely negative. Individuals critique policy debate for being out of touch with real world skills. Critiques of this kind are also frequently made by people who have seen the HBO documentary Resolved. So when I talk to people about the fact that I am/was a debate coach, I sometimes hear similar critiques of high school debate. I try my best to contain my excitement that they know what debate is and then attempt to defend the activity that I love. Most people make the assumption that debate is about speaking in a impassioned and persuasive manner and those critics argue that the activity as currently practiced does not contain these skills (if it ever did).

As a long time member of the debate community, I can tell you that this argument fails to make any sense. First, debate is activity about arguments. We want our arguments to be good and we want a lot of them. Making arguments quickly allows you to make more arguments. This is pretty much the same principle in every sport imaginable. In baseball, you win by scoring more runs. This is helped by running as fast as you can to beat out a ground ball. In football, we like speedy running backs and wide receivers because they can beat the defense and score touch downs. (Or if you prefer defense, speedy linebackers so they can make devastating hits). I’d make a similar analogy about soccer or hockey if I understood those sports. My point is, speed is preferred in almost every game played. If debate is a game, then why is it so wrong that speed is an element of the game?

Alright, I can understand you’re not buying this. (Many people have made this claim in the comments section, and the critics of policy debate don’t buy it either). Athletic skills are not the same as academic ones. Particularly because academic ones only have a need if they fit a “real world” skill. BTW, Let’s take two seconds to point out how ridiculous this is. How is running fast/jumping high a real world skill? What businesses are hiring Usain Bolt to curry documents on foot? This line of argument would eliminate every high school competition, including sports. I don’t think most people would be in favor of getting rid of everything that doesn’t have a “real world” applicability. More ridiculous, I don’t see the harm in this. Lexington’s coach says, in the article, when they have a slow speed judge, they debate slow… So who is hurt by speaking fast? No one seems to articulate a negative impact of speaking quickly other than; “it shouldn’t be that way.”

This leads me to my second point. Well, it’s not really my point. I heard Tom Rollins  make the same point in last year’s Breakfast of Champions. If you’re assumption is that debate is about flowery rhetoric and poetry; your assumption is flawed. Debate is a thinking exercise. As a contest of arguments, policy debate requires in-depth research, organization, and analytical thought. These are skills that are not developed by simply thinking about the mode and method of communication. Debate’s emphasis is on skills not emphasized in other forensics events – thinking, research, and organization. If you want understandable analysis about current events – do extemp. If you want to build a persuasive case about a policy issue and do it convincingly – do oratory. If you want to argue and practice persuasive speaking – do Public Forum or Student Congress. There are other activities that develop argumentation and emphasize effective, real-world style speaking. Don’t critique policy debate for not doing these skills. In the debate/forensics world, we have many different events for students. What gets lost in these criticism is that, as a community, we DO encourage eloquent rhetoric – just not in policy debate. It’s silly for all of the events (and we have many) to have a similar style.

In fact, policy debate’s fast style is a good thing in so far as it promotes the skills of thinking, research, and organization. Speaking fast encourages fast thinking, more evidence, and way to understand that evidence. There is pretty strong evidence that debate does this. The research completed by debaters is often, not on a college level – but a graduate level of research (similarly – college debaters are some of the smartest people I’ve ever met). Because debaters push the limits of their information processing, they can think handle information later in life better than others. Being able to think faster than your opponent is a real world skill. Being able to organize quickly is a real world skill. Being able to understand all the facts about a real world issue is a real world skill.

If you think debate doesn’t have great rhetoric, I will agree more times than not. But that doesn’t mean debate is without value. As a thinking activity, debate seems to excell at imparting high level thinking skills to students and critiquers should take time to understand the activity, rather than over-react.

Reflections on State

It’s taken me a whole day to realize how happy I am about last weekend’s debate tournament. I guess that’s mostly because there were a number of depressing moments during the tournament. My policy kids not doing as well as they could have, Bill’s kids not getting judges who take the activity as seriously as they do, and general frustrations that come with running a state debate tournament.

My policy kids had a rough draw their first two rounds, having to debate SPASH TW and Wausau West LM, both good and hard working teams. We lost both rounds. That made the rest of our tournament difficult. The next round we drew the negative. That normally is our preferred side, especially on this topic, but we had to debate in front of the only C-C judge in a field of A-A judges. And we lost particularly because the judge did not understand the strategy that we were using. A ballot line of “At the point that the aff wins T, the CP just becomes advantages to the plan, so I vote aff” does not bode well for the judge’s competence. So we lost, ending our tournament. We later lost another round that we should have won in front of the biggest surprise of the tournament: that a coach of 11 years could render decisions so silly as to demean the virtue of our activity.

