Date: Sun, 11 Oct 1998 02:36:52 -0400 (EDT)
From: Hosea Chang <hchang@chs.cusd.claremont.edu>
To: Multiple recipients of list CX-L <cx-l@debate.net>
Subject: CMC Tournament invitation
THE CLAREMONT COLLEGES INVITATIONAL
September 1, 1998
Dear Colleague:
You are cordially invited to attend the CLAREMONT COLLEGES INVITATIONAL
FORENSICS TOURNAMENT, an event for interscholastic competitors, sponsored
by the Claremont Colleges Debate Union, from Friday-Sunday, October
23-25, 1998.
The tournament will feature Policy, Lincoln-Douglas and Parliamentary
Debate, Student Congress, and Individual Events. There will be three
policy debate divisions (varsity, junior varsity, and novice*), a single
open division of each of the Lincoln-Douglas Debate, Parliamentary
Debate, and Student Congress events, and two divisions (varsity and
novice**) of Individual Events.
The Claremont Colleges Debate Union is pleased to offer a division of
Parliamentary Debate, the fastest growing forensic event in the United
States and the most popular debate event in the world. This is an
outstanding entry-level event, in that the absence of strict rules and
procedures allows students to immediately and effectively participate in
the event. There is a list of event guidelines and sample topics included
with this invitation. In addition, the tournament will offer an
instructional session prior to competition and will have sample debates
on videotape in the visiting coaches' lounge.
If you have any questions or require supplemental information, please do
not hesitate to contact me. I look forward to seeing you in October for a
most enjoyable and challenging experience.
Sincerely yours,
John K. Meany
Director of Forensics
Contact information
John Meany
Bauer Center
Claremont McKenna College
Claremont, CA 91711
(909) 607-2667 voice
(909) 621-8249 fax
jmeany@benson.mckenna.edu
jkm1993@aol.com
Information and Guidelines
Entries: Three divisions in the Policy Debate event (varsity, junior
varsity, and novice, entries permitting, with junior competitors with
less than three full semesters of competition; reserving the right to
collapse divisions if necessary, due to entries); one open division of
Lincoln-Douglas Debate, Parliamentary Debate, and Student Congress; two
divisions, championship and novice, of select Individual Events [**the
tournament may collapse divisions in events, based on entries]. The
deadline for entries is Tuesday, October 20, 1998, at 12:00 pm. You may
change your entry until Thursday, October 22, 1998, at 12:00 pm, after
which all fees will be assessed. Entries will be accepted by fax, e-mail,
and phone. Phone entries will be accepted at (909) 607-2667. Please speak
clearly when providing messages and spell the full name of participants,
including judges. Please leave a contact name and telephone number with
any message. Fax entries to (909) 621-8249. E-mail entries to
jkm1993@aol.com. Please confirm all e-mail entries.
Registration: Registration will take place in Bauer 31, Claremont
McKenna College. Additional registration times are added for competitors
entered in later events (please check schedule for appropriate
registration time for your entry).
Rules: Some events conflict. Please check the schedule before considering
registration for events. The tournament will use the national topic on
foreign policy toward Russia for policy debate and the national LD topic
on the preferential value of the sanctity of life to the quality of life.
Congress bills and resolutions are enclosed (1 for each of the first two
rounds; 2 for round three and the final round). The format for Policy
Debate is 8-3-5, with 8 minutes of preparation time. The format for LD
Debate is 6-3-7-3-4-6-3, with 3 minutes of preparation time. The format
for Parliamentary Debate is 7-8-8-8-4-5, with 15 minutes of preparation
time prior to the debate. Additional parliamentary debate information is
included with this invitation. We will not break brackets during the
elimination rounds. Individual events include: ext (one division,
including national and international topics), di, oo, imp, and expos.
Students may enter a maximum of two individual events. No student is
permitted to enter policy debate and any other event.
Travel & Housing: Air Information: If you are arriving by air, you should
make arrangements to arrive at Ontario Airport (only 10-15 minutes from
the City of Claremont). Taxi and shuttle transportation is approximately
$15-20 to Claremont. Driving Directions: To reach Claremont McKenna
College: Take the San Bernardino Freeway (I-10) to Indian Hill Boulevard
(Exit 47). Drive north on Indian Hill Boulevard for approximately 1 mile
to the Arrow Highway. Proceed right to Claremont Boulevard. Left on
Claremont Boulevard for 3/4 mile to the college entrance at 9th Street.
