Skip to content
March 6, 2017 / compassioninpolitics

The 10 Biggest Critique on the Education Reform Topic for High School Debate 2017-2018

You want to say that the economic ideology of the status quo that the aff will continue will only entrench that ideology even further.

 

What ideology does our educational system perpetuate?  What is its worldview?  What is its paradigm?

 

I think the following 9 arguments will pretty much establish the core:

  1. Capitalism/Neoliberalism/Marxism
  2. Feminism
  3. Race-type arguments
  4. Foucault (and various off-shoots of this argument)
  5. Ecological arguments
  6. Heidegger
  7. Science and/or technology  (or more scientism, which is not actually science).
  8. Pedagogy of the oppressed/Paulo Friere
  9. Dis/ability

There will also be libertarian/coercion type arguments as well.

 

I suggest the Eric database will be incredibly helpful on both sides of this topic.  It doesn’t have as much of the policy literature, but its free and has lots of full text articles.

 

For instance, when I look at this entry: https://eric.ed.gov/…gy&id=EJ1124663

 

Three subject areas strike me as pretty important to investigate:

  • Critical Theory
  • Neoliberalism
  • Hidden Curriculum

I would suggest “Critical pedagogy” is also a pretty huge search term, specifically in the education-specific literature.

 

 

There is a whole literature that critiques the nature of education, its model and its process.

February 14, 2017 / compassioninpolitics

Writing frontlines and strategizing about De-development

De-dev is pretty consistently:

1) Environmental/scarcity

2) War

 

If this position was created at camp this year, you might check out what those impacts (ie the shell)

 

BTW, the best way to answer this is to answer the environmental, scarcity question via multiple turns if possible.

 

And I’m not sure about other judges but specific scenario answered back by a generic turn with a good warrant–I don’t think i’m going to care about the specificity question as much.

February 3, 2017 / compassioninpolitics

Critical Reading Skills–How to Read an Academic Research Article

I think a couple years back I wrote an article on how to read a law review article as an academic or debater–this is a revisiting of a short portion of that insight:

• Why is this argument true?
• Whats the implication? Whats the impact? Who cares?
• Is it credible?
• Is it defensible in debate?
• How could I enhance this argument?
• How can I focus this argument? (signal/noise)
• What is the impact?
• How does this fit?

• Identify key moves in the field (history)
• Identify key theorists in the field
• Terms of art/Definition of terms/definition of acronyms

• Context (geographical, physical, institutional, cultural, and historical)
• Credibility
• Causal Chain (?)
• Impact (Paint a picture)

Systemtatically addressing these tools and perspectices can turn critical reading into a genuine skill that you apply throughout your schooling, your university experience, and ultimately in life.

Note: in relation to academic study, this doesn’t speak to the knowledge you need to understand statistics.

You can read through the original article here.

January 23, 2017 / compassioninpolitics

Role of the Ballot and Role of the Judge–Evidence from Giroux

As RotJ: The Role of the Judge is to act as a critical educator combating oppression—while obviously signing the ballot won’t make oppression disappear, voting for strategies to combat oppression in this round makes us better activists in the future.

As RotB: The Role of the Ballot is to serve as a tool to combat oppression—while obviously signing the ballot won’t make oppression disappear, voting for strategies to combat oppression in this round makes us better activists in the future. 

Giroux 13 (Henry, American scholar and cultural critic. One of the founding theorists of critical pedagogy in the United States, he is best known for his pioneering work in public pedagogy, “Public Intellectuals Against the Neoliberal University,” 29 October 2013, http://www.truth-out…ral-university)

 

