First
Diversity Recruitment and
Retention
in Debate Ideafest
Edited by Gordon R.
Mitchell
University of Pittsburgh
Published by Office of
the Dean
University of Pittsburgh
Ideafest convened at
Emory University
Atlanta, GA
June 10-11, 1997
IMPACT Coalition (NY)
and Parliamentary Project (CA)
Will
Baker & John Meany
Will Baker: Before we begin, I'd
like to step here up front and offer three perspectives. My wife, who is much smarter than me,
gave me these. First, I think it
is wise to take the perspective of pessimistic optimists. This means that the administration will
at first say "no," but then they will come around later on. Second, as good as we are at being
advocates, we also need to be mobilizers and managers. We need to synthesize portable
packages. Third, we need to think
of debate teams versus what? We
need to envision beyond debate.
You could win six national championships and it wouldn't matter at all
if you got shot. Debate is nice,
but it's just not real. It's a
mechanism to other ends. If we
lose sight of this, nothing's going to get done. Now let me turn it over to John and I'll come back later to
talk more specifically about IMPACT.
John Meany: I'm a big supporter of
policy debate, but I think it's insufficient for the task we have in front of
us. We need a large and diverse
intercollegiate debate population.
Melissa Wade was right. The
Urban Debate League in Atlanta is great, but most intercollegiate environments
don't cut it. The translation of
policy debate to high school administrators is very difficult. That's why I emphasize parliamentary
debating in our program.
* Parliamentary debate
at Claremont
Parliamentary debate is the most popular
format of debate in the world, practiced in 40-50 countries. It's growing enormously in the U.S.
West, with 50-150 teams added during the last two years. There are a number of reasons that
explain the surge in interest for the parliamentary format. One has to do with the structure of the
event. Parliamentary debating is
largely extemporaneous, allowing one hour for preparation, with lay and
specialized judges. There are few
rules, but unlike policy, few conventions as well. How does one explain the recent increase in participation in
parliamentary debating? First,
there are few entry barriers.
Second, it's possible to conduct an entire tournament in a single
day. The direct and indirect costs
of participation are lowered.
Third, coaches can participate, sustain a family, and continue
participation in debate. You can
also use people with no background to coach and judge. There is much less strain
organizationally. We use a model
of an eight tournament league.
There is a $12 entry fee, and we were able to send eight or more teams
to one tournament for the cost of one national policy tournament. Traditionally, Claremont had 4-6 NDT
teams. Now, we have 35 teams, 24
travel nationally, and 10 travel internationally. We also bring in many more under-represented students than
in the past.
* Non-competitive debate
at Claremont
In addition to the parliamentary part of our
program, we have a non-competitive program dealing with public debate and
discussion. We have flexible
formats; we identify the population to be served and then structure the debate
accordingly. We have a program on
cable TV that carries the debates.
We have mentoring for at-risk students. There are public debates around the Claremont area, as well
as guest lectures. With the
topics, we try to encourage the attendance of people who are not usually drawn
to debates. For example, we've
done debates on the meaning of the Million Man March, representations of women
in the art, and African-Americans in the media. The programs have been attended by groups not traditionally
served by debate. Before we
started the program, we would occasionally have public debates, but usually
just one debate per semester. Now
we have over 40 students involved in non-competitive debate. Some go on to careers in social and
political activism.
Tuna Snider: I'm concerned about splitting
squads, having part of the team devoted to parliamentary and the other part of
the squad devoted to non-competitive debate. Is it possible to do both?
John Meany: Interestingly, so far,
we haven't had students select policy debate. Out of eighty students, zero have selected policy debate.
Will Baker: It really depends on how
you spin it. Some debaters doing
policy debate could be convinced to do public forum debating.
Tuna Snider: How do you deal with
Melissa's argument that the high school students in Atlanta already have
eloquence; that what they really need is research and critical thinking?
Will Baker: We also serve the high
school and middle school audiences, and many of them agree that there needs to
be a research emphasis. However, I
think it's important to point out that many competitors in parliamentary debate
have a heavy research emphasis.
For example, kritiks are very valuable on general parliamentary topics. Look at critical race theory. The same thing can be done by giving
people the topic in advance of the tournament.
Shawn Whalen: [question to John Meany]
114 students sounds mind-boggling.
How do you coach all of them, and what is the reaction in terms of
satisfaction?
John Meany: Most of the students
that are involved do not choose parliamentary debate because it's an easier
alternative than policy. They are
already involved in intensive research.
We have a much stronger focus on skill development, involved in multiple
settings. This kind of flexibility
is de-emphasized in policy debate.
Laura Heider: Is there a problem
regarding demographic inequality within the national parliamentary circuit?
John Meany: Many people of color
select parliamentary debate because they "feel comfortable" in that
community. It's better in parliamentary
than in NDT, but no, it's not satisfactory.
Will Baker: We are asking the wrong
questions, usually. Usually, we
ask why or why not they are not here.
We don't ask, "What can we do to invite them?" The model of just putting up signs and
seeing who comes is not enough.
People see those signs and think, "Oh, it's just another meeting of
white folks." At Rochester,
they put out posters with red, yellow, and green colors, and tripled the
turnout [of African-Americans]. I
got out of debate for awhile. I
got back in because I saw some frightening statistics. 55% of African-Americans and Latinos
don't finish college degrees. 82%
of those living in poverty do not finish [college degrees]. Debate is a way to get them back. I am incredibly energized by Betty and
Melissa, and we should go back to our respective communities with this energy.
* The IMPACT Coalition
I was doing a speed drill with an NYU
debater; this debater kept stuttering, and she burst into tears. Eventually, this debater went on to win
five speaker awards and reach the elims of novice nationals, even with
dyslexia. It turned out that that
this debater had been memorizing cards.
This debater reached the quarters of JV nationals and cleared at CEDA
nationals. Early on, her partner thought
she was really good, but dumped her because she thought that as a team, they
would never go anywhere, because she wouldn't be strong in rounds against other
women. The bottom line is that we
don't know how many debaters we have overlooked and lost this way. We need networking; we need
examples. A big part of it is
workplace dynamics. I have all the
resumes of current and former debaters on file. I can help them find work and develop a career. Debate is part network-building and
part time management. There are a
bunch of people in New York City who are interested in debate, but you have to
respect their time when you invite them to participate. I thought that when I started, school
administrators would jump at the opportunity to support debate, but I was
incorrect. I showed them the
IMPACT [business] cards, some said they liked the idea, but didn't do
much. I went back and showed them
my U.N. [business] cards, and they said they could use a couple of
interns! The bottom line is that
there is a need to give a pitch in terms of what people want.
Tuna Snider: The reception of other
schools to the IMPACT cartel has been very encouraging.
Will Baker: Tuna has led the charge
here. His students have sat down
and committed resources. Instead
of trophies, he has given money.
The Vermont students engage the IMPACT students. The ultimate point is that we want to
get where these schools can get their own teams.
Chris Wheatley: How do you find the task
of running a full-diversity program in an English-only format?
Will Baker: We have discussed a
Spanish-only competition, but since English is important in the community,
we've felt that it's important to teach English; that it's a disservice to
steer the students away [from English].