<font color='black' size='2' face='arial'>
<div>I just realized that I forgot to sign my name. </div>
<div> </div>
<div>Lisa Willoughby</div>
<div> </div>
<div>Henry W. Grady High School</div>
<div><br>
<br>
</div>
<div style="CLEAR: both"></div>
<br>
<br>
<div style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; COLOR: black; FONT-FAMILY: arial,helvetica">-----Original Message-----<br>
From: I <quaintt@aol.com><br>
To: ericcrisp@walkerschools.org; thegfca@lists.gradyspeaks.org<br>
Sent: Tue, Oct 19, 2010 3:09 pm<br>
Subject: Re: [GFCA] The By-Laws<br>
<br>
<div id=AOLMsgPart_3_6479880e-9b31-4def-905c-da971d06025f><FONT face=arial color=black size=2>
<div><WBR>I am troubled by this proposal for several reasons. Much to my surprise, I have come to believe that technology has leveled 'the playing field' rather than exacerbating the digital divide. The NDCA open evidence site provides much greater access to evidence, as has the Wiki spaces listing of cases and judge paradigms. The forums, blogs and videos of rounds available online are an invaluable resource for training. The introduction of laptops into the round for flowing also helps students and many judges. I am troubled, however, by the transition to paperless debate. In theory, the change seems positive, but in practice it often is less so. Debaters or judges without laptops are often reluctant to complain because they don't want to seem 'uncool' when students from privileged backgrounds "explain" to their judge in condescending tones how preptime should be kept or when paperless teams fail to provide viewing computers, or limit access to those computers to their opponents. Most frustrating to me personally, is the frequency with which I have been subjected to petty disputes about whether or not a team is obligated to share blocks or analytics. I know that the activity is evolving, and I am not saying that we should try to regulate every aspect of the change. Part of what makes debate exciting for students is that they feel ownership of the activity because they can shape the norms through the process of debate. I realize that my role as the judge in the round is to guide the changes by the way I render decisions about the fairness of debate practices within the round. That said. I do think the GFCA also has a role to play. However time consuming it may be to flash evidence between teams, I am fearful that if we allow open access to the Internet during the course of a round, we will create a norm that condones assistance from debaters or coaches outside the debate itself. It will be difficult, if not impossible, to determine whether or not a team has accessed evidence from a drop box, from an Internet site, or from a hired researcher, I would like to believe that my colleagues are ethical and can be trusted to establish a clear differentiation between coaching and participating in a debate round. Unfortunately, not all coaches are adults, and not all of us are educators. I am afraid that overzealous hired coaches, or team mates will be tempted to 'help out' during the round. I feel like the rule prohibiting Internet access during the round itself creates the clearest bright line, and I am willing to risk having to listen to a few 'silly' debates that could have been prevented by immediate Internet access during the round. I especially think that the restriction must apply when only one team has technlogy. If we do not set a prohibition against Internet access during rounds as a guideline for the activity, we need to be very vigilant about monitoring our hired coaches and judges, and we need to set very clear standards with our debaters about who participates in a given round. </div>
<div> </div>
<div style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; COLOR: black; FONT-FAMILY: arial,helvetica">-----Original Message-----<br>
From: Eric Crisp <<A href="mailto:ericcrisp@walkerschools.org">ericcrisp@walkerschools.org</A>><br>
To: <A href="mailto:thegfca@lists.gradyspeaks.org">thegfca@lists.gradyspeaks.org</A><br>
Sent: Tue, Oct 19, 2010 12:27 pm<br>
Subject: Re: [GFCA] The By-Laws<br>
<br>
<div id=AOLMsgPart_0_2e42808e-7fdd-4da0-9c01-c667814556da style="FONT-SIZE: 12px; MARGIN: 0px; COLOR: #000; FONT-FAMILY: Tahoma, Verdana, Arial, Sans-Serif; BACKGROUND-COLOR: #fff">Coming from a school that would be at a disadvantage from this research potential, I still am not sure we should ban it. I'm worried about enforcement. As a teacher, I don't want to try to figure out whether teams are on line with their laptops and if so, with whom they may be interacting. I'm not sure my teams' potential disadvantage is worth the Pandora's box of trying to outlaw this... <br>
<br>
Eric Crisp <br>
Ridgeland HS <br>
<br>
On Oct 19, 2010, at 12:14 PM, Sean Hiland wrote: <br>
<br>
> I have of couple of concerns <br>
> <br>
> 1) Allowing students to use the internet during rounds does provide > a disadvantage to students w/o computers. It also lends to > confusion about when said research would be done. Could it be done > after round to justify statements made without evidence? This could > be problematic in that it could lead to long delays in finishing > rounds as competitors frantically search for evidence they never > had. At the last tournament we competed in, students even took a > judge back to their teams table in the cafeteria to show him > evidence. When is the cutoff for evidence research? This could get > out of hand. <br>