Increasingly, as universities are shaped by an audit culture, the call to be objective and impartial, whatever one’s intentions, can easily echo what George Orwell called the official truth or the establishment point of view. Lacking a self-consciously democratic political focus, teachers are often reduced, or reduce themselves, to the role of a technician or functionary engaged in formalistic rituals, unconcerned with the disturbing and urgent problems that confront the larger society or the consequences of one’s pedagogical practices and research undertakings. Hiding behind appeals to balance and objectivity, too many scholars refuse to recognize that being committed to something does not cancel out what C. Wright Mills once called hard thinking. Teaching needs to be rigorous, self-reflective, and committed not to the dead zone of instrumental rationality but to the practice of freedom, to a critical sensibility capable of advancing the parameters of knowledge, addressing crucial social issues, and connecting private troubles and public issues. In opposition to the instrumental model of teaching, with its conceit of political neutrality and its fetishization of measurement, I argue that academics should combine the mutually interdependent roles of critical educator and active citizen. This requires finding ways to connect the practice of classroom teaching with important social problems and the operation of power in the larger society while providing the conditions for students to view themselves as critical agents capable of making those who exercise authority and power answerable for their actions. Higher education cannot be decoupled from what Jacques Derrida calls a democracy to come, that is, a democracy that must always “be open to the possibility of being contested, of contesting itself, of criticizing and indefinitely improving itself.” Within this project of possibility and impossibility, critical pedagogy must be understood as a deliberately informed and purposeful political and moral practice, as opposed to one that is either doctrinaire, instrumentalized or both. Moreover, a critical pedagogy should also gain part of its momentum in higher education among students who will go back to the schools, churches, synagogues and workplaces to produce new ideas, concepts and critical ways of understanding the world in which young people and adults live. This is a notion of intellectual practice and responsibility that refuses the professional neutrality and privileged isolation of the academy.  It also affirms a broader vision of learning that links knowledge to the power of self-definition and to the capacities of students to expand the scope of democratic freedoms, particularly those that address the crisis of education, politics, and the social as part and parcel of the crisis of democracy itself. In order for critical pedagogy, dialogue and thought to have real effects, they must advocate that all citizens, old and young, are equally entitled, if not equally empowered, to shape the society in which they live. This is a commitment we heard articulated by the brave students who fought tuition hikes and the destruction of civil liberties and social provisions in Quebec and to a lesser degree in the Occupy Wall Street movement. If educators are to function as public intellectuals, they need to listen to young people who are producing a new language in order to talk about inequality and power relations, attempting to create alternative democratic public spaces, rethinking the very nature of politics, and asking serious questions about what democracy is and why it no longer exists in many neoliberal societies. These young people who are protesting the 1% recognize that they have been written out of the discourses of justice, equality and democracy and are not only resisting how neoliberalism has made them expendable, they are arguing for a collective future very different from the one that is on display in the current political and economic systems in which they feel trapped.  These brave youth are insisting that the relationship between knowledge and power can be emancipatory, that their histories and experiences matter, and that what they say and do counts in their struggle to unlearn dominating privileges, productively reconstruct their relations with others, and transform, when necessary, the world around them.

Best for activism— Talking about methodologies to combat oppressive structures makes us better advocates in the future—this is a key pre-requisite to education and fairness claims, even if we learn from debate, that education is useless without the ability to put it to use.

January 22, 2017 / compassioninpolitics

Is war going away? Is the world getting more peaceful?

January 19, 2017 / compassioninpolitics

Simple Critical Affirmative/Performance Case Outline

I tend to think there are a couple key ways:

I. Status Quo/Whats going on

A. Critique of resolution

B. Overall story/performance type (narrative, geneaology, poetry, personal testimony, etc…)

II. Solvency:

A. Re-thinking/challenging/rejecting x good.

B. Language key/representations key (sometimes generic, sometimes topic specific)

III. Ballot/Framework:

Why policy-making is bad, why roleplaying is bad or at least a policy framework is bad.

Its worth noting that some people combine II and III, but thats a personal choice of sorts.


The easiest way to think about this is to think about running a critique on the affirmative.

The best way to learn more about performance affirmatives:

  1. Read more of the literature
  2. Look at previous performance affs and critical affs
  3. Look at the neg. on performance. Think how you will answer it.
  4. Watch lectures on performance
  5. Watch example debates which feature critical/performative
  6. Talk to someone who is pretty decent at running peformance affs, not just that happens to run them.

In order to be successful its pretty important that you do all 6.

January 2, 2017 / compassioninpolitics

Impact Calculous for Debate Worksheet

Version 1: Impact Calc for Debate Worksheet

Timeframe

 

Probability

 

Magnitude

 

Turns the Case

 

Other Analysis

 

Version 2:

Impact Comparison is ultimately about comparison:

Our Timeframe     Their Timeframe

 Our Probability     Their Probability

Our Magnitude       Their Magnitude

Turns the Case        Turns the Case

Other Analysis        Other Analysis

 

Notes:

I’m not sure which worksheet you will prefer or which your debates will prefer.

I’ve borrowed these frameworks from a sheet I found on the NDSA Curriculum Resources (Google Docs shared), but realized this one would show up in search results.

To me, the first makes more sense for in round and the later for the classroom.  However, I can see that you could fix the second one to make it better.

I’ve covered impact analysis on the debate before, I recommend searching for those posts and covering those as short lectures.  I would focus on key debate conflicts that are common (rights versus nuclear war or similar considerations)