I also felt particularly bad for Bill Batterman – Marquette’s director of debate and forensics. He spent (and still is spending) an enormous amount of time working with his top team. And through preliminary rounds that work appeared to be paying off, emerging as the top seed and best speaker of the tournament. However, the executive committee voted earlier to fill all of the spots in elimination rounds, instead of allowing only teams with more wins than losses to advance. This placed 3-3 Neenah as the 8th seed, against the 1st seed of Marquette. Marquette ended up losing on what appeared to be at least one questionable ballot. Bill took the lost rather hard, and I can understand that reaction. I’ve been at a place where I had coached the top seed of the tournament, put a significant amount with the debaters, and only to see them lose. That feeling is unlike anything else, and is particularly something that I hope not to experience again. To see a friend experience that is not pleasant either.

But at the same time, I am really happy for Noah. To finally coach an LD State Champion is an experience that I don’t think I will forget in a while. Although Noah’s win probably does not feel as meaningful as Brian’s would have (had he actually won the round), it does feel good to know that I do know what I am doing with LD. Hearing Noah finally not be frustrated after more than a month of things not going our way (Hortonville, Glenbrooks, and Appleton East) was well worth it. And it came at the right time too! After all he went through last year, he can now lay claim to being one of the best Sheboygan North debaters of all time. (It’s a short list). This may very well be Sheboygan North’s first Varsity debate championship since the 1991 Sheboygan North MR Championship in Policy Debate. Even mine (WFCA LD) is a bit tainted, because of the events involved and that it came after the first WDCA LD State championship. Particularly it was fun to have Noah win, where (same location) I felt I should have six years ago.

The End

I just finished directing my first debate tournament and let me tell you – directing an entire tourament is way more work than helping tab. I am very glad its over, and I don’t think that I’ll do it again. I simply don’t have a team, coaching staff, or an alumni base large enough to ensure a smooth tournament operation. As a result, I’m doing things like copying ballots – making it harder for me to resolve big issues and hoping that the people that I rely on for help are doing things the way I want them to be done. Thankfully – there are some really helpful, generous, and smart coaches around the state who did help and did things “my way” most of the time.

I think too that this is the beginning of the end of my involvement in debate. At the end of the tournament on Saturday I noticed that I am not having as much fun as I did when I worked with Memorial – which makes it harder to justify spending a significant amount of time doing this activity, especially now that I have less time to devote to non-school related activities. Specifically – my best PF team doesn’t care about winning and my best policy team doesn’t care to come talk to me about anything. This makes me want to stop participating in the activity. I come from a long distance to help these kids, and they don’t want any help. Part of the fun of being a coach is helping kids make blocks and arguments. Neither things can occur if kids don’t come to me or want to win.

JMM wins 4th State Title

While the Wisconsin State Journal refuses to report this story, I will report it with all enthusiasm. James Madison Memorial won its fourth WFCA State Title at Ripon College on April 22 by tieing Appleton East with 325 points.

This may seem confusing but Head Coach Tom Hardin explains, “Forensics is like track. There are many different speaking events that students can compete in. Students can win their own event, like pole-vault or the long-jump, and the team as a whole can also win.”

Memorial also took home eight individual events championships. Individual champions were: Maddy Wilson and Spencer Retelle in Duo Interpretation, Janani Iyengar in Extemporaneous Speaking, Micah Herstand in Demonstration Speaking, Albert Li in Four Minute Speaking, Miranda Morgan in Solo Acting Serious, Matt Scales in Interpretation of Prose, Connor Gants in Radio Announcing, and Josh Kellerman and Elena Colas in Play Acting. This is the most individual state champions Memorial has ever won in a single year. Other students also performed well. Memorial cleared 22 of its 25 entries into the semi-finals and 20 of those 22 into final rounds of competition. Memorial also had runners up in Demo, Solo Acting Humorous, Poetry, and Story Telling and a third place finish in Duo.

James Madison Memorial has now won four out of the last five state Championships. Over the last five years, only six events have not been won by a Memorial Student. Those events are: Farrago, Oratory, Oral Interpretation of Literature, Storytelling, Solo Acting Humorous and Group Discussion. Memorial also continued its success in the limited preparation events. JMM won its third extemp title, with its third different extemper and Connor Gants won a rare third state championship in Radio Announcing. Memorial actors performed exceptionally well also: in 2006 JMM claimed the state championship in all but one of the acting categories – in the category that they did not win, Memorial took second.

