Minutes from the February 10, 1996 National Debate Tournament Committee Meeting

The meeting was held at the University of Michigan "Yankee Classic" Debate Tournament, Ann Arbor, Michigan.

Cate Palczewski called the meeting to order at 2:50 pm. The committee elected (unanimously) Palczewski to serve as Chair in Madsen's absence. Brett O'Donnell serving as Secretary. David Hingstman serving as Parliamentarian.

Present: Damus (proxy for Gass) for District One, Fritch (proxy for Backus) for District Three, Hingstman for District Four, Hinck for District Five, Smith for District Six, O'Donnell for District Seven, Strange for District Eight, Bjork (proxy for Pickering) for District Nine, Katsulas as AFA Eastern Representative, Panetta as AFA Southern Representative, Palczewski (proxy for Madsen) as AFA Central Representative, Jewell as AFA Western Representative, Parson as Tournament Director, Louden (ex-officio) as Tournament Host.

MINUTES

The minutes from the NDT Committee meeting at the Speech Communication Association Convention in San Antonio, Texas were approved without objection (Jewell motion, Parson second, passed unanimously).

REPORT OF THE COMMITTEE CHAIR (Palczewski)

The Chair called the committee's attention to the agenda items and the written report forwarded by Madsen (see attached).

REPORT OF THE BOARD OF TRUSTEES

No report.

REPORT OF THE 1996 TOURNAMENT HOST (Louden)

Louden reported that plans for the 50th NDT were progressing on schedule. He informed the committee that there would be a dinner for the Board and the NDT Committee.

REPORT OF THE 1997 TOURNAMENT HOST (O'Donnell)

O'Donnell reported that Lucy Keele had made her formal visit to Liberty University and to Lynchburg. She negotiated the hotel contract and visited the university. Keele will make a formal report to the Board of Trustees, but O'Donnell believed that the visit went well. He reported that partial sponsorship for the tournament has been arranged with the Pepsi Cola Corporation.

REPORT OF THE TOURNAMENT DIRECTOR (Parson)

Parson requested correct addresses for the sending of first and second round bid applications. He clarified the times for the committee to call in their at-large rankings and reported that these times would be detailed with the applications. He informed the committee that subscription fees to the NDT must be paid for each school submitting an at-large application.

Parson relayed a fax message from Lucy Keele that many alumni and past coaches from the NDT are making plans to attend the 50th NDT at Wake Forest.

The Director submitted a proposal for a NDT Director's home page on the Internet. He clarified that this would not replace, but rather would serve as an addition to current sources of NDT information. (Bjork moved, Hingstman second, passed unanimously).

Parson reported that Ron Wastyn has requested to perform research at the Wake Forest NDT. A formal proposal will be included with the first round applications and the committee will vote on the proposal when submitting their first round at-large rankings.

Parson expressed concern about the change in the decision confidentiality rule and the impact on the time schedule of the tournament. He requested feedback from the committee. The consensus of the committee was that if judges did not begin their critiques until after handing in their ballot, the tournament schedule would not be affected.

The Director informed the committee that there may be a need to even the tournament. He suggested four possibilities for evening the tournament. First, the host school could provide a team. Second, the next second round not invited could be used. Third, a team in the area could be used. He informed the committee that Cori Dauber could provide a hybrid North Carolina/North Carolina State team. Fourth, a seventh third team could be invited. No action on these alternatives was taken at this point. The Director informed the committee that he will even the tournament, if it becomes necessary to take such action.

Smith asked Parson if the rankings could be faxed. Parson replied that they could not be faxed.

Parson reminded the committee about submitting judge philosophies and that judge philosophy forms will be mailed to qualifying teams.

REPORT OF THE RANKING DIRECTOR (Backus)

No report.

OTHER COMMITTEE REPORTS

BID ALLOCATION COMMITTEE (Katsulas)

Katsulas reminded the committee members that they must send district information to him by February 20, 1996.

TOPIC COMMITTEE (Hingstman)

Hingstman reported the results from the survey taken at the Northwestern tournament and on the NDT-L. The mass media topic was first, biomedical research second, freedom of expression third, environmental topic fourth, welfare reform fifth, affirmative action sixth, and freedom of religion seventh. He reported that papers have been assigned for the topics and that a full set of essays should be available by the NDT.

COMMITTEE ON NDT-CEDA COOPERATION/AFFILIATION

Fritch reported that he will be working on a survey. Gordon Mitchell has proposed a joint NDT-CEDA tournament at the University of Pittsburgh next season.

