FRINK Linked Data Fragments server

Matches in SemOpenAlex for { <https://semopenalex.org/work/W129894865> ?p ?o ?g. }

• W129894865 abstract "Many of the American Debate Association (ADA) rules merely codify conventions are almost universally practiced in tournaments. Among them are such standards as who is eligible debate and judge, what shall be debated and fnr how long, and restrictions on ballot submissions. Other rules come under the general'heading of which speech rules that codify conventions for specific kinds of arguments. Ttere are two content-based rules, designating topicality as voting the other restricting counterargument non-topical counterplan. Three rules distinguish tournaments from other debates. One requires the random assignment of judges debate rounds. A second rule bars judges from revealing decisions until preliminary rounds conclude. To emphasize the oral nature of debate, third rule limits judges' ability read materials upon arguments are based. PolJcy debate has decreased drastically in recent years. debate has been successful because of its consensus on rules. In reviewing its rulemaking, the accept Learned Hand's argument for judicial review in constitutiona2 system: that it is proper engraft upon the text such provisions as are necessary prevent the failure of the undertaking. (One attachment containing standing rules of tournament procedure is appended.) (SO) **,.**********************************************r********************* * Repioductions supplied by EDRS aroa the best that can be made from the original document. ********************************************************************** THE AMERICAN DEBATE ASSOCIATION: AN EVALUATION OF RULES FOR ACADEMIC DEBATE paper prepared for presentation at the 1991 Convention of the Speech Communication Association Atlanta, Georgia, October 31-November 3, 1991 by Frank Harrison, Trinity University American Debate Association was formed in 1985 by several policy debate program directors from the Middle A4-lantic states, the areas known as NDT District VII. Its purpose, in the words of of its founders, Warren Decker, was to foster the growth of /reasonable' policy debate. Decline seemed characterize participation rates at most policy debate tournaments during the 19801s. ... reasons most often cited related excesses in certain types of behaviors exhibited by debaters and judges...The then set about re-establish control over the activity...with the goal of diminishing the excesses. A decision was made concentrate upon behaviors could be uniformly curtailed preserve fairness. Eventually, set of rules were adopted were designed curb those excesses.' These ADA have been revised and reprinted annually, but their principal provisions remain rA essentially unChanged.2 GI CJ PERMISSION TO REPRODUCE THIS offinunducatronel Rsaefeh sm. Hipormisno u.e. 011WMOSOT OF SOUCATION dlikA444LWAaZelWowed 1,01* nos Wien as ofirknia~ MATERIAL HAS BEEN GRANTED BY D 0 Aknisp:dcoctharmittuamyteve teem *NM afitOloye * Pmeimoonnepo' *Oa ConecessioP001:yalr=romosidOC4e OFR1 PFlaborw w Fpbcv BEST COPY AVAILABLE TO THE EDUCATIONAL RESOURCES INFORMATION CENTER IERIC) Last August, at the 7th Alta Conference, I presented paper which, in part, analyzed these rules and the effect they have had on policy debate. Some of the ADA's founders have been kind enough read that paper and provide some comments on it. purpose today is review my analysis of the rules summary is attached this paper -and share with you their reaction it as well as my own conclusion about the role of rules in policy debate. My Many of the rules merely codify conventions are almost universally practiced in our tournaments. These include those determining who shall be eligible debate and judge; what shall be debated and for how long; the form in decision shall be rendered; criteria for determining who shall debate whom; qualification for elimination rounds and awards. They also govern such subsidiary issues as the definition of eligibility for separate division of competition; establishment of tournament schedules, the length, order and number of speeches and other events within each round; provision for forfeiture by any team not ready proceed; common ballot and requirement for its timely submission. A number of other provisions come under the general heading of which speech rules. For ne most part they also codify existing conventions -e.g., case in the first affirmative, in the first negative, now new arguments in rebuttal. Still others can be grouped as mandating decorum and courtesy. Debaters should speak comprehensibly and intelligibly and debaters and judges alike refrain from the use of profanity. Prompting, cross-talk and in-round coaching is prohibited. Only the person speaking, asking question in cross-ex, or answering question in cross-ex be talking. debaters may not receive, assistance, suggestions, or coaching from anyone while the round is in progress. There are two content based rules. One provides that topicality is a voting issue, but does not designate any criteria be applied in determining the issue. Another restricts the negative one counterplan and requires that it be non-topical. Rules adopt the American Forensic Association Code of Standards with respect the full citation of evidence and require that the information be given orally...the first time the evidence is presented. All of these rules, it seems me -with the possible exception of the mandate that counterplans be non-topical -could be adopted by any policy debate tournament without any significant change in its practices or its outcome. There are, however, three rules do make difference between those tournaments are and are not administered under standards. first requires that [j]udges will be assigned debate rounds by using 'random' method of judge placement. Another provides that [j]udges Should not reveal decision debaters or other coaches until the end of the prelims. The third, and perhaps the most controversial provides" @default.