Pictured below are, from left to right: Assistant Coach Nick Bubb, Head Coach Tom Hardin, and Assistant Coach Tim Scheffler. Other Coaches contributing to the effort were: Beth LeMay, Matt McCloud, Kristin Scheffler, and many former and current students. Pictured above are the 2006 WFCA State Champions.

Debate Problems

On my recent debate problems.

Tim Scheff: there seems to be a curse for sheb north senior debaters… if they get a girlfriend things go to shit
njbubbster02: that’s kinda true
njbubbster02: then again, i’m the only one to not go to shit
njbubbster02: that either speaks well for me as a debater or terrible for my love life
njbubbster02: lol.
Tim Scheff: little column a, little of column b?
njbubbster02: sure?

V4

About the recent WFD Thursday thing to Read.njbubbster02: ah.. i have the dorkiest lead in ever!
seacheala: haha
seacheala: what’s that?
njbubbster02: for the column
njbubbster02: The Supreme Court of Wisconsin Forensics and Debate discussion (Wisconsin Foreniscs Daily) has granted certiorari to the on going case Varsity Switch Sides et al v. Varsity Four Person et al
seacheala: hahaha
seacheala: so that implies that vss has brought charge against v4?
njbubbster02: for defamation of debate
seacheala: HAHAHA

Wisconsin Forensics Daily

I cannot believe that I forgot to make an announcement about Wisconsin Forensics Daily on my own corner of the web. Back in March I proposed that Wisconsin should create a “wi-debate.com.” That proposal was announced on my old blog and on cross-x.com. You can read a copy of that proposal here.

And now the hard work is done. Wisconsin Forensics Daily is a reality and is online. Here’s the text of the announcement strait from WFD:

After a summer of work, many email conversations, and a lot of help from Bill Batterman and Adam Jacobi, I am pleased to bring to everyone: Wisconsin Forensics Daily.

Wisconsin Forensics Daily is your source for news and culture regarding Wisconsin Debate and Forensics.

Wisconsin Forensics Daily is an independent website devoted to covering all that is Debate and Forensics in Wisconsin. We are not affiliated with the WFCA, the WDCA, or the WHSFA. Wisconsin Forensics Daily does not seek to replace those organizations or the uses of their websites. Similarly, we are not attempting to replace other debate community websites like VBD, lddebate.org, or cross-x.com. Rather, we are attempting to foster community development in Wisconsin debate and forensics across geographic, economic, and philosophic differences. In doing so, we will report on all the forensics and debate events across the state of Wisconsin that we can.

And we are attempting to proceed with our coverage and commentary in a journalistic fashion. Pieces will be written by members of the Debate and Forensics community who can not only offer information, but also provide insight into what it means to be involved in debate and forensics in the state of Wisconsin.

As such, we will be more than simply a blog, but hopefully an interactive magazine. As one can see, each entry has the capacity to evolve into a controlled discussion focused on the written entry. I think this format will allow for an improved online discussion and foster a larger sense of community. Moreover, this will provide one central space for all of those involved in Wisconsin debate and forensics to interact.

I also hope that we can provide a space where all members can interact. Not just simply students or only coaches, but a forum that allows all members to be involved. Accordingly, we will have news, information, and commentary for coaches, judges, and students. And the neatest feature: We will be reporting live, from some tournaments, so that parents and friends at home may receive an up-to-the minute update on how your child is doing.

I invite everyone to surf-on by.

Sincerely,

Nick Bubb

Editor-in-Chief
Wisconsin Forensics Daily

http://www.wiforensics.com

A Day of Firsts

It is now two in the morning and I really don’t feel like sleeping much. Tomorrow I officially start doing work as the “assistant” debate coach at North High School. “Assistant” is pretty flexible term, if it means doing all of the debate work while doing none of the bureaucratic work, then I guess I’m an assistant. I like to think of myself as a “virtual director of debate” because in the time I spent with Memorial I have had enough experiences that I should feel confident enough to lead a new program. Should is the operative word.

But right now, I’m here awake. Either because I’m too excited to sleep or that I feel that I could do more work to be prepared, it really doesn’t matter. Things really don’t feel different. I mean, I’m still asking Tim debate questions when I get stuck, and doing so probably more than I should. But like many young debaters, I too find that when giving advice and making arguments it is often extremely helpful to deliberate arguments with another experienced argument maker.

All of that aside, I am not the only one who should be excited about starting something new.