COMMITTEE ON ELIGIBILITY ISSUES (Jewell)

Jewell initiated a discussion on eligibility. He suggested that the AFA rules do not specify the kind of debate that counts toward eligibility for the NDT.

Jewell moved (Katsulas second) that rule II A 1 of the standing rules be amended by adding subpoint "e" to read:

"For the purpose of determining eligibility to participate at the National Debate Tournament, the number of time blocks in which a student has competed will include all intercollegiate debate competition."

Whalen questioned whether the phrase "intercollegiate debate" should be more specific. Deatherage spoke in favor of the proposal. Mancuso suggested that student eligibility should extend for four years from the start of a student's college admission.

Fritch suggested that students should have five years of eligibility because of the changing nature of the college experience and the nature of students entering debate programs.

Smith inquired as to whether or not CEDA experience counts toward eligibility under the current rules. The committee took no position on this issue.

Hingstman offered an amendment that this proposal should be grandfathered to apply to all students who matriculate in the fall of 1996. The amendment died for lack of a second.

Louden communicated that he believed the previous eligibility question before the committee was answered by granting an exception.

Strange clarified that if the motion passes, the rule would take effect for the 1997 NDT. The committee would have no rule on clarifying the counting of eligibility for the 1996 NDT.

The question was called. The motion passed unanimously.

OLD BUSINESS

Lexis/Nexis--see attached report

Deatherage asked for clarification on the third team rule change. If a school receives two first round bids, is that school's third team required to participate in the district process? The secretary clarified that the Mancuso amendment from the West Georgia NDT Committee meeting had been left out of the rule change the second time the rule was voted on at the SCA meeting. The corrected rule should read:

"Unless a school has received two bids in the first round at-large process, participation in the district process shall be a prerequisite for receipt of a Second Round At-Large selection."

NEW BUSINESS

Southworth asked the committee how the Redlands Tournament should be reported on first round at-large applications. Deatherage suggested that the form be acceptable either reporting the tournament as a round robin or a regular tournament. It was suggested that it be counted as a round robin if a team did not clear at the tournament and as a regular tournament if a team cleared at the tournament.

Site selection and dates for the NDT were discussed. It was suggested that the NDT Committee recommend to the Board of Trustees that where practical the board consider dates for the NDT in consideration of CEDA Nationals.

Smith clarified that the committee can set the dates for the tournament per the Standing Rules. He suggested that we design the rules so that the tournaments do not occur on the same dates. This is important if both organizations start moving together or share the same topic.

Deatherage argued that setting tournament dates is difficult given the constraints of Easter, host availability, semester exams, etc. that define a narrow window for scheduling the NDT.

Kevin Bertram's request for eligibility for a hybrid team was discussed. Bjork moved that the hybrid from Arizona/Occidental be allowed to compete at the 1996 NDT (Hinck second). A lengthy discussion followed the motion concerning whether or not District IX would allow them to enter their tournament and about the impact of allowing a hybrid team to compete at the NDT. The committee agreed that both schools should be encouraged to participate in NDT debate. Deatherage suggested that a letter be written to both programs and their administrations encouraging their participation.

The Parliamentarian clarified the conditions necessary for making exceptions to the Standing Rules which would be necessary since no change voted on by the committee could take effect until 1997 making it impossible for the committee to use normal procedures to allow the team to compete. He indicated that the Standing Rules would require a change that would not take effect until the 1997 NDT and that there is no provision in the current Standing Rules to allow such an exception. Hingstman ruled the Bjork motion out of order because the rules cannot be amended and there is no clause in the rules to allow for such exceptions.

Palczewski suggested that Scott Deatherage write a letter on behalf of the NDT community to both the University of Arizona and Occidental College explaining the specificity of the rules concerning eligibility and that these rules could not be amended to allow the team to compete at the 1996 NDT. The letter should also express the interest of the NDT community of having both colleges compete in policy debate and offering any assistance in encouraging their participation.

The method of evening the NDT was again discussed. The Chair asked the committee to clarify how the Tournament Director should select a team to even the tournament.

Smith moved that the director be advised that if the tournament is odd at the end of the second round at-large process that the next eligible second round team, including third teams if no eligible first or second team is available, be invited unconditionally.

Passed unanimously.

The committee clarified that a team from the area that is not a hybrid team should be invited in case of an emergency and the NDT is at an odd number of teams.

The meeting was adjourned at 5:40 pm

Respectfully Submitted, Brett O'Donnell, Secretary