At the Speed of Sound: Rate of Delivery as a Dividing Factor in Debate.
Saved in:
| Title: | At the Speed of Sound: Rate of Delivery as a Dividing Factor in Debate. |
|---|---|
| Language: | English |
| Authors: | Dudash, Elizabeth |
| Peer Reviewed: | N |
| Page Count: | 13 |
| Publication Date: | 1998 |
| Document Type: | Opinion Papers Speeches/Meeting Papers |
| Descriptors: | Audience Awareness, Debate, Debate Format, Higher Education, Speech Instruction, Speech Skills |
| Abstract: | The rate of speech in intercollegiate debate has been increasing and might have contributed to the proliferation of divisions in debate. The American Debate Association (ADA), National Parliamentary Debate Association (NPDA), American Parliamentary Debate Association (APDA), Cross Examination Debate Association (CEDA), National Education Debate Association (NEDA), and the National Debate Tournament (NDT) all have different ideas about how to achieve their specific goals. However, a brief look into their general aims discloses that there are very few differences in their goals overall. Part of the advantage of an audience focused style over a speed style is that it prepares students who choose that track to be prepared to debate in the real world. The level of argument in speed debate is much deeper than that of stylized debate. Disadvantages to speed debate may include that not everyone can judge it, that jargon will be used, that some debaters will lose their judges in debates and that there will be disparity when confusing debates take place. The advantages of speed debate outweigh the disadvantages. A compromise on the issue of pulling debate communities back together again is to merge the debate programs and have one big debate community all striving for educational goals. Debaters can learn judicial preferences and cater to that. No matter what decision is made by individual schools as they choose their own communities, the goals they all share in the community should not be compromised. (Contains 10 references.) (RS) |
| Entry Date: | 1999 |
| Accession Number: | ED421728 |
| Database: | ERIC |
| Abstract: | The rate of speech in intercollegiate debate has been increasing and might have contributed to the proliferation of divisions in debate. The American Debate Association (ADA), National Parliamentary Debate Association (NPDA), American Parliamentary Debate Association (APDA), Cross Examination Debate Association (CEDA), National Education Debate Association (NEDA), and the National Debate Tournament (NDT) all have different ideas about how to achieve their specific goals. However, a brief look into their general aims discloses that there are very few differences in their goals overall. Part of the advantage of an audience focused style over a speed style is that it prepares students who choose that track to be prepared to debate in the real world. The level of argument in speed debate is much deeper than that of stylized debate. Disadvantages to speed debate may include that not everyone can judge it, that jargon will be used, that some debaters will lose their judges in debates and that there will be disparity when confusing debates take place. The advantages of speed debate outweigh the disadvantages. A compromise on the issue of pulling debate communities back together again is to merge the debate programs and have one big debate community all striving for educational goals. Debaters can learn judicial preferences and cater to that. No matter what decision is made by individual schools as they choose their own communities, the goals they all share in the community should not be compromised. (Contains 10 references.) (RS) |
|---|
