Directions for Current and Future NPDA Programs in the 21st Century.
Saved in:
| Title: | Directions for Current and Future NPDA Programs in the 21st Century. |
|---|---|
| Language: | English |
| Authors: | Backus, Nick |
| Peer Reviewed: | N |
| Page Count: | 15 |
| Publication Date: | 1998 |
| Document Type: | Opinion Papers Speeches/Meeting Papers |
| Descriptors: | Audience Awareness, Debate, Debate Format, Higher Education, Persuasive Discourse |
| Abstract: | As the National Parliamentary Debate Association (NPDA) debate spreads across the country, as more schools and more students become involved in this type of debate, those involved in the activity need to take a step back and evaluate their progress, as well as plot their future. Coaches have a critical role as educators. NPDA needs clear organizational goals. If NPDA is to remain an alternative, it must be different from the other choices. The current state of National Debate Tournament/Cross Examination Debate Association (NDT/CEDA) is a case in point: as differences narrowed, CEDA became less and less an alternative to NDT. The development of CEDA should be viewed with an eye toward the evolution of NPDA. The threat to diversity comes in the form of modeling by both competitors and judges. Pluralism in forensics is crucial to the survival and growth of all parts of the activity. Forensics presents educators with unique opportunities for interaction with students. A direction for NPDA is the audience-centered model of debate, which holds debaters to the same standards other public speakers are expected to follow. (Contains 22 references.) (CR) |
| Entry Date: | 1999 |
| Accession Number: | ED426439 |
| Database: | ERIC |
| Abstract: | As the National Parliamentary Debate Association (NPDA) debate spreads across the country, as more schools and more students become involved in this type of debate, those involved in the activity need to take a step back and evaluate their progress, as well as plot their future. Coaches have a critical role as educators. NPDA needs clear organizational goals. If NPDA is to remain an alternative, it must be different from the other choices. The current state of National Debate Tournament/Cross Examination Debate Association (NDT/CEDA) is a case in point: as differences narrowed, CEDA became less and less an alternative to NDT. The development of CEDA should be viewed with an eye toward the evolution of NPDA. The threat to diversity comes in the form of modeling by both competitors and judges. Pluralism in forensics is crucial to the survival and growth of all parts of the activity. Forensics presents educators with unique opportunities for interaction with students. A direction for NPDA is the audience-centered model of debate, which holds debaters to the same standards other public speakers are expected to follow. (Contains 22 references.) (CR) |
|---|
