The Fine Five - August 28, 2013
(1) Today's lecture in the debate class was on the Federal Assault Weapons Ban ... which is only fitting, since it's our legislation for next month's first debate tournament of the year. A number of students were absent, due to it being the first blood drive of the year at Wellington, and they were volunteering their time (and internal fluids) for a greater cause. So I emailed my lecture notes home to all students and parents because I wanted them to have the information I presented.
Because Wellington is supporting a reinstitution of the 1994 FAWB (with a few modifications), my lecture notes were somewhat heavy on the affirmative side. One parent apparently misconstrued this as "Gaba's personal viewpoint":
I see what your opinion is on this issue. Are all students going to write an affirmative or will some be allowed to argue the other side?
Here was my response (with names of the parent and student changed, because in the grand scheme, it was a minor misunderstanding, and the real reason I am posting this is to show my - and many other coach's - position on teaching debate):
What was presented wasn't about my opinion, and to be honest my opinion is irrelevant on any current event topic we cover. I am not, and never have, pushed a personal political agenda in 15 years of coaching and teaching debate.
Wellington's legislation is to reinstitute the FAWB.
Students will be writing "affirmative" arguments on the topic for a grade; they need to be able to present the sponsorship speech at the Sept. 28 debate tournament. However, to ensure we can have viable debate on the topic, they will be afforded the opportunity to write a speech on the negative for extra credit.
The primary reason all Wellington debaters need to be ready on the affirmative side on any legislation we as a program present - whether dealing with immigration reform, creation of a flat tax, funding NASA, whatever - is because it is our sponsorship. Further, let's say your child and three other Wellington students are in the same congress chamber (I'll call them John, George and Ringo), and they as a collective decide that Ringo is going to give the Wellington authorship. And the day of the tournament comes, and Ringo's fighting off a bad stomach bug, and can't make the tournament. Someone (your child, John or George) needs to then give the sponsor speech. They all need to be prepared to do so.
On any other school's topic, when it comes to writing and presenting speeches, each student can choose whatever side they wish on which to speak. Heck, it's possible at another tournament in the future, another school presents a bill dealing with gun control. your child can speak on whichever side he is most comfortable with. No issues here.
Debate isn't about pushing one's own personal views; students need to be able to present the most convincing argument possible on any number of current event issues, regardless of their personal feelings or opinions. Congress is about presenting facts and stats as informatively as possible. They also need to know all possible sides of a topic. If a student goes into a debate with information on only one side of an issue, they are unprepared; they must be able to defend their position with facts and logic against the opposition, and be able to attack the opposition with facts and logic. Thus, they need to know all possible arguments that could come up in a debate on any given topic.
The debate program is designed to teach students these skills, through research, organization, critical thinking, and oral persuasion.
I hope this makes sense, and that your child is enjoying the course so far. I look forward to meeting you at our parent/student meeting next month!
My response was dead-on, and the parent was impressed:
Sorry for the misunderstanding. I was simply looking for clarification as to whether or not both sides of issues will have to be argued. I actually feel arguing opposite your own personal opinion is very good stuff. I think I understand that as a school team we are assigned either a pro or con position and argue with other schools? Therefore the debates are not taking place in the classroom between kids in the same class at Wellington HS. Perhaps you could help me understand these programs and the debating format at the student/parent meeting. Thank you for your response.
I love my job!
(2) No word on how successful said blood drive was yet, but we will be told very soon. I hope it was an amazing day. Wellington still has four more blood drives on campus this year. In the past, they've taken place in what is now my classroom, but apparently when I set up the room last month (and part of this month), I did so in such a way that it is not conducive to the blood drive any more. So it's right down the hallway from where I teach.
(3) Sidebar: during the first 30 minutes of school, three students asked me (which I was on watch in the hallway), "Where is the blood drive taking place?" (I'm pretty sure the large red arrow pointed the way accurately ...)
Sometimes, I am truly amazed at the inability of individuals to be able to ... I don't know ... READ SIGNS that are right there in front of them. In the hallway, about 15 feet from where the photo was taken, was another sign directing individuals in the right direction. Down the hallway the arrow was pointing to was yet ANOTHER sign. The door leading into the blood drive room had a sign on it. SMH ...
(4) Speaking of weapons (going back to the initial commentary), when the class was discussing gun control in general yesterday (we hadn't gotten into the actual FAWB yet), one of the questions came up about teachers with weapons (stemming from the political post-Sandy Hook tragedy in December). I did my best dance around the topic, pointing out (1) I'm not really sure many parents would be thrilled knowing the entire education profession was armed and loaded, (2) I'm not really sure students wanted me to have the ability to draw a weapon when a fight on campus broke out (and there happened to have been a fight on campus the day before), (3) had I been near the fight and someone, while I was attempting to break up the disturbance, managed to take my gun from the holster,
then what?, and (4) I have horrid vision and minimal training with a weapon; AM I REALLY THE ONE YOU WANT WITH A GUN ON CAMPUS? They laughed; so did I.
(5) Today I filled up the Prius, for only the second time in the past month. (The Prius received a full tank on July 26, and then on August 14.) Ten gallons. 46 MPG.
Weird News of the Day
From The Wichita Eagle: "'Nebraskan sues Wal-Mart over plastic bag's failure" - Forget the lousy salaries and employee relations, Wal-Mart is so fucking cheap, it apparently won't even buy quality grocery bags these days.
Stupid News of the Day
From Gawker: "Cellphone Robber Caught After Tripping Over Own Sagging Pants" - The 21-year-old was tackled and arrested on charges of robbery, ass-ault, and "looking like a fool."
Florida News of the Day
From NBC Miami: "Man Arrested For Drugs in Front of Elementary School, Says He Is Having Sexual Relationship With Adult Step-Daughter: Deputies" - I tried to come up with a really witty response, but with a headline like that, there was no chance in hell I could accomplish anything of the sort.
Video of the Day
In honor of the wacky world of high school debate, I present Monty Python's Flying Circus. At least it wasn't abuse ...