> <br>
> 2) Am I missing something? Why would the partners need to > communicate electronically with each other? texting? How does > anyone know whether they're texting each other or a coach, parent, > or a team member in another room? <br>
> <br>
> 3) As far Jenny's comment about people downloading something they > forgot - most debaters come prepared and I have no sympathy for > debaters who do not. Consider it a lesson in responsibility. This > also comes back to my previous comment. If evidence is produced > post-round then your opponent's lose the opportunity to challenge > your evidence by requesting to see it in context. <br>
> <br>
> 4) This last comment refers to something said previously about to > which tournament(s) the bylaws apply. Even if the bylaws are not > binding on all tournaments, we need to recognize that they are > still looked to as a guiding principles by some tournament > directors. My team lost a ruling at the last tournament under the > justification that something was not prohibited by the GFCA bylaws. <br>
> <br>
> Sean Hiland <br>
> St. Pius X <br>
> <br>
> -----Original Message----- <br>
> From: <A>thegfca-bounces@lists.gradyspeaks.org</A> [<A>mailto:thegfca-</A>> <A>bounces@lists.gradyspeaks.org</A>] On Behalf Of Berthiaume, Maggie <br>
> Sent: Tuesday, October 19, 2010 11:05 AM <br>
> To: Spiegel, Jeremy J; <A>thegfca@lists.gradyspeaks.org</A> <br>
> Subject: Re: [GFCA] The By-Laws <br>
> <br>
> It seems like that is clearly no - then coaches would be doing work <br>
> during the debate. That's why I think it's best to say no internet > but <br>
> yes communicating between the two members of the team, at least at > this <br>
> point. <br>
> <br>
> Maggie <br>
> <br>
> -----Original Message----- <br>
> From: <A>thegfca-bounces@lists.gradyspeaks.org</A> <br>
> [<A>mailto:thegfca-bounces@lists.gradyspeaks.org</A>] On Behalf Of Spiegel, <br>
> Jeremy J <br>
> Sent: Tuesday, October 19, 2010 11:00 AM <br>
> To: <A>thegfca@lists.gradyspeaks.org</A> <br>
> Subject: Re: [GFCA] The By-Laws <br>
> <br>
> I agree with Jenny, but have one question: What if a coach works on a <br>
> file during the 1ac and posts it to the teams' server. Is it ok to > use <br>
> it? <br>
> <br>
> -----Original Message----- <br>
> From: <A>thegfca-bounces@lists.gradyspeaks.org</A> <br>
> [<A>mailto:thegfca-bounces@lists.gradyspeaks.org</A>] On Behalf Of Jenny > Heidt <br>
> Sent: Tuesday, October 19, 2010 10:56 AM <br>
> To: Berthiaume, Maggie; Jeffrey Miller; <A>thegfca@lists.gradyspeaks.org</A> <br>
> Subject: Re: [GFCA] The By-Laws <br>
> <br>
> I agree with both of Maggie's suggestions but also think that students <br>
> should be allowed to research in debates. 2 important examples re: > why <br>
> this should be the case: <br>
> <br>
> 1) A few years ago where there was some very surprising aff T <br>
> evidence--a search during the debate revealed that it was fabricated. <br>
> <br>
> 2) A politics DA was read that had passed. The aff found one card <br>
> saying "it passed." The judge did not know either way so that was <br>
> critical and prevented what would have been a fairly dumb debate from <br>
> occurring. <br>
> <br>
> If a position is so bad that it can be beaten with a card or two found <br>
> during prep time, why not? <br>
> <br>
> Also, we have our files on email and a server. If someone forgot to <br>
> download something, why couldn't they access it? <br>
> <br>
> So, I think that the rule should exclude electronic communication <br>
> between anyone besides the partner but not otherwise limit internet <br>
> access. <br>
> <br>
> Jenny <br>
> <br>
> <br>
> <br>
> _______________________________________________ <br>
> thegfca mailing list <br>
> <A>thegfca@lists.gradyspeaks.org</A> <br>
> <A>http://lists.gradyspeaks.org/listinfo.cgi/thegfca-gradyspeaks.org</A> <br>
> _______________________________________________ <br>
> thegfca mailing list <br>
> <A>thegfca@lists.gradyspeaks.org</A> <br>
> <A>http://lists.gradyspeaks.org/listinfo.cgi/thegfca-gradyspeaks.org</A> <br>
> _______________________________________________ <br>
> thegfca mailing list <br>
> <A>thegfca@lists.gradyspeaks.org</A> <br>
> <A>http://lists.gradyspeaks.org/listinfo.cgi/thegfca-gradyspeaks.org</A> <br>
> _______________________________________________ <br>
> thegfca mailing list <br>
> <A>thegfca@lists.gradyspeaks.org</A> <br>
> <A>http://lists.gradyspeaks.org/listinfo.cgi/thegfca-gradyspeaks.org</A> <br>
> <br>
<br>
_______________________________________________ <br>
thegfca mailing list <br>
<A>thegfca@lists.gradyspeaks.org</A> <br>
<A>http://lists.gradyspeaks.org/listinfo.cgi/thegfca-gradyspeaks.org</A> <br>
</div>
</div>
</FONT></div>
<!-- end of AOLMsgPart_3_6479880e-9b31-4def-905c-da971d06025f -->
<div id=AOLMsgPart_4_6479880e-9b31-4def-905c-da971d06025f style="FONT-SIZE: 12px; MARGIN: 0px; COLOR: #000; FONT-FAMILY: Tahoma, Verdana, Arial, Sans-Serif; BACKGROUND-COLOR: #fff"><PRE style="FONT-SIZE: 9pt"><TT>_______________________________________________
thegfca mailing list
<A href="mailto:thegfca@lists.gradyspeaks.org">thegfca@lists.gradyspeaks.org</A>
<A href="http://lists.gradyspeaks.org/listinfo.cgi/thegfca-gradyspeaks.org" target=_blank>http://lists.gradyspeaks.org/listinfo.cgi/thegfca-gradyspeaks.org</A>
</TT></PRE></div>
<!-- end of AOLMsgPart_4_6479880e-9b31-4def-905c-da971d06025f --></div>
</font>