• W129894865 created "2016-06-24" @default.
• W129894865 creator A5015730273 @default.
• W129894865 date "1991-10-01" @default.
• W129894865 modified "2023-09-27" @default.
• W129894865 title "The American Debate Association: An Evaluation of Rules for Academic Debate." @default.
• W129894865 hasPublicationYear "1991" @default.
• W129894865 type Work @default.
• W129894865 sameAs 129894865 @default.
• W129894865 citedByCount "0" @default.
• W129894865 crossrefType "journal-article" @default.
• W129894865 hasAuthorship W129894865A5015730273 @default.
• W129894865 hasConcept C142853389 @default.
• W129894865 hasConcept C144024400 @default.
• W129894865 hasConcept C15744967 @default.
• W129894865 hasConcept C17744445 @default.
• W129894865 hasConcept C185592680 @default.
• W129894865 hasConcept C190253527 @default.
• W129894865 hasConcept C199539241 @default.
• W129894865 hasConcept C2778680907 @default.
• W129894865 hasConcept C2780608745 @default.
• W129894865 hasConcept C2781019588 @default.
• W129894865 hasConcept C520049643 @default.
• W129894865 hasConcept C542102704 @default.
• W129894865 hasConcept C55493867 @default.
• W129894865 hasConcept C83009810 @default.
• W129894865 hasConcept C94625758 @default.
• W129894865 hasConcept C98184364 @default.
• W129894865 hasConceptScore W129894865C142853389 @default.
• W129894865 hasConceptScore W129894865C144024400 @default.
• W129894865 hasConceptScore W129894865C15744967 @default.
• W129894865 hasConceptScore W129894865C17744445 @default.
• W129894865 hasConceptScore W129894865C185592680 @default.
• W129894865 hasConceptScore W129894865C190253527 @default.
• W129894865 hasConceptScore W129894865C199539241 @default.
• W129894865 hasConceptScore W129894865C2778680907 @default.
• W129894865 hasConceptScore W129894865C2780608745 @default.
• W129894865 hasConceptScore W129894865C2781019588 @default.
• W129894865 hasConceptScore W129894865C520049643 @default.
• W129894865 hasConceptScore W129894865C542102704 @default.
• W129894865 hasConceptScore W129894865C55493867 @default.
• W129894865 hasConceptScore W129894865C83009810 @default.
• W129894865 hasConceptScore W129894865C94625758 @default.
• W129894865 hasConceptScore W129894865C98184364 @default.
• W129894865 hasLocation W1298948651 @default.
• W129894865 hasOpenAccess W129894865 @default.
• W129894865 hasPrimaryLocation W1298948651 @default.
• W129894865 hasRelatedWork W1599219878 @default.
• W129894865 hasRelatedWork W2009674305 @default.
• W129894865 hasRelatedWork W2032401709 @default.
• W129894865 hasRelatedWork W2050425352 @default.
• W129894865 hasRelatedWork W2056051971 @default.
• W129894865 hasRelatedWork W2140474112 @default.
• W129894865 hasRelatedWork W2169064338 @default.
• W129894865 hasRelatedWork W2247604473 @default.
• W129894865 hasRelatedWork W2257108286 @default.
• W129894865 hasRelatedWork W226777777 @default.
• W129894865 hasRelatedWork W2367868900 @default.
• W129894865 hasRelatedWork W2373090211 @default.
• W129894865 hasRelatedWork W2791952841 @default.
• W129894865 hasRelatedWork W2807978792 @default.
• W129894865 hasRelatedWork W2978492891 @default.
• W129894865 hasRelatedWork W3124956380 @default.
• W129894865 hasRelatedWork W3160361196 @default.
• W129894865 hasRelatedWork W87536337 @default.
• W129894865 hasRelatedWork W966205845 @default.
• W129894865 hasRelatedWork W2598205446 @default.
• W129894865 isParatext "false" @default.
• W129894865 isRetracted "false" @default.
• W129894865 magId "129894865" @default.
• W129894865 workType "article" @default.