Some more from AT

Professor Timmons has recently posted some direct answers in a couple of comments, but this long one should go in the main body. (That is the problem of the discussion in this format, but on the other hand, I get to moderate it the way I like it, so at least there's one person getting some satisfaction out of it...)

---

Case lists, legality and more: A second try

I must admit three things as I take a second swipe at the issues of case lists and privacy as it addresses Chris Palmer’s concerns.

First – Chris Palmer is a gifted writer and super bright. Reading anything he writes makes that readily apparent. Bringing Chris and Jim Menick into the discussion about the merits (or lack thereof) of case lists in debate offers an important perspective. While they might disagree with your arguments, they do so in a manner that embodies respect and intelligence that certainly raises the bar in the typical discussion on this issue. Thank you for bringing your collective voices into this conversation.

Second – My initial response which focused on the legality of case lists was a response not just to Chris, but others who that made this argument as well. I will address the potential risks inherent in case lists from a perspective on long term impact to the student and programs based on the content of the material submitted.

Third – Chris Palmer is an IT person who also does debate. He speaks from a position of knowledge that most debate coaches (myself included) can’t. In fairness, his argument about the long-term impact of case lists has a ton of merit. It is an issue we should discuss. We, as a community, should work to educate our kids about what they place on the Internet.

I am convinced that despite some inherent risks, disclosure and case list are on balance better than a culture of secrecy. The bottom line is this: if what the students we coach run arguments are SO offensive that a future employer, or the voting public, might inquire about it OR that will justify a school board cutting a program, perhaps (independent of case lists) we need to be discussing what our kids are arguing. I would love to hear (even via backchannel) schools that had political support that were canceled because of an argument a student ran. I would guess that even if an example or two were provided, I could counter with more of where funding was increased due to proving the “across the curriculum “ benefits of arguments that are being made.

Chris argues it is “not about can, but ought.” I think is about both. Others have argued directly that since disclosure “violates privacy” and that case are “educational records,” the argument of whether a tournament director CAN require students to disclose were an issue if a claim of a constitutional, or violation of states’ rights was an issue. In our litigious society, we as educators must engage in due diligence to make sure our actions are BOTH in line with the law AND if they are educationally sound. I have heard no real response to the legal perspective I outline. (In fact, all seem to agree that no claims of a right to privacy have merit.)

Again, while we do need to look at what our students place online, in reading part of Chris’s post the undertone is that things are being said of such a radical nature in high school debate rounds that justify comparison to a world of being an Islamic sympathizer (my words) or a Communist. A resurgence of McCarthyism, perhaps…?

It has been argued that information “has caused collateral damage” and that “some have had to deal with the issue before.” I am not sure of those situations or their frequency. I can say, based on personal experience, that many of my former students and colleagues have had positive questions asked about their debate experience AND about arguments/positions based on being Googled. Those conversations have all been positive. The impact is not being ignored to the potentiality of information being used, either tomorrow, or in the next decade, based on a case list. Rather, three quick thoughts come to mind. First, I haven’t seen in happen in fifteen years of case lists in policy debate. Perhaps with new technology and increased frequency it could happen but I am just saying.,, Second, Facebook posts or lddebate.org/VBD posts of old have MORE of a risk than the posting of a case outline. Third, the “impact” is outweighed by the benefits of a case list in my opinion.

I know this about contemporary Lincoln-Douglas debate. I can point to three National Championships whose results were impacted by bad/doctored/out of context evidence. I am sure many major invitational tournaments results as well. Other abuses seem to exist as well in an attempt to win. Many reasons exist as to why. But we all know it’s true. Case lists are just one effort to confront these abuses.

I would hate to have us “hunker down” in even more of a culture of secrecy due to an “inherent risk of change means stick with the status quo argument.”

President Obama, and President Bush for that matter, were elected after admitting using illegal drugs but a high school debater has his future ruined for arguing is “capitalism is bad” in a switch side debate tournament? This makes little sense to me.

Chris has a very compelling argument. I would suggest that the impact is huge but the link is small. Also uniqueness (Facebook, other social networking sites, blogging and the like) overwhelms the link.

Education is what we need regarding what and how we submit information online, not secrecy.

Respectfully submitted.

Aaron