Park in the first parking lot on the left. Bauer Center is directly west
of this parking lot. Bauer 31 is located on the second floor of the
circular, southern section of Bauer Center. Do not park in the lot
designated "Faculty/Staff Parking", immediately adjacent to the Bauer
Center. Your vehicle will be towed from this lot. Housing Information:
There is no designated tournament hotel and no claims are made regarding
these hotels, but a partial listing of area hotels includes: Claremont
Inn, 555 W. Foothill Boulevard, Claremont, (909) 626-2411; Claremont
Travelodge, 736 S. Indian Hill Boulevard, Claremont, (909) 626-5654;
Ramada Inn, 840 S. Indian Hill Boulevard, Claremont, (909) 621-4831.
Judges: Some events conflict. Judging one event may prevent an individual
from covering entries in another event. Please check the schedule to
evaluate judging needs. You must provide one judge for every two teams or
individuals in any debate event (or fraction thereof). You must provide
one judge for every 5 individual event slots or student congress slots
(or fraction thereof). Judges must be adults or qualified college
students in all divisions. Judges are obliged for one round beyond the
round in which their students were eliminated from competition. Failure
to judge an assigned round, or failure to pick-up a ballot before a
scheduled round resulting in judge reassignment, will result in a penalty
equal to the cost of hiring a judge for that round. Repeated failure to
judge assigned rounds will result in disqualification and assignation of
hired judging fees. Hired judging is available.
Fees: $20 school fee; $35 per entry in Policy Debate; $20 per entry in
LD; $30 per entry in Parliamentary Debate; $8 per slot in Student
Congress and Individual Events. The hired judging fee is $45 per team in
Policy Debate; $35 per individual in LD Debate; $35 per team in
Parliamentary Debate; $8 per slot in Student Congress and Individual
Events. All checks are payable to Claremont McKenna College.
Friday, October 23
10:00a-11:00a Registration, Bauer 31
12:00p Round 1 Congress, LD & Policy Debate
1:15p Round 2 LD
2:00p Round 2 Congress & Policy Debate
2:30p Round 3 LD
4:00p Parliamentary Instructional Seminar
4:15p Round 3 Policy Debate
4:30p Round 3 Congress
5:15p Round 4 LD
7:00p Round 4 Policy Debate & Congress Finals
7:15p Round 5 LD
9:00p Announcement and/or Awards, Congress & LD
Saturday, October 24
7:30a-8:15a Registration, IE & Parliamentary Only Schools
8:00a Round 5 Policy Debate
9:00a Round 1 IE & Extemp Draw
10:30a Round 2 IE & Extemp Draw
11:00a Round 6 Policy Debate
1:00p Round 3 IE & Extemp Draw
2:45p Policy Debate Announcements, Awards, and Elims
3:15p IE Elims
3:15p-4:00p Registration, Parliamentary Only Schools
4:30p Round 1 Parliamentary Debate
5:45p Round 2 Parliamentary Debate
6:45p IE Awards
7:00p Round 3 Parliamentary Debate
Sunday, October 25
8:00a Round 4 Parliamentary Debate
9:30a Policy Debate Elimination Rounds Continue
10:00a Round 5 Parliamentary Debate
12:00p Parliamentary Debate Announcements, Awards, and Elims
Entry Form
School:
Director:
Office/Home Phones: /
FAX/E-mail: /
Team Debate. Please indicate V, JV, or N for divisions after names.
1. & Div.
2. & Div.
3. & Div.
4. & Div.
5. & Div.
6. & Div.
Parliamentary Debate.
1. &
2. &
3. &
4. &
5. &
6. &
Lincoln-Douglas Debate.
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
Student Congress.
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
Individual Events.
For each entry, please indicate "V" for Varsity or "N" for Novice in each
of the event categories.
Name Ext Imp DI OO
Expos
1. "Sample" V
V
JUDGES
Please list judges and events for which they will meet the judging
obligation for your school.
1.
2.
3.
4.
Or, please check the following:
I need to hire judging to meet my obligation. [ ]
Claremont Colleges Invitational, October, 1998
Student Congress information
Round 1: A Bill
Be it enacted by the student congress here assembled that: The United
States improve its pension system.
Section I. Privatize elements of the Social Security system to encourage
the creation of responsible investment portfolios.
Section II. Increase education, information, and tax incentives to
promote saving and pension investment by corporations and citizens.
Round 2: A Bill
Be it enacted by the student congress here assembled that: The United
States increase programs to prevent and punish acts of terrorism.
Section I. Coordinate anti-terrorist information with national and
international police agencies.
Section II. Strengthen the investigatory power of national police
organizations, including the FBI.
Section III. Establish a comprehensive security program for government
buildings, military and secure installations, and airports.
Round 3: A Bill
Be it enacted by the student congress here assembled that: the United
States should not cooperate with other nations in establishing and
implementing a permanent War Crimes Tribunal, as adjunct office of the
United Nations, for the investigation and prosecution of war crimes,
genocide, and other crimes against humanity as stipulated in
international agreements, including the Genocide Convention and the
Nuremberg Accords.
Section I. Investigate possibilities for the unilateral prosecution of
war crimes.
Section II. Refuse jurisdiction of the International Court of Justice
with respect to cases for the prosecution of individuals for crimes
against humanity.
A Bill
Be it enacted by the student congress here assembled that the United
States should establish a national electronic information policy.
Section I. Create a commission to monitor and report on new issues and
technologies related to electronic information and dissemination. Conduct
social impact statements of new technologies to assess potential costs
and benefits before implementation.
Section II. Establish regulations to create an open marketplace of
electronic information. Apply current obscenity standards to the
publication of electronic information.
Section III. Provide funding to educational institutions to increase
computer literacy.
Section IV. Provide funding to increase access to the internet for the
economically-disadvantaged and the geographically-isolated.
Finals: A Resolution
Whereas, American society has often wrongfully promoted fairness and
equality of opportunity in the application of its laws and administrative
regulations, and whereas, it is essential to appreciate the differing
circumstances of individuals in contemporary society, be it resolved by
the student congress here assembled that the United States should
champion the principle of compassion, rather than the principle of
fairness.
A Bill
Whereas, the application of the death penalty is a legitimate legal
implementation of the law, and, whereas, the state has a duty to provide
information to citizens regarding the application of the law, and,
whereas, the state would promote a general deterrence to crime with the
provision of more information regarding the death penalty, be it resolved
by the student congress here assembled that the United States should
provide for the mediated public viewing of executions.
Section I. Establish guidelines for the broadcasting of public executions
by the federal and state governments.
Section II. Conduct research on the deterrent and other effects of the
public execution of criminals.
Claremont Colleges Invitational, October, 1998
Parliamentary debate information
Parliamentary Debate Guidelines and Conventions
I. Parliamentary debate is a formal contest featuring critical analysis,
rhetorical skill, and wit. Participants represent the advocates for and
against a motion (also known as a resolution or topic). One or more
judges deliberate on the outcome of the contest. A judge or other member
of the audience is designated as "Speaker of the House" to moderate the
event and rule on any parliamentary issues.
II. A motion is presented as the subject for debate. A different topic is
used for each round of debate. The two teams, each with two persons and
designated as "Proposition" (also known as "Government") and
"Opposition", prepare to debate the topic. The teams are given fifteen
minutes of preparation time, prior to the debate, for preparation.
Students may use dictionaries and prepared notes during the preparation
period. There is no preparation time once the debate commences.
III. There are two types of formal speeches in each round of debate:
constructive speeches and rebuttal speeches. The order, formal titles of
the speakers, and time limits for each speech are as follows:
First Proposition 7 minutes
First Opposition 8 minutes
Second Proposition 8 minutes
Second Opposition 8 Minutes
Opposition Rebuttal 4 minutes
Proposition Rebuttal 5 minutes
The first speaker for each side speaks twice (a constructive speech and a
rebuttal speech). The second speaker for each side delivers a single
constructive speech.
IV. The purpose of constructive speeches is to introduce the foundational
arguments of the debate. The First Proposition speaker interprets the
topic and establishes a case that offers a proof for the topic. The
opposition speakers critically investigate the case and attempt to
undermine it. The responsibility of the opposition team is to clash with
the proposition's case, using appropriate techniques of refutation,
including an assault on the underlying assumptions of the case, the
introduction of exclusive, opposing philosophical and/or policy
objections, or critical analysis of the major issues and concrete
examples of proof, with point-by-point disagreement with the factual and
logical claims.
V. The rebuttal speeches provide the final summary positions of each team
in the debate. These speeches indicate the important issues that
establish a proof for the resolution or undermine that proof. New
arguments are not permitted in the rebuttal speeches, unless the
arguments have a logical foundation established in the constructive
speeches. For example, new issues may be presented in the Second
Opposition speech. It is appropriate for the Proposition Rebuttalist to
answer these issues, although doing so might constitute a "new argument".
This is the first opportunity that the proposition team has to answer
these arguments and the issues have an established foundation in the
constructive speeches.
VI. A modified form of parliamentary procedure is used in the debate,
including:
A. Points of Information: These are common practice in parliamentary
debating and provide a foundation for interactive and challenging
debates. A Point of Information is a statement or a question directed to
the speaker holding the floor. One or both members of the opposing team
rise and announce "Information" or "Point of Information". The speaker
has the discretion to accept or refuse the point. If the point is
accepted ("I will take your point"), the opposing team member directs a
statement or question to the speaker. The speaker is yielding time from
her/his own speech for the point of information and the time is deducted
from the speaker holding the floor.
Points of Information must be concise statements or questions, lasting no
more than fifteen seconds. The speaker accepts a single point; the
opposing speaker is not permitted to make following questions or
arguments unless again recognized by the speaker holding the floor.
Points of Information can only be offered after the first minute and
before the last minute of a constructive speech. The judge, "Speaker of
the House", or designated timekeeper knocks on a desk or table or
otherwise announces that one minute of each constructive speech has
elapsed and that one minute of each constructive speech remains, so that
the participants know when Points of Information may be presented. No
Points of Information are permitted during the rebuttals.
B. Points of Order: These are objections to a breach of the rules of
parliamentary debate. The points are directed to the Speaker of the
House. The time for a Point of Order is not deducted from the speaking
time of the debater holding the floor. Points of Order should be quickly
and clearly made by a single debater. These are not points of argument
and should not receive a reply by the speaker holding the floor. Points
of Order should be used judiciously and debaters may be penalized for
excessive or unnecessary interruptions of an opposing team's presentation
by the use of Points of Order.
The points may be raised for breaches of the rules, for example, the
introduction of new arguments in the rebuttal speeches or speakers
substantially exceeding the specified time limits for a speech.
A Point of Order receives an immediate ruling from the Speaker of the
House, who may accept the point ("Point well taken"), reject the point
("Point not well taken"), or privately deliberate on the point at the
conclusion of the debate, together with the other issues of the contest
("Point taken under consideration"). The ruling of the Speaker of the
House if final; rulings may not be argued or appealed. The speaker
holding the floor immediately continues with her/his presentation upon a
ruling from the chair.
A Point of Order is initiated by a debater rising and stating to the
chair, "Point of Order", and continuing with the presentation of the
point.
VII. No prepared materials may be brought into the debate round for the
debater's use. Debaters are not permitted to read published material in
the speeches of the debate to support their argument claims.
VIII. Sample topics.
This House believes the power to tax is the power to destroy.
This House believes that only the elite can truly manage national affairs.
This House believes the death penalty should be abolished.
This House believes in pacifism.
This House believes that public monies should not finance art.
The West will regret free trade.
This House don't need no education.
In this age, there is a dearth of heroes.
Freedom of the individual is a myth.
This House supports discrimination.
This House wants a new song for America.
This House would use force to make peace.
This House would protect the environment rather than the economy.
This House would let the language die.
This House would put pragmatism before principles.
This House would give racists a platform.
This House would commit crimes.
Censorship can never be justified.
This House rejects political correctness.
This House believes a strong dictatorship is better than a weak democracy.
This House would impose further restrictions on speech.
This House would grant permanent most-favored nation status to China.
This House would reject consensus.
This House would test nuclear weapons.
This House would dissolve NATO.
This House would end the embargo on Cuba.
This House believe in poetic license.
This House would increase the power of labor unions.
This House opposes trial by jury.
This House rejects big government.
This House believes the 'melting pot' has failed.
The "House" refers to the audience assembled for the debate.
Topics may be understood and interpreted as literal statements or as
figurative or metaphorical claims. Many topics require interpretation for
meaningful debate (for example, "This House would clear the air", or
"This House would fiddle while Rome burns.") The proposition team need
only present a debatable case; the proposition team is under no
obligation to offer a more obvious or predictable understanding of the
topic.
For example, given the topic, "This House opposes the death penalty", it
is possible for the proposition team to argue the popular understanding
of this topic, namely, that the government should abolish the execution
of felons convicted of capital crimes. It is also possible for the
proposition to argue a more unconventional case that also fits the topic,
that is, that the government should ban the use of laboratory animals in
cosmetics research.
============================== CX-L Mailing List =============================
To unsubscribe: send the text UNSUBSCRIBE CX-L to listproc@debate.net with
NO SUBJECT. For other help, send mail to jordyn@debate.net. Fear the Kvaal